

US begging for an audience so they can walk their bullshit back: “China is softening”
The Guardian is so full of shit lol
US begging for an audience so they can walk their bullshit back: “China is softening”
The Guardian is so full of shit lol
If you mean printing weapons, I really doubt that would help a lot in getting access to female hospital wards, homeless shelters, bathrooms, domestic abuse centres, and so on.
A symptom for sure. She’s just a kids writer, nobody would pay her any attention if she was a communist. She’s being boosted exactly because she’s a TERF.
Obligatory (and, sadly, real):
Copying my comment from another thread: when I need to discuss “change through bourgeois electoralism” with libs I love sharing this interview:
It’s so perfect; it’s a reputable Western newspaper so you can share it in almost any setting, just preface it for plausible deniability with something like: “It’s a hilarious read, one of the greatest modern liberal intellectuals debates a genocidal maniac frothing at the mouth!”
Libs love the idea and usually swallow the bait expecting funzies, they looooove them a stuck-up Brit “speaking truth to power” and handing out “hitchslaps”.
And then Stalin absolutely demolishes Wells and it really fucks with their world. Wells says FDR’s New Deal will bring about socialism in the USA and Stalin’s like nah cause the economy is in the hands of capitalists so at most you will get some concessions which capitalists will keep fighting to revert. Stalin’s arguments are so clear and concise, and his predictions are so plainly correct, while Wells is just being confidently wrong and terribly smug about it.
I had some success with it too, including one well-meaning lib literally telling me the next day, “Stalin was right” which are the three words I would not expect a lib utter under any circumstances.
This sits right next to the all-time high rate of suicides in the US. Clearly Americans are getting their taxes worth from the military spending.
Finally some good news, thank you CPC and comrade Xi for shining a bit of light through the clouds of current world affairs.
So when the CPC achieves a “staggering success in combating pollution” while capitalist South Asian states become the “global pollution epicentre”, how is it framed?
The Communist Party of China is not mentioned even once, not even as “the CCP”, Xi Jinping is never mentioned, the article only talks about vague “Beijing”, “Chinese government”, “Chinese leaders”.
Systemic differences between the way China is governed vs India and Pakistan are never brought up, instead “the progress made in China shows that change is possible, if the government and its people are willing and able to put in the work”: clearly South Asians just don’t want breathable air enough to “put in the work”.
Are systemic solutions ever mentioned? Maybe South Asia needs to stop being the Wests sweatshop so that they can start healing their land? Nope, they just need a handout: “Aid from international organizations and private donors could go a long way.”
They also talk about how “China remains the world’s 13th most polluted country”, of course without a mention that this pollution was caused primarily by manufacture for Western markets and in many cases by the Western owned companies, so that the West could in many cases double dip: on the one hand, by exploiting cheap but well educated labour (that education bankrolled by the Communists, mind you) so that they could sell necessities to workers in the West at ridiculously low prices, allowing them to suppress wages in the West without guillotines wooshing; and on the other hand by exporting the profits of the entire production chain back to the West where the company is owned.
If the pollution in China was getting worse you can bet your ass they would be talking about “the CCP” and Xi Jinping personally, and the solution would be nothing short of the outright regime change.
I’m trying to seize the means of production but I’m dummy thicc and the clap of my ass cheeks keeps alerting the bourgeoisie
Isn’t it basically petty bourgeoisie + labour aristocracy?