I'm pro-NATO and against all dictators and autocrats.
We are not the same.
Can NATO ever get rid of its own dictators and autocrats? Dunno but it wouldn't be as bad if it could
That would be amazing and I hope it'll happen. Unfortunately this will probably take years.
There is no process for this.
Turkey was soooo close, now I’ve lost all hope for them
I don’t think Hungary will get rid of that fucker anytime soon either
Call it democracy, but in reality it's just lobbyism.
Especially in Germany and in the US.
Germany and the US are very different.
There is no prosses of kicking a country our if that's what you're thinking. The only part of the treaties that allow a member to leave is if they leave and give a years notice. But it's not possible at this time for a vote on kicking a country out.
Yeah it was a rhetorical question
No different from a tankie then. They also have excuses for their preferred governments' atrocities. If you think "dictators and autocrats" are the only evil that exist in the world, I have some bad news for you.
Yeah, the suckage of, say, Germany or the Netherlands being less nice to refugees and farm animals is exactly the same as Russia and China actively committing genocide right now.
Yeah let's conveniently forget about the agent orange and the toppling of governments to install dictators
I'm not. The both sucked in the past. But let me repeat:
Russia is committing genocide. Right now.
China is committing genocide. Right now.
My country is a military dictatorship right now at least in part because the US supported the overthrow of the democratically elected leader.
And just to be clear, I'm not comparing who is "worse". I understand that a genocide kind of takes the cake there if you really want to have a pissing contest about it. But the OP above you said that they were "pro-NATO", which in my book means they're a shit person.
I'm not a shit person, but thanks.
Without NATO Europe would have been a huge mess
Yeah that was uncalled for my bad, and I do understand what you mean about Europe. But while the US is helping Europe, it's actively fucking the rest of us over, with European countries' help. So that's great for you, but being pro-NATO can only be seen as extremely selfish at best.
It's ok.
Just to add: I wish the whole world would live in peace, and I wish organisations like NATO wouldn't be nessesary.
They used to practically run the place, is why they're seething so damn hard.
Before the API comedown, the entire All page on most instances was their horseshit.
Thank you all for freeing us from Reddit (and Mastodon).
When was the last time China invaded anyone? Including China here is a baseless equivocation and basically yellow scare nonsense.
Hong Kong...like, as we speak.
Yellow scare sounds like a very racist term
Nukes
It is a term used to describe racists, yes. Which the vast majority of China fear-mongering is deeply rooted in.
Nukes are the reason they’re the same? India, Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan also have nukes.
Let’s use racism to describe racists? Seems reasonable
I knew you’d use the “other countries have nukes too” statement. Well, other countries aren’t as hostile as China is, except North Korea, but are you going to tell me it doesn’t get the China treatment? Lol. Israel is basically an extension of NATO at this point, Pakistan isn’t viewed favourably at all and India isn’t particularly hostile
Israel is doing quite villainous things, true
China is a superpower, nuke-holder
China failed and still fails to condemn russia's actions and still see russia as their partner.
Communist countries stick together
China is the only superpower not involved with the current war that remains aggressive towards NATO/US
China has now completely took over Hong-Kong
And they're openly planning to do the same with Taiwan.
All these 6 combined is why china is worthy being next to russia in this meme.
Hey hey let's not call China communist
Let's not call Russia communist either lol.
People who think that communism is still a threat in '23 are stuck in their cold war dystopianism.
Russia and its history is the antithesis of communism
You mean china that is lead by the communist party of china?
Good marketing, like "Democratic People's Republic of Korea"
And both in practice something totally else
Can you name a communist country that is radically different than china?
Because I can name 20 different democratic countries that are radically different than north korea, in turn not changing the meaning of "democracy".
An outlier doesn't mean the word changed its meaning.
I would argue that China has implemented a one-party fascist system, as the major ideal of communism is the economic side. They have embraced capitalism, be it under the shadow of the authoritarian government, it is capitalism none the less....
From my understanding, this is different then communist states such as Cuba and North Korea, as the large majority of their means of production are still 100% state owned.
It's more like it's impossible to name how China could be communist. They'd need a revolution or something
I'd bet it's not the first on the list to have it's people take power
I'm saying that china + soviet union has defined and continue to define what communism is. It's a word that's tainted forever.
Just like, for example, Christianity is defined by modern Christians.
They define the cultural idea of communism
I hate being "that guy" tm but
The Soviet Union only briefly played with the idea of communism before committing to a single party socialist Republic. Modern day Russia is an autocratic dictatorship hiding in a Trenchcoat with "democracy" written on it.
China is again, a one party state which is, in truth, a Republic. China's historical dances with "communism" are rather similar to that of the USSR wherein an offshoot of marxist-leninism was implemented, modified and then used, ultimately landing closer... Again to a socialist Republic and now being effectively an autocratic dictatorship hiding in a Trenchcoat... Etc. Etc.
Neither country in myopinion ever reached the illusory "true communism". Maybe the west is right and it's a failed ideology, maybe "it just hasn't had the right leader yet" but ultimately, I believe most political ideologies have good bits that we can take notes on to improve the lives of others.
I apologize for any historical or political inaccuracies, wrote this with knowledge from the best of my memory while on the toilet at work
I agree with the majority of what you are saying, but stating either the USSR or China had a foundation as a republic I would say is a gross mischaracterization, as supreme power within these states were held by the "communist" party, and not the people. Authoritarian regiems may play at calling themselves republics or democracies, but this should never be given credence.
Thank you for the correction! I agree it's far more accurate to call them authoritatian/autocratic regimes both now and then which is what I was trying to indicate by saying they were single party republics, but I suppose one should say what they mean and mean what they say.
And thank you for accepting criticism on the internet! I think I might really like being on lemmy! I do see where your thinking was there, though.
Some good info in here.
From what you've said, it looks like communism has a historical tendency to become an authoritarian dictatorship, in turn redefining what 'communism' means to most people?
I think authoritarian states typically get mislabeled very easily within modern times, especially by themselves. Some precedent I believe should exist for what I would loosely call "Stalinist" Communism, as that is what has been the most historical application of the term. But the modern Chinese state I believe would make Mao, Lenin, and even Stalin roll around in their graves by being considered Communist, and we should call a spade a spade. China is a fascist country now.
I won't say you're wrong, after all, what do I know, I'm not a politician.
But the point of my comment is that the two countries which are most touted as examples of "communisms failings" were never really communist in the first place, regardless of what they labelled themselves as, they were single party socialist Republics. Both failed to eliminate class divides, neither had the workers control the means of production as they were still pawns of the government, failed to eliminate parties altogether, etc. Etc.
I'd trust communists more to define what it is. Even nazis used the word socialism, so it's understandable that Soviet Union and China would follow the practice. We wouldn't believe a used car salesperson selling a Lada as a Lamborghini
Why do you feel the need to defend China? They could have put any powerful country in there really, but there aren't many left when you have NATO and Russia already
Do we count EEZ encroachments in the Pacific? Only reason why China isn't as militarily adventurous as Russia right now, is because they know they're not ready yet. Not really yellow scare nonsense when China itself (Republic of) is concerned about this.
Do we count disputes over territorial waters as the same as war? Are you actually serious with this question?
The Spratly Islands are China’s Afghanistan?
It would be a bit more serious if the territories they claimed were Japanese, but they're not. China's not going to pick that fight, because they know they won't win. China has picked regions guarded by nations that have ships such as these guarding their territories.
I'm pro-NATO and against all dictators and autocrats. We are not the same.
Can NATO ever get rid of its own dictators and autocrats? Dunno but it wouldn't be as bad if it could
That would be amazing and I hope it'll happen. Unfortunately this will probably take years.
There is no process for this.
Turkey was soooo close, now I’ve lost all hope for them
I don’t think Hungary will get rid of that fucker anytime soon either
Call it democracy, but in reality it's just lobbyism.
Especially in Germany and in the US.
Germany and the US are very different.
There is no prosses of kicking a country our if that's what you're thinking. The only part of the treaties that allow a member to leave is if they leave and give a years notice. But it's not possible at this time for a vote on kicking a country out.
Yeah it was a rhetorical question
No different from a tankie then. They also have excuses for their preferred governments' atrocities. If you think "dictators and autocrats" are the only evil that exist in the world, I have some bad news for you.
Yeah, the suckage of, say, Germany or the Netherlands being less nice to refugees and farm animals is exactly the same as Russia and China actively committing genocide right now.
Yeah let's conveniently forget about the agent orange and the toppling of governments to install dictators
I'm not. The both sucked in the past. But let me repeat:
Russia is committing genocide. Right now. China is committing genocide. Right now.
My country is a military dictatorship right now at least in part because the US supported the overthrow of the democratically elected leader.
And just to be clear, I'm not comparing who is "worse". I understand that a genocide kind of takes the cake there if you really want to have a pissing contest about it. But the OP above you said that they were "pro-NATO", which in my book means they're a shit person.
I'm not a shit person, but thanks. Without NATO Europe would have been a huge mess
Yeah that was uncalled for my bad, and I do understand what you mean about Europe. But while the US is helping Europe, it's actively fucking the rest of us over, with European countries' help. So that's great for you, but being pro-NATO can only be seen as extremely selfish at best.
It's ok. Just to add: I wish the whole world would live in peace, and I wish organisations like NATO wouldn't be nessesary.
They used to practically run the place, is why they're seething so damn hard.
Before the API comedown, the entire All page on most instances was their horseshit.
Thank you all for freeing us from Reddit (and Mastodon).
When was the last time China invaded anyone? Including China here is a baseless equivocation and basically yellow scare nonsense.
Hong Kong...like, as we speak.
Yellow scare sounds like a very racist term
Nukes
It is a term used to describe racists, yes. Which the vast majority of China fear-mongering is deeply rooted in.
Nukes are the reason they’re the same? India, Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan also have nukes.
Let’s use racism to describe racists? Seems reasonable
I knew you’d use the “other countries have nukes too” statement. Well, other countries aren’t as hostile as China is, except North Korea, but are you going to tell me it doesn’t get the China treatment? Lol. Israel is basically an extension of NATO at this point, Pakistan isn’t viewed favourably at all and India isn’t particularly hostile
Israel is doing quite villainous things, true
All these 6 combined is why china is worthy being next to russia in this meme.
Hey hey let's not call China communist
Let's not call Russia communist either lol. People who think that communism is still a threat in '23 are stuck in their cold war dystopianism.
Russia and its history is the antithesis of communism
You mean china that is lead by the communist party of china?
Good marketing, like "Democratic People's Republic of Korea"
And both in practice something totally else
Can you name a communist country that is radically different than china?
Because I can name 20 different democratic countries that are radically different than north korea, in turn not changing the meaning of "democracy".
An outlier doesn't mean the word changed its meaning.
I would argue that China has implemented a one-party fascist system, as the major ideal of communism is the economic side. They have embraced capitalism, be it under the shadow of the authoritarian government, it is capitalism none the less....
From my understanding, this is different then communist states such as Cuba and North Korea, as the large majority of their means of production are still 100% state owned.
It's more like it's impossible to name how China could be communist. They'd need a revolution or something
I'd bet it's not the first on the list to have it's people take power
I'm saying that china + soviet union has defined and continue to define what communism is. It's a word that's tainted forever.
Just like, for example, Christianity is defined by modern Christians.
They define the cultural idea of communism
I hate being "that guy" tm but
The Soviet Union only briefly played with the idea of communism before committing to a single party socialist Republic. Modern day Russia is an autocratic dictatorship hiding in a Trenchcoat with "democracy" written on it.
China is again, a one party state which is, in truth, a Republic. China's historical dances with "communism" are rather similar to that of the USSR wherein an offshoot of marxist-leninism was implemented, modified and then used, ultimately landing closer... Again to a socialist Republic and now being effectively an autocratic dictatorship hiding in a Trenchcoat... Etc. Etc.
Neither country in my opinion ever reached the illusory "true communism". Maybe the west is right and it's a failed ideology, maybe "it just hasn't had the right leader yet" but ultimately, I believe most political ideologies have good bits that we can take notes on to improve the lives of others.
I agree with the majority of what you are saying, but stating either the USSR or China had a foundation as a republic I would say is a gross mischaracterization, as supreme power within these states were held by the "communist" party, and not the people. Authoritarian regiems may play at calling themselves republics or democracies, but this should never be given credence.
Thank you for the correction! I agree it's far more accurate to call them authoritatian/autocratic regimes both now and then which is what I was trying to indicate by saying they were single party republics, but I suppose one should say what they mean and mean what they say.
And thank you for accepting criticism on the internet! I think I might really like being on lemmy! I do see where your thinking was there, though.
Some good info in here.
From what you've said, it looks like communism has a historical tendency to become an authoritarian dictatorship, in turn redefining what 'communism' means to most people?
I think authoritarian states typically get mislabeled very easily within modern times, especially by themselves. Some precedent I believe should exist for what I would loosely call "Stalinist" Communism, as that is what has been the most historical application of the term. But the modern Chinese state I believe would make Mao, Lenin, and even Stalin roll around in their graves by being considered Communist, and we should call a spade a spade. China is a fascist country now.
I won't say you're wrong, after all, what do I know, I'm not a politician.
But the point of my comment is that the two countries which are most touted as examples of "communisms failings" were never really communist in the first place, regardless of what they labelled themselves as, they were single party socialist Republics. Both failed to eliminate class divides, neither had the workers control the means of production as they were still pawns of the government, failed to eliminate parties altogether, etc. Etc.
I'd trust communists more to define what it is. Even nazis used the word socialism, so it's understandable that Soviet Union and China would follow the practice. We wouldn't believe a used car salesperson selling a Lada as a Lamborghini
Why do you feel the need to defend China? They could have put any powerful country in there really, but there aren't many left when you have NATO and Russia already
Do we count EEZ encroachments in the Pacific? Only reason why China isn't as militarily adventurous as Russia right now, is because they know they're not ready yet. Not really yellow scare nonsense when China itself (Republic of) is concerned about this.
Do we count disputes over territorial waters as the same as war? Are you actually serious with this question?
The Spratly Islands are China’s Afghanistan?
It would be a bit more serious if the territories they claimed were Japanese, but they're not. China's not going to pick that fight, because they know they won't win. China has picked regions guarded by nations that have ships such as these guarding their territories.