might look tempting, but another totalitarian authority would have to swoop into the power vacuum created by dedollar-efforts.
Why is this a given?
is this for community meant for tankies??
You don’t have to be a “tankie” to see that harm of maintaining dollar hegemony, or to see the potential value in alternative currencies gaining support. And using “tankie” here is just meaningless; you’d add as much value saying “is this community meant for wokies??”.
And China has just about as many of those capitalism problems as we do.
Do you really think China has all of the same capitalism problems?
China doesn’t have:
Does China have problems related to capitalism’s influence? Of course. Does it have as many, or do they permeate it so deeply and thoroughly? Of course not.
If we’re going to do this whole “your source is unreliable” nonsense, can we at least get some consistency? Attack the BBC for outright lies and misinformation and siding with moneyed interests at the expense of the rest of humanity; attack CNN for the same; attack The Economist for the same; attack NYT for the same; attack the Washington Post for the same.
Also, just because their editorial opinion differs from yours doesn’t mean they’re unreliable. Just because they “defended Bashar Al-Assad” doesn’t mean they are “fake news”. There are plenty of people in the world whose world-view does not align with yours, and they aren’t all lying and wrong. It should also be noted that if an article links out to other sources, then even if you don’t agree with the article’s editorial opinion, you can still gauge the truthfulness and form opinions on the subject by following to the sources.
Edit to add: In this specific case, we saw several news sources you are unlikely to call ‘fake news’ all report the same lie with tiny variations: NYT, CNN, and Politico, among others. What they said was so blatantly false, even the Pentagon denounced it. Cuba condemned the reports, saying:
Cuba’s Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernandez de Cossio said the accusation is “untrue and unfounded”, arguing that the articles were “promoted with the malicious intention to justify the unprecedented reinforcement of the economic blockade, destabilization and the aggression against Cuba”.
Why would the USA do such a thing? Perhaps it’s because The Pentagon Is Freaking Out About a Potential War With China (Because America might lose.). Have we seen similar actions from these untrustworthy news sources in the past? Absolutely, NYT published an article in 2020 that, while demonstrably false, was still cited by the US House of Representatives Armed Services Committee and used to extend the war in Afghanistan; the Pentagon even admitted the report was false only a couple weeks later.
Before you get all up in arms that a news outlet from another country or side of the political spectrum must be spewing 100% lies, you should ask yourself why you are willingly to blindly believe the entrenched western media outlets, who have proven time and again that they are used to manipulate world events, manipulate public opinion, and are overall a blight on the average man’s wellbeing.
Hey, do you have any resources that might discuss the ‘flavours’ of communism? I’m looking for good reading material and this sounds like a specific tangent I’d like to be more knowledgeable on.
I came across this comment today, and it really makes me wonder how people just dismiss intellectual curiosity outright.
yes!!! they’re everywhere and anytime I see someone bring it up someone comments some shit about having an open mind… uhhh no???
Unlike the side many of them seem to blindly and militantly defend, the side they rage against is not asking for blind adherence to beliefs. You have to open yourself up to questioning your beliefs; there is no value in a closed mind.
You’ve come in to a three year old thread only to not say a single true thing.
China is a socialist country, and has been for a while now. The only reason you think any inkling of capitalism being present somehow means they aren’t socialist is because you aren’t using the right framework to look at the situation. You think it must be either-or, when a socialist country can take advantage of aspects of a capitalist system. There is no class of capitalists, and there is no reliance on or subservience to investors. It doesn’t have the characteristics of capitalism: it is not an economic system based on private property. The use of a market economy also doesn’t make it not socialist: the basic economic system is socialist, and a socialist market economy plays a role in the allocation of resources and distribution[1].
There are other political parties in China, and they’re permitted. The fantasy that only one party is permitted to exist is just that, a fantasy. From what I can tell there are currently at least 8 political parties, and there have been many others in the near past. Also, the fact that most people support one party is not evidence that people are forced to support it; it’s evidence that that party serves the needs and desires of its people. People support the party because it benefits them.
Your comment just reads as ignorance. If you are actually curious about China, and aren’t just going to sling talking points you’ve heard from Western sources, there are plenty of resources to help you learn about it. If you don’t bother to put in the effort, then don’t try to offer up what you think must be true.
Boer, R. (2021). “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics”. ↩︎