All of a sudden, Europe now cares about international law?

They’ve been playing this sectarian card for decades now. They only care about dividing Syria and weakening it regardless of who’s in charge.

With boredom comes dedication and commitment. I recommend The Count of Monte Cristo. Long but very captivating.

Again, you’re ignoring the fact that socialism is not a defined set of policies that gets to be uniformly applied in a vaccum. The trajectory even has historically varied from one socialist state to another. To attribute the accomplishments of the PRC to “capitalism” is inaccurate. What there is in China is a market economy that is predominated by public ownership and state-owned enterprises, which is nowhere close to capitalism.

You condemn the consequences of the early Maoist policies, and then equally condemn Dengist reforms. What’s the point of critiquing for the sake of critiquing, whem there is no constructive effort on your part to properly assess and understand the material and historical circumstances that have led to China’s development into what it is now, only being guided by emotions and a confident lack of theory. One recent book on the matter that I recommend is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics by Roland Boer.

China has always and will always be imperialist

This is ahistorical and untheoretical thinking on your part. Imperialism is an advanced form of capitalism. An imperialist state is one that has saturated its domestic markets and as a consequence seeks to expand its markets and the reproduction of private capital overseas, by all means possible and most notably by force. China simply does not possess the features of imperialism. Prolewiki has a very informative article that explains the concept.

Until now, you’ve only indiscriminately sprinkled terms like imperialism and capitalism and fascism without much thought in the process, and so we’ve reached an impasse.

As to the Xinjiang matter, your views reflect those of the western propaganda machine. I’ve already mentioned above a FAQ compiled by Dessalines (yes, Lemmy’s lead dev) which contains many articles and documents that may at the very least give a different perspective on this matter.

Why did the Chinese lose so many citizens fighting fascist just to adopt capitalism and produce more billionaires than the US this and last year while also being an obvious oligarchy. Why did all these innocents need to die just for China to become fascist themselves?

Capitalism and socialism are not some clear cut systems or categories that can be merely “adopted.” They are modes of production that are dictated by the material and social relations of production in a given space at a given time. For instance, the transition from feudalism to capitalism did not occur neither swiftly, nor neatly nor universally; rather, capitalist bubbles existed at the epitome of feudal rule and did not expand until the favourable material circumstances emerged — abrupt demographic changes in the 14th century, colonialist ventures by private companies in American continent, and so forth. And even after capitalism became the dominant mode of production, feudalist relations of production still existed at the peripheries.

A similar perspective should be adopted in China. The existence of markets is not a core aspsct of capitalism; and regarding billionaires, the PRC prosecutes even more of them, in addition to the tens of thousands of millionaires who emigrate every year.

This is exactly what socialism looks like, a transitional stage that will bring forth a post-capitalist society once the international contradictions (Chinese millionaires) as well as external (US imperialist encroachment) are extinguished. Some policies may succeed, while others may fail and become lessons for future policymaking. But to call this anything close to fascism is treason to the working classes of the Global South.

Now they are openly committing genocide against Muslims.

Just ask yourself a simple yet important question: what does the PRC stand to gain from indiscriminately persecuting its own citizens and making them suffer aimlessly?

You can travel right now to Xinjiang and visit all of its towns and cities freely with total access and ease (as many tourists do every year), and you would see people openly speaking Uyghur, rituals and local events practiced publicly, and mosques operating normally. If you’re adamant on believing what some white journalist from NYT or WSJ has to say instead of the locals and residents as well as tourists and independent, on-ground reporters, then this conversation should stop right here.

The concept of an independent Tibet never existed before the British imperialists in India plotted to expand their sphere of influence into China. See for instance the Lhasa Convention.

Furthermore:

Britain put before the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs a five-point demand, indicating the denial of China’s sovereignty over Tibet. When the Chinese government rejected the British demand, the British blocked all the roads leading from the British Raj in India to Tibet.

In 1913 the British government coerced local Tibetan authorities into declaring independence and proposed that:

“Britain be the weaponry supplier after total independence of Tibet;” “Tibet accept British envoys’ supervision of Tibetan financial and military affairs in return for Britain’s support of Tibetan independence;” “Britain be responsible for resisting the army of the Republic of China when it reaches Tibet;” “Tibet adopt an open policy and allow freedom of movement of the British.”

Source.

You can’t compare China, who hasn’t waged a single war in 50 years, to a genocidal entity like “Israel” that is being constantly aided by the US empire and defended by the western propaganda machine.

And regarding Xinjiang, you may need to look at the facts before throwing terms like “ethnic cleansing.”

EDIT: I have to add how despicable and of ill nature it is to shift the conversation away from the issue at hand, i.e. the war crimes of the imperialist machine, and towards discursive topics.

Dude’s been tanking all the quips and jokes for three decades now. There’s a crazy amount of scholars I’ve read who shit on his work just in order to introduce their books and chapters.

deleted by creator

The US doesn’t need the Kurds anymore after Assad got deposed. So they were betrayed in favor of the new puppet president.

Most of the Arab peninsula was inhabited by nomadic tribes that continuously moved with their cattle and tents, with the exception of a few scattered cities that thrived on trade and light agriculture (dates).

This post is untrue. The woman who was bombed is a pro-Palestine influencer called Rosey in gaza.

You giving it such instructions doesn’t mean it will abide by them the way you’d desire. How would the machine interpret this “Globally Neutral and Holistic Perspective”?

Ultimately LLM is governed by the data which it is provided with, and usually it is very eurocentric.

I’m pretty sure US-China trade is done from the Indian ocean, through the Singapore strait and into the South China sea.

This is clear case of capitalism at its most advanced stage: monopoly capitalism. The competitive system that produces winners and losers will inevitably progress towards the concentration of capital in the hands of the few. There is no point in creating inaccurate terminology such as “techno-feudalism” when Marx and his intellectual successors had already studied this phenomenon in depth.

Why do you feel offended by the fact that another instance wants to ensure a safe space for its users?

TIL that containing a zionist infestation is a petty war.

Third time’s the charm eh

The imperial core is harder to break because the material contradictions are well dissimulated. Modern Western societies have been historically maintained by the abundance and welfare that is provided from the subjugation and colonization done overseas (this welfare is shrinking as we speak and the European proletariat and subalterns are getting more conscious of the contradictions as we speak). Their democracies, human rights, constitutionalism and all of their institutions are dependent on the bloodshed abroad, which the average citizen rarely perceives beyond the obfuscated facades set up by the bourgeois press and media.

On the other hand, the colonies that were set up by the Europeans showcased the most advanced stages of capitalism and fascism before they were properly introduced in Europe. It was a case of imperialist dominance and not mere hegemony, which unashamedly flaunted its contradictions.

Scratch a liberal something something.