• GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    203
    arrow-down
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ten Chinese air force aircraft entered Taiwan’s air defence zone . . . Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.

    For those unfamiliar with the Air Defense Identification Zone:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Identification_Zone_(Taiwan)

    Not only does it include a lot of water that isn’t part of the Strait, right off of China’s coast, it also includes a portion of Mainland China a few times larger than Taiwan itself.

    People like to talk like China is flying jets over Taipei City, but you can fly a plane from one city in Mainland China to another, only passing over land, and be in this zone. Mind you, I don’t think Taiwan having this zone is bad – countries generally should be aware of air traffic nearby – but this is part of a long history of alarmist headlines by western media regarding what is often very uninteresting air traffic in the PRC.

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        86
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, obviously it’s a glorified puppet state but there’s no point in arguing from that standpoint here. If a country is to exist, it should know about local air traffic, that’s all I’m saying.

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            64
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The PRC wants a peaceful reunification, which would not be aided by them continuously flying military jets over the island. I, too, would prefer peaceful reunification, which means some level of cooperation and tolerance is necessary.

              • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                31
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The RoC won’t give up their holdings in the interest of human benefit, but liberalism shows us that there are countless ways to skin a cat. The RoC is not autarkic and is very dependent on its NATO friends and its trading partners. As the US wanes and third world nations stand up, the support for Taiwanese nationalism will surely dwindle, and RoC leadership may be put in a position where their best offer is clearly to reunify.

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            77
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China so that the US could us the island as a threat against China – as it also attempted to do in Korea when it had more-or-less complete control of the southern half. Taiwan spent about 40 years as a military dictatorship killing tens of thousands of dissidents, native Formosans, and others (this was called the “White Terror”), while their patron the US looked the other way while it pumped resources into the country (for the ruling class, mind you) to use the island as a sweatshop site in the interim. This legacy and its connections to fellow US puppet South Korea and US ally Japan go a long way to explaining its current capacity in manufacturing, which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.

            Both Taiwan and SK have made various attempts to assert themselves (with some success in both cases), but with the pathetic diplomatic position of the former and the continued military occupation of the latter by the US, I think “puppet state” is a fair title for them, perhaps as much as Israel, but that’s its own can of worms.

            I didn’t really intend on getting into litigating this topic, but I’m happy to discuss it as best I can.

            • StalinForTime [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              23
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not only did the US turn a blind eye to the White Terror, but they were positively gleeful about it, as a key target of it was of course not only indigeneous-politics based, but fundamentally anti-communist.

              Indeed a basic presupposition of the US providing you such extensive economic support, as a forward base in Asia against communism, is that you crush any opposition to its ‘proper’ functioning as such an economic and military asset. That supposes that you will crush any radical, labor, trade-union, let alone explicitly socialist or communist activity which appears to challenge the state.

            • randint@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China […] which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.

              Yes, I know about its not-so-glorious past and the White Terror. Thousands of innocent civilians were killed. It was terrible. However, I must respectfully disagree with you on the “puppet state” part. I don’t think that Taiwan is a puppet state. The US sponsoring Taiwan is a thing of the past. Neither is a pathetic diplomatic position a good reason for being a puppet state.

              • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                27
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                if US support dropped overnight, reunification with the mainland would become inevitable. it’s a puppet state in the sense that it’s propped up by the might of the US/NATO military.

              • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I didn’t see this reply before. The other commenter has it right that the relevance of its pathetic diplomatic position is that it is being propped up by the US/NATO and ultimately depends on them to exist apart from the PRC, which makes it very difficult to oppose them. Incidentally, does the US not sponsor Taiwan? Even just recently there was this, which sure seems like sponsorship to me.

                • randint@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Apparently being sponsored by a foreign state is now counted as being a puppet state?

          • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            41
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Taiwan is a rump state of the despotism that existed before the Maoist revolution. When the government fled to the island, the US backed them up and prevented the revolution from purging them from power and uniting the whole country under one flag. They exist today as they are because of western intervention, and is therefore a puppet state. I disagree with ‘glorified’ considering it’s taboo internationally to even call them a state.

        • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          62
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Like asking yankoids what they want to do with “their land”, the question is pointless and only serves to legitimize a faulty preposition.

          The ROC also still claims to be the legitimate government of all of China (plus Mongolia and a sizable chunk of Russia) so its not like they’re just sitting there minding their own business either.

          • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            41
            ·
            1 year ago

            The ROC also claims the South China Sea as its own and has build naval bases in there. Even the DPP doesn’t want to give up those naval bases. So, it’s the Republic of Taiwan to stick it to the Mainland commies, but “akctually, we’re the Republic of China, and the South China Sea is part of Chinese naval waters, so we get to build as many naval bases as we want” to Vietnam and Indonesia.

          • randint@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Do you even know why the pro-independence party (DPP) lost so badly in the local election for mayors? Because the people were disappointed in what DPP had done with the economy, not because they didn’t agree with the foreign policies DPP was pushing! (Please note that I’m not saying most people agree.) In local elections, people are going to choose whoever they believe would be the best for the city/county, not the one whose views on China they agree with.

            Additionally, if you look at the latest opinion poll for the presidental election next year, you’d be surprised to find out that the candidate from the pro-independence party is leading.

            Source: am Taiwanese

            ps. you made a typo in your comment. it was the 2022 local election, not 2020.

            • meth_dragon [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              55
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because the people were disappointed in what DPP had done with the economy

              inciting conflict with your biggest trading partner does tend to have negative effects on the economy

              • randint@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well yeah I guess, but really it’s more about the policies they had been pushing domesticlly

                • meth_dragon [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  37
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  i am sure the success or failure of those domestic policies were not in the least contingent on international political conditions. the economic policies of an island that imports 97% of its energy with a food self sufficiency rate of around 30% and exports accounting for 70% of gdp can in no way be considered to be overexposed or at risk to trade fluctuations and even if that were the case, i am sure that foreign policy would not play an outsize role in determining the magnitude or periodicity of said trade fluctuations.

          • oatscoop@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Because a poll asking a direct question is a hell of a lot more accurate in gauging how the population feels about the issue.

            Political parties can lose elections for their stances/actions outside their main one – which seems to have been the case per the actual person from Taiwan that responded to your comment. It doesn’t matter what a party is called or what their main goals are if they’re bad at their job.

            If and when the people of Taiwan decide they want reunification, it will happen. Thankfully Beijing isn’t going to be allowed to force the issue.

            • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              48
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              You want polls, how about this poll conducted by a Taiwanese university where the majority of Taiwanese want neither reunification nor independence, but the status quo? The majority of Taiwanese people wanting the status quo lines up with how the pro-independence party ate shit while the pro-status quo party made huge gains. The DPP got BTFO so hard the current DPP president Tsai Ing-wen had to resign as party head.

              • randint@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The majority of Taiwanese people has always wanted to remain status quo, as indicated by the two triangle data lines in the plot. Since declaring independence is basically asking China to attack and that peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population) either, the majority are of course pro-status quo. It does not line up with how DPP ate shit last year.

                • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population)

                  Again, this was “forced” reunification in that poll, i.e. military takeover. Of course people oppose that. I think at least the plurality opinion is against peaceful reunification under the PRC too, but it’s not by as high a margin.

            • randint@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Thank you for mentioning me. Makes me feel like not all people on this thread is pro-China. :D

    • Too Lazy Didn't Name@lemmy.woodward.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      OK, but these articles arent alerting on that type of traffic, only when military aircraft are flying near Thailand, so whats the significance of the ADIZ extending into China in this context?

      • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s exactly what type of traffic these articles are alerting. Which is why there’s no need to even pay attention to it.

        Also Thailand has had Chinese military visit it’s country as well as trained with Chinese soldiers. If you know so little, why comment?

        • Too Lazy Didn't Name@lemmy.woodward.tech
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          The quoted text in your reply says that the jets crossed a half way point over the sea. They were not over mainland China.

          This feels like having a conversation with bing’s chat bot.

          • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ten Chinese air force aircraft entered Taiwan’s air defence zone . . . Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.

            This is what the original post quoted. Flying over international air space is NOT news worthy. Unless China does it, suddenly it’s news. And yes, in case you don’t understand, the median line IS international air space. In fact, that’s USA’s whole point of freedom of navigation is that anyone can fly or sail over that median line.

            So if your argument that countries shouldn’t freely fly or sail over the Taiwan Strait, you agree with China, NOT Taiwan.

            • Too Lazy Didn't Name@lemmy.woodward.tech
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              My argument is that you shouldn’t fly military aircraft so close to a country in their ADIZ after stating you don’t believe they’re a country and that you will take them over with violent means if necessary.

              • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ah classic, your all for rule of law until there’s an actor you don’t like following rule of law. Suddenly the law should change just for them. Hypocrite.

    • RandAlThor@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      51
      ·
      1 year ago

      So Chinese bots are on lemmy too now. You obviously didn’t read the article - “Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.”

      In international relations, militaries have defined and at times unspoken rules of engagement. This was NOT routine flight over mainland China that you are making out to be, but was a clear breach of said protocols. Thus Taiwan sent its fighter jets to observe the Chinese military aircraft.

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is this that stupid shit where their air defense zone covers a huge chunk of mainland China and they freak out every time China flies Chinese planes over China?

  • ThomasMuentzner [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    okay guys , so since this hole federation stuff your Pro Imperial Wrong Takes comes my way , it must be corrected …

    this is Taiwans Air Identification Zone it is a Bullshit leftover that spans so vast over china that it simply can not be not violated ,… theirby producing the most wonderfull “Permanent - Saturaton - Propaganda” of China Bad Bakround noise for the Imperial core audience in their Echo Chambers .

    PS: this is where real Journalist go in the west , when they start beeing critical of non approved subjects.

    “Good thing propaganda only ever happens to other people”

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        57
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        withdrawing support for Taiwan in the still-distant future.

        They’re going to tip the Republic of China in to the ocean as soon as they’ve stolen all of TSCM’s productive capacity. That’s all this was ever about. They’re building chip fabs in Arizona right now. As soon as the US can produce it’s own Chips the RoC is… going to go right back to tense but peaceful relations with the mainland like they had before DC started waving it’s grand imperial [redacted] around.

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, you can say in a meaningful sense that the US co-founded Taiwan. I personally think that part of the reason the US wants to recreate Taiwan’s manufacturing capacity is that it makes Taiwan much more expendable, meaning it can be used for military provocations and even war (as some US generals are openly calling for or predicting) without risking the loss of an irreplaceable economic asset to the US.

            • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I thought the US Taiwanese support had more to do with keeping an open lane in East China Sea? If they can win over Taiwan somehow then that would be completely closed off in a potential future conflict.

  • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Goddammit, I do NOT want us to be propping up a war in Ukraine and fighting an actual war with China.

    • CloutAtlas [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      91
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      My dude calls people statists but then also cites death tolls spouted by the US State department on Mao’s casualties is a level of mental gymnastics that may finally dethrone the Maga morons.

      I’m sure there’s some explanation for how Mao killed 100,000,000 people but somehow the population of China went up and the life expectancy doubled under him. It can’t be because the US stat dept. exaggerated the deaths by an exponent tho.

      这个老外真过瘾,哈哈

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        China is fascist now, they can go on calling themselves communist in a vain attempt to have something resembling legitimacy. But any fool knows that when the ruling party is full of billionaires, that’s no communist system.

        They Chinese people are a great people and deserve a better government than the fascist regime lead by Winnie Xi Pooh.

          • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            How is it racism to say Chinese people are great people?

            It’s just their government sucks. They deserve better.

        • CloutAtlas [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know we are a great people. I am Chinese.

          You have it wrong. The Communist Party isnt producing billionaires or getting rich through corruption (at least not in the recent decade of anti corruption). Billionaires join the CPC for THEIR benefit, clout and image.

          China is the only country that actually punishes billionaires for their crimes instead of giving them a slap on the wrist, house arrest or just straight up not punishing them. China executes billionaires when they commit a crime. Liu Han ordered a Mafia hit on a villager who protested one of his illegal real estate expansions, as well as a business rival. He was executed for murder. China is the only country in the world that would sentence someone worth $40 billion, let alone to death, let alone not given a presidential pardon. Jack Ma regularly oversteps and gets punished by the CPC.

          The only billionaire the west has executed is Jeff Epstein (for entirely the wrong reasons). China’s executed 14+ in the last decade.

          If there was a snap election todaty in China with 100% voter turnout, the Communist Party would be re-elected tonight. The party responsible for improving the lives for 1.4 billion people actually isn’t disliked in China. The Chinese are not without grievances with the government but literally no other political system in the world has matched Chinese progress over the last 70 years. The average Chinese person isn’t unaware of western Liberal democracy, it simply isn’t appealing. A system that’s basically a popularity contest that elects senile old men, cowboy actors and reality TV stars that have no business being statesmen is actually not a good system. Having lifetime appointed judges to interpret the words of long dead slave owners is not a good system. Having a leadership spill and a change of prime minister every year is not a good system. We can improve on freedom of expression, sure, but the Chinese people aren’t sheep who need to be liberated. Neoliberalism is the failure in the world, not the Chinese model.

        • immuredanchorite [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          They Chinese people are a great people and deserve a better government than the fascist regime lead by Winnie Xi Pooh.

          “I am totally not racist, I love the chinese people. I just love endlessly repeating that their leader is a yellow bear! funny, right?”

          so-true frothingfash smuglord

          Idk how to tell you this, but the CPC and the Chinese state have like 90% approval from the Chinese people according to western academic sources beloved by libs.

      • Fox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        ATTENTION

        Your account has been flagged for CCP tankie shill-like activity. Please review These Nuts and never forget that Mao killed more people than Stalin and Hitler combined!

          • Fox@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            Your logic is baffling. Hitler killed millions of people in the Holocaust. Mao killed millions more, yet he’s still a folk hero. Where is the disconnect here?

            • brain_in_a_box [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              106
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              That the only way you can come to the conclusion that Mao “killed more” is if you’re deliberately downplaying how many Hitler killed, aka Holocaust denial.

              • Fox@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                I may have missed the lesson where numbers aren’t allowed to be bigger than other numbers, so let me rephrase this in a way you might be able to understand. The most conservative estimate of famine deaths during the Great Leap Forward (backward) is greater than the ENTIRE European Jewish population in 1933 by at least six million.

                • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  96
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Famines were extremely common before the CPC came to power. Most Chinese people lived in extreme poverty, and life expectancy was less than 35, with no significant improvement under the KMT. In between Mao coming to power and his death, life expectancy in China nearly doubled. Today, average life expectancy in China has exceeded that of the US, a feat that would’ve been unimaginable back then.

                  It’s true that Mao made misteps (which the CPC readily admits), but those specific, dramatic events have been disproportionately elevated to obscure the more general trend, which has been drastic improvements in the lives of the people of China.

                  Of course, in addition to minimizing the frequency and severity of famines in pre-industrial China, your history books likely did not place the same level of blame on the British for the intentional famines which Ireland and India were subjected to, in which Britain did not only refuse to provide aid to their colonial subjects (often on the express basis that it would motivate people to work harder), but also did not cease their plundering - in both cases, food was exported out of the country while the people starved.

                • meth_dragon [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  84
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  the GLF was economic policy made in response to withdrawal of soviet technological and financial aid during the sino-soviet split, one of the primary motivating factors of which being soviet insistence on china essentially allowing the soviets to recolonize the port of dalian to build a naval base from which to deploy its pacific fleet.

                  on top of being under sanctions from the west, the sino-soviet split further deprived china of markets with which to support its all-important capital intensive industries and so china was forced to resort to agricultural export as a method of making up the shortfall. collectivization was also pursued simultaneously to pool domestic capital for internal consumption, but due to various geographical, technical and political considerations, internal consumption was not sufficiently stimulated to support manufacturing, and so agricultural export became the primary way to finance china’s continued industrialization. most accounts that are not hysterically anti-communist (including liberal darling amartya sen) of the period around the 1958 famine have records of aggregate production being more than sufficient to sustain the overall population, with the primary points of failure being overzealous local governments in highly productive areas, as opposed to popular western conceptions of overbearing central government mandated directives.

                  all this to say that hitler and the holocaust’s relevance as a point of comparison to mao and the GLF as anything beyond ‘people died when he was in charge’ is laughably superficial and mostly only functions as a thought terminating associative fallacy for juicing your dopamine receptors in order to immunize your brain against more correct opinions.

                • brain_in_a_box [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  80
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Source: it came to me in a dream.

                  I also like how you’re deliberately trying to whitewash Hitler by ignoring all the non-Jewish deaths he was responsible for.

                  Seriously, you’re trying to argue that Mao “killed” every single person who starved to death in a famine, but Hitler is completely innocent of any of the deaths that occurred in World War 2. It’s a double standard no one would employ unless they were trying to downplay Hitler’s crimes.

              • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                15
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                China’s growth in life expectancy between 1950 and 1980 ranks as among the most rapid sustained increases in documented global history.

                louder, for everyone in the back.

                CHINA’S GROWTH IN LIFE EXPECTANCY BETWEEN 1950 AND 1980 RANKS AS AMONG THE MOST RAPID SUSTAINED INCREASES IN DOCUMENTED GLOBAL HISTORY.

                :mao-wave:

            • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              34
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hitler killed millions of people in the Holocaust.

              Fascism did this, not Hitler alone. Fascism and Capitalist Imperialism (western as well) started a world war that killed nearly 100 million people in WW2. Mao did not kill anywhere near that much, it’s reactionary nonsense. China experienced the greatest increase in life expectancy in history under Mao

            • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              26
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It’s funny how you clowns keep pretending that the only deaths Hitler caused were the ones that specifically happened in the death camps, as if he didn’t literally start WWII. And meanwhile you insist that every single stubbed toe and premature ejaculation that ever happened in a socialist country should be added to the “victims of communism” death toll.

              The double standard is baffling.

              • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Scanning Umberto Eco’s 14 points, China ticks most of them.

                It’s certainly not communist else they would be redistributing the wealth of the billionaires, not welcoming them into the ruling party.

                • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  else they would be redistributing the wealth of the billionaires, not welcoming them into the ruling party.

                  Hey look who wants to have an opinion without doing investigation. Is it any surprise they’re only able to speak nonsense?

              • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Cancel culture is just changing the channel when there’s someone on your TV screen that you don’t like.

                You want go clockwork orange and strap people down, tape their eyes open and force them to watch the things you want them to watch? Because that would ensure the freedom of the people on TV to say whatever they want, right? The freedom of Hollywood assholes are more important that our freedom to change the channel, amirite?

                • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What the fuck are you even talking about with Hollywood and television? Are you on a script? Bitch, you’re the one complaining about cancel culture. You’re the one equating being made fun of for having stupid reactionary opinions to literal torture. Can you please put in the absolute bare minimum of effort when you speak to at least remember the topic of fucking discussion??

                  I haven’t been so befuddled by a completely deranged and incoherent reply since I last posted on reddit-logo. Buddy I do not miss dealing with dipshits like you.