92% Of Polled Russians Want To Return To The USSR

sladerunner69

Member
Joined
May 24, 2013
Messages
3,307
Age
31
Location
Los Angeles
Interesting. There definitely seems to be a point of pride about it. Understandably so, since the Soviet Union achieved quite a lot in such a short time.



"80% of Russians consider important and support Putin's amendments to the Constitution" (2020)

80% россиян считают важными и поддерживают поправки Путина в Конституцию

"Putin won the presidential election with 76.69 percent of the vote" (2018)
Путин победил на выборах президента, набрав 76,69 процента голосов

Putin also had his only legitimate political opponent assassinated- in broad daylight- right in front of the Kremlin.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
I've hardly any knwoledge about these fields, I cannot asses how much room for severe misconceptions there is in the fields of science. I hope a lot. I really hope that the world and the natural laws are ultra-complex beyond control so that evtually they will make a massive, game-changig mistake.

It’s ongoing, from our perspective on here we are witnessing the biological aspect of it, psychotic behavior is being normalized if not idolized.

The problem is they are dangerous, I was never overly concerned about nuclear power as much as I am about biological warfare.
They are foaming at the mouth to use CRISPR via viruses on the populace, they don’t have the courage to do it just yet because they can’t protect themselves from it, a psychotic state like China could do it now and enforce a ruthless lockdown of borders.

https://phys.org/news/2017-08-crispr-biological-weapon.html
I may start a separate thread with this article to highlight it to people, Captain vaccine Bill Gates is all over this sphere of research.
 

Max23

Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
490
Why put a label on it? To better comprehend it? Impossible. You can only anticipate a broad corridor of motives and possible developments. If you label it you involuntarily begin to fill it with preformed and incorrect content.

What we live through is what will someday be regarded by the Homo Deus-people similar to how we regard the hunter-gatherer era. An archaic pre-stage of „civilization“ and history, only abstractely and remotely feasible that it were humans that lived that way and paved the way to the present.

Homo Deus will look in astonishment and pitifulness on our time, where billions of people toiled blindly and ignorant towards the next stage of evolution/progress.
Homo Deus will know that his ancestors were among the privileged few who by chance and design steered that process. He will thank them and rational the cruelties on the way as the necessary and noble thing to do in the name of the greatness of what Homo sapiens really could become - if such categories even still exist among these new humans. There ethics will be fundamentally different from ours.

Not putting a label on it isn´t going to help understand the situation better either. I quote you: „It doesn’t matter if it really is attainable. It only matters that they currently think it is.“ This means you can fight it. That post created a picture that everyone should fear. These images can be used to combat the fear they put out. Naming them or what is happening would really help to identify them and the situation and to get people to join the resistance.

The second post I don´t like. It is smart talk. You just want people to see how smart you are. It sounds not only defeatism, but empowering the enemy. Calling god gay doesn´t help either.
 

LeeLemonoil

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
4,265
@Max23

I don’t call God gay. I call the transhumans by the Species Name „Homo Deus“ instead of „Homo Sapiens“. It’s a term coined by Yuval Noah Harari, one of his books is called that, where he describes this possible or consequent next step in human history.

I don’t do smart talk to impress or what. I don’t want to sound defeatist either. I like what you wrote about picturing the worse case and stiring people to resist that way.

At the same time I do believe it’s hopeless. They can only beat themselves now - but they will crush billions up until that day, of it ever comes
 

sladerunner69

Member
Joined
May 24, 2013
Messages
3,307
Age
31
Location
Los Angeles

I LOVE that article. It's both deliciously depraved and shamelessly reaching. The kind of twisted writing that could only come from the sick minds maufactured by our marxist indoctrination camps aka western public universities.\

For instance, it claims that most westerners have never been to a communist country, and have no idea how popular communism is in these places. Forgetting for a brief moment that expressing views antithetical to any communist regime has been a one way ticket for a front row seat to a firing squad since the bolshevik revolution, let's give it the benefit of the doubt and test that belief on it's own assumptions: Venezuelan, Cuban Refugees Call on Trump to Help Free Their Countries From Communism

Refugees from the authoritarian regimes produced by communism/socialism have an incredibly high tendency of anti-communism. Actually, refugees from these countries are far more likely to hold anti-communist sentiment than the average american. Look at all of the college student out protesting, they are marxists. Anti-communism is far too rare here if anything. The democratic candidates are now all full blown socialist, just one step away from communists.
 
OP
Energizer

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611


The Boris Nemtsov Assassination: A Propaganda Attack On Vladimir Putin?

The question is who was responsible for Nemstov's death, I don't think we should assume it was Putin. If there is no corroborating evidence for the claims in the articles you linked, and I don't see any direct evidence to support that it was in these articles, I find it more likely this was done by someone else, maybe Russian nationalists who saw Nemtsov as a threat as the article I linked points out. Ask yourself, do you really think Putin is stupid enough to assassinate people? Think about it in terms of geopolitics.

It would make Washington's anti-Russian lobby job easier if he was just offing people. It would also cause massive distrust in the Russian citizenry of their own president, and he would be voted out of office if he were pulling those kinds of stunts. Keep in mind, on average, Russians do like him being in office, judging by their actions of continually voting him in. Yes they complain about him at times, but they view him differently than Westerners do, the legitimate criticisms involved with his presidency from Russians are far removed from the propaganda being churned out about him in the West.

I am always suspicious of so-called "grass-roots" opposition movements, these usually turn out to be CIA funded artificial protests and paid actors, I wouldn't be surprised if Nemtsov himself was in the CIA or working with them.
 
Last edited:

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
stalin.jpg


(Not my email, one of the commenters on Danny Roddy's channel posted that).

Grover Furr's personal website, includes information about all of his books and many of his articles:
Welcome to Grover Furr's Home Page

I find it ironic usually the people that so vehemently attack communism don't seem to realize the US is already a Democratic-Republican (two sides of the same wing essentially) one-party state that protects only the interests of the rich (oligarchy).
I don't trust Ray on anything political. He always seem to take Chinas side and he avoids criticizing China for its many well documented human rights abuses. And in the next sentence he talks about (real) American imperialist crimes and how the KKK runs American police departments or whatever. Very strange indeed. It's very ironic that someone who calls himself anti-authoritarian takes the side of one of the most openly authoritarian governments of the world. To me this means that he's probably completely deluded when it comes to Soviet Russia as well. I haven't yet done a lot of my own reading on Soviet Russia though so I can't speak too much on that specifically, however Chinas extreme and open authoritarianism is there for everyone to see, today.
 
OP
Energizer

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
I don't trust Ray on anything political. He always seem to take Chinas side and he avoids criticizing China for its many well documented human rights abuses. And in the next sentence he talks about (real) American imperialist crimes and how the KKK runs American police departments or whatever. Very strange indeed. It's very ironic that someone who calls himself anti-authoritarian takes the side of one of the most openly authoritarian governments of the world. To me this means that he's probably completely deluded when it comes to Soviet Russia as well. I haven't yet done a lot of my own reading on Soviet Russia though so I can't speak too much on that specifically, however Chinas extreme and open authoritarianism is there for everyone to see, today.

You have to look at the historical context of these countries that support a strong state (and to an outsider just look authoritarian). Most of the time they have been attacked and at war and therefore the existence of a state is a natural thing for them. Don't just take the mainline Pentagon-narrative on China, look at perspectives from Chinese living in China about how they feel about their government. An argument can be made for the Great Firewall that China imposes for censoring Western sites, because so much of them act as a propaganda for the anti-Chinese narrative. China being a very tumultuous country, may want to discourage radicalism and extremism. Unfortunately, the US is still funding protests in Hong Kong and funding 3rd party terrorist groups to try to break up China.

China is definitely not perfect, and like I said before, they do seem to have a form of imperialism, but historically speaking, they tend to be more interested in self-preservation than invading foreign countries, though there are some exceptions to that. I don't pretend to be an expert on Russia or China, but I do think they have been misunderstood, and I am reading up on the history of both old and modern China and Soviet to Modern Russia to try to understand their current politics and culture. Westerners have a very strong distrust of our own government, Chinese have a wide range of opinions, but on average from what I have read they seem to have more trust in their government so authoritarianism is less of a "problem" because they have some faith in their system meeting their needs.

Here in America there's the pretense of freedom, which I think is probably worse than China's system, because Americans believe they are free and are represented in politics when they opposite is usually the case -- the idea of a Democracy is more of a convenient illusion to maintain the ruling class. Americans are also on average, completely unaware of corporate censorship, lobbying, and propaganda (especially pro-Pentagon lobbying that supports endless wars, coup d'etats of foreign governments that the US gov't doesn't like, sanctioning foreign governments ie. Venezuela and Iran recently, propaganda to overthrow foreign governments, anti-communist lobbying, expansion of US military bases across the world, etc) and how it influences mainstream media, and are overly trusting of the media here so censorship here is less "out in the open" as it is in China; in China the citizens are totally aware of the censorship and that their government blocks certain Western sites. I interpret that as an act of self-preservation on part of their government. There's definitely faults in both the Chinese and Russian governments, but I see the US Empire (The US Gov't and its NATO allies) as the worst offender in terms of starting the most wars, killing the most people (especially innocent people), so in the grand scheme, it puts these things in perspective. I support criticism of foreign governments but it should be legitimate, fair criticism, and it should be distinguished from propaganda.

Steve Bannon coaching CIA cutout Hong Kong "protester":
https://vimeo.com/438365101
 
Last edited:

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
I don't trust Ray on anything political. He always seem to take Chinas side and he avoids criticizing China for its many well documented human rights abuses. And in the next sentence he talks about (real) American imperialist crimes and how the KKK runs American police departments or whatever. Very strange indeed. It's very ironic that someone who calls himself anti-authoritarian takes the side of one of the most openly authoritarian governments of the world. To me this means that he's probably completely deluded when it comes to Soviet Russia as well. I haven't yet done a lot of my own reading on Soviet Russia though so I can't speak too much on that specifically, however Chinas extreme and open authoritarianism is there for everyone to see, today.

The real strangeness here is your paraphrasing of Peat.
 

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
You have to look at the historical context of these countries that support a strong state (and to an outsider just look authoritarian). Most of the time they have been attacked and at war and therefore the existence of a state is a natural thing for them.
It has nothing to do about having a strong state or just "looking authoritarian". There are basic rights like free speech and such that don't cost the government anything. Right to stand trial etc. You can have a strong state and still have these rights. America despite all of its problems excels in these areas. Legally, on paper, and most of the time upheld by the courts, Americans enjoy the most freedom of speech on the planet, and it seems to be just about the only country in the world that even makes an attempt to have free speech. Rogue intelligence agencies might harass you or kill you, but legally speaking you do have the free speech, more than anywhere else, at least.


Don't just take the mainline Pentagon-narrative on China, look at perspectives from Chinese living in China about how they feel about their government.
Chinese people who don't feel good about the government and express those feelings get their social credit score lowered, get intimidating visits by the police. And if they insist on dissenting they eventually get put in prison, or even worse, they just completely disappeared. My thoughts about China comes mainly from information and experiences of Chinese people, and foreigners who have lived in China.

An argument can be made for the Great Firewall that China imposes for censoring Western sites, because so much of them act as a propaganda for the anti-Chinese narrative. China being a very tumultuous country, may want to discourage radicalism and extremism. Unfortunately, the US is still funding protests in Hong Kong and funding 3rd party terrorist groups to try to break up China.
This is an authoritarian position. You can make any arguments against free speech that you want, but you can't dress it up in rhethoric about freedom or anti-authoritarianism. It's a lie. The argument that you made is exactly the same argument that has been made by tyrants since time immemorial. It's the argument of authoritarian despots, monarchs, and churches. It's an argument that nazis make all the time.

Also, the fact that USA still exists despite having free speech and despite all the various kind of propaganda Americans are subject to disproves the idea that you have to kill free speech because of propaganda.

China is definitely not perfect, and like I said before, they do seem to have a form of imperialism just like the US does, but historically speaking, they tend to be more interested in self-preservation than invading foreign countries, though there are some exceptions to that.
I don't believe that at all, it looks like apples and apples to me. Psychopaths are all the same and history will repeat itself for as long as people fetischise authoritarianism.

I don't pretend to be an expert on Russia or China, but I do think they have been misunderstood, and I am reading up on the history of both old and modern China and Soviet to Modern Russia to try to understand their current politics and culture.
We are talking about empires that are in constant information warfare. Most things about most things you read are lies, the only fully trustworthy things are first hand accounts and even then it's only proof that person X actually asserted thing Y.

Westerners have a very strong distrust of our own government,
I don't think westerners in general distrust their governments more than in the rest of the world, I think that's a distinct American thing.

Chinese have a wide range of opinions, but on average from what I have read they seem to have more trust in their government so authoritarianism is less of a "problem" because they have some faith in their system meeting their needs.
All media in China is run by the state. There is no diversity of opinion allowed, at least when it comes to politics and how the state is run. The state of diversity of political opinion is bad in the west, but it's much much worse in China. You're probably right that there is a general trust by the Chinese people (or at least the Han people) that the Chinese government is working, at least on some level, in their interest. And it's probably true. China is run by its own totalitarian psychopaths who actually have vested interest and a will to make China great. Wheras western countries have basically been mostly hijacked (by the banking cartel, oligarchic industry-owning families, massive multinational corporations, think tanks, rootless cosmopolitans, and probably marxists as well), and virtually no western government is run in the interests of their people. It's clear to see. Living standards are dropping in the west, whereas living standards are increasing in China. So there is an underlying reason for Chinese people to trust their government on some level.

Here in America there's the pretense of freedom, which I think is probably worse than China's system, because Americans believe they are free and are represented in politics when they opposite is usually the case -- the idea of a Democracy is more of a convenient illusion to maintain the ruling class.
Representative democracy is basically a scam that doesn't work very well anywhere (meaning in the interst of the people). However those classical liberal human rights that Americas founders institued are anything but a pretense. We could discuss the state of these freedoms but compared to the rest of the world Americans have the freest speech and they have the unique right to defend themselves. They also have the right to stand trial and and the right to not have to witness against themselves, and to not be tortured et cetera. Of course traitors are always chopping away at those rights and they are destroying them more and more, and always making new ways to work around them. But at least on paper they exist, USA is probably the only country in the world were you can actually win a court case against a government representative.

Americans are also on average, completely unaware of corporate censorship, lobbying, and propaganda (especially pro-Pentagon lobbying that supports endless wars, coup d'etats of foreign governments that the US gov't doesn't like, propaganda to overthrow foreign governments, anti-communist lobbying, expansion of US military bases across the world, etc) and how it influences mainstream media,
I'd argue that northern and western Europeans are even less aware. We are all under heavy propaganda from all directions. Operation mockingbird propaganda from the CIA, duginists from Russia spreading all kind of separtist and/or divisive propaganda and the same from China as well, thinktanks and multinational corporations promoting economic neo-liberalism and globalism and open borders, anti-white propaganda from X, nazi propaganda from reactionary losers in their basements, market fundamentalist propaganda from rich privileged autists, and communist propaganda from disillusioned deluded unemployed people, and much much more.

and are overly trusting of the media here so censorship here is less "out in the open" as it is in China
In USA they'll cut the feed and blacklist you, and maybe they'll try to sabotage your business. In China you just straight up disappear. Political murders clearly happen in USA as well but it takes much more than just dissenting.

; in China the citizens are totally aware of the censorship and that their government blocks certain Western sites.
They block ALL western sites. You used to be able to easily circumvent the firewall with a VPN but now the Chinese government is cracking down hard on that as well, as China sinks deeper and deeper into naked authoritarian totalitarianism.

I interpret that as an act of self-preservation on part of their government.
You could use the same psychopathic argument to defend basically all of Americas crimes, that it is done to preserve American hegemony.

There's definitely faults in both the Chinese and Russian governments, but I see the US Empire (The US Gov't and its NATO allies) as the worst offender in terms of starting the most wars, killing the most people (especially innocent people), so in the grand scheme, it puts these things in perspective. I support criticism of foreign governments but it should be legitimate, fair criticism, and it should be distinguished from propaganda.
Russia is not communist anymore not even in name so I don't understand why you (and other communists) are even defending it. It's complety oligarchic, all of your criticism of western capitalism can be applied to Russia as well.

USA is definitely a bigger international bandit than Russia (but not the USSR) and probably China too. That is not a reason to become an authoritarianist. I think it's important to note that most of those international "excursions" are illegal even under American law, and they certainly don't seem to be done in the interests of the American people, as their living standard keeps on dropping. Rather, it's done by various parasitic special interest groups, none of which actually value any of the values that USA was founded upon, or that The Enlightment highlighted.
 

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
Steve Bannon coaching CIA cutout Hong Kong "protester":

Also, all of these destablizing activities that USA is doing in China and Russia, China and Russia are doing in USA as well. How could you decry one but not the other?
 
OP
Energizer

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
It has nothing to do about having a strong state or just "looking authoritarian". There are basic rights like free speech and such that don't cost the government anything. Right to stand trial etc. You can have a strong state and still have these rights. America despite all of its problems excels in these areas. Legally, on paper, and most of the time upheld by the courts, Americans enjoy the most freedom of speech on the planet, and it seems to be just about the only country in the world that even makes an attempt to have free speech. Rogue intelligence agencies might harass you or kill you, but legally speaking you do have the free speech, more than anywhere else, at least.



Chinese people who don't feel good about the government and express those feelings get their social credit score lowered, get intimidating visits by the police. And if they insist on dissenting they eventually get put in prison, or even worse, they just completely disappeared. My thoughts about China comes mainly from information and experiences of Chinese people, and foreigners who have lived in China.


This is an authoritarian position. You can make any arguments against free speech that you want, but you can't dress it up in rhethoric about freedom or anti-authoritarianism. It's a lie. The argument that you made is exactly the same argument that has been made by tyrants since time immemorial. It's the argument of authoritarian despots, monarchs, and churches. It's an argument that nazis make all the time.

Also, the fact that USA still exists despite having free speech and despite all the various kind of propaganda Americans are subject to disproves the idea that you have to kill free speech because of propaganda.


I don't believe that at all, it looks like apples and apples to me. Psychopaths are all the same and history will repeat itself for as long as people fetischise authoritarianism.


We are talking about empires that are in constant information warfare. Most things about most things you read are lies, the only fully trustworthy things are first hand accounts and even then it's only proof that person X actually asserted thing Y.


I don't think westerners in general distrust their governments more than in the rest of the world, I think that's a distinct American thing.


All media in China is run by the state. There is no diversity of opinion allowed, at least when it comes to politics and how the state is run. The state of diversity of political opinion is bad in the west, but it's much much worse in China. You're probably right that there is a general trust by the Chinese people (or at least the Han people) that the Chinese government is working, at least on some level, in their interest. And it's probably true. China is run by its own totalitarian psychopaths who actually have vested interest and a will to make China great. Wheras western countries have basically been mostly hijacked (by the banking cartel, oligarchic industry-owning families, massive multinational corporations, think tanks, rootless cosmopolitans, and probably marxists as well), and virtually no western government is run in the interests of their people. It's clear to see. Living standards are dropping in the west, whereas living standards are increasing in China. So there is an underlying reason for Chinese people to trust their government on some level.


Representative democracy is basically a scam that doesn't work very well anywhere (meaning in the interst of the people). However those classical liberal human rights that Americas founders institued are anything but a pretense. We could discuss the state of these freedoms but compared to the rest of the world Americans have the freest speech and they have the unique right to defend themselves. They also have the right to stand trial and and the right to not have to witness against themselves, and to not be tortured et cetera. Of course traitors are always chopping away at those rights and they are destroying them more and more, and always making new ways to work around them. But at least on paper they exist, USA is probably the only country in the world were you can actually win a court case against a government representative.


I'd argue that northern and western Europeans are even less aware. We are all under heavy propaganda from all directions. Operation mockingbird propaganda from the CIA, duginists from Russia spreading all kind of separtist and/or divisive propaganda and the same from China as well, thinktanks and multinational corporations promoting economic neo-liberalism and globalism and open borders, anti-white propaganda from X, nazi propaganda from reactionary losers in their basements, market fundamentalist propaganda from rich privileged autists, and communist propaganda from disillusioned deluded unemployed people, and much much more.


In USA they'll cut the feed and blacklist you, and maybe they'll try to sabotage your business. In China you just straight up disappear. Political murders clearly happen in USA as well but it takes much more than just dissenting.


They block ALL western sites. You used to be able to easily circumvent the firewall with a VPN but now the Chinese government is cracking down hard on that as well, as China sinks deeper and deeper into naked authoritarian totalitarianism.


You could use the same psychopathic argument to defend basically all of Americas crimes, that it is done to preserve American hegemony.


Russia is not communist anymore not even in name so I don't understand why you (and other communists) are even defending it. It's complety oligarchic, all of your criticism of western capitalism can be applied to Russia as well.

USA is definitely a bigger international bandit than Russia (but not the USSR) and probably China too. That is not a reason to become an authoritarianist. I think it's important to note that most of those international "excursions" are illegal even under American law, and they certainly don't seem to be done in the interests of the American people, as their living standard keeps on dropping. Rather, it's done by various parasitic special interest groups, none of which actually value any of the values that USA was founded upon, or that The Enlightment highlighted.

I think you're sort of misconstruing my argument. China definitely has its problems, but the foolishness of US and its NATO allies is Western paternalism and trying to project its own cultural values and rules of governance on China and trying to assume the superiority of its own system and impose it on other countries. I don't support authoritarianism, but I support the Chinese government from having autonomy from Western interventionism and do not support Western exceptionalism. Doesn't mean I agree with them censoring the internet, but again -- they have good reason to given their history. To sit here and pretend otherwise and ignore their reasoning is being willfully ignorant of their history. It is up to Chinese citizens to decide what they want out of their country, not Americans or Europeans. I am tired of the pretense of the American Empire thinking of itself as coming to "the rescue" of foreign countries (and typically destroying them) -- leave them alone, I say. I attempted to try to provide a defense of their system as understanding it under their own cultural history but there's really no point on this forum, a lot of people have been influenced by endless, endless propaganda to believe China has some super evil government worse than anywhere else. BTW, it is not true that the Chinese government forbids diversity of opinion. Go on Chinese social media sites and you'll see plenty of highly opinioned people with a wide range of different opinions, just like on Twitter.

Frankly I don't have the prolonged interest in "defending" China, just showing a different side than the Western anti-communist propaganda that clearly seems to have influenced you as well. I think criticism should be more nuanced than China is this or that.

Russia is a former Soviet State and has been influenced by socialist history, but you are right that it's not exactly a socialist country anymore since the fall of the SU. Every country to some extent or another has to exist within the global capitalist framework and Russia has had a long string of corrupt presidents who tried to privatize their whole economy and left things in a poor state for Putin so I don't try to blame him for inheriting such a mess, he seems to be doing his best to try to fix things. I do look at Russian and Chinese imperialism and recognize their own bad behavior, but I am simply more vocal about my own country's activities, mainly because I live here in America and think our government is the most prolific in causing global damage and I have more "control" over affairs here (and know more about what's going on as I live here) than I do in any foreign countries. I think it is also dangerous to have such a hostile relationship with Russia and China that the US and its NATO allies seem to promote with the constant barrage of fear-mongering and propaganda in the mainstream news -- I do not want more pointless wars. What I was defending against wasn't that China and Russia are perfect countries, but that the mythology the Mockingbird Media has created around them is mostly divorced from reality. So whatever criticism of their governments there is, and there is plenty to be had there, it should be nuanced and not just parroting propaganda or looking at things divorced from their context. BTW, I am not defending authoritarianism either, understand that. I do not want hierarchy or class divisions. But I also don't live in China, so their problem whether that be one of authoritarianism or not, isn't my problem. My problem is my own government, because that is the government I live under.

For online resources, I look on reddit.com/r/sino for a different side of China that is not presented in Western media. There is a large Chinese presence on that forum and is not as biased as Western anti-communist propaganda that is omnipresent in the media. Their FAQ has some topics that might address some of the things you are talking about:

Social Credit

Hong Kong Protests

Xinjiang Muslims

Internet Censorship

Democracy

The average Westerner projects his own values and government system onto the Chinese one and assumes the superiority of his own without considering the cultural values and history of China and what the Chinese want out of their own government. That is why I appreciate the perspective from native Chinese as opposed to the stereotypical bitter laowai "sexpats" who just come to China with an agenda and live there for months to years, and learn nothing because of their superiority complex and ignorant attitude that keeps them from ever learning about the culture and history.

Probably my biggest criticism of China and Asia/Russia in general is their high PUFA intake, but it's pretty high here now too in America, it seems like there's only a few countries and populations within certain specific regions that use butter or coconut oil as their standard.
 
Last edited:

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
I think you're sort of misconstruing my argument. China definitely has its problems, but the foolishness of US and its NATO allies is Western paternalism and trying to project its own cultural values and rules of governance on China and trying to assume the superiority of its own system and impose it on other countries.
I don't think human rights have a cultural bias.

I don't support authoritarianism, but I support the Chinese government from having autonomy from Western interventionism and do not support Western exceptionalism. Doesn't mean I agree with them censoring the internet, but again -- they have good reason to given their history. To sit here and pretend otherwise and ignore their reasoning is being willfully ignorant of their history.
Every authority has a good reason to control and censor information, it doesn't make it a good or moral or justifiable thing to do. It is one of the single most authoritarian things a government can do, you are literally making the exact same argument that nazis make.

It is up to Chinese citizens to decide what they want out of their country, not Americans or Europeans.
I never argued otherwise.

I am tired of the pretense of the American Empire thinking of itself as coming to "the rescue" of foreign countries (and typically destroying them) -- leave them alone, I say
I agree wholeheartedly.

I attempted to try to provide a defense of their system as understanding it under their own cultural history but there's really no point on this forum, a lot of people have been influenced by endless, endless propaganda to believe China has some super evil government worse than anywhere else.
Wrong. My opinion is not based on western propaganda.

BTW, it is not true that the Chinese government forbids diversity of opinion. Go on Chinese social media sites and you'll see plenty of people with plenty of different opinions, just like on Twitter.
They have a freer debate climate when it comes to some things. For example, many Chinese are openly racist, and it's accepted and normal like it was in the west a hundred years ago. They can openly talk about many things that are considered politically incorrect in the west, things that would get you banned on western social media. That is true.

What they can't do is criticize their governments decision making, their government system, or highlight government faults. Many Chinese people were completely banned of off their social media for criticzing the CPCs handling of covid19, and some were arrested and taken away.

Frankly I don't have the prolonged interest in "defending" China
Really?

just showing a different side than the Western anti-communist propaganda that clearly seems to have influenced you as well. I think criticism should be more nuanced than China is this or that.
I haven't made any arguments against communism so I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Russia is a former Soviet State and has been influenced by socialist history, but you are right that it's not exactly a socialist country anymore since the fall of the SU. Every country to some extent or another has to exist within the global capitalist framework and Russia has had a long string of corrupt presidents who tried to privatize their whole economy and left things in a poor state for Putin.
Post-Soviet Russia only had one single president before Putin was elected.

I do look at Russian and Chinese imperialism and recognize their own bad behavior, but I am simply more vocal about my own country's activities, mainly because I live here in America and think our government is the most prolific in causing global damage and I have more "control" over affairs here (and know more about what's going on as I live here) than I do in any foreign countries. I think it is also dangerous to have such a hostile relationship with Russia and China that the US and its NATO allies seem to promote with the constant barrage of fear-mongering and propaganda in the mainstream news -- I do not want more pointless wars. What I was defending against wasn't that China and Russia are perfect countries, but that the mythology the Mockingbird Media has created around them is mostly divorced from reality. So whatever criticism of their governments there is, and there is plenty to be had there, it should be nuanced and not just parroting propaganda or looking at things divorced from their context.
I think western media is largely right about Russia, and Russian media is largely right about the USA. Have you watched RT? RT is pretty good for American news, but their reporting about Russia is a complete joke. All of these governments are run by complete psychopaths, you're making a large mistake by assuming the "other side" is in any way superior just because "your side" sucks.
 
OP
Energizer

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
Yes, but even before the fall of the SU, I would argue, since Stalin's death, things went downhill, even before then there were problems, for instance the Trotskyist conspirators that collaborated with the CIA, not to mention the effect WWII had on Soviet Russia -- basically, when the Bolshevik party fractured due to those aforementioned reasons, most of the subsequent leaders were ones who claimed to be carrying on the socialist torch, but meanwhile they had no intent of keeping that system, instead they were more reactionary, more interested in their own gain and selling out Soviet Russia to private parties and appeasing the West.

Many mistakes were made, but then these were erroneously blamed by detractors and opposition within Russia and Western propagandists on communism/socialism, rather than the implantation and conspiracy involved. The US gov't has always hated communism and socialism, so they have always tried to destabilize these kinds of systems and then when they fall, have the failures blamed on the political philosophies themselves. So it's many decades of problems accumulated. As for superiority of a system, I don't know for sure to say one way or another, you are right, but what I do know is the current American government is a complete joke so at this point I am quite open to alternatives. Nevertheless, I agree that it's good to be wary of tyranny -- it's just I have to ask, what system do you think is best? I doubt they are all equally bad, I am sure some have more satisfied people than others.

"Every authority has a good reason to control and censor information, it doesn't make it a good or moral or justifiable thing to do. It is one of the single most authoritarian things a government can do, you are literally making the exact same argument that nazis make."

I am not arguing for their censorship or not, just pointing out the reason they have it, and that it could be useful geopolitically to block Western sites when nearly all of them are anti-Chinese propaganda. Doesn't mean I agree with that system, necessarily, but I see why they have it. Again, since I don't live there, I don't have to deal with their internet firewall, and it probably would be inconvenient if I did. The whole idea that Chinese can't access Western sites however, is not true, as you can go on Western social media and find quite a deal of Chinese comments, clearly people are able to get around it.

I don't know much about Russia but what you're saying sounds possible. I would argue that the same is true for the west, since roughly about the same time, or earlier.


I don't know what the best system is but I know I'm for liberty and against authoritarianism, so naturally I'm against anyone who wants to restrict the flow of information. Maybe some kind of mixed economy system with pervasive direct democracy, ideally every government decision would take the freedom of the individual into account.


Yes, I understand. That argument can always be made, by anyone in power. There are always subversive forces vying for power so this argument can always be made, but I don't think that makes it legitmate. The west is subject to the same kind of propaganda by the east, and for the most part it's not censored (at least in the USA).

If the goal was specifically to combat foreign propaganda there are many things you could do other than just abolish any and all semblance of political free speech. For example you could ban all foreigners from owning any media or being employed at any media company, you could abolish free speech for foreigners, you could put all foreigners under surveillance (already a thing), and so forth. Those things are still bad but it would keep politcal free speech for the Chinese so it's not nearly as bad, at all. But the goal isn't just to combat foreign propaganda, the goal is to squash all dissent.

Here is a nice quote from an old sci-fi game: "As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."

I appreciate your response, postman. I think I understand your POV better.
 
Last edited:

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
Yes, but even before the fall of the SU, I would argue, since Stalin's death, things went downhill, even before then there were problems, for instance the Trotskyist conspirators that collaborated with the CIA, not to mention the effect WWII had on Soviet Russia -- basically, when the Bolshevik party fractured due to those aforementioned reasons, their came to power leaders who claimed to be carrying on the socialist torch, but meanwhile they had no intent of keeping that system, instead they were more interested in their own gain and selling out Russia to private parties. So it's many decades of problems accumulated.
I don't know much about Russia but what you're saying sounds possible. I would argue that the same is true for the west, since roughly about the same time, or earlier.

As for superiority of a system, I don't know for sure to say one way or another, you are right, but what I do know is the current American government is a complete joke so at this point I am quite open to alternatives. Nevertheless, I agree that it's good to be wary of tyranny -- it's just I have to ask, what system do you think is best? I doubt they are all equally bad, I am sure some have more satisfied people than others.
I don't know what the best system is but I know I'm for liberty and against authoritarianism, so naturally I'm against anyone who wants to restrict the flow of information. Maybe some kind of mixed economy system with pervasive direct democracy, ideally every government decision would take the freedom of the individual into account.

"Every authority has a good reason to control and censor information, it doesn't make it a good or moral or justifiable thing to do. It is one of the single most authoritarian things a government can do, you are literally making the exact same argument that nazis make."

I am not arguing for their censorship or not, just pointing out the reason they have it, and that it could be useful geopolitically to block Western sites when nearly all of them are anti-Chinese propaganda. Doesn't mean I agree with that system, necessarily, but I see why they have it. Again, since I don't live there, I don't have to deal with their internet firewall, and it probably would be inconvenient if I did.
Yes, I understand. That argument can always be made, by anyone in power. There are always subversive forces vying for power so this argument can always be made, but I don't think that makes it legitmate. The west is subject to the same kind of propaganda by the east, and for the most part it's not censored (at least in the USA).

If the goal was specifically to combat foreign propaganda there are many things you could do other than just abolish any and all semblance of political free speech. For example you could ban all foreigners from owning any media or being employed at any media company, you could abolish free speech for foreigners, you could put all foreigners under surveillance (already a thing), and so forth. Those things are still bad but it would keep politcal free speech for the Chinese so it's not nearly as bad, at all. But the goal isn't just to combat foreign propaganda, the goal is to squash all dissent.

Here is a nice quote from an old sci-fi game: "As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
 

No_Energy

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
241
It is incredible how a new generation has been so deeply indoctrinated with all this Socialist Neo-Marxist Garbage. It is very Sad. You either believe in Freedom or all this Socialist Garbage , can't have both.
 

michael94

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
2,419
I don't know much about Russia but what you're saying sounds possible. I would argue that the same is true for the west, since roughly about the same time, or earlier.


I don't know what the best system is but I know I'm for liberty and against authoritarianism, so naturally I'm against anyone who wants to restrict the flow of information. Maybe some kind of mixed economy system with pervasive direct democracy, ideally every government decision would take the freedom of the individual into account.


Yes, I understand. That argument can always be made, by anyone in power. There are always subversive forces vying for power so this argument can always be made, but I don't think that makes it legitmate. The west is subject to the same kind of propaganda by the east, and for the most part it's not censored (at least in the USA).

If the goal was specifically to combat foreign propaganda there are many things you could do other than just abolish any and all semblance of political free speech. For example you could ban all foreigners from owning any media or being employed at any media company, you could abolish free speech for foreigners, you could put all foreigners under surveillance (already a thing), and so forth. Those things are still bad but it would keep politcal free speech for the Chinese so it's not nearly as bad, at all. But the goal isn't just to combat foreign propaganda, the goal is to squash all dissent.

Here is a nice quote from an old sci-fi game: "As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."

But wouldn't you say that America has been compromised since 1913 with the Federal Reserve giving private interests defining control over the money supply. From 1920-1960 Sight Deposits ( Bank Account Money ) was definitively pushing out cash as the dominant form of money. In doing so the Private Banks achieved what the 1844 Bank Charter Act in England set out to put an end to, Bank led money creation on the basis of shrinking Reserves which could be obtained post-facto if need be. Money is really a simple matter that has been made "complex" for the benefit of Financial Parasites. So when we say America is free we must be doing so with exceedingly low standards.
 
Back
Top Bottom