• ComradeMiao@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is just like how I can praise so many things about China, push back against anti-China US propaganda, and still not pretend it isn’t an authoritarian regime where Xi made himself essentially life time president now.

    Speaking of that, are there any left leaning subs that aren’t delusional?

    • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      authoritarian regime

      Both of these terms are obfuscstory propaganda that mean a person hasn’t placed enough scrutiny on what they have internalized. That might sound like I am simply attacking you, but I mean this as a way of answering your (combative) question: you want a space where people have some basic ideas about cold war propaganda but where they retain a significant amount of chauvinist framibgs from that propaganda. You can find like-minded people wherever left education arrests itself, which is why you won’t find it in organizations or spaces that require reading on these topics.

      To explain my response, I’ll go over the two words.

      Authoritarian. This word is poisoned beyond clear meaning. Every state is authoritarian, so what is the meaning of calling a particular state authoritarian? Every revolution is authoritarian, so do you also criticize them as such and seek out anti-revolutionary spaces? In reality, I know that this term is just thrown around in chauvinist contexts as a dog whistle. In this context it just means “bad” and “the enemy”. It’s the liberal version of, “they hate us for our freedoms”.

      Regime. This term is synonymous with givernment or state, but just colors it as, again, “bad”. Venezuela must always be described as being led by a regime, not a government. As a target of imperialist propaganda, it must be implicitly propagandized as illegitimate and bad. Think of someone saying, “the Biden regime”. How often do you hear that phrase? If you’ve heard it, it was a socialist trying to make this point and even the playing field.

      If you remove the propaganda aspects, your framing becomes, “still not pretend it isn’t a government”. Becomes less spicy, doesn’t it? Despite having no differences in meaning outside of implying it is bad.

      Finally, Xi didn’t make himself president for life, he must be regularly reelected. The government itself removed term limits in the normal way: with a vote. Imperialist media calls this “president for life” because they are chauvinists. When the US had no term limits, was every president “president for life”? Aren’t term limits antidemocratic, i.e. more authoritarian?

      In short: please do some self-criticism on this internalized chauvinism and you will find it easier to find comrades. You are currently in an incoherent position and that means you’d only find comeradery among the incoherent snd incurious. Be around people that challenge you based on their reading and knowledge.

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      It’s hard finding people with this opinion, sadly. I’m with you on this one comrade

    • riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      go make one, id join ;3

      assuming you arent a delussional leftist yourself, unaware of your own delusions…

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      1 day ago

      No. Failing to praise all US empire efforts to diminish China is “letting China win”. There cannot be a “some good some bad” view on China. “all bad only” is allowed.