TrueScotsman
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Are you defending the expansionist policy of China…”
What “expansionism”? Into the South China Sea? Where no one lives?
“…which has shown itself equally as willing as the USA to cooperate with despots and dictatorships?”
The difference, comrade, is that all those dictators were installed by the US in coups, invasions, color revolutions or electoral manipulations. Name one dictator on earth today installed by China. Just one. What would you have China do? Sanction such countries like the good ol’ U.S. of A.? Who is harmed by such sanctions? Why the common prole you rend your garments in support of. Do you see the glaring hypocrisy of such a position?
“Do the interests of the Chinese state over-ride solidarity with Myanmar’s working people?”
No, they go hand in hand. That’s the whole point of the BRI, mutual prosperity and development. Myanmanr’s NED funded opposition wants no part of it. They shun the very idea, condemning their country to backwardness and underdevelopment. Is that OK with you, comrade?
“Real Politik is already asserting itself. Regardless of the token sanctions being imposed upon certain individual Myanmar officials, every nation is eager to come to a working accommodation with the Tatmadaw. ASEAN has a pragmatic relationship with the Tatmadaw government.”
Again, I ask, what would you do? Sanction, invade, fund color revolutions?
“The way to understand the coup is simply to follow the money – Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd (MEHL) and Myanmar Economic Corporation (MEC) – through which the military and their families possess monopolistic control over core sectors of the economy and the country’s most lucrative industries.”
Everything happening in SE Asia ties back to US containment of China, including the coup in Myanmar. If you don’t know that, I don’t blame you, few do. But now you do. Choose not to believe it, well, that’s your prerogative.
“I apologise if I gave the impression that there are no real conspiracies.
However, I was simply trying to infer that they can be a myriad of motivations in politics and cherry-picking supposed connections gives the impression that there is one grand plot in the great scheme of things.”
Well, I’d feel better about accepting your apology if you’d gone to the effort of watching the original video I’ve linked to. It’s about 14 minutes long. Watch it and give me your thoughts. I’m curious where you think the analysis is mistaken.
“Remember, it was the American oligarchs that chose China to partner. It is their rival protectionists,”America First” who are calling for a trade war.”
That is true, but no poor country since WW2 has thrived without such help. The CCP was smart enough to make sure that technology transfer was part of the deal. Without such a devil’s bargain China could not have achieved anything like what it has.
“The capitalist class has never been united except in the class war against the workers.”
No argument from me on that point.
To begin, I haven’t failed to notice your inability to address any of the points I made about Hong Kong, you know, our topic of conversation? I’d much rather talk about that than be dragged into this rabbit hole. So, I shall address your points above then you try and get back to Hong Kong, eh?. So…
“You are certainly not expressing the ideas of Marx nor depicting the role of the State as defined by him.”
Which or Marx’s ideas am I failing to express exactly? And do tell me how I am mistaken regarding the role of the state.
“This Party has been dealing with your mistaken beliefs since it was founded in 1904.”
“The Party”? What, you and a half dozen others? While you retreat into obscurity as the one true Scotsman (see what I did there?), 1.4 billion people in China are getting on with the real task of building socialism.
“Have you not read “Socialism, Utopian, and Scientific” where Engels showed that the nationalisation of industries does not lessen their capitalist nature?”
China’s is a mixed economy like every other nation on earth. They have capitalist enterprises and nationalised enterprises, the profits of which go to social uplift. They Chinese, as the longest contiguous nation state on earth play the long game. They are preparing their population for communism, but that requires technology, infrastructure, wealth and education. China was as poor as Haiti at the turn of this century. You can’t do communism under those circumstance, not according to Marx anyway.
“In 2020, China claimed it lifted nearly 100 million people out of extreme poverty. But the truth is questionable, given that China’s definition of the poverty line is $1.69, compared to the World Bank’s $1.90.”
That’s rural poverty. But in China the peasants own their own land. They get free schooling, healthcare is massively subsidised, they have internet and infrastructure is being built connecting them to the outside world and opening up further opportunities for development. Watch this video of “the poorest village in China” and then tell me how terrible life there is, comrade.
Yes, China has billionaires. Do I think there should be billionaires? Of course not. But it’s not contrary to Marxist thought for there to be billionaires before communism, no? At any rate, the billionaires are not in charge of the society. China is working towards a Gini coefficient equal to lowest in the world by 2050 (Finland’s) and full communism by 2121. Those billionaires, well, they’d better enjoy it while it lasts because it isn’t going to be a lot longer.
“I find it somewhat surprising that someone purporting to be a socialist should be such an apologist for a state-capitalist regime and its economic exploitation of fellow workers.”
The term “state capitalism” is an oxymoron is it not? The state is the government which is representative of all the public. Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production. How is it possible for the public to privately own the means of production? The Chinese government has lifted 800 million people out of poverty in the last 40 years. How so unless the profits from China’s industry are being invested in its population? China will have the equal lowest Gini coefficient by 2050 and plans to be fully communist by 2121. How can you call yourself a socialist and not approve of that?
“Neither Washington nor Beijing but World Socialism”
Your logic is fundamentally flawed comrade. You are presupposing that the Chinese share the delusions of their western counterparts. They don’t. They’re not at all interested in ruling the world, they’re far to clever for that. They wish to invest in the uplift of the world’s poor . That’s the whole purpose behind the BRI. China has suffered under the imperialist yoke of the west as have most black, brown and yellow peoples. China seeks to liberate these nations from western dependency and debt. They are doing this because they are committed socialists. Are you hostile to such aims? How is it you call yourself a socialist if you are?
“A plague on both”
So are you one of those “socialists” who condemns all people who have actually brought about a socialist state? Odd kind of socialist that.
“You can speculate on the motives for the coup but Occam’s Razor applies to your conspiracy theory.”
Occam’s Razor is not a fundamental Law of the Universe but a mere rule of thumb. To pretend otherwise is childishness. Conspiracies are happening everywhere all the time. The Holocaust was a conspiracy, the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the Iraq war were conspiracies. There are whole bodies of law devoted to conspiracies. Instead of throwing out ad hominem attacks why not watch the video I linked to? It’s not very long. Every single claim is sourced beneath “Show all”.
“The easiest explanation is that the Tatmadaw feared that their extensive corrupt business interests were potentially being threatened.”
And why is that a simpler explanation than the one I provided? The US is locked in a new Cold War with China. The Chinese economy will soon eclipse the US’. The US knows this and is doing everything in its power to prevent it happening just as they have always done. Pretty simple, no?
“However, to dismiss the Hong Kong unrest as having been manipulated by anti-China interests is not the same as suggesting they were engineered by them.”
The Hong Kong protests were a failed color revolution. The leaders of the protests flew to and from Washington meeting with such figures as Nancy Pelosi and count as their most vocal allies “far-right Republican Senators Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, Marco Rubio, Rick Scott, and Tom Cotton”. The NED was providing funding. Ever wonder where all those gas-masks and helmets came from?
https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/china-attacks-pelosi-for-meeting-hong-kong-activists
The NED Strikes Again: How Neocon Money is Funding the Hong Kong Protests
“We cannot ignore that it was a continuance of the 2014 Umbrella protests”
Indeed we cannot. Funnily enough, that movement was also an NED funded failed color revolution.
https://journal-neo.org/2014/10/01/hong-kong-s-occupy-central-is-us-backed-sedition/
“Genuine grievances exist and China’s government response is to suppress opposition.”
Indeed, genuine grievances do exist. Why don’t you name a few? Then explain how Beijing is responsible? After all, Beijing had been upholding the “One Country Two Systems” policy. Hong Kong’s governing parties and oligarchs are therefore responsible for the declining living standards in Hong Kong not the CCP where living standards are ever rising.
“The fact that such protests were not repeated on the Mainland is not due to no discontent but that it is expressed in many different manners such as factory strikes or local community protests.”
The Chinese people are among the most satisfied of any in the world with their governance. Multiple independent polls show this to be true.
“According to the Edelman Global Trust Barometer Report, the rate of public trust in the Chinese government was 84 percent in 2018, 86 percent in 2019 and 90 percent in 2020. Over the same period, Americans’ trust in the U.S. government ranged from 37 to 40 percent.”
https://www.chinausfocus.com/society-culture/why-chinese-people-support-their-government
“I have heard many US right-wingers simplistically accuse “globalists” such as George Soros as creating Black Lives Matter.”
And what do such people have to do with me? I support all my claims with evidence. As a good socialist should.
“It is standard procedure for any authoritarian regime to divert attention away from discontent by blaming foreign interference.”
All government is by definition “authoritarian”. Try not paying your taxes and see what happens. But I’m reminded of the quip, “Just because I’m paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get me.” The US is demonstrably funding the protests and platforming its leaders. To believe that the US is not behind the protests is, I gotta say, naive in the extreme. Here’s a by no means exhaustive list of successful US regime ops against mostly socialist countries since WW2.
https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
The Hong Kong Protests were a failed regime change op orchestrated in Washington with NED funding. A significant minority of the protesters were nothing short of fascists. I’m glad they failed and you should be too.
The National Unity Government (in exile) is actually a US/UK stalking horse. Its leader is an Asian version of Juan Guaido, who hopes to requisition Myanmar’s one billion dollars of frozen assets. Members of the “government” receive funding from the CIA cutout the National Endowment for Democracy. The NUG counts as its benefactors one Prince Charles of the sky fairy appointed British royal family, (the former colonial oppressors of “Burma”), warmonger Hillary Clinton and wife of Obomber- Michelle.
The coup in Myanmar was carried out o put a stop to the hostile takeover of the country by Washington/UK stooges whose mission is to aid in containing China by cutting off its trading partners and sabotaging the Belt and Road Initiative. All this is laid out very succinctly in the following short Youtube video…
