Jul 1, 2022·1 replyAlso this girl blocked me after I sent her a map of Turkic languages which also marked some areas in China as having Turkic languages
Also she really hated most men despite having a BF and cheated on him with a girl behind his back
Jul 1, 2022·1 replyyou said that anarchists have never had a successful revolution, is that right you f***ing tankie s*** for brains? then explain this
- Jul 1, 2022
She was like an Imperial China stan too shyt was kinda funny
Dengoids underestimate how rehabilitated Imperial China has been
- Jul 1, 2022fun guy
you said that anarchists have never had a successful revolution, is that right you f***ing tankie s*** for brains? then explain this
- Jul 1, 2022·2 repliesSEGA GOON
Also this girl blocked me after I sent her a map of Turkic languages which also marked some areas in China as having Turkic languages
Also she really hated most men despite having a BF and cheated on him with a girl behind his back
where are you meeting all these racist girls
Jul 1, 2022·1 replyfun guywhere are you meeting all these racist girls
CHYNA
- Jul 1, 2022fun guy
where are you meeting all these racist girls
Im in racial chatrooms showing cock
- Jul 1, 2022Scratchin Mamba
CHYNA
If Dengoids actually talked to real Chinese people they would know how silly their s*** is
Jul 1, 2022·1 replySEGA GOONShe also complained about African men in Guangzhou seducing and taking advantage of innocent Chinese girls
She also was very interested in tarot stuff, imperial Chinese history, concubines, Ancient Egypt and other weird stuff
She had an Ancient Egypt emoticon pack that kinda creeped me out
Also she was a bit freaky ...
Her university is an English university (as in England) with a campus in China
Aah she must be one of those rich international students. Chinese men are getting Kenyan teens pregnant then disappearing and Kenyans still aren't sinophobic, I doubt seeing an African guy hit on a Chinese girl is where her problem with us started.
- Jul 1, 2022·1 reply
the reaction in china to this was nuts
dude was like tito when he got a lapdance for the first time and started liveblogging on ktt
- Jul 1, 2022Lein
Aah she must be one of those rich international students. Chinese men are getting Kenyan teens pregnant then disappearing and Kenyans still aren't sinophobic, I doubt seeing an African guy hit on a Chinese girl is where her problem with us started.
She just did a summer English course or something in Vancouver, she lived in China
- Jul 1, 2022·3 replies
Another Chinese girl wrote me this:
The teacher said that Mao Zedong revised Marxism and Leninism. He believed that the superstructure acted against the foundation of the economy, and he believed in the power of the people. As for why the revolutionaries reformed the superstructure when the economic foundation was inadequate, it was probably because they were revolutionaries. They were in the concrete environment of historical view, and they must properly revise their theories to achieve the revolutionary purpose. There is a gap between theory and practice.
I am now more and more wary of those revolutionaries who advocate happiness for the people in the name of revolution. The loftier their revolutionary ideals, the more likely the ordinary people will suffer. Now I do not believe in any doctrine, only believe in humanity and speak of humanity.
The economic base determines the superstructure. What I don't understand is why there hasn't been a socialist revolution in the United States and Germany, where capitalism is highly developed. Is it that capitalism has not reached a certain stage yet? Or have they improved capitalism through moderate state intervention in the economy, thus avoiding its periodic economic crises?
- Jul 1, 2022·2 repliesSEGA GOON
Another Chinese girl wrote me this:
The teacher said that Mao Zedong revised Marxism and Leninism. He believed that the superstructure acted against the foundation of the economy, and he believed in the power of the people. As for why the revolutionaries reformed the superstructure when the economic foundation was inadequate, it was probably because they were revolutionaries. They were in the concrete environment of historical view, and they must properly revise their theories to achieve the revolutionary purpose. There is a gap between theory and practice.
I am now more and more wary of those revolutionaries who advocate happiness for the people in the name of revolution. The loftier their revolutionary ideals, the more likely the ordinary people will suffer. Now I do not believe in any doctrine, only believe in humanity and speak of humanity.
The economic base determines the superstructure. What I don't understand is why there hasn't been a socialist revolution in the United States and Germany, where capitalism is highly developed. Is it that capitalism has not reached a certain stage yet? Or have they improved capitalism through moderate state intervention in the economy, thus avoiding its periodic economic crises?
AI generated text
- Jul 1, 2022Scratchin Mamba
AI generated text
It's real ...
- Jul 1, 2022·3 repliesScratchin Mamba
AI generated text
^ this user thinks Chinese people are robots
- Jul 1, 2022Lein
^ this user thinks Chinese people are robots
- Jul 1, 2022·1 replyLein
^ this user thinks Chinese people are robots
I feel like I just went through a Kafka-esque nightmare. I talked to this communist girl from China, as in the post quoted above. She invited me into a leftist group chat consisting of communist university students. They were curious about a Western leftist. We chatted online for 5 hours straight with no interruptions. It has seriously worsened my view of Chinese communism, if these are the types of arguments and people they have.
Bear with me here: At first we bonded over some history. They quoted Che Guevara, posted Red Army stuff, East Germany stuff and so on - things you would expect from a commie. We talked about the USSR and I said that we should a***yze why the USSR failed and improve upon that. While mentioning that, I namedropped Cockshott and said he's a guy who wrote a book about this stuff. Then, all hell broke loose.
They said that central planning is a pipe-dream, and accused me of being an anarchist (yes). I said no, I am not an anarchist, I am a communist. We eventually talked about billionaires. I said: How can China be socialist if it has nearly 30% of the world's billionaire population? They of course rebutted with the 2050 argument: We need billionaires (yes, specifically billionaires) now so we can have socialism in the future. I said: No, even under capitalism, it would be possible to have a system that doesn't have 800 billionaires, of which 100 sit in the national congress. The "building up of productive forces" via capitalism does not require extreme wealth inequality. A billionaire is magnitudes richer than a multi-millionaire. What China aspires is perfectly possible in a society where "only" multi-millionaires exist.
They said I wanted to destroy China, accused me of being a spy, that I was an anarchist, a wrecker and a lover of the USA. I said that I am none of the above, just a regular Marxist. I said a 70 year NEP is ridiculous, but even if you agree with one, you don't need a single billionaire within that NEP system.
They eventually argued, and I quote verbatim: "China needs 800 billionaires, or otherwise the USA will kill China." I said why does China need a single billionaire if workers create the value anyways? And how does Jack Ma defend China from the USA? All the billionaire does is funnel the surplus value into offshore tax havens, which does not benefit the Chinese public. They then acknowledged the LTV's existence, but told me that still, China requires billionaires. Why?
Because the Party says so.
Because billionaires create jobs and tax value.
Because they bring unique ideas that the state cannot.
Because the wealth trickles down on the populationAt that point, I felt like I was arguing with robots in what resembled my personal hell. Their entire logic was inconsistent, since they acknowledged the LTV, yet denied the existence of capitalist surplus extraction. Deep down inside, I knew that some of them agreed with me, but dared not agree so as to not fall out of line with their party. Someone literally said: "Your ideas are too dangerous, now I know why the government bans it". I said: "The government bans it so billionaires can stay billionaires. You can tax billionaires within a capitalist system, even many Westerners support this." They argued with the typical argument Americas use ad nauseam: "China is different, China is special, what works in other countries will not work in China, China is too small (sic!), China is too poor."
I said: Maybe the worker wouldn't be so poor if the billionaire didn't extract their surplus product to such a degree. At this point, I was surprised I wasn't kicked out of the group yet. We kept talking in circles. The users said that everyone in China hates billionaires - but why keep people you hate? Well, because it is necessary, because the government said so, repeat ad infinitum. Then, the admin came and wrote me:
"China needs billionaires, or the companies like Tencent will die. Without them, China cannot compete against the USA and will fall. You are an anarchist. See you in 2050."
Then I was blocked (and surely added to some Chinese watchlist).
- Jul 1, 2022
^Old post I wrote
- Jul 1, 2022fun guy
the reaction in china to this was nuts
dude was like tito when he got a lapdance for the first time and started liveblogging on ktt
I remember Chinese social media during this went nuts
- Jul 1, 2022·1 replySEGA GOON
Another Chinese girl wrote me this:
The teacher said that Mao Zedong revised Marxism and Leninism. He believed that the superstructure acted against the foundation of the economy, and he believed in the power of the people. As for why the revolutionaries reformed the superstructure when the economic foundation was inadequate, it was probably because they were revolutionaries. They were in the concrete environment of historical view, and they must properly revise their theories to achieve the revolutionary purpose. There is a gap between theory and practice.
I am now more and more wary of those revolutionaries who advocate happiness for the people in the name of revolution. The loftier their revolutionary ideals, the more likely the ordinary people will suffer. Now I do not believe in any doctrine, only believe in humanity and speak of humanity.
The economic base determines the superstructure. What I don't understand is why there hasn't been a socialist revolution in the United States and Germany, where capitalism is highly developed. Is it that capitalism has not reached a certain stage yet? Or have they improved capitalism through moderate state intervention in the economy, thus avoiding its periodic economic crises?
- Jul 1, 2022·1 replySEGA GOON
I feel like I just went through a Kafka-esque nightmare. I talked to this communist girl from China, as in the post quoted above. She invited me into a leftist group chat consisting of communist university students. They were curious about a Western leftist. We chatted online for 5 hours straight with no interruptions. It has seriously worsened my view of Chinese communism, if these are the types of arguments and people they have.
Bear with me here: At first we bonded over some history. They quoted Che Guevara, posted Red Army stuff, East Germany stuff and so on - things you would expect from a commie. We talked about the USSR and I said that we should a***yze why the USSR failed and improve upon that. While mentioning that, I namedropped Cockshott and said he's a guy who wrote a book about this stuff. Then, all hell broke loose.
They said that central planning is a pipe-dream, and accused me of being an anarchist (yes). I said no, I am not an anarchist, I am a communist. We eventually talked about billionaires. I said: How can China be socialist if it has nearly 30% of the world's billionaire population? They of course rebutted with the 2050 argument: We need billionaires (yes, specifically billionaires) now so we can have socialism in the future. I said: No, even under capitalism, it would be possible to have a system that doesn't have 800 billionaires, of which 100 sit in the national congress. The "building up of productive forces" via capitalism does not require extreme wealth inequality. A billionaire is magnitudes richer than a multi-millionaire. What China aspires is perfectly possible in a society where "only" multi-millionaires exist.
They said I wanted to destroy China, accused me of being a spy, that I was an anarchist, a wrecker and a lover of the USA. I said that I am none of the above, just a regular Marxist. I said a 70 year NEP is ridiculous, but even if you agree with one, you don't need a single billionaire within that NEP system.
They eventually argued, and I quote verbatim: "China needs 800 billionaires, or otherwise the USA will kill China." I said why does China need a single billionaire if workers create the value anyways? And how does Jack Ma defend China from the USA? All the billionaire does is funnel the surplus value into offshore tax havens, which does not benefit the Chinese public. They then acknowledged the LTV's existence, but told me that still, China requires billionaires. Why?
Because the Party says so.
Because billionaires create jobs and tax value.
Because they bring unique ideas that the state cannot.
Because the wealth trickles down on the populationAt that point, I felt like I was arguing with robots in what resembled my personal hell. Their entire logic was inconsistent, since they acknowledged the LTV, yet denied the existence of capitalist surplus extraction. Deep down inside, I knew that some of them agreed with me, but dared not agree so as to not fall out of line with their party. Someone literally said: "Your ideas are too dangerous, now I know why the government bans it". I said: "The government bans it so billionaires can stay billionaires. You can tax billionaires within a capitalist system, even many Westerners support this." They argued with the typical argument Americas use ad nauseam: "China is different, China is special, what works in other countries will not work in China, China is too small (sic!), China is too poor."
I said: Maybe the worker wouldn't be so poor if the billionaire didn't extract their surplus product to such a degree. At this point, I was surprised I wasn't kicked out of the group yet. We kept talking in circles. The users said that everyone in China hates billionaires - but why keep people you hate? Well, because it is necessary, because the government said so, repeat ad infinitum. Then, the admin came and wrote me:
"China needs billionaires, or the companies like Tencent will die. Without them, China cannot compete against the USA and will fall. You are an anarchist. See you in 2050."
Then I was blocked (and surely added to some Chinese watchlist).
Because billionaires create jobs and tax value.
Because they bring unique ideas that the state cannot.
Because the wealth trickles down on the populationthe classic dengist to neoliberal pipeline
- Jul 1, 2022·1 replyMyBallsAndMyWord
That's what they teach at China's top universities
- Jul 1, 2022·1 replySEGA GOON
That's what they teach at China's top universities
Not sure where to even begin with all this
- Jul 1, 2022fun guy
Because billionaires create jobs and tax value.
Because they bring unique ideas that the state cannot.
Because the wealth trickles down on the populationthe classic dengist to neoliberal pipeline
Bro that robot s*** was kinda true
Their idea is: If the party says it, it must be right. Well, if the party turns neoliberal, then guess what happens with all the principled socialists ... That's why IMO any socialist leader should say "your loyalty should be to the revolution, not the party"
- Jul 1, 2022·1 replyMyBallsAndMyWord
Not sure where to even begin with all this
There's a good chunk of Chinese intellectuals who envy the West for muh parliamentary democracy and social democracy. Of course there might be a certain selection bias with me talking to people who know English, but they tell me about their Chinese universities and classes and a lot of the stuff is just idealist BS
