Link to the acc? (Ideally archived)

Yeah, I can see presidential assassinations becoming the preferred outlet for misanthropic rage for those who don’t like the sound of children screaming.

Rumour is it’s a lib: https://x.com/karol/status/1835424126481437071

Yeah, the weirdest part about 90s/00s culture is the idea that a stable desk job in an air conditioned office is the worst thing ever.

9 to 5? Sounds heavenly.

Graeber has you covered.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what’s going on here. These “heroes” are purely reactionary, in the literal sense. They have no projects of their own, at least not in their role as heroes: as Clark Kent, Superman may be constantly trying, and failing, to get into Lois Lane’s pants, but as Superman, he is purely reactive. In fact, superheroes seem almost utterly lacking in imagination: like Bruce Wayne, who with all the money in the world can’t seem to think of anything to do with it other than to indulge in the occasional act of charity; it never seems to occur to Superman that he could easily carve free magic cities out of mountains.

Almost never do superheroes make, create, or build anything. The villains, in contrast, are endlessly creative. They are full of plans and projects and ideas. Clearly, we are supposed to first, without consciously realizing it, identify with the villains. After all, they’re having all the fun. Then of course we feel guilty for it, re-identify with the hero, and have even more fun watching the superego clubbing the errant Id back into submission.

Sad horse show is way better than sad grandpa show and both are reflections of the social malaise we’ve fallen into

You’ve quoted the right leaning party members at a conference during the height of privatisation. Ofc there’s gonna be some dumb shit said.

If you’re assessing China, you need to look at its direction presently, under Xi Jingping, not it’s direction thirteen years ago under Hu Jintao, especially given that the Shanghai Clique of Jiang Zemin only started to lose power in 2006-2007.

Instead, let’s look at some of what Xi says.

Here’s a document distributed to all high level cadre outlining ideological trends to be wary of.

Neoliberalism advocates unrestrained economic liberalization, complete privatization, and total marketization and it opposes any kind of interference or regulation by the state. Western countries, led by the United States, carry out their Neoliberal agendas under the guise of “globalization,” visiting catastrophic consequences upon Latin America, the Soviet Union, and Eastern Europe, and have also dragged themselves into the international financial crisis from they have yet to recover.

This is mainly expressed in the following ways:

[Neoliberalism’s advocates] actively promote the “market omnipotence theory.” They claim our country’s macroeconomic control is strangling the market’s efficiency and vitality and they oppose public ownership, arguing that China’s state-owned enterprises are “national monopolies,” inefficient, and disruptive of the market economy, and should undergo “comprehensive privatization.” These arguments aim to change our country’s basic economic infrastructure and weaken the government’s control of the national economy.

Not to mention this hilarious headline: China’s Latest Crackdown Target Is Liberal Economists.

Alright, so there’s at least some ideological pushback. But what about reality? After all, didn’t they privatise a bunch of stuff like those economists wanted?

Well, the holding entity for state owned entities is the largest economic entity in the world at approximately 7.6 trillion USD, so whatever they’ve privatised, there’s clearly a hell of a lot they haven’t.

But what about the general trend? And what good are those entities if they’re just running according to market principles?

Well, let’s just check the news:

An agency led by President Xi Jinping to advance institutional changes in China has approved a new plan to make state-owned enterprises “stronger, better and bigger”. Monday’s decision by the Central Commission for Comprehensive Reforms to “optimise and restructure the state economy layout” – a euphemism that generally points to government-led mergers and the consolidation of various state-owned companies, with ornamental participation by private investors – came after Beijing found its state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to be more reliable in answering the government’s calls during the coronavirus.

China’s “adjustment” of its state sector is aimed at “serving national strategic goals and adapting to high-quality growth”, and state firms will dominate areas of “strategic security, industrial leadership … and public services”, according to an official statement released through the Xinhua news agency.

So what we see is that SOEs were better able to respond in a pandemic situation, where market allocation just wasn’t going to cut it, and use value needed to be pushed to the fore.

No one’s denying there are capitalists in China, or that they haven’t been allowed to flourish. What’s important is that they remain under the control of the Party, and that the Party retains its control over police, military, and the commanding heights of the economy. It says a lot that even at the height of their power, the capitalists had to couch their arguments for privatisation in Marxist terms.

Being paid to be in shape, being able to fire a gun, and having knowledge of effective command structures would all be useful af.

Anything on top of that is a bonus, and comes from specialisation. Bomb disposal very quickly can become bomb creation, etc.

One difference is the people they’re trained to oppress.

Cops are trained to oppress their own countrymen. Soldiers are trained to oppress people on the other side of the world.

It’s why in revolutions we see the military flip long before cops do. Cops are always the last holdouts.

We already do see it, in fan fiction. However, those works end up hitting a ceiling, as they lack the resources to get polished, or the legal rights to get published.

Sure, the major cities are hot shit, but there are parts of China, especially rurally, where it’s all but a completely different country.

That’s why it’s still considered ‘developing’.

They’re a developing nation, and well below their historical carbon budget per capita.

They’ve committed to peaking in 2030.

This tweet goes into detail.

Basically, the Party’s onto the environmental stuff. It knows people want change. It’s making that change.

It’s declared a goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2060. There are huge subsidies for solar panels, and it’s the world’s largest exporter. It uses its military for huge reforestation efforts.

There’s no need for a western-seeded social movement telling them to do what they’re already doing.

I have two skills -it’s non-monogamy and speaking publicly, okay? Do some fucking research!

This is a pretty slick line

I see your TumblrInAction and raise you KotakuInAction

Trump doesn’t affect that and neither does Biden. It’s a wash on that front.

Brains are material, and that aside, the superstructure is influenced by and influences the material.

The material conditions can promote fascism, but having them surge elsewhere also feeds into it. It allows fascism examples of what tactics and messaging works. American cultural hegemony means any shift in American culture also affects overseas.

If you’re familiar with the war of position, having Trump in the bully pulpit is a big win for fascism in that war. It also so happens that it harms liberals, which we like. It’s a Mexican stand off.

I envy you

Discord for those who want it.

Lemmy for all.

China is currently in a state of precariousness, with the primary contradiction being the inequality between urban and rural.

In that context, it’s understandable, albeit not laudable, that they’ve chosen not to legalise gay marriage. The focus is on stability, and that seems to mean not triggering any culture wars.

That said, there have been victories. LGBT couples can file for voluntary guardianship of one another. There have been court victories. Being gay and trans has been demedicalised. We’ve seen more representation in media in recent years.

One upshot is that, to my knowledge, there aren’t any conservative groups opposing LGBT rights.

But yeah, they should take a cue from Fidel in his later years.