I had a journey

Reading about FOSS philosophy, degoogling, becoming against corporations, and now a full-blown woke communist (like Linus Torvalds)

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

550 comments

No, I didn't change the subject at all. I provided you with background evidence supporting my point. Communism and socialism are very clearly popular in places like China, Cuba, Vietnam, and Laos. You'd know this if you actually interacted with people from these countries.
Meanwhile, the reason it's not popular in the western shithole countries is because colonizers live like parasites off the backs of the rest of the world, and majority of westerners are perfectly happy with the arrangement.
A country with almost as much wealth disparity between the poor and wealth as the US?
A country that's seen biggest poverty reduction in human history, where practically everyone owns their home, and people see their lives improve dramatically each and every year. The fact that you ignore all that just shows how intellectually dishonest you really are.
- colonizers live like parasites off the backs of the rest of the world, and majority of westerners are perfectly happy with the arrangement.
  100% true, Western capitalists have been exploiting cheap Chinese labor, and labor of other Asian countries, for decades, plus stripping them of natural resources. With the consent of their (according to you - Communist) governments. This is where the government should be regulating labor, tariffs on imports and exports, and regulating involvement of foreign corporations. Instead, these governments are colluding with Western capitalists to enrich themselves.
  A country that’s seen biggest poverty reduction in human history, where practically everyone owns their home, and people see their lives improve dramatically each and every year.
  https://www.bbc.com/news/56213271
  A very dramatic improvement, but about a quarter of China's population still makes less than $5.50 a day, and $600 million make just $154 a month. Meanwhile, China has about 500 billionaires.
  If communism looks like a huge number of people living on less than $5.50 a day, while billionaires still exist, I'm really going to dislike communism for the exact same reasons I dislike capitalism.
  
  Pretty funny of you to go on a big rant regarding not trusting state propaganda then post a link to British state propaganda without a hint of irony. Why don't we look at what the World Bank has to say instead https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/04/01/lifting-800-million-people-out-of-poverty-new-report-looks-at-lessons-from-china-s-experience
  Also, you're clearly not familiar with the concept of PPP, so might want to educate yourself on that as well https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/tracking-gdp-ppp-terms-shows-rapid-rise-china-and-india
  
  Your source does not contradict mine, it just defines "poverty" as "less than $1.90 a day", which actually my source already covered.
  This is a country with 500 billionaires, you can't do better than "you aren't poor as long as you make $2 a day"?
  So communism is when your billionaire factory owner tells you, "Here are your 2 bucks for the day, now you aren't poor anymore".
  
  What you appear to be utterly oblivious to is the change over time that's happening in China. The standard of living is rapidly improving for the regular people living in China with each and every decade. It's not a static situation of people making 2 dollars a day as you try to paint it.
  Meanwhile, China has to exist within the global capitalist system created by the west after WW2. That means having to participate within the global economy and engage with capitalism. The thing anarchists invariably aren't able to wrap their heads around is the fact that transition from capitalism to communism is a process, and that countries led by communists still have to exist within the larger capitalist world.
  Pointing at the fact that there are 500 billionaires in China as some sort of a gotcha while ignoring the larger trends really highlights how superficial your understanding of the subject you're attempting to debate really is.
  
  Meanwhile, China has to exist within the global capitalist system created by the west after WW2. That means having to participate within the global economy and engage with capitalism.
  So China is speedrunning late-state Capitalism with private mega-corps like Tencent and exploiting its own cheap labor by giving them out to western capitalists so they can enrich their own billionaires. Of course, your excuse, as I already said it would be much earlier in the thread, "it's the West's fault".
  Isn't that peak chauvinism of you, removing all agency from the communist people because "the West is forcing them to"?
  Pointing at the fact that there are 500 billionaires in China as some sort of a gotcha
  What is the point of communism?
  
  So China is speedrunning late-state Capitalism with private mega-corps like Tencent and exploiting its own cheap labor by giving them out to western capitalists so they can enrich their own billionaires. Of course, your excuse, as I already said it would be much earlier in the thread, “it’s the West’s fault”.
  If we take China out of the equation poverty actually increased in real terms:
  If we take just one country, China, out of the global poverty equation, then even under the $1.90 poverty standard we find that the extreme poverty headcount is the exact same as it was in 1981.
  The $1.90/day (2011 PPP) line is not an adequate or in any way satisfactory level of consumption; it is explicitly an extreme measure. Some analysts suggest that around $7.40/day is the minimum necessary to achieve good nutrition and normal life expectancy, while others propose we use the US poverty line, which is $15.
  It's pretty dishonest to claim ChInA Is DoInG StAtE CaPiTALiSM when it's pretty clear that China is basically the only place in the world where standard of living is going up significantly. If China was doing what you claim it's doing then we'd see the same results as we see under actual capitalism. It'd look like India today.
  What is the point of communism?
  Point of communism is to have an equal society, but the question is how you get there from where we are now. Apparently anarchists believe that magic happens as opposed to this being a process the way things work in the real world.
  
  It’s pretty dishonest to claim ChInA Is DoInG StAtE CaPiTALiSM when it’s pretty clear that China is basically the only place in the world where standard of living is going up significantly. If China was doing what you claim it’s doing then we’d see the same results as we see under actual capitalism. It’d look like India today.
  Circular reasoning: communism increases standard of living, China's standard of living is going up, therefore China is communist, therefore communism increases standard of living. This is a logical fallacy.
  China's economic boom correlates to its involvement in the capitalist world economy. It's very easy to argue that the more China does capitalism, the more wealthier it gets, the better off the Chinese citizens.
  India is not doing quite as well as China, but it's still seem a very dramatic decrease in poverty, especially if you go by the "$1.90/day" mark, which is not enough imho, but it's the one you choose to go by: https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/september-2023-global-poverty-update-world-bank-new-data-poverty-during-pandemic-asia
  To say "China is basically the only place in the world where standard of living is going up significantly", you're "basically" just straight-up wrong.
  Point of communism is to have an equal society, but the question is how you get there from where we are now. Apparently anarchists believe that magic happens as opposed to this being a process the way things work in the real world.
  So the path to communism is paved with mega-corps and billionaires? What do you expect them to do, voluntarily give up all their wealth and possessions when it's time for the communism to begin?
  
  Circular reasoning: communism increases standard of living, China’s standard of living is going up, therefore China is communist, therefore communism increases standard of living. This is a logical fallacy.
  You don't understand what circular reasoning is. What I actually said is that the standard of living is going up in China while it's not going up in capitalist countries. If China was capitalist then you'd expect the same thing to happen as it does everywhere else where there is capitalism. China would look something like India right now.
  China’s economic boom correlates to its involvement in the capitalist world economy. It’s very easy to argue that the more China does capitalism, the more wealthier it gets, the better off the Chinese citizens.
  Oh weird, why aren't we seeing this economic boom in eastern Europe, Russia, India, and other parts of former USSR that transitioned to capitalism. According to your "logic" we should see exact same standard of living improvements there too.
  India is not doing quite as well as China, but it’s still seem a very dramatic decrease in poverty, especially if you go by the “$1.90/day” mark, which is not enough imho, but it’s the one you choose to go by
  Not even remotely comparable to poverty reduction in China.
  So the path to communism is paved with mega-corps and billionaires? What do you expect them to do, voluntarily give up all their wealth and possessions when it’s time for the communism to begin?
  Once you show me somebody doing it better than China then we'll talk. And nobody is expecting them to voluntarily give up wealth, taking the wealth away and nationalizing things is the job of the government. Of course, you refuse to accept the fact that working class holds power in China and that's what your fallacious view of China is premised on.
  
  What I actually said is that the standard of living is going up in China while it’s not going up in capitalist countries. If China was capitalist then you’d expect the same thing to happen as it does everywhere else where there is capitalism. China would look something like India right now.
  https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/standard-of-living-by-country
  https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings_by_country.jsp
  Numbeo is ranking India at #56, China at #65 for quality of life index.
  China is notable for having a recent rapid increase. It's easier to have a big delta number, when your starting number is so low.
  Once you show me somebody doing it better than China then we’ll talk.
  According to Numbeo there are still 64 counties doing better on the quality of life index than China.
  And nobody is expecting them to voluntarily give up wealth, taking the wealth away and nationalizing things is the job of the government. Of course, you refuse to accept the fact that working class holds power in China and that’s what your fallacious view of China is premised on.
  Working class holds what power? Tencent and Alibaba aren't owned by its workers. Why would the government ever decide to give up its joint wealth and power with the billionaire class? What could the workers possibly do to hold them accountable?
  
  These numbeo rankings of yours are just another great example of how western propagandists like to play with numbers. It's pretty funny how you're very vary of numbers coming out of China because you don't trust them, but quickly lap up whatever numbers fit with your prejudices.
  Here's the reality of poverty in India https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/governance/just-how-poor-is-india-10-per-cent-says-the-world-bank-85225
  China is notable for having a recent rapid increase. It’s easier to have a big delta number, when your starting number is so low.
  Why is India not having the same kind of rapid increase, why is it getting worse there, why did capitalism create the same problems in post Soviet countries? I love how you keep dodging these questions here.
  Working class holds what power? Tencent and Alibaba aren’t owned by its workers. Why would the government ever decide to give up its joint wealth and power with the billionaire class? What could the workers possibly do to hold them accountable?
  This illustrates grade school understanding of what the working class holding power means. What that means is that the government is consists of predominantly working class, which it does, and makes decisions in the interest of the working class which it also demonstrably does. The fact that you have private companies in China doesn't make it any more capitalist than having free healthcare in Canada make it communist.
  Why would the government ever decide to give up its joint wealth and power with the billionaire class? What could the workers possibly do to hold them accountable?
  Here's an entire book you can read on the subject if you were genuinely interested in this question https://redletterspp.com/products/the-east-is-still-red

550 comments