Chinese propaganda is rampant on the fediverse. We need to discuss ways to combat this. One group- memes or something is wholly controlled by Chinese state actors. What do you think?

top 98 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 56 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

There'a a global positive shift in opinion on China that's happened over the first year of Trump. The trend was already there in the "Global South" but it's now happening everywhere. This shift is driven by real economic and geopolitical pressures. E.g. US tariffs and military threats, Chinese investment and cheap EVs, etc. Add to that there are more people on Lemmy from non-NA/EU countries than on US-centric platforms like Reddit and this shift becomes even more apparent here. In Western countries the positive opinion on China is less one of an ally and more of a necessary partner. In Canada, the opposition to trade with China shifted from 80% in 2020 to 32% at the end of 2025.

If you're primed to not see anything positive about China, then even positive views around partnership could appear as pro-China propaganda. Also people in the Global South are much more aware of US and European atrocities so when you present China's atrocities as a counter to people's positive opinions, it looks unserious and hypocritical to them. If you see their hypocrisy callout as a propaganda method and you call it out as such, you lose all good faith credibility with them.

Pics:

From

PS: Along with this shift, comes the realization among some that a lot of what they thought about China came from corporate US interest via US-owned media that pushes a line useful for that interest. This has happened to me and multiple RL friends and family in Canada. The conversations on the last thanksgiving table have changed a lot since 2024. At present we're in the necessary partner camp.

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 9 months ago*

    I'm no fan of Tankies or the CCP, but I'm really not seeing any more pro-china propaganda than you see elsewhere, mostly excitement as a result of their green tech stuff or HSR (while ignoring why China has a need for HSR)

    I am seeing a surprising amount of anti-china paranoia from the UK press right now that frankly seems like it's engineered by the US given its timing. Like articles about diplomats using burner phones as if that isn't standard (for all countries).

  • source
  • [–] 61 points 9 months ago (14 children)

    Treat it like a troll post. Downvote and move on, if the name becomes familiar block them.

    This goes for all propaganda not just the stuff you are against.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    That assumes you accurately define propaganda. I think we've all faced half baked allegations as such, and had people vote with the accuser, you want everyone to be seperated from each other on here because they misunderstood a point, or understood different facts, or because they are a dumbass on a different topic?

    Just downvote, and move on, unless the person is stalking you, looking at you hexrat, or whatever fucking mammal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Speak of the devil. The long palsied arm of [redacted.]

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Is the hexbort here in the room with us right now? There's a fancy saying my people have, if you're smelling dog shit everywhere you go, look under your own shoe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] [S] -17 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    This was true until I realized they're all over. Anything even remotely pertaining to China is flooded with the Chinese state actors reply guys and bots. In effect, using the protocols strength against itself. Is the protocol itself even able to be banned in China? Are they seriously active on here just to push their bullshit China marketing even harder. They've gone all out the last five years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 9 months ago

    When I check facebook, just in passing as I use marketplace occassionally I check the enshitified feed, and there is a lot of chinese propaganda on there, pushing their advancements, science, it's a concderted effort for sure.

    The Chinese are really bad at propaganda though, they never had to try with their own people, so they put that same amount of understanding into it here and it falls flat, at least so far. They are getting better with their fluff pieces, but as far as manipulating us, they suck at it, unlike the Russians, they get us, they know just how stupid we are.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 9 months ago

    Even Chinese SA's have access to VPN's, proxies, etc. It's not like they would tie their own hands behind their backs to spread the good word, ya know?

    Russia only needed a small number of inroads to influence the 2016 US election, and now? Pff, they hardly need to do anything, we're completely self-sufficient in propagandizing ourselves. It's entirely possible China's already created their own army of Overseas Useful Idiots.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    Downvote and move on, if the name becomes familiar block them.

    Sorry, but you forgot a step:

    Downvote and move on, if the name becomes familiar report them and then block them.

    Moderators should help so not all users will need to block these bad actors.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] -22 points 9 months ago

    Entire subs and communities, and servers are Chinese state actors. I wish we could daylight this bullshit, a single serving page with a method for rankings subs, servers with biases?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    On the topic, I've been seeing plenty of war-hawk think-tank accounts who only post propaganda, like:

    They are clearly not involved in our communities.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    Pretty sure these are all the same person. If you ever engage, you can recognize the same asshole attitude. I've seen multiple of them up/down vote comments where no one else has. Don't think they do that anymore cause it's too obvious.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago

    I'm sorry to say that lemmy is not popular enough to be on CPC's radar.

    The CPC's propaganda budget is mostly focused on what Chinese people would read if they get over the great firewall (mainly YouTube and Twitter).

    Second to that is the general "feel good" stories, like scenery, food, or panda (recently high-speed trains), aiming at the mainstream Western public. You may see those on lemmy, but it's very unlikely that the state propagandists are the ones posting them here.

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Plenty of Russian propaganda too. Every "conservative" community or server is essentially acting in Putin's favor.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 9 months ago* (2 children)

    Don't forget USAian propaganda. By far the most prevalent under that regime.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    Ironically, the most active user on the current #2 China community, !china@sopuli.xyz, is an absolutely indefatigable anti-Chinese propagandist.

    This person, @Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org posts multiple times per day, usually quite sensible and well-sourced articles, but always on the same downer subjects (repression, Uighurs, corruption and so on) and never anything that paints China (let alone its government) in the slightest positive light. Since nobody else in this community can match their posting stamina, the end result is a community that, to newcomers, looks like one rando's "I hate China" blog. Hardly surprising that it's not a very successful community.

    I've asked this user to consider dropping the tempo a bit, and been met with defensiveness. I complained in private to the mod, who is completely AWOL, and they didn't care. Oh well.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago* (6 children)

    It's not even 1 account. It's a collection of sockpuppets. I started noticing them when they started posting in !Canada@lemmy.ca but apparently the streak goes quite further back. The latest ones are Sepia and tardigrade.

    I've also suggested changing tactic a bit from being a complete bad-faith asshole to good-faith commenters to at least being nice. Nada.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Ultimately the problem is that the mods for the communities they frequently post to have allowed this to go on for years. They have to know by now what’s going on, and by doing nothing they tacitly endorse it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    I don't mind it too much. If the community itself can deal with ir by voting on the posts, it's a more democratic solution and it has a built-in consensus. Mods killing it makes life easier but it produces more quesrions among the community abt whether that was the best course of action. Kinda like how some people feel about being censored on .ml, no offence. Isn't that a dialectical relarionship of sorts, the effects of more vs less moderation?

    I guess it depends on the people's culture. If they come from a lib background, less moderation is more productive. If they're used to authority taking care of things instead of them having to do the work, then more moderation is better suited or else people would complain mods aren't doing their job.

    And speaking of moderation. OP got banned. 😄

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Out of interest, how do you know it's sockpuppets?

    To be honest I'm genuinely a bit interested in who this might be. I'm imagining a disgruntled Hong Kong exile with too much time on their hands. Also seems likely to be Chinese in that they have a top-down concept of information, not seeing that obvious and relentless propaganda will just backfire with a sophisticated and relatively informed audience. Perhaps I'm being slightly optimistic, but I can't see how they've convinced anyone here that "China bad" who didn't already think that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    What I've noticed:

    • The posts themselves follow almost identical structure. Large quotes with poster emphasis.
    • The posting topics is almost identical.
    • The reliability of sources is hit-or-miss on all posts. Some are from legit sources, some are from really questionable ones. The questionable ones are common between accounts.
    • The communities where they're all active are the same. Lately there's a bit more separation where some accounts frequent some communities more than others. E.g. some time ago we used to get Hotznplotzn, randomname and Scotty in !Canada. Now we mostly get Scotty.
    • When you engage in conversation the lang expression, attitude and arguments are identical. This when I really noticed the pattern.
    • I've had multiple accounts from this set group up/down vote their/mine comments, deep into a discussion that didn't attract other up/down votes.
    • I've had a discussion that reached a dead end with one account, only for another to show up and restart it from a different angle attempting to reach a different conclusion. E.g. first discuss an economic side of some China-related issue, reach a dead end, restart with human rights abuses side on the same topic. That's while having the group up/down voting action going on.
    • Two of the accounts were created on the same date, on two different instances, a few minutes away from each other. This was the smoking gun for me that this is the same person.

    Some of these aren't damning on their own, but put altogether make me believe it's one person. Also they never deny that when pressed. The conversation just stops and they disappear for a day or two until the next post.

    a disgruntled Hong Kong exile with too much time on their hands

    Quite possibly. I think they may live in Germany or be German because I've seen some activity in German. Who knows. I doubt they're a paid actor because there's enough money in the official media machine pushing this line so I think you're right. Someone who really hates China/CCP/CPC, perhaps for a good reason of their own, with a lot of free time. It really sucks because there are really interesting discussions that can be had on any of these topics. There's another guy around here whose family emigrated from China because they weren't having a great time with the 1-child policy among other things. He's in the US and can have rational and interesting discussion about this stuff without bursting in flames.

    E: Here's a recent unhinged discussion with Scotty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Amusing. And what detective work! Your time is valuable, careful not to waste too much of it.

    Personally I'm not especially bothered by sockpuppetry in itself (talking of people wasting their time...). But it's obviously important to have a plurality of viewpoints. If only they would sockpuppet more creatively!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago

    Yeah, I do spend too much time here but I think it's important to keep the community active because we haven't won the anti-corpo social media war yet. So we have to overcontribute in content, funding, etc. From each according to their ability, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 9 months ago

    lemmy.ml is just like that, maybe you want to look for a new home instance.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    You have discovered .ml? Yeah the lead devs are tankies lol

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] [S] -12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    So they're trying to capture mind share of technologists. Nice play, I'm embarrassed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    You are your own algorithm. If you see a lot of propaganda or whatever, it's because you chose that content at one point or another. And you can just as easily stop seeing it by unfollowing and blocking.

    Also, evidence. I see no signs of rampant propaganda on the fediverse, not on Lemmy or on Mastodon. Now, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But that's where you should provide examples so I can check for myself.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    Your instance is the lead actor on that one

  • source
  • [+] 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (8 children)
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Not all leftists are supportive of China, anarchists certainly aren't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

    That's not a rule, though. Many anarchists critically support the PRC and consider socialism to be better than capitalism, even if they disagree with Marxism and seek communalization over collectivization in the final analysis. As an alternative to the US Empire's naked terrorism, the PRC plays a positive role.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    Some of the worst things happen in the US are adoptions of PRC style domestic policy and some of the worst in the PRC is the adoption of both British and US style imperealism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    Can you elaborate? The US isn't adopting PRC style domestic policy, nor is the PRC adopting British nor US-style imperialism, so I have no idea what you're talking about. The PRC isn't imperialist to begin with, it has no colonies nor neocolonies and isn't plundering the surplus value created by the global south. Trade deals with China don't come at the barrel of a gun either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Sure. US takeover of TicTok is really direct example. The current ethnic cleasing operation empowering state protected slavery. Tighter interaction between buisness and goverment where failure to toe the party line is punished through unfavorable legal action and loss of goverment contracts for them or assoiciates. A heavy investment into domostic survellence and again forced cooperation for survellence capitalists.

    On the US side.

    On the PRC side, the expainsion Hong Kong style loan aggreements in order to establish maritime control globally. The attempt to expand territorial rights in the south china sea in order to expand their of control on their neighbors. Exporting survelence and censorship systems and models to keep favoriable dictatorships in power (as well as probally establish backdoors though that is an assumption). The funding of any group that fights their rivals influence as well. Just things imperialist do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago

    The US taking over Tik Tok isn't "PRC style domestic policy," though. The PRC has knowledge transfer agreements with any company that does business with China, I think this may be what you're hinting at, but this is just the standard "sell it to us or we'll ban it" style of US policy.

    The PRC isn't committing ethnic cleansing nor is it enslaving Uyghur peoples in Xinjiang, just like South Africa wasn't committing "white genocide," nor is there "christian genocide" in Nigeria. These are all examples of atrocity propaganda, where the west heavily distorts and often fabricates narratives in order to foment resistance and to give their own populations free excuses to not support anti-imperialism, in essence supporting it.

    In the case of Xinjiang, the area is crucial in the Belt and Road Initiative, so the west backed sepratist groups in order to destabilize the region. China responded with vocational programs and de-radicalization efforts, which the west then twisted into claims of "genocide." Nevermind that the west responds to seperatism with mass violence, and thus re-education programs focused on rehabilitation are far more humane, the tool was used both for outright violence by the west into a useful narrative to feed its own citizens. I highly recommend Qiao Collective's Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation for more on this subject.

    In the context of tighter control between the state and business, it's important to understand the class dynamics. The US Empire is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the large firms and key industries are privately owned, and the state entrenches their power. In the PRC, public ownership is the principle aspect, and the working class is in control of the state. The commanding heights of industry in China are all SOEs, and the bourgeoisie that controls small and medium firms are kept in check by the socialist state. You're confusing form for essence, by only looking at similarities and ignoring the differences, you come to false conclusions.

    Here's more on the SOEs governing the commanding heights of industry in China:

    As for surveillance, the US Empire has a far deeper level, the PATRIOT Act makes that clear. The US never copied China on this, they've always been worse. Further, in China surveillance is largely used against capitalists, while in the US Empire it's used against the working classes.

    On to the PRC side.

    The PRC is expanding trade, but not dominance, nor does its trade deals come at the barrel of a gun. The PRC recognizes territory that has been consistent with what China had while the ROC held the UN seat for China, until it was transfered over to the PRC, leading to territorial disputes, not naked piracy and invasion like the US Empire does. They also are not "exporting surveillance and censorship systems." They trade with pretty much everyone, and support their allies, but this is not imperialism.

    To the contrary, the PRC is acting against imperialism.

    And many, many more sources back this up. It's no secret that imperialists have been trying to smear China into being "no better" than the west, but the reality on the ground is that partnering with China results in mutual development and cooperation, while partnering with the west results in stripped autonomy, underdevelopment, and exploitation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Chinese, Chinese, Chinese! Doesn't anyone care about the Lithuanians and what they are doing!!?? /s

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 9 months ago

    Capitalist propaganda is rampant on the fediverse. We need to discuss ways to combat this. Most big instances -generalist, tech or something are wholly controlled by bourgeois people who would rather uphold state violence than democracy. What do you think?

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (39 children)

    There are a lot of people supportive of the PRC, both because the US Empire is declining and the PRC is positioned as an alternative to the US Empire's naked terrorism, and because Lemmy has a lot of communists. Lemmy has a lot of communists because the lead developers are communists, FOSS attracts communists, and because as Reddit bans communist communities they are often suggested to come here.

    There's absolutely no credible evidence of CPC interference in Lemmy, this is a normal thing to happen to a FOSS alternative to Reddit.

  • source
  • hideshow 39 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    I used to be critical of PRC even though I’m American Chinese. Nowadays however I just don’t want to be governed by a pedo king. Seeing a bunch of teslas around when Elon is also very clearly on the list sucks too. Guess this is Chinese propaganda..

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 7 points 9 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    To a degree, perhaps, though the CPC largely sticks to the Chinese sphere of the internet. I haven't seen any evidence for CPC interference in Lemmy though, nor of widespread CPC influence over western, English-speaking spaces. China doesn't really care as much for that, plus the implication is that the US Empire is fundamentally weaker than the PRC at propagandizing on the Statesian "home turf" when we know the opposite is the case.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    the PRC is not nearly an alternative to the US empire, its a replacement to it, with different but overlapping trade-offs. what about neither? It's seriously like instagram users fleeing to tiktok, then to upscroll or whichever other corporate platform.

    the bad of the US does not make the PRC good. I want change, big changes, but definitely not that kind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    The US Empire is currently exporting mass death and destruction globally, threatening Greenland and Canada with annexation, kidnapped another country's president and first lady, is performing piracy for oil, threatening Cuba, and on top of all of these overt acts of terror, is super-exploiting the global south for super profits. The PRC, on the other hand, as a socialist country, is far more peaceful, maintains a defensive millitary, has ~3 overseas millitary bases compared to the hundreds of the US Empire, and offers mutual development opportunities like Belt and Road.

    The differences are staggering. When countries in the global south partner with the US Empire, they are trapped in cycles of underdevelopment, where their surplus value is plundered. When countries in the global south trade and partner with the PRC, they achieve rapid development, and escape the never-ending cycle of impoverishment. This win-win development isn't because China is more morally good, but because their economic structure and geopolitical position compels them towards mutual cooperation over plunder and terror.

    Further, there isn't really an alternative to the US Empire and PRC. The US Empire is actively invading countries to make sure they comply. The EU is vassalized by the US Empire. When we look at who the global south goes to for development opportunities, they are increasingly rejecting western imperialism in favor of cooperation with China and BRICS, and forming mutual partnerships with neighboring countries (like the Alliance of Sahel States).

    The bad of the US Empire isn't why the PRC is better, the sheer benefit of working with the PRC is why the PRC is better.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (16 children)

    Man's freaking out cos he just learned .ml stands for marxist-leninist 😂 Glad to find something we strongly agree on tho comrade.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (15 children)

    To be clear, .ml stands for Mali, and it was allegedly chosen because it was cheap/free. Lemmy.ml is just the flagship, test instance, and happens to have a lot of communists because the devs are communists. Lemmygrad.ml is explicitly ML.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 9 months ago (12 children)

    @Cowbee@lemmygrad.ml

    Lemmygrad. ml is explicitly ML.

    Exploring Left-Wing Extremism on the Decentralized Web: An Analysis of Lemmygrad. ml

    ... findings reveal a substantial increase in user activity and toxicity levels following the migration of these subreddits to Lemmygrad. ml. We also identify posts that support authoritarian regimes, endorse the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and feature anti-Zionist and antisemitic content ... Moreover, their support can extend beyond backing these authoritarian regimes, even cheering on their violent actions, as evidenced by their posts on the Russian invasion of Ukraine ...

    The whole study makes a good read.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    I liked the part where they conflate anti Zionism with antisemitism, show one comment/"post" as proof, and don't reference it so readers can view upvotes or context around said post.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    The problem with political studies is that they're nonscientific. It's a blog post they're calling a study. No amount of statistical analysis or clever methodology makes this a proper study because it's based on political opinions. A terrible, ignorant set of opinions at that.

    "But isn't Marxism a study of politics?!" No, it's a body of works in economics and historical analysis, not wayward political opinions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    Communist subreddits like r/GenZedong and lately r/TheDeprogram, after being banned by Reddit, migrated largely to Lemmygrad.ml. I agree that the study is a good read, but for humor, not serious journalism. Their study is essentially them finding out that communists are on a communist platform, and then the study conductors conflate anti-Zionism with anti-semitism, a common hasbara tactic.

    Nothing you said contradicts that Lemmygrad.ml is Marxist-Leninist, all you've really done is confirm that it is, while also conflating anti-Zionism with anti-semitism. Further, the only comment they point out as anti-semitic, was in fact removed by the moderation for spilling over the edge, as comrade Edie pointed out here. Claiming grad is anti-semitic because of comments it removes is tortured logic.

    Also not sure why you're tagging my grad account, if I was trying to hide that I wouldn't post in my account description that I'm a Marxist-Leninist, nor would I have made my grad account the same name as my Hexbear and Lemmy.ml accounts.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

    We already went over this garbage study with your @Scotty@scribe.disroot.org account^1 and @Sepia@mander.xyz account^2 two days ago and your @Sepia@mander.xyz account two months ago^3.

    You’re like a broken record, bot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)
  • [+] -11 points 9 months ago (17 children)

    This seems right. Personally I'm not sure I could roll my eyes harder at the fact that so many people in 2026 are so ignorant as to be prepared to call themselves "communists" - after all the famines, the purges, the 40 years in which much of Europe was struggling to escape (literally) from communism... And then I saw that you, too, call yourself a communist! So I guess I'll stop there.

    Except to recommend you the Ones and Tooze podcast, in which the brilliant host (an ex-communist) recently did a whole series, in great and illuminating detail, on the various communist thinkers. Which I listened to... dutifully.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago (14 children)

    Communists govern the largest economy in the world by PPP, and capitalism is falling apart at the seams as the spoils of imperialism are beginning to be cut off. The global south is escaping underdevelopment, and this is forcing austerity in the west, explaining the surge to the right. In the US Empire, communists are more and more common than ever before:

    Famine was ended by communists in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cuba, etc. These areas had woefully inefficient systems of agriculture, such as the kulak system, which served to enrich one group of people over the laborers they employed. Collectivization combined with industrialization is why food security was achieved after the introduction of socialism to these countries, and the famines commonly attributed by western historians to communism were the last of a long line of regular famines.

    Similarly, purges in the largest majority of cases meant expulsion from the party or position, not execution, except in times of crisis, like the 1930s when fascism was on the rise. They were not done arbitrarily, but as a response to corruption, subterfuge, and sabotage.

    It's also a bit silly to suggest that people spent "40 years trying to escape communism." Right up to the end, the majority of people in the USSR wished to retain both the USSR and the system of socialism. This is proven not just from eyewitness reports of support, but also vote totals:

    Moreover, after the fall of socialism in Europe, the majority of people want it back or say they are worse off. This is compounded by the fact that over 90% of the Chinese population supports their government and system. Socialist countries run by communists have higher approval rates than capitalist states.

    Looking at Adam Tooze, I don't see much indicating him as a former communist. He grew up in West Germany in the height of the Cold War, is trained in liberal economics such as Keynesian economics, though his grandfather was allegedly a soviet recruiter, which is cool. I'm not really convinced I could find much out of his mini-series on Luxemburg, Trotsky, Stalin, or Lenin, considering I've already read works both by them and about them in greater detail than a podcast is going to cover.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (11 children)

    Right up to the end, the majority of people in the USSR wished to retain both the USSR and the system of socialism. This is proven not just from eyewitness reports of support, but also vote totals

    This isn't entirely true. The question posed essentially meant the USSR would reform into a more supranational organisation, granting more sovereignty and independence to the constituent republics. Voting "yes" was basically a vote for "'less' Soviet Union", as there was no option to vote to dissolve it entirely. It's also why after the yes-vote won, Soviet hardliners tried to coup the government.

    When the New Union Treaty wasn't fully implemented, member republics took it upon themselves to run full independence referendums, which were passed with overwhelming numbers (see the results on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Referendums_in_the_Soviet_Union, 90%+ pro-independence in most countries. Remember, most happened in 1991 just like the Union referendum, and no large population swings to the complete opposite direction that fast). The massive disapproval of the communist party was also very visible, as the vast majority of republics started electing non-communist leaders.

    And of course there were people still in favour of the Union, but they were largely outnumbered. Pro-union manifestations were met with large protests that often ended in police action to suppress them. Pro-Union sentiments started increasing again after the economic crises post-collapse, but it has never become so popular again to lead to a reformation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    I'm aware that after the votes, crisis in politics caused a dramatic swing in faith in the system. The question of viability of the socialist project wasn't unclear, however. The dissolution of the USSR was something that happened not due to some inevitable death clock in socialism. Contrary to what you believe, popular opinion can swing that fast, such as in the US Empire, where within a single month sentiment on Israel flipped from overwhelmingly positive to majority negative.

    Further, as I already showed, the large majority of people in post-soviet countries feel worse off and/or regret its fall. Socialism was an effective system at meeting the needs of the people, and though liberalization and a harsh recovery process from World War II strained the system, it was not on the way to collapse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (9 children)

    such as in the US Empire, where within a single month sentiment on Israel flipped from overwhelmingly positive to majority negative.

    It didn't go from +90% to -90%. That's what I mean with the huge 'swing' seen here. Negative attitudes on Israel went from 42% to 53% in 3 years time. Yet this supposed "total reversal of opinion" happened in months? Nonsense of course. Remember, the Soviet referendum did not have "dissolution" as an option. People picked the option closest to it.

    the large majority of people in post-soviet countries feel worse off and/or regret its fall

    This is irrelevant to the false notion that the Soviet Union dissolved against what the people wanted at the time, which that graphic is often used to misleadingly suggest.

    Even then, opinion polling on the subject is highly unreliable. Even the same pollster slightly rephrasing the question nets wildly different results. In the Baltics opinion is pretty consistent that the fall of the USSR was a good thing. But Belarusians tend to disagree with that. But when Belarusians are asked if they prefer to follow a Soviet system or a western democratic system, they choose the latter. And when another pollster asks them again in the same year, opinions flip again.

    There's certainly a strong sentimental nostalgia towards the Union, though not in all former member states. Yet it seems unlikely the population would be willing to vote it back into existence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    People did have a massive swing in opinion. I'm aware that dissolution was not an option, but your claim that people didn't change their opinion in light of the immense political turmoil between that vote and the second vote requires more evidence than "people don't change their minds that quickly." Rather, to the contrary, large shifts in opinion do happen more swiftly than gradually.

    Further, the fact that the large majority regret the fall of the soviet union is relevant in showing that it clearly wasn't as simple as saying everyone hated living in the soviet union, but realized how good they had it afterwards. Polling is often inconsistent not because of bad polling, but political instability caused by the immense fuckery of capitalism and imperialism in these countries, and forces like NATO.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    Protests were already widespread in the Union. Several member states had already declared nominal independence from Moscow. Gorbachev was doing damage control and trying his best to keep the Union from fracturing further. Elections in member republics saw huge rises in popularity for noncommunist parties.

    The referendum was an attempt to gain the political momentum required for reform, in an ultimate effort to keep the Union together. It was essentially a kind of propaganda attempt to display large support for the reformed Union, made possible because dissolution was not on the ballot.

    There was widespread civil discontent before the referendum. Elections saw noncommunists rise to power and several member states declared independence. Then I am somehow to believe that the population first swung all the way back to "actually the Soviet Union is great and we don't want to leave it" and back to "we should leave the Soviet Union" in a matter of mere months? That is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence, which you don't have. The truth is far simpler: at every point once the civil unrest started, the population voted in favour of less Soviet Union and for more independence, and not the other way around.

    My point regarding the phrasing of post-Soviet polling is that the wording drastically changes the outcome. Sure, people aren't happy about how the 90s turned out and they feel they're not part of a superpower anymore. They're not happy with being screwed over by western nations. They say those things were better under the Soviet Union. But ask them if they would go back to such a Union, and suddenly support evaporates. And in several former member states even the first few questions don't find much Soviet sympathies (eg the Baltics). They want to live in a stronger nation, akin to the Soviet Union, but they do not want to go back to what once was. It isn't a simple case of "boy we sure had it good", that does a huge disservice to the diverse and complicated opinions of the Union.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago* (6 children)

    Gorbachev had also implemented Perestroika, and his policy of Glasnost had weakened the soviet system. The seeds for radical change for the worse and instability were already there. My point isn't that there was 0 discontent and it flipped to 100% discontent, but that people, despite the various nationalist movements in some of the member-states, overall did support the socialist project up to the end. After the vote, there was the hardliner coup, dramatic sharpening of contradictions, and the internal, anti-democratic dissolution by Yeltsin claiming legitimacy from the rising nationalist movements.

    You have no evidence supporting your claims other than the idea that there was some discontent, which I never denied, and that people ultimately lost faith in the stabilty of the soviet union right at the end itself. Further, support for returning to socialism doesn't simply "evaporate," and again, it depends highly on the political fuckery in the region, the purging of communists by westerners, and the sheer devastation these countries went through. Trying to chalk it all up to simple pride in a stronger nation instead of the actual material benefits is an extraordinary claim.

    Russia and Belarus, for example, are seeing rising waves of socialist sympathy among the populace. The CPRF is rising rapidly, and people fundamentally feel that capitalism should not last any longer. This represents the large majority of the post-soviet population.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    CPRF support rising rapidly? You must live in a fantasy world. Their electoral results have rarely been worse, their 2024 presidential election candidate receiving a mere 4% of the vote (a record low for the party).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    And much more. At the end of the day, the Russian Federation is a bourgeois dictstorship, so it isn't going to just accept rising communist sympathies at a state level. The nationalists have a balancing act to play, trying to take advantage of rising soviet smpathies without legitimizing socialism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Party membership is a bad indicator for national popularity, as evidenced by the historically bad election result that followed the first article you linked.

    The second article does not have anything to do with the popularity of the party.

    The third article contradicts the sentiment you express in your own paragraph; you suggest the Russian government is taking advantage of rising Soviet sympathies, as if it's "just happening". But as your article explains, those Soviet sympathies are being expressly fuelled and created by the Russian government, as part of their propaganda efforts to promote the great patriotic war (which Putin now claims they're in another one of course, fighting the west). It's artificial, not natural.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    A rise in party membership in the CPRF does indeed suggest that they are growing, and further establishing legitimacy. National election results in war-time aren't a major indicator of popularity of the CPRF. Further, no, the nationalists are not creating soviet sympathies, but trying to take advantage of them. Capitalism has been devestating for Russia, and people yearn for the old days when their needs were better taken care of. The nationalists are appealing to that and trying to turn it into Russian pride.

    The idea that the nationalists are just beaming sympathies to the heads of the citizenry, rather than the citizenry longing for a working system after the devastation of cspitalism and the nationalists are trying to take advantage of that, is absurd. That's not how propaganda works, you have to identify actually felt beliefs and leverage them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    If you look at just about any country anywhere, you'll find that party membership does not really correlate with election success, but rather with more radical beliefs or activism. The national election results of the CPRF had been on a downward trend well before the war broke out as well. Their membership may have increased, but electorally they lost about 70% support. Even in wartime that's hard to ignore.

    I also don't think you've been paying attention to what the propaganda efforts of the Kremlin have been putting out. As a result, you have cause and effect reversed. They've been boosting national pride through the "great history of Russia", which inevitably means highlighting the Soviet Union and the great patriotic war. But the Soviet sympathies created through it are a side-effect of this.

    This also explains why polling suggests that sympathies for the Soviet Union mostly (not fully) consist of cultural and military pride. Yet sympathies for the Soviet economic system is low in comparison. It's also heavily influenced by current geopolitics. Ukraine used to be the most pro-communist member state, but these days the majority no longer regrets its dissolution. In East-Germany, there's a significant chunk of people who believe life was better in the GDR, yet that effectively translates into nationalist support for parties like the AfD (who of course are fascist, not communist). In Hungary, a large majority believe they were better off under communism than they are now, yet a large majority of 70% supports the move to a market economy. Uzbeks believe the Soviet government better responded to their needs, yet only a tiny minority believe life was actually better in the USSR.

    But this is all largely besides the original point, which is that the graphic showing the Soviet referendum results is used in a misleading narrative that suggests people did not want the Soviet Union to dissolve, as that wasn't on the ballot and subsequent referendum results showed overwhelming support for independence and dissolution. And as election results in former Soviet states prove, support for a return to communism or a more socialist system is fairly low, despite a complicated nostalgia for the Soviet Union in some member states.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    Again, you are confusing how propaganda works. Propaganda doesn't "create" sentiment, it appeals to underlying sentiment. The working classes aren't morally just, nor gullible, nor intelligent, but instead rational, and therefore generally seek narratives that conform to their felt conditions.

    It's not that I confuse cause for effect, it's that I go deeper, the cause is actually the devastation in capitalism compared to socialism resulting in rising socialist sentiment, the effect is that the nationalists take notice and are trying to twist it into Russian nationalism, causing a struggle between Russian nationalism and socialist nostalgia playing out in the Russian Federation, the effect of which is large increases in CPRF membership and restoration of soviet monuments and nomenclature. Cause and effect do not exist in a vacuum, but are instead the result of endless spirals. Dialectics at work.

    Further, the CPRF supports Russia United against Kiev in the war, and has taken a stance of critical support. The fact that United Russia is doing better electorally right now doesn't mean communism is falling out of favor, but that communist analysis is rallying around the nationalists in Russia, and partisans aren't willing to advocate for overtaking the current system at the moment.

    This also explains why polling suggests that sympathies for the Soviet Union mostly (not fully) consist of cultural and military pride.

    Polling does not suggest this, it suggests that the increase in poverty, austerity, sex work, drug abuse, homelessness, and overall devastation of capitalism wasn't worth it for the broad majority of society. You seek to explain sentiment derived from real, material economic conditions via culture and vibes, when the culture and vibes are a reflection of the economic base. You did it earlier with the idea that the nationalists are creating soviet pride in a vacuum, ignoring economic conditions, and you do it here again.

    As for Ukraine, it's very convenient that you skip over the Banderite coup in 2014 where the nationalists took political power. Ukraine did used to be more pro-communist, especially in the Donbass region, but after the western-backed Euromaidan coup the nationalists took political supremacy and started punishing communists. Same for East Germany, after reunification the communists were punished in show trials and purged, leaving the right-wing West German political force with supremacy. This purge of leftists created a vacuum for far-right populists and nationalists, as capitalist devastation combined with a lack of leftist organizing results in the faf-right having free-reign.

    Overall, when we take your convenient framing of trends and insistence on explaining demographic shifts not by real, material conditions but instead by a battle of vibes and ideas alone, we have to question your entire thought process. It's clear that you view history not as a long process that progresses in spirals, but as static snapshots, and the ideas held by the people not as coming from their real conditions economically but instead as beamed from above, and these failures in analysis are why you come to incorrect conclusions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I don’t see much indicating him as a former communist

    He talked about it - some variety of Trotskyism IIRC. A bit of a surprise but shouldn't have been. Tons of former Maoists have been in high positions. Even a neoliberal head of the European Commission (Barroso).

    On the supposed virtues of communism, you won't convince me but I suppose you know that already. IMO the world would have done very well to listen to George Orwell, someone who saw through it all on the basis of up-front experience 90 years ago. That might have saved an awful lot of needless suffering. Or Orlando Figes, who wrote a book whose title says it all: "The USSR: A People's Tragedy".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    To be fair, I don't think many communists globally are fans of Trotskyism, considering it's predominantly western and liberal-compatible. The vast majority of communists globally are Marxist-Leninists, Trotskyism is seen as more fringe. Trotskyists tend to already begin with anti-AES stances (for a variety of reasons, usually a combination of Red Scare propaganda mixed with alienation from capitalism), so going from "socialism is a good idea but never existed" to "socialism is a bad idea because what's existed hasn't worked" is a common jump. A former Trotskyist making loads of money off of denouncing communism is both entirely predictable and hardly compelling for those who've studied communism in theory and practice.

    As for the rapist Eric Blair, also known as George Orwell, the western world listened to him too well. He didn't see through anything, rather, his position as a British fed (known for keeping a journal of people he knew and suspected of being Jewish and/or communists) and propagandist was extremely useful to western intelligence agencies. On Orwell is a good essay going over his dreadfall past and role in propagandizing. Orwell has been taught in countless schools not because of any truth, but because of his utility.

    As for Figes, another that earns an enourmous sum of money from preaching the bible of anti-communism to serve capitalist interests, better historians exist. Syzmanski's Is the Red Flag Flying? The Political Economy of the Soviet Union today, Pat Sloan's Soviet Democracy, Human Rights in the Soviet Union, Anna Louise Strong's This Soviet World, Mary Stevenson Callcott's Russian Justice, the recently deceased Dr. Michael Parenti's Blackshirts and Reds, all the way up to Professor Roland Boer's Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance, there's tons of academic resources to get a much better view of socialism in practice.

    I don't expect you to read these, of course, my point is that just like you don't expect to change your mind by me sharing evidence counter to your views, I'm unlikely to be swayed by professionals repeating standard anti-communist dogma. It takes a much greater amount of study and reflection to go against the dominant, hegemonic culture, nearly every common anti-communist talking point has been wielded against me at some point simply by me stating that I support socialism.

    Is there anything specific you'd like to discuss, regarding the effectiveness of socialism/communism? We can have a constructive conversation surrounding specifics.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] -10 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Their idol Mao killed approx 160 million humans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 9 months ago

    Do you have a source on that? Even if you include landlords killed by the peasantry during land reform, all of the deaths by unintentional famine, and the excesses of the cultural revolution as deliberately killed by Mao, the numbers accepted by Historians are nowhere close to 160 million. This is such a fantastical number that even the famously debunked Black Book of Communism doesn't go over 100 million, and that was including the entire history of the soviet union as well as PRC. The Black Book of Communism famously included both non-births as deaths, and Nazis killed by the Red Army as "victims of communism."

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 child)

    One group- memes or something is wholly controlled by Chinese state actors.

    As one of the moderators of !memes@lemmy.ml i encourage OP to look at the sort of posts i make and tell me - do you really think i'm a "Chinese state actor"?

    Do you think all these posts i make in, eg, !hoch@lemmy.ml and !goodnews@lemmy.ml and !badnews@lemmy.ml and !eleven@lemmy.ml... these are all part of a carefully-crafted cover, and I'm actually being paid by China to delete totally-not-racist posts depicting their president as a yellow cartoon bear?

    And for this service, to maintain my cover, they also pay me to create memes like this and this and this and this and this and this (and defending that one against less informed nerds) and this and this and this (a small sample of my OC here)?

    And do you think China paid for this understandable explanation of asymmetric cryptography using high-school level math, because someone asked, deep in a thread about a service which I'd also already debunked the snake-oil privacy claims of?

    Really?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›