I don’t see the difference between being a landlord and being a piece of shit, tbh. All landlords are parasites.

I never argued in bad faith, but it’s clear that you never intended on good faith discussion when you can’t even handle basic, factual evidence disproving your orientalist views. Blocking me and running after failing to confront your misconceptions is sad.

Returning to your enjoyment of racist memes, you specifically said you enjoy it because it pisses off communists. The reason it pisses off communists is the same as why racialized caricatures are censored in China: they are racist.

In other words, you enjoy the rage that comes from those disgusted by racism, and continue to perpetuate that racism because of your enjoyment of it. Even if you aren’t aware of the racist implications (somehow), you’re still just as guilty for deliberately perpetuating it without investigating why it offends people.

Yep, excellent expansion! I by no means meant to minimize the historical devastation of women’s rights, I was specifically meaning the context of the 19th and 20th centuries with that comment. Women’s history is far more complex than just that period.

No bad-faith on my part, I explained exactly what I meant by saying you linked it for me again. Again, meaning it has been linked for me many times by different people, not you in particular. This is grammatically correct, but you’re using it as a springboard to pretend I can’t speak English well or that I’m bad-faith.

As for the US, it’s a settler-colonial, genocidal empire. It is far more racist than China, which has strong minority protections. This is you, again, being orientalist and revealing your racism. For example, you make false claims of genocide towards Uyghur peoples.

The best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is a group of Chinese diaspora living in the west, and they compiled an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims. The majority of their sourcing is western, and they cite official Chinese government writing and white papers when relevant. Uyghur culture is preserved.

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:

The vast majority of the population supports their government, actually, because they are treated very well. Over 90% of the population supports the CPC. NIRA data’s latest polling found China to be one of the more comprehensively democratic countries in the world as seen by its own population:

In other words, you’re digging a deeper and deeper hole for yourself and doubling down on your orientalist views. It isn’t enough for you to defend racist caricatures, you have to project the undeniable racism of the US Empire onto China, using your orientalist views as reason to believe atrocity propaganda.

Not everyone can be in the same level of organizing, and that’s fine. For those who can, joining a communist party that engages with the people, and correctly brings them up to their level of political awareness and analysis, is what sets up the basis of a successful revolutionary apparatus.

I said “again” as in I had seen it before and you gave me a chance to revisit it and confirm I’m correct.

As for Statesians loving to shit on communism, this is correct. Statesians are also wildly racist, and usually combine the two. Orientalism runs deep, and as such depictions of Eastern socialism usually involve deep degrees of racial caricature. Other vile memes involve depicting Chinese people as “bugmen” and as a “hive-mind,” which combines racist views of Asians with anti-communism. I’m sure you know this, you’re just refusing to see it because it’s uncomfortable to admit after you defended a racist caricature.

If you just learned about why Chinese people view the meme as racist, why not just change your views? Is your anti-communist thrill so great as to prevent you from growing as a person? That’s a rhetorical question, you don’t need to answer. I just recommend you reflect, rather than deflect.

Slave based economies existed before feudalism, yes. The advancement from slave-based economies like Rome to feudalism was a progressive one, and was largely based on changing productive modes.

I’ve read the wiki page, but thanks for linking it again. The fact that the meme originated in China, but spread like wildfire in the west, needs to be examined. Xi Jinping is incredibly popular in China, legitimately so. A picture comparing Xi to Winnie and Obama to Tigger showed up online. There wasn’t mass protest against Xi Jinping or anything.

What then exploded was western usage of the meme, beyond its origins, and in a new context. Largely among the anti-communist right, vile depictions and distortions of Xi Jinping began to take place, creating a racialized caricature. By this point the meme faded away near entirely in China, and instead became a symbol of hatred towards Xi Jinping in particular and the PRC in general in the west.

The western obsession with depicting Xi Jinping as a yellow bear is what is racist, and hiding behind the fact that the first iteration of the meme came from China, before it became distorted by the west, is a “get out of jail free” card for racists. It isn’t only communists that can correctly identify this, marginalized groups that have been caricaturized by westerners can also see this easily.

The communists were never allies with the Nazis. A non-aggression pact is not an alliance. The communists spent the decade prior trying to form an anti-Nazi coalition force, such as the Anglo-French-Soviet Alliance which was pitched by the communists and rejected by the British and French. The communists hated the Nazis from the beginning, as the Nazi party rose to prominence by killing communists and labor organizers, cemented bourgeois rule, and was violently racist and imperialist, while the communists opposed all of that.

When the many talks of alliances with the west all fell short, the Soviets reluctantly agreed to sign a non-agression pact, in order to delay the coming war that everyone knew was happening soon. Throughout the last decade, Britain, France, and other western countries had formed pacts with Nazi Germany, such as the Four-Power Pact, the German-French-Non-Agression Pact, and more. Molotov-Ribbentrop was unique among the non-agression pacts with Nazi Germany in that it was right on the eve of war, and was the first between the USSR and Nazi Germany. It was a last resort, when the west was content from the beginning with working alongside Hitler.

Harry Truman, in 1941 in front of the Senate, stated:

If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.

Not only that, but it was the Soviet Union that was responsible for 4/5ths of total Nazi deaths, and winning the war against the Nazis. The Soviet Union did not agree to invade Poland with the Nazis, it was about spheres of influence and red lines the Nazis should not cross in Poland. When the USSR went into Poland, it stayed mostly to areas Poland had invaded and annexed a few decades prior. Should the Soviets have let Poland get entirely taken over by the Nazis, standing idle? The West made it clear that they were never going to help anyone against the Nazis until it was their turn to be targeted.

Churchill did not take the Nazis as a serious threat, and was horrified when FDR and Stalin made a joke about executing Nazis. Churchill starved millions to death in India in preventable ways, and had this to say about it:

I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.

Meanwhile, the soviet famine in the 1930s was the last major famine outside of wartime in the USSR, because collectivized farming achieved food security in a region where famine was common. As a consequence, life expectancy doubled:

The Nazis and soviets were never allies. A non-aggression pact is not an alliance, and the non-aggression pact between the soviets and the Nazis was unique among the other non-aggression pacts in that it was on the eve of war. The soviets knew war was coming, and so bought more time to prepare.

Neither Stalin nor Mao were “tyrannical dictators,” even the CIA said Stalin was closer to a “captain of a team” than an iron-fisted tyrant:

Even in Stalin’s time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and it seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain. However, it does not appear that any of the present leaders will rise to the stature of Lenin and Stalin,so that it will be safer to assume that developments in Moscow will be along the lines of what is called collective leadership, unless Western policies force the Soviets ‘to streamline their power organization. The present situation is the most favorable from the point of view of upsetting the Communist dictatorship since the death of Stalin.

From Comments on the Change in Soviet Leadership.

As for Stalin and Mao “hating the news,” this is similarly wrong. Stalin and Mao opposed bourgeois media, essentially outlets like Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia, where CIA-funded reporters would blast propaganda from the west into socialist countries. News was still reported on, even Statesian reporters like Anna Louise Strong would meet with Stalin, Zhou Enlai, Mao Zedong, and more.

In other words, an entirely different context, and not at all a quote from Stalin and Mao.

As for Trump, he is a billionaire. He serves his class, and the ones who fund him, imperialists and tech giants. This is why he took Elon Musk, Boeing execs, and more to the PRC and tried to get a good deal (which failed). Trump isn’t “trying to consolidate power,” he wants profits, which come from advancing the interests of finance and tech capital. When you erase class analysis, life appears to be an absurdity.

You don’t see how depicting an Asian man as a yellow bear is racist?

Slaves were largely taken from conquered enemies, there was not an industry of taking and gathering slaves. African economies were instead more feudal and communalistic, rather than slave-based. It wasn’t until the arrival of the Europeans that slaves became as important as they did for gaining technology and avoiding invasion by the Europeans, and thus the slave trade proper was created. There existed proto-slave trade formations that grew vastly.

I think you’re getting a bit hooked on how I’m wording things. Am I denying the existence of anyone buying a slave ever before the Europeans arrived? No. Am I denying that there was a real slave trade, an economy of slavery, before the Europeans arrived? Yes.

The slave trade practically did not exist. Slavery did, but it was not an industry. This is why it dramatically expanded.

Yep! Great point. Women were (and are) used for unpaid domestic labor, but this labor is absolutely socially necessary. In this way, the nuclear family arose as a way for capitalists to avoid paying for domestic labor, where the wage of the man was essentially the social cost of reproducing a family. Women were made dependent, and entire families created in such a fashion as to be the most profitable for capitalists.

Stalin and Mao were both committed communists. How is Trump quoting them? Is the context the same as when Stalin and Mao said them? Trump undeniably serves Statesian finance and tech capital, Stalin and Mao served the proletariat and peasantry.

Chattel slavery, as a core component of African economies, did not exist. There was slavery, but it was not inherited, not a major aspect of the economy, and not a motivating factor for development. When Europeans came to Africa, they found States that in many ways put European ones to shame. Benin shocked European explorers with its high culture and developement.

Europe, however, had begun the exponential growth that comes with capitalism. This created industrialized production, more advanced technology, and thus a monopoly on these key goods that could give African States leverage over their neighbors. Europeans took advantage of this, and required slaves in return. Those who resisted were met with naval cannons and European guns.

The reason for this was to aid with the massive labor required for all of the land Europe was stealing in the Americas. Agricultural products needed labor. African countries were made dependent on export of human lives. This created demographic crises and stunted development, after all, how can you develop when your economy isn’t focused on productivity but instead on warring with neighbors and exporting your own people? This widened the gap, which then was taken advantage of further by Europeans, resulting in colonialism.

The point isn’t that slavery did not exist at all. The point is that it was extremely minor, and not at all the focus of African economies until European capitalists established contact, and forced it if not by advanced technology to trade, then by gun and cannon. Europe even refused to share how to create guns, as this way they could control the flow of weaponry, and de-fang resistance. They controlled who had guns, for what reasons, and to what extent. Replacement parts were monopolized, creating dependence.

This is the ball and chain put around African necks, and what began the balkanization of what were, until Europe’s involvement, states that rivaled those of Europe. This is the history European settlers wiped away, trying to manufacture a narrative of “civilizing savages.” This is what Walter Rodney debunked.

Sounds like OP is advocating for the working classes to stop falling for the DNC.

Not entirely true, if public ownership is the principal aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state, then it’s socialist. If such a state decided to tax billionaires out of existence it would not change the form nor essence of the economy, just change the level of wealth for the capitalists that do exist, and as economies centralize over time capitalists in socialist countries exist in a continually shrinking pond with no way out to begin with.

I don’t know why liberals are obsessed with metaphor to cape for genocidal imperialists, but the fact of the matter is that you do not have to eat either. The system itself must be overthrown, because both “sandwiches” are battery acid. Both will kill the world and those abroad as the US Empire continues to decay.

It’s more that the system itself cannot be made to work, and therefore we should work to overthrow the system. This requires organizing the working classes in a party outside this system.