Chinese peasants geting uppity

There was a already thread on this subject, but Your going to go with I said no one ever died. No one died directly in the square like reported by U.S media however in Beijing which was already largely ignored alot of people died. 3,000 I believe. (But hey a picture of a tank is worth more)

But hey back on topic.

Edit: Kali/others your thoughts on the video.

Yes.

If you have pride in simply being white, then yes.

It's okay to be proud of your achievements. It's racist to be proud of your race.

If you have pride in your skin color then you are a racist; it's as simple as that.

He's out and out stated the most obvious calling card of the closet racist: "I have pride in my race."

He wasn't shot. He was tortured. To death. Pretty much the worst possible way to die.

The media blackout imposed by the PRC over the whole incident seems to indicate that they think otherwise. And they've had a long-running policy of making the political opposition disappear.

That makes no sense. You aren't going to judge their actions until it's discovered how they act... Well, their actions are apparent in the status quo. Hence your ability to initially judge them.

There is enough information. They've tortured a man to death. That alone condemns them. However, their action that caused all of this is also clearly unjust: stealing the land from all of these villagers and offering no compensation. And their response to the village's opposition is also clearly unjust, with the media blackout being a clear prelude to more atrocity.

And while I'm here, joske, I understand that there is a difference between communists that have actually mattered and have had an impact on history and geopolitics, and communists that like to have tea parties and complain about the definition of communism, but both of them claim the title of communist and use communist rhetoric to justify their actions. The USSR was not a communist society, clearly, but it was a society that existed explicitly because of communism and it labelled itself as such. Sure, they might technically have been state capitalists, but they were very clearly opposed to free market capitalism and justified their statism as necessary for a transition to the communist utopia.

Modern communists hail Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Bukharin, etc. as heroes and have an irrational respect and apologetic attitude towards the dystopian regimes of the USSR, the PRC, the DPRK, Vietnam, and many other states. The symbols, terminology, and culture surrounding communism, even in its supposed 'true' form, are heavily based on these brutal people and nightmarish regimes. Even as they whine about any kind of association with these regimes as being unfair, they will wave Soviet flags, wear Che Guevara inspired t-shirts, and defend the obvious crimes of the regimes they supposedly want nothing to do with.

My mind is already made up on communists: a red by any other name is still a red. It's the damn pinkos that haven't made up their minds.

Funny thing is I am a Pinkos, however i hate the CCP and hope the they get what they deserve.

Time to go around slaughtering the peasants until they are happy and content.

The next time you put up a reaction to my comments, could you quote me or something because I almost missed your response.

a) Although I dont think this is what you mean, alot of what you write sounds like you are saying that all reds are crypto-authoritarians who love dictatorships even if they say they dont.

b) I still think that if you are constantly arguing against "communists" which you actually define as being capitalists I think you should start recondsidering your wording, even if you only do it inside this forum as it could really smoothen alot of discussions.

c) Note that all these brutal people you point out to went through different phases in their lifes, including phases where they werent authoritarian and phases where they recognized their mistakes (although often they tried to be apologetic about it). Also the fact that they were authoritarian does not mean this factor played through in (all) their theoretical works, and thus it does not warrant to throw all of them in the garbage bin. Thirdly it is not like all Trotskyists are (crypto)-authoritarians just because Trotsky was one.

d) Almost every dictatorial regime in the world (of which there are more then actual democratic regimes) uses the imagery, language...etc of democracy, does this mean that everyone who argues in favour of democracy is a damn pinko who hasnt made up his mind and spends his time doing stupid discussions on definitions, and that "real-world democrats" are actually authoritarians?

While were on the talk of racism:
rac·ism
Noun:
The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as...
Prejudice or discrimination directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief.

Saying i have pride in my race is not racist, saying my race is superior, is racist. I have pride for being Latin, but I do not think we are superior.

An unrelated question, but given what you think about authoritarianism, what do you think about Putin and his buddies (Medvedev included). I remember your avatar used to be Medvedev.

On topic now, I doubt that this will herald the end of the rule of the CCP. Realistically, sadly these villagers will be harshly punished and the Party will remain unfazed.

racial pride is fucking stupid, but its not always racist.

First of all, I said I agreed with Imperial. I do condemn the actions prior to now. Also, you seem to have a twisted definition of pride. Of course, if I wanted to determine where that came from, I would have to judge you, and that would hardly be fair to you, wouldn't it? Because I barely know you. Based on what little I know from your arguments, you have determined that there is no capacity for change within the system of their government, and will react with hostility to any attempt they make to rectify their mistakes.

I reserve my judgement of them because judging them would, in my humble opinion, make the opinion of their actions become a fact; if that were to happen, any chance I would have, if I were to enter any sort of global politics, make it impossible for me to negotiate peacefully with anyone I would affiliate with them. On such a scale, that sort of opinion could cause a war. And if you want to trace that sort of thinking back into a historical context, that sort of thinking violated the civil rights of many innocent Americans during the Cold War, 1950's era.

Judgement is very difficult to change once it has been made. Opinions are possible to change with facts. My opinion is still in concurrence with Imperial's on the subject.

And my opinion of you currently Kala, is that you shouldn't use a variation of Shakespeare to define a political party, because there are just as many flavors of Communism as there are Linux distributions. Doing such shows just how little or much you know about what Communism is, and undermines any argument you may choose to make about the subject.

An oak by any other name would smell as sweet; knowing exactly what kind of oak it is would keep you from being poisoned if you touched it.
And even that variation doesn't do the subject justice...

I would compare it to religion. Communism can be completely harmless if people would actually follow the rules they worship so much.

My apologies if that analogy offends you. Though if it does, it will give me that much more information about you to further flesh out my opinion of you. And if it doesn't offend you, then I still can further develop my opinion.

Being proud of your race isn't racist, it just leads me to believe that said person is desperate or misguided. Race is something that is neither granted nor earned. It has no accomplishments, and it isn't something that should affect someone's character in anyway. Why should you be proud of something like that? Show pride in your family, or yourself. What possible justification do you have to be proud of it?

We tend not to do that with both don't we.

PEACE AND LOVE FOR ALL.....*Slaughters capitalist Muslims lulz*

Who or whatever is power... the Chinese peasantry will always be oppressed and abused...

Cough History cough.

But as an optimistic human being I believe in brighter future...

Nah, just kidding... And if democracy enters China... Corruption and rebellion strikes!

Well, back to this topic:

joske
a) I wouldn't say they love dictatorships. I'd say they have an irrational love for anything that brands itself as communist, even when it is clearly not.

b) I disagree with both communism as a reality and communism as an ideology. One of them just happens to be significantly worse.

c) I don't have a problem with people adopting their ideas or looking to their works. I have a problem with people turning brutal killers into heroes and apologizing on their behalf when there is no reason to do so. When self-proclaimed communists start defending the Holodomor or the purges or any number of atrocities that the USSR committed, even though the USSR wasn't a communist society by any stretch of the imagination, it pisses me off. And not only do they defend it (and any other regime that labels itself communist and is in practice state capitalist), they use its terminology, symbols, and leaders to define themselves.

d) The difference is that proponents of democracy don't care what a nation calls itself. Communists do, a lot.

Romulus
Yes, that definition is exactly right. Discrimination on the basis of race, even apparently positive discrimination, is racist. That's why "racial pride" is racist. Race is an invention, a fantasy concocted by people to assign social and mental traits to arbitrary physical features. If you have pride in your race, you are a racist, and you are completely irrational.

Kurayami
First, see above.

Next, don't apologize on behalf of the PRC. They don't deserve it and it's actively harmful to human dignity. I don't judge them on anything but their actions, which are horrendous and unjustifiable. There is no excuse for denying people basic rights and liberties, no matter the political persuasion of the population or the culture/nation/traditions of the people. The PRC has demonstrated a clear and gargantuan capacity for evil and a very, very petite capacity for reason. If there is dissent, it is crushed. If there is news, it is buried. If there is political opposition, it is silenced. Only when the eyes of the world are on them do the PRC feel as if they have any responsibility towards basic human dignity, and even then it's tempered strongly against their desire to maintain Orwellian control of a society of over a billion. That behavior is simply inexcusable.

Again could you at least quote the posts your reacting to next time because I almost missed your response again.

- Yeah, again could you at least differentiate between those two concepts, by not using the same term for both concepts as it could solve alot of pointless bickering.

- So if I get this correctly and judging from alot of previous posts you made, some of the most recurent arguments you have against communists is that either they dont see the soviet union and deriviates as communist societies in which case they are using the true scotchman argument, or that they defend the soviet union and deriviates in which case they are authoritarian?

- Yeah well thats because nobody believes that all these "democratic" regimes are democratic and this while non-communist regimes are constantly regarded as communist regimes, and off course if they dont think that way they are using the true scotchman argument.

I'm on a crappy laptop at the moment and can't use the full functionality of the text editor thing. I can't even see it, so I have to type in my own italics tags in order to get them italicized. I would use a quote of you, but it doesn't alert you unless there's a linked thingy in the quote, which I can't manufacture.

I'd say that the NO TRAAAUUUUUEEEEE SCOTSMAN argument exists because they refuse to stop treating the USSR, the PRC, and other "communist" nations as something to be defended. When push comes to shove, and they do something that little miss communist finds offensive, then well of course they're not communists. But any other time, these societies were actually really great. There isn't a logical reason to apologize on behalf of these dystopian regimes, and yet they do it all the time.

Anyways, I agree with the point that communists still tend to defend dictatorial regimes too much, although pretty much everywhere you have to nuance that view thanks to them doing things such as selectively condemning certain parts of certain figures and regimes while sometimes admitting these figures and regimes made mistakes but being apologetic about it, to actually defending them. But yeah in the end they tend to be too defending of awfull regimes in the name of ideology, but on the other hand pretty much every ideology does that.

Oh, and I missed this earlier, but JJstringofnumbers, I put Medvedev in my avatar because I like the guy. Obviously the current situation in Russia is undemocractic and unsustainable, but among Russian leaders, Medvedev is pretty great and tempers the anti-Western attitude that Putin has developed.

Well you only have a choice of three people.