You can find all of these videos as written articles, plus some extra content, at https://thelibre.news You can the channel grow by donating to the following platforms: Paypal: https://paypal.me/ni...
  • yet_another_commie@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    74·
    4 days ago

    China is authoritarian just like every other state in the world. Except that it’s also a whole-process people’s democracy unlike the W🤮st

    • chebra@mstdn.io
      65·
      4 days ago

      @yet_another_commie

      > just like every other state in the world

      Really? Let’s talk about Tiananmen Square. Or how about Uyghurs. Let’s use a picture of Winnie the Pooh. Is it really “just like” every other state? I’d say it’s a little bit above the average. People’s democracy my ass. Just because trump turned USA authoritarian didn’t make China less authoritarian.

      • davel@lemmy.mlEnglish
        4·
        4 days ago

        Let’s talk about Tiananmen Square.

        .

        Or how about Uyghurs.

        .

        Let’s use a picture of Winnie the Pooh.

        Not censored. You can buy Pooh-branded toys, watch Pooh Disney films, and ride Pooh-branded amusement park rides. Nobody has a problem with this adorable meme.

        People’s democracy my ass.

        .
        If you want to talk about a fake democracy, look no further than the US. Previously:

        The US government was never not captured by the bourgeoisie, because the US was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

        • chebra@mstdn.io
          1·
          3 days ago

          @davel notably, we are not in China. Are you also going to claim that DeepSeek isn’t censored?

          If you don’t see any protests in a democracy, it’s not because everybody is happy.

          • davel@lemmy.mlEnglish
            1·
            3 days ago

            Are you also going to claim that DeepSeek isn’t censored?

            You can download DeepSeek and run it yourself to get uncensored answers.

            Large Language Models (LLMs) are not truth machines. They are garbage in, garbage out. The input to English-language models are largely English-language texts from Five Eyes countries, with all the disinformation and bias that that entails. So the DeepSeek company is in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation. They can either refuse to answer certain questions, in which case Western media will accuse them of censorship; or they can answer them, in which case (a) their model will perpetuate Cold War I & Cold War II falsehoods and (b) Western media will parade those false answers around in a victory lap. They chose the former for the cloud version of their app, and the latter for the local version.

            If you don’t see any protests in a democracy, it’s not because everybody is happy.

            Now you’re just vagueposting 🙄 Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds:

            During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.

            If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

      • yet_another_commie@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
        61·
        4 days ago

        Ok, let’s talk. Trump never really changed anything about “authoritarianism”. Every single state is by nature authoritarian. Where in the West do you see a democracy? Almost all media in the US is controlled by 6 corporations. What kind of democratic process can there be if the only candidates that get mainstream attention are Trump and controlled opposition (Kamala)?

        Again, here’s some Chad Lenin:

        It is sheer mockery of the working and exploited people to speak of pure democracy, of democracy in general, of equality, freedom and universal rights when the workers and all working people are ill-fed, ill-clad, ruined and worn out, not only as a result of capitalist wage slavery, but as a consequence of four years of predatory war, while the capitalists and profiteers remain in possession of the “property” usurped by them and the “ready-made” apparatus of state power. This is tantamount to trampling on the basic truths of Marxism which has taught the workers: you must take advantage of bourgeois democracy which, compared with feudalism, represents a great historical advance, but not for one minute must you forget the bourgeois character of this “democracy”, it’s historical conditional and limited character. Never share the “superstitious belief” in the “state” and never forget that the state even in the most democratic republic, and not only in a monarchy, is simply a machine for the suppression of one class by another.