When will Westerners realize that the common characture of the brainwashed, thought controlled, information controlled, constantly surveiled citizen that we attribute to China/The USSR/etc… IS US?! You clutch your pearls at people in other countries potentially being treated like that but are inclined to do nothing about OUR OWN countries treating US like that.
A Russian is on an airliner heading to the US, and the American in the seat next to him asks, “So what brings you to the US?” The Russian replies, “I’m studying the American approach to propaganda.” The American says, “What propaganda?” The Russian says, “That’s what I mean.”
You can be against US and Chinese fascism simultaneously.
Chinese fascism
Just say you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Nice argument.
You didn’t make one you just stated something wildly incorrect so why should I take the time to give you a well thought out response trying to explain how truly idiotic is?
I did make one, that you can oppose two things at the same time.
I could explain, but wait, you already said that authoritarianism was meaningless to you. If it doesn’t matter to you, well, seems pointless to try to convince that it is actually fascist.
You have to be a troll.
You can appose 2 things
Sure not what I took issue with. I took issue with you calling China fascist which is just an untrue statement.
Authoritarian is a pejorative. All countries and states in class society are “authoritarian” by necessity. Fascism is a specific thing arising from the tendency for the rate of profit to decline in capitalist society.
You can keep insisting I’m a troll if it helps you deal with not being able to engage with arguments.
China is authoritarian, but authoritarianism doesn’t matter to you, so that shouldn’t matter to you. Consistency, please.
And no, countries aren’t “authoritarian” by necessity. Even if some amount of policies etc that would be considered such exist everywhere, you have countries that are freer and countries that have more political suppression, censorship of media outlets, etc etc.
China does censor it’s media—political and entertainment— heavily. Just one small example.
Removed by mod
What do you actually know about China?
“authoritarian oppression” entirely meaningless when stripped of context.
I like it when the working classes in China wield the state against capitalists and fascists, and to ensure that social surplus is directed towards social ends above all else.
In what way is China fascist? It’s a socialist country, public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state.
Authoritarianism, violent oppression of minorites and dissenting movements, deeply ingrained surveillance state with state censorship.
China does not violently oppress minorities, and wielding state authority, censorship, and surveilance against capitalists and fascists is necessary for a socialist state, and doesn’t make it fascist. Fascism is capitalism violently defending itself from decay and solidifying bourgeois control, not proletarian.
But enough about the US.
But those are actions of the US empire. Projecting them onto China isn’t a good thing
Surveillance and political suppression for one. Media, journalism, etc.
That’s not what fascism means, especially when these are used against capitalists most of all, and not against the working classes nearly as much. Fascism is capitalism violently entrenching itself when it finds itself in crisis, it isn’t when a socialist state uses state power to keep capitalists under control and expropriate their property.
That’s not what fascism is either lol
I wouldn’t call china fascist, though doubtlessly authoritarian. But I don’t have nearly as much info on china, it seems to me the persecution of minorities is less of a central political scapegoat and more some weird side thing. But without speaking chinese, I might be wrong. The US had plenty of fascist characteristics at this point and is rather open about the persecution.
The US is fascist because it’s in crisis. Imperialism is decaying and austerity is being brought inward.
I’m not trying to fuss over what to call something. My intended point stands.
It doesn’t, though. Socialism is not fascism, and all socialist states need to exert authority against capitalists and fascists to continue to exist. Class harmony is a lie.
My point is that the forms of oppression that occur in China aren’t exclusive to the capitalist class, and remain something I oppose.
Which stands.
Per Wikipedia:
The program first emerged in the early 2000s, inspired by the credit scoring systems in other countries.
It’s almost the same thing but a different name, and is nationalized to a state system instead of like 3 or 4 companies lmao
Right wingers fear the word “social” for some reason ig
It’s also not applied at a national level, but in some areas, from what I’ve read, and is used largely against companies that try to skirt the law.
I mean, that’s also pretty awesome that there’s decent regulations as part of it(at least nominally, I don’t live there so can’t say for certain), but it seems to be primarily a banking/lending thing similar to in the US which is what a lot of jingoistic fearmongering types either completely miss or purposely ignore.
It’s decidedly not a surveillance thing, which is the funny part.
The Misconceptions section of that page is really funny. It just keeps on going with the same thing over and over but with different people and dates, it feels like a bit
Shit. I thought that was Dennis Reynolds for a second.
Some gringo in the comments: “Something something Uyghurs, something something mass surveillance, winnie poo”
Liberals and real actual gaza genocide: 🥱
Liberals and fake Uyghur genocide: Real shit
“fake” Uyghur genocide, wow.
It is? Their is no evidence. It’s a fabrication invented by a German evangelical on a self proclaimed “mission from god” to destroy communism.
No, it isnt. We have geographic evidence as well as countless testimonies of the Uyghur people.
For some reason when it comes to China/Uyghur muslims, people have no issue dismissing their genocide and thinking it’s okay.
I was in Urumqi recently enough and I can tell you this they are some of the most pro government people I have ever talked with lmao they love that ETIM was kicked out.
You have gusano testimony from the likes of Rushan Abbas (Guantanamo bay torturer) It’s not real.
Also tell me about this geographic evidence? Pictures of prisons that you decided are camps because we’re evil scary Chinese people?
I never said “you’re evil scary Chinese people”. The Chinese state however, is another story (authoritarian— but I know you’re apathetic towards authoritarianism). I realize now that this may be evoking some sort of nationalistic reaction out of you, though.
I didn’t “decide”— like I said, independent journalists and satellite imaging. And no, it’s not reducible to “Western evil scary propaganda” like you’re making it out to be.
The Chinese state that has 95+% support from the population and is made up of a representative of Chinese people.
White people decided we’re evil and you just go along with it without any investigation because you’re racist and it confirms your biases
There is no genocide of Uyghurs. Uyghur genocide atrocity propaganda akin to claiming that there’s “white genocide” in South Africa, Christian genocide in Nigeria, or that Hamas sexually assaulted babies in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
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.
The best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is explicitly pro-PRC, but this is an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims.
I also recommend reading the UN report as well as (especially) China’s response to it, which eclipses it in size and detail.These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, Christian nationalist and professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does. Zenz’ work has been thoroughly discredited, yet is supported by western media for its utility in fearmongering. An example is lying about 8.7% of new IUDs as 80%, to back up claims of “forced sterilization,” from this chart:
Tourists do go to Xinjiang all the time as well. You can watch videos like this one on YouTube, though it obviously isn’t going to be a comprehensive view of a complex situation like this. Has there been mistreatment? Almost certainly to some degree, in a campaign as large as this. Is it genocide, be it cultural or outright? No, Uyghur culture is preserved and there are no mass killings.
Removed by mod
So not accepting exaggerated narratives means China is a utopia? Why do people rarely offer ordinary, policy-level criticism? There is plenty of it, but discussion often defaults to cartoonish claims instead of routine institutional analysis.
Where is the discussion of the hukou household registration system and its trade-offs?
Where is the discussion of local government reliance on land-use financing?
Where is the discussion of provincial policy experimentation and uneven implementation?
Where is the discussion of state-owned enterprises and their structural advantages and drawbacks?
Where is the discussion of demographic policy after the one-child era?
Where is the discussion of regional inequality between coastal and interior provinces?
Where is the discussion of the property sector’s role in household wealth and local budgets?
Where is the discussion of debt accumulation among provincial financing vehicles?
Where is the discussion of administrative campaign-style governance and its policy side effects?
Where is the discussion of bureaucratic incentives within the cadre evaluation system?
Where is the discussion of industrial policy prioritization and capital allocation?
Where is the discussion of urban planning constraints produced by internal migration controls?
Where is the discussion of education access differences tied to household registration?
Where is the discussion of long-term pension sustainability in an aging population?
I know where they are, in China because none of you know enough about China to have a proper discussion on any of these. All you know is spouting ridiculous talking points.
China isn’t a utopia, and does have problems. China’s problems are real, though, not invented, so discussion of China’s issues requires drawing a line between fact and fiction.
I donno anything about China, but whoever made this meme certainly doesn’t know anything about the USA. The idea that “liberals” or anyone else (??) are high-fiving themselves over a credit score. lol
People like thay exist. In the same way that 40 year olds high five themselves for still fitting into the pants they wore in hs.
OK but I would hi-five those people. It’s harder to fight capitalism if you’re also fighting health problems!
Removed by mod
No? I’m an ML and I live in a capitalist country. Further, liberals are absolutely worse than anarchists.
Where are progressives on that scale? Oh, and do fascists, I definitely want to know how a fascist stacks up against a liberal!
“Progressive” doesn’t really mean anything beyond “left of establishment democrats.” They range from liberal to socialist. Fascists are a twin of liberalism, worse but fundamentally connected.
If you’re not anti capitalist and anti bourgeois democracy even if you’re “progressive” you’re just a flavour of liberal. Fascists are obviously worse than liberals although they tend to agree on a surprising amount of things when push comes to shove unfortunately. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds is a widespread phrase for a reason.
The formula for a fascist is liberal plus time, multiplied by war
I’ll stand corrected on the anarchist comment. But if one lives in a capitalist country, one inevitably supports capitalism, right? Even if it’s against their will.
This sounds more and more like Original Sin.
Existing within capitalism does not mean you cannot work to overthrow it and must ideologically support it by espousing liberal talking points.
Profoundly wrong statement.
First because that’s not how Marxist-Leninists use the word ‘liberal’, that’s a definition you just made up while ignoring decades of literature. Second, because it implies that is not what the word actually means to literally everyone, not just Leninists or even just socialists, everywhere on the planet with the exception of the US liberal duopoly.
Third, because it mistakenly assumes people are calling you a liberal because of your instance, and not because of your shit takes.
The ML usage of the term liberal comes from Classical Liberalism, right? Please correct me.
Also I hate how y’all think I’m personally evil because I haven’t Read Theory. Y’all are my first exposure to MLs and I don’t have any control over what my society has taught me. (I’m not defending what my society has taught me, I’ve been deconstructing for a long time and not stopping.)
Is naivete a sin?
Is naivete a sin?
No investigation no right to speak is a core part of MarxistLeninist thought as it has evolved. Naivete is not “a sin” but if you haven’t researched a topic you shouldn’t speak on it.
As Chairman Mao put it:
Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?
It won’t do!
It won’t do!
You must investigate!
You must not talk nonsense!
“liberal” denotes adherence to bourgeois democracy and capitalist property relations, (pro bourgeois democracy and private property)
The critique of certain “anarchists” is that they guise reactionary politics in radical language, which aids capitalism.
Removed by mod
This is nonsense. Communism has not been achieved, but socialism absolutely has. Communism has not been achieved not for lack of trying, but because it is a post-socialist system. There’s no psyop.
First, let’s be precise about terms: capitalism is defined by private ownership of the means of production, profit-driven accumulation, and wage labor; socialism is defined by social ownership (state, collective, or cooperative), planning mechanisms, and the subordination of remaining market forces to developmental and social goals. They are distinct modes of production, not a binary where anything short of stateless communism “counts” as capitalism.
Second, “Western capitalism” isn’t a universal default, it specifically describes the Euro-Amerikan core and its integrated vassals (NATO, Five Eyes, dependent economies). That system is hegemonic, but it is not total. Russia, for instance, operates a distinct sovereign-capitalist model: not socialist, but explicitly de-linked from Western financial architecture and actively contesting unipolar dominance.
Third, China, Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam are explicitly in the early stages of the socialist transitionary period. Their frameworks (especially China’s “primary stage of socialism”) theorize that underdeveloped socialist states must develop productive forces, utilize regulated markets, and engage globally while maintaining proletarian state power and public ownership of commanding heights. This isn’t “capitalism with red flags”; it’s a materialist strategy to build the basis for higher-stage socialism. Dismissing these distinctions because communism hasn’t been “achieved” yet misunderstands dialectics: transition is a process, not an event. You don’t call a bridge under construction meaningless because it has yet to reach the other side.
All of the ID verification, posing as age verification, legislation is for better thought monitoring of social credit too.
Yea, China monitors a billion people in their country and assigns them a score if a citizen walks on the sidewalk correctly /s
assigns them a score if a citizen walks on the sidewalk correctly
Funny story about Jaywalking
The automobile lobby in the US took up the cause of labeling and scorning jaywalkers in the 1910s and early 1920s. In 1912, for instance, Popular Mechanics magazine reported that the term was current in Kansas City: “The city pedestrian who cares not for traffic regulations at street corners, but strays all over the street, crossing in the middle of the block, or attempting to save time by choosing a diagonal route across a street intersection instead of adhering to the regular crossing, is designated as a ‘jay walker,’ in Kansas City.”
In 1915, when New York City’s police commissioner Arthur Woods sought to apply the word “jaywalker” to anyone who crossed the street at mid-block, the New York Times protested, calling it “highly opprobrious” and “a truly shocking name.”
Originally in the US, the legal rule was that “all persons have an equal right in the highway, and that in exercising the right each shall take due care not to injure other users of the way”. In time, however, streets became the province of vehicular traffic, both practically and legally.
Anyway, enjoy your hyper-criminalized car culture hellscape while making spooky fingers about Evil Foreign Country.
Yea, China monitors a billion people in their country
Correct, and those abroad too.
I know this because a US government-funded “independent” think tank told me so.
You know the stories of secret overseas Chinese police stations were fake news, right?
Not an American or a liberal, and yes, china is authoritarian. Is america better? No. The credit score system in the US is also bad.
Authoritarian is a meaningless pejorative.
The social credit score isn’t real.
Removed by mod
Go back to 4chan obergruppenfuhrer. Or provide some evidence/analysis but I doubt you have that capability.
Re: authoritarianism— your opinion.
Some of us aren’t in favour of oppressive regimes that aren’t transparent, surveil, and censor.
“Authoritarianism” is meaningless because all it means is “uses state power.” It doesn’t acknowledge which class controls the state and who it uses state power against. In China, the working classes control the state, and use state power against bad actors and capitalists more than anything else. China is oppressive to capitalists and liberating to workers.
I’m using the term to refer to suppression of people (which isn’t restricted to workers) in politics, media, etc.
Except by “the people” you seem to mean capitalists and fascists, not the broad majority of society that are uplifted and support the system.
This!
Removed by mod
China is a socialist country, public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state. Child labor is illegal in China, you may be thinking of the US.
Still better then the baby eating pedo elite
It is possible to oppose all three things. It is possible to simultaneously oppose the Social Credit System in China, the Credit Score system in the United States, and the elites connected to Jeffrey Epstein.
The social credit system that you know of doesn’t exist.
Interesting phrasing. A phrasing that assumes assumptions on my part. So … what social credit system DOES exist.
Is it? You need to think more pragmatically, you are a laborer. Your only bargaining chip is your labour, decide who gets it. Personally, I don’t want to be part of any helping them live their best life.
I am curious, who is “them” in your statement and how does opposing all three of those things inherently cause me to give up my bargaining power?
No don’t, you never will. You’ll always contribute what ever system you’re a part of. Just choose one and the chienese might do a lot of bad things but they aren’t the pedofile baby eating elites.
I am a Chinese minority living in China. You really don’t know what you’re talking about when it comes to China. You very clearly have done 0 research beyond maybe reading RFA. You should be quiet until you have done some proper research.
You can’t possibly be a minority in China, what with all those intact organs.
Ad hominem, ad hominem, and mmm, ad hominem. Yeah, nothing to see here.
It isn’t an ad hominem fallacy to point out that doing little research on a topic and repeating easily disproven talking points isn’t a sound basis of argument.
And I have, and my responses were given little in return from them.
You have not, considering everything you’ve said has been easily debunked, and when encountering hard numbers you reflect to dogmatism.
Least insufferable redditer
“Homnum Homnum”- Liberal chimps.
Not an adhominem. You’re not wrong because you’re stupid you just happen to be both wrong and stupid.
Well in the comment I said that you didn’t explain why I was wrong and simply resorted to making a string of ad hominems.
So I’ll reiterate: ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem.
Saying you should shut up if you haven’t researched a topic isn’t an adhominem.
Removed by mod
Two kinds of people in the comments: those who think credit scores are bad, and those who think social credit systems are good
Lmao Chinese can’t even move to the other cities of their own country.
“A central rationale of such policies, particularly in first tier-cities, has been to prevent severe overcrowding, infrastructure overload, and the emergence of large-scale slums during China’s rapid industrialization and urbanization phases. Shahid Yusuf, a Senior Adviser in the World Bank’s Development Research Group noted that the hukou system served as a “cornerstone of China’s urbanization strategy” by controlling migration and channeling migrants toward small or medium-sized cities rather than allowing unchecked inflows to the largest urban areas.”
this sounds…good?
how come other countries don’t need this insane oppression? Also did you finish the actual wiki page?
During the Great Chinese Famine from 1958 to 1962, having an urban versus a rural hukou could mean the difference between life and death.[33] During this period, nearly all of the approximately 600 million rural hukou residents were collectivized into village communal farms, where their agricultural output—after state taxes—would be their only source of food. With institutionalized exaggeration of output figures by local Communist leaders and massive declines in production, state taxes during those years confiscated nearly all food in many rural communes, leading to mass starvation and the deaths of more than 65 million Chinese people.[34]
The 100 million urban hukou residents, however, were fed by fixed food rations established by the central government, which declined to an average of 1500 calories per day at times but still allowed survival for almost all during the famine. An estimated 95% or higher of all deaths occurred among rural hukou holders. With the suppression of news internally, many city residents were not aware that mass deaths were occurring in the countryside at all. This was essential to preventing organized opposition to Mao’s policies.[35]
The bootlicking is crazy here.
how come other countries don’t need this insane oppression?
They do. e.g Moving in the United States is quite expensive. While it’s not restricted by law, it’s restricted by class.
Home ownership in socialist States like in China is way higher than in the capitalist ones as well
Removed by mod
Not what a strawman is
Those citations from that page come back to a book written by Jasper Becker, a right-wing journalist expelled from Hong Kong in the 90s and who became a Tory Councillor in the 2010s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungry_Ghosts:_Mao's_Secret_Famine
His book plays fast and loose with statistics, and the margins of error are huge - somewhere between 15 and 55 million people died in the famine but this citation seemingly suggests 65 million died, above that even cited in the books Wikipedia article. Reading the citations in the book’s article leads you to a number of American (and American Chinese) authored articles that all pluck various numbers from this vast range.
Even a cursory amount of research and poking around links those various citations led to makes the presented state of affairs that seemed so ironclad and clear cut almost melt into meaningless. What else can be expected from anti-communist hit pieces so readily shared by idiots hoping to spread atrocity propaganda.
China institutionalized what USA prefers to make private.
China doesn’t have the type of social credit system the west has, and the meme idea of a social credit score reported by western media doesn’t exist.
Removed by mod
It’s good for the working classes to wield state authority against capitalists and fascists. To not do so would be to allow capitalism to reform, and the alternative is capitalist authority used against the working classes.
But China is capitalist.
No, it isn’t. Public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state, it’s socialist. What do you think socialism and capitalism are? Vibes?
I’m convinced (based off interactions I’ve had on NextDoor) a lot of people think capitalism=uses money. But also that socialism/communism=failed/corrupted capitalism. China looking better than the USA nowadays means they have to be capitalist since they obviously aren’t failing.
That’s certainly how some people see it! Liberals look at China’s success and some try to twist that into a victory for capitalism, even if that doesn’t actually describe China’s success accurately.
Wrong.
Is China State Capitalist?
- The backbone of the economy is state ownership and socialist planning. 24 / 25 of the top revenue companies are state-owned and planned. 70% of the top 500 companies are State-owned. 1, 2 The largest bank, construction, electricity, and energy companies in the world, are CPC controlled entities, subject to the 5 year plans laid out by the central committee.
- Workplace democracy in action in the CPC.
- Is modern day china communist? Is it staying true to communist values?
- Didn’t China go Capitalist with Deng Xiaoping? Didn’t it liberalize its economy? Is China’s drastic decrease in poverty a result of the increase in free market capitalist policies?
- Is the CPC committed to communism?
- The Long Game and Its Contradictions. Audiobook
- The myth of Chinese state capitalism. Did Deng really betray Chinese socialism?
- Tsinghua University- Is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics real socialism, or is it state Capitalism?
- Isn’t China revisionist for having a capitalist sector of the economy, and working with capitalists? Why isn’t it fully planned like the USSR was?
- Castro on why both China and Vietnam are socialist countries.
I want you to really try to make a singular definition of Authoritarianism and Libertarianism that applies to all examples you would classify as authoritarian or libertarian. Is it theoretically possible for them to exist at the same time in the same place? Would that be a common definition? If not, why is your definition different and more importantly do you have enough evidence to justify having a different definition from the majority of people who use those terms?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Willful ignorance is not ignorance.
Removed by mod
And all states are authoritarian, so it loses its explanatory value and is a useless term when used to isolate and describe individual states.
False dichotomy. Both of these things suck.
The popular conception of China’s system doesn’t actually exist, though.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Marxists understand nuance and that two things can be bad. The problem pointed out by this meme is that the “social credit score” system of China as you know it does not exist, while credit score in the west absolutely does and is far more wide-reaching.
They seem incapable of realising that two things can both be bad.
Even three things can be bad at the same time, holy if we as species evolve we can even have four things!!!
But the problem is that one of those two things is not even true in the first place.
Just copy pasting the shit lib catch phrases word for word
Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax are awful entities that I never consented to share my personal financial data with. But one wrong doesn’t justify another. Personally I think a score by private data brokers to judge creditworthiness is less harm than a score by your government to judge social worthiness but both are harm.
The idea of a social worthiness score doesn’t exist in China, though. They have a system largely for penalizing corporations and businesses that are caught skirting regulations, and a limited system for catching those who commit tax fraud and other crimes.
They have a system largely for penalizing corporations and businesses that are caught skirting regulations
The core mechanism is the court “judgment defaulter” blacklist (失信被执行人) and related high-consumption restrictions (限制高消费), which are imposed when someone refuses to comply with a legally effective court judgment, such as paying a debt or damages ordered by the court. The penalty mainly restricts luxury or non-essential spending (flights, first-class train seats, luxury hotels, tourism, etc.) until the judgment is fulfilled. In law it applies to any individual or company, and if a company is the debtor the restrictions can extend to its legal representative or responsible managers on top of any accounts registered to the company. In practice 99.99% of cases involve businesses because most court enforcement actions arise from commercial disputes (contracts, loans, wages, suppliers, etc.), so the mechanism ends up being an enforcement mechanism against business owners and managers to push them to settle judgments properly, but legally it’s just a court enforcement tool against anyone who refuses to comply with a court ruling.
Ah, gotcha, thanks for the clarification!
How do you make businesses (i.e. the corporations) unable to access luxury? Sounds like an individual-level policy being applied to the organization.
It’s applied to bank accounts. If you owe a debt ordered by the court (99.99% businesses) you can’t use your business accounts to buy luxuries, it is often also applied to the individual owner/management of the company as well so they can neither use personal or business accounts to live a life of luxury while owing debts to people.
If you’re in a position to make decisions for a non-compliant corporation, then it does indeed become personal, but you can opt out of the C-suite at any time, or you can get your company in compliance.
Edit to add: You may not like it, but this is what peak dictatorship of the proletariat looks like.
