802
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
802 points (100.0% liked)
Lefty Memes
7282 readers
17 users here now
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of "ML" (read: Dengist) influence. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Serious posts, news, discussion and agitprop/stuff that's better fit for a poster than a meme go in c/Socialism.
If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.
Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low quality!
Rules
0. Only post socialist memes
That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme. Please post agitprop here)
0.5 [Provisional Rule] Try to use alt text or image descriptions to allow for greater accessibility
(Please take a look at our wiki page for the guidelines on how to actually write alternative text!)
We encourage alternative text (from now referred to as "alt text") to be added to all posts/comments containing media, such as images, animated GIFs, videos, audio files, and custom emojis.
EDIT: For files you share in the comments, a simple summary should be enough if they’re too complex.
We are committed to social equity and to reducing barriers of entry, including (digital) communication and culture. It takes each of us only a few moments to make a whole world of content (more) accessible to a bunch of folks.
When alt text is absent, a reminder will be issued. If you don't add the missing alt text within 48 hours, the post will be removed. No hard feelings.
0.5.1 Style tip about abbreviations and short forms
When writing stuff like "lol" and "iirc", it's a good idea to try and replace those with their all caps counterpart
- ofc => OFC
- af = AF
- ok => OK
- lol => LOL
- bc => BC
- bs => BS
- iirc => IIRC
- cia => CIA
- nato => Nato (you don't spell it when talking, right?)
- usa => USA
- prc => PRC
- etc.
Why? Because otherwise (AFAIK), screen readers will try to read them out as actually words instead of spelling them
1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here
Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.
2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.
3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.
That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" (read: Dengists) (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).
4. No Bigotry.
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.
6. Don't irrationally idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.
- Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:
- Racism
- Sexism
- Queerphobia
- Ableism
- Classism
- Sexual assault
- Genocide/ethnic cleansing or (mass) deportations
- Fascism
- (National) chauvinism
- Orientalism
- Colonialism or Imperialism (and their neo- counterparts)
- Zionism
- Religious fundamentalism of any kind
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Had me in the first half, ngl.
https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/territorial-disputes-south-china-sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_status_of_Taiwan
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-expressed-concern-over-chinese-structure-disputed-area-sea-2025-04-24/
Ask literally any average Southeast Asian citizen about China’s influence on their country, and you’ll get a sense of Chinese imperialist ambitions.
I’m brushing over the long history of Han ethnic expansionism and the literal war with communist Vietnam over their supposed vassal-state of Cambodia.
Edit: Read up on the Chinese Ethnic Unity Law: https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/ethnic-unity-and-progress-law/
Whom will likely benefit the most: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_China
More complicated than what most people think considering the history of Taiwan. Imagine if fascist in your country seized a region via ethnic cleansing and then created a break away state. Would your country be happy to recognize it as an independent nation? The only thing that complicates this is they eventually established a somewhat democratic government, after +40 years of violent authoritarianism.
Eh..... Comparatively I think you would hear worse if you asked them about western ambitions.
China is a superpower, you don't get to that status without flexing that power. The reality is that every superpower in history regardless of what social economic system they utilize has to compete with an established hegemony to upset the status quo. You can label that as imperialism if you want However that opens the debate on how we quantify imperialism, and the only real way to do that is by comparison.
Compared to the leading superpower I'd hardly say their activity in their own backyard really can't be compared to what the US is currently doing to control a waterway right now.
I think Han chauvinism has long been an issue within China, even Mao spoke about it during his time in power. Do I think it's as dire as it's depicted in western media? No, but I do hope that the CCP takes more steps to integrate ethnic minorities into positions in higher government like the politburo. That being said, is the treatment of ethnic minorities on the same level or worse than in western nations.....? Not really, which leads me to believe that ethnic chauvinism isn't really a problem specific to any government or economic system.
Which the CCP openly admits was a misguided mistake, and apparently unlike other superpowers was something they actually learned from.
Self-determination is a virtue. Holding onto the claims of your forefathers is problematic to say the least. History of Israel and all that.
Anecdotally, I have experienced the opposite. I oppose US imperialism too. It’s all bad
This is a non-answer. You want to discuss the nature of power and dynamics. Doing an imperialism because your neighbor did an imperialism does not make it morally correct, in fact it’s likely to lead to a cascade into conflict. This is not US or Russia apologia, everyone should rail them for doing that. Making excuses for China doing the same is the weakest take you can have in a conversation on the topic of morality.
On the topic of Han ethnicity, we should always be wary of the concept of ethnicity in political policy, rather than people as people.
Great to hear that the CCP is willing to admit a few mistakes. Really puts into perspective how bad Trump is.
The non-western world’s current stance on LGBTQ+ will always make the US and Europe better places to exist for personal choice and freedoms. Until that changes, Chinese / Russian apologists will always be treated with derision and Fox News level credibility. FYI
Is it always a virtue? For example, was the Arrow Cross party taking over Hungary and helping exterminate 500k Hungarian Jews a virtuous act of self determination?
I think we can agree that any foreign nation flexing their power their smaller neighboring countries is bad, but we are making a comparison here. You can disagree with the actions of both countries and still compare their actions against each other.
My point wasn't supposed to be interpreted as a definitive answer. It was a way to open the discussion to further evaluation.
To have an actual discussion about this we would have to first define what you think imperialism actually is. That way we can separate acts of imperialism, and actions taken to bulwark against encroaching imperialism.
Imo morality rarely comes into play when super powers enact geopolitical strategy. As observers we can analyze the resulting fallout of those strategies, but I think it's a mistake to assume morality in their intent.
I don't think I really brought up morality, I was focused more on outcomes of their actions.
Ehh... It kinda depends on what country you are talking about in Europe and honestly the US is back sliding on that front as well.
Many East Asian countries including China have actually made a lot of progress for the LGBT populations there. The Chinese government tends to take a hands off approach, going so far as to adopt the "Three Nos" position as in "no approval, no disapproval, and no promotion".
Most LGBT people in East Asia are a lot more affected by their own family's perception rather than the government. The wide influence of Confucianism makes any changes to family structure a slow and difficult process. Though the general acceptance among young urban people has been pretty rapid.
I think that's making a hasty generalization.... I can in fact believe that China has a better track record on foreign policy than most western countries, and still be critical about some of their domestic policy. Does that make me an apologist, or were you just creating a false dichotomy?
I also don't really know what Russia has to do with anything I've said? We were talking about eastern and/or socialist countries.......Russia isn't either of those. FYI
Yes. Nazi’s killing Jews is explicitly against the self-determination of said Hungarian Jews. To shorthand this argument: People make countries, countries don’t make people.
I set the line at morality in my subsequent responses. Comparing two hegemon’s actions in discussions often falls into the Argumentum ad antiquitatem fallacy.
My first post was explicitly calling out the downplaying of Chinese imperialism from the OP. I don’t have time lately to discuss geopolitical strategies of hegemons, as you will see with this truncated response, but I will call out influence tactics of the either ill-informed or state-paid actors. Hence, bringing Russia into this.
As for LGBTQ+, I have no interest in modeling state systems that are behind on personal freedoms such as these. It’s good to hear things are changing, and I hope they do for everyone’s sake, but watching even the more “freedom” minded places utilize LGBTQs as scapegoats for conservative failings gives me little hope for the timeline of places where they are not legally recognized.
And what about tens of thousands of civilians The KMT murdered to create the ROC?
Only if you force the comparison into a subjective debate about morality instead of utilizing objective observation like outcomes.
You don't have time to discuss the actual topic, but do have time to showhorn in a strawman argument?
I don't think state systems have a real affect on the personal freedoms of LGBTQ people. There are plenty of liberal democracies that are still way behind on LGBTQ rights, and we've seen policy that was progressive for it's time in communist countries and we've also seen those countries regress in the same policies. It has more to do with social mores than how you run a state.
Circular argument. How many native Taiwanese did the Han Chinese kill in the 1600s for the Qing to lay claim to the island?
How is that a circular argument? And how does that support your argument? Is it a virtuous act of self determination if it deprives the right to self determination from others?
The kmt did not believe in the people's right to self determination, which is self evident in their slaughtering of tens of thousands of its own citizens who protested against the kmt government.
Minor border disputes are not imperialism.
Projection.
Over 40 years ago lol. If the US had been at peace since Vietnam, I'd have very different opinions about it.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/imperialism
Bruh can’t even read a dictionary, lmao.
Lmao, who do you even think I am?
The US is bad too. If you’re going to be anti-imperialist then you need to be against all imperialism and not just the one you were told to hate.
The vitriol toward defending China in this second response, at any cost, gives you away.
That's still not the same as minor border disputes.
Yes, decades long occupations, minor border clashes, both equally bad and equally requiring staunch opposition. You gonna go full "white lives matter" next? Or can we agree that focusing on the much, much bigger problem should be the priority?
"Gives me away" as what? If you're going to accuse me of something, say it to my face.
Using the Britannica definition of Imperialism is like using the IDF definition of antisemitism. It isn't actually very persuasive, bcs it gives you away as either a shill for the existing world order or a useful idiot for the same.
Imperialism is the stage of capitalism where finance capital overtakes commodity production. That's a gross oversimplification, but it'll do for the level of debate in this thread.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/imperialism.pdf
Neither China nor Russia is an Imperialist power because in neither state has capitalist control over markets led to the rise of finance capital overtaking commodity production as the main basis of the economy.
Using what's widely respected as one of the most accurate sources available isn't acceptable so you bust out quotes from Lenin as the reliable source? Lol
They brigaded you Dagnet. RIP.
Purged like their authoritarian heroes wished for dissidents, downvotes to the back of the head. :,(
And so they prove my point. Luckily those downvotes are as meaningless as their opinions
Being wildly unpopular does nothing to prove you right or wrong
Damn, my comment got removed, I wonder who did it, and admin perhaps?
~~I find it incredible funny that I have seen many other people (me included) criticizing their country, all of the countries really... but I have never seen Objection saying a negative word about China. Not even once. On any matter.~~
Edit: I stand corrected. I though Objection to be either a hypocrite, a shill or a bot, or otherwise unable to criticize China. They changed my opinion by showing they are capable of criticising China on issues they find fault with.
I generally don't go around shit-talking other countries that I don't live in and have never been to. The only real exceptions being ones that are receiving military aid from my own country, such as Israel, because that makes it relevant to me.
For the record, I have and do criticize China on certain things, such as LGBT rights. But again, that's pretty irrelevant to any political questions that are actually relevant to me and my life. What am I going to do about problems in China? What levers of power can I or should I assert to address their problems? It kinda seems like I should probably be a little bit more concerned about all the horrible things my own country is doing. Don't talk shit about a splinter in their eye when there's a wooden board in your own or something.
If there was a way for me to assert some lever of power against China, it would be through my own government. But that would only be a valid thing to do if my government wasn't doing worse things, which is why it's relevant to point out that the US is worse, in spite of the inevitable response of "whataboutism."
If the discourse around here was upholding China as some utopia that we should all try to emulate in every regard, you would see me criticize it more. But because the discourse is more about how evil every single thing it does is, how every accusation should be believed completely uncritically, how we should support Western governments acting against it, etc, it's only natural that that's what you see me pushing back against the most.
Your profile motto:
Sure.
I think we have different definitions what criticism is, because all you do there is explain why, whitewash.
Wait, no, unless you think this is the part when you criticize China
Because you don't. You explicitly don't criticize China in this sentence.
Edit: I checked, definition of the words are clear. To criticize is to pass judgment, or find fault. To explain is to provide context or inform or clarify. You did the latter.
How is acknowledging that Chinese homophobia exists, is a problem, and comes out of a socialist intellectual tradition not a criticism of China? Wtf are you talking about? Obviously, that falls under "finding fault."
Yes, of course I'm going to contextualize and explain it, because the person in that thread asked me for an explanation.
This is ridiculous goalpost moving. No criticism would ever be enough for you, short of going full on rainbow imperialism, chauvanism, or exaggerating/making shit up. You're being blatantly intellectually dishonest.
This is just straight up lying. Acknowledging that a problem in China is also a problem in other socialist countries does somehow make it not a problem when China does it. Fuck off with that BS.
No, literally writing "I think China is wrong on LGBT treatment" would suffice. You did NOT write that. Thats not goalpost moving, dont try to gaslight me. From the start to finish I keep claiming I have never seen you critisize China. This still remains. You're sad on SOME communist country brainworms, but you did not list that specific country in that sentence, nor your personal opinion on homophobia in question.
Heck, you can write it right now and I will be convinced and for as long that comment remains will never claim you're incapable of criticizing China.
Yeah, if you completely ignore the fact that that sentence was in the context of talking about China, if you completely ignore the parts where I talk specifically about "China's modern day homophobia" then you might not be the bold-faced liar that you are. Talking about me gaslighting you while trying to pull this shit is incredibly rich.
Liberals only ask for evidence of criticism to use it in bad faith, exhibit #1684938
Write it then. Not that hard
I think China is wrong on LGBT treatment.
Also, you are a fucking liar and asking in bad faith.
I literally said that I have and do criticize China for things including LGBT rights. That itself is an acknowledgement of fault. The fact that you were so intent on this fucking gotcha, so confident that it could never possibly be true that I'm capable of criticizing the country, it's just ridiculous. What, did you genuinely think we're bots, as opposed to that being something y'all say to just write off any perspectives you disagree with? Don't drink your own Kool-Aid.
This is the only comment of yours I have ever seen where you do critisise a country you're usually idealizing. What else am I supposed to think? Indoctrinated propagandist like on Fox news with different flavour.
Also cool it with insults.
I don't idealize China. I do "defend" it, in the same way I do with every country. If someone makes a false or unfair criticism of any given country, then I'll push back against that on the basis of it being untrue. This is controversial because it means failing anti-communist purity tests.
For decades, it has been the norm that if someone talks shit about a socialist country, nobody challenges it, for fear of being labelled a Red, a Pinko, more recently a "Tankie." Everyone remotely on the left in the West felt the need to constantly prove that they were "one of the good ones." After actual communists were sidelined, blacklisted, kicked out of organizations like the AFL-CIO, then the tests only got more stringent, until even supporting or being involved with unions at all became suspect. Finally, we reached a point where people are out there labeling people like Obama and Biden as communists.
This state of affairs has resulted in the anticommunist myths and stereotypes to spiral out of control, and it has allowed the standards of what defines someone as a communist to shift to a ridiculous degree. This strategy of caving to anticommunist purity tests has been proven by history to be an abject failure, and is a major part of how we got to the place we're in today.
In this context, there are a handful of people like myself willing to try a different strategy, of refuting falsehoods and trying to ground the discourse in reality, unconcerned about what labels may be assigned to us as a result. Because only a handful of people are willing to do this, in anglosphere discourse that is generally heavily anticommunist, it is only natural that someone such as myself will spend a lot more time refuting misinformation about socialist states than criticizing them on the points that are valid concerns.
This does not mean that I consider China some kind of utopia or that I idolize it, or think it should be a model of emulation (although there are aspects that we could do well to borrow and learn from, like their trains). China has had a unique timeline of development and has it's own unique conditions to deal with. As I said previously, I don't believe there's anything I could do to affect Chinese policy regardless of what I think of it, other than through my own government, and that is not an option I'm willing to support.
I'm so glad nobody cares when the US does "minor border disputes" the way they care about when China does it.
Oh wait...
Some exerpts:
Article 4 In advancing the building of the community for the Chinese nation, economic, political, cultural, social and ecological-civilization development shall be coordinated; common prosperity and development for all ethnic groups shall be fully realized; the people of all ethnic groups shall be ensured the ability to jointly act as masters of the country; a shared spiritual home for the Chinese nation shall be built; all-round mutual embeddedness and extensive interaction, exchange and integration among all ethnic groups shall be promoted; an ecological home in which humanity and nature coexist in harmony shall be jointly protected; and the Chinese nation shall be developed into a community with a stronger sense of identity and greater cohesion.
Article 5 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China are equal before the law. All ethnic groups in the People’s Republic of China are equal. Discrimination against or oppression of any ethnic group is prohibited.
Article 6 A sense of community for the Chinese nation is the foundation of ethnic unity. The state shall increase commonality while respecting and accommodating differences, promote mutual support and harmonious coexistence among all ethnic groups, and safeguard the great unity of the Chinese nation. Acts that undermine ethnic unity or create ethnic separatism are prohibited.
Article 8 The state shall uphold and improve the system of regional ethnic autonomy and safeguard national unity and ethnic unity.
Article 9 The state shall govern ethnic affairs in accordance with law, protect the lawful rights and interests of the people of all ethnic groups in accordance with law, strengthen publicity and education concerning the Constitution and laws, enhance the awareness of the state, citizenship and the rule of law among the people of all ethnic groups, safeguard the unity, dignity and authority of the socialist rule of law, and modernize the system and capacity for governance of ethnic affairs within the framework of the rule of law.
Article 15 The state shall comprehensively promote and popularize the standard spoken and written Chinese language. No organization or individual may obstruct citizens from learning or using the standard spoken and written Chinese language. Schools and other educational institutions shall use the standard spoken and written Chinese language as the basic language of education and instruction. The state shall promote the learning of Putonghua by preschool children and the basic mastery of the standard spoken and written Chinese language by young people who complete compulsory education. State organs shall use the standard spoken and written Chinese language for official purposes. Where documents are required by relevant laws to be issued in the spoken and written language of an ethnic minority, versions in both the standard spoken and written Chinese language and the minority language shall be provided. Where state organs, social organizations, enterprises, public institutions or other social organizations need to use both the standard spoken and written Chinese language and the spoken and written language of an ethnic minority in a public setting, prominence shall be given to the standard spoken and written Chinese language in terms of placement, order and other respects. The state shall respect and protect the learning and use of the spoken and written languages of ethnic minorities, promote their standardization, normalization and digital development, and support the preservation, collation, study and use of ancient books and records in minority languages.
Article 16 Schools and other educational institutions of all types and at all levels shall carry the requirements for fostering a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation through the entire education process and incorporate them into an education system combining classroom instruction, social practice, themed education and online education. Schools and other educational institutions of all types and at all levels shall use state-compiled textbooks in accordance with relevant state provisions. Education administrative departments shall implement the requirements for fostering a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation in the preparation and review of teaching materials. The departments of the State Council responsible for education administration, ethnic affairs and related work shall organize the preparation of series of textbooks or readers concerning the community for the Chinese nation.
Article 29 The state shall enhance mutual learning and integration among the cultures of all ethnic groups and encourage all ethnic groups to appreciate one another’s fine traditional cultures and learn one another’s spoken and written languages. People’s governments at all levels shall support cultural workers and relevant entities in creating and presenting literary and artistic works that are grounded in Chinese culture and reflect interaction, exchange and integration among all ethnic groups. People’s governments at all levels shall support libraries, museums, cultural centers and stations, memorial halls, art museums, science and technology museums, workers’ cultural palaces, children’s and youth palaces and other public cultural-service entities in conducting exhibitions and exchange activities concerning the history of the Chinese nation, national prosperity and development, and related subjects. People’s governments at all levels shall draw on the Chinese nation’s rich cultural, sporting and other resources to encourage and support exchange activities, including traditional festivals of the Chinese nation, folk culture events and sporting competitions, that are welcomed and jointly participated in by the people of all ethnic groups.
So scary for our government with mandated representation of minorities to wish to encourage cultural exchange while instituting a common tongue to allow for our social and physical mobility while continuing to encourage the teaching of minority languages and writing systems. 😱
Territorial disputes without violence. China hasn't fired on a ship since 1988. They have engaged in territorial disputes over the SCS without engaging in violence. If you want to understand what the alternative would look like, I direct you to the events in the Caribbean.
The UN recognizes Taiwan as a province of China and has done so without interruption for many decades.
And yet, China is not actually doing anything resembling imperialism. You project psychology (ambitions) onto a nation-state (China) because that's all you understand. You don't understand what the possible alternatives are.
Chinese imperialism during the dynastic era is not only well understood and recognized, it's openly discussed in China as the wrong solution to statecraft. Chinese violent and wrong-headed foreign policy during Mao's leadership are also openly discussed in China as the wrong solution to statecraft. The government has openly declared that those decisions were incorrect and have openly established that they are taking a new direction based on more accurate understandings of the principles of statecraft and the consequences of those actions.
This isn't exactly true. The level of violence they have engaged in thus far has been limited but they have absolutely engaged in violence. The same is true for the disputed territory with India. There is regular violence, but it is limited with lines that they have not crossed (i.e. they aren't out there firing missiles and dropping bombs, they doing things like ramming fishing boats or beating people with clubs). I think you are going to be very disappointed by China if you genuinely believe the current government is pacifist or lacks an imperial agenda.
The border dispute with between India and China over that specific border is both millennia old and exacerbated by European colonialism in the region defining boundaries by dictatorial decree. The fact that the border is policed by armed guards wielding clubs is by mutual agreement between India and China and the fact that there was a skirmish is not the same as "China is out there beating innocent people with clubs for their own territorial gains".
As for ramming fishing boats, look at Operation 34A. The US has a history in the region of using fishing boats to lay mines covertly to avoid triggering a response or causing an international incident. The US soldiers were unmarked, wearing civilian clothing and the boats were design deliberately to look like civilian fishing boats.
When you don't know history, it's difficult to understand the present.
If you think China engaged in top-to-bottom self criticism and established the official opinion that previous foreign policy under Mao was incorrect and not beneficial to the Chinese state means that after 40 years of non-violent growth they maintain imperial ambitions because they are still managing ancient border disputes and are defending against real threats from the most violent psychopaths on the planet, I don't know what to tell you.
I'm sorry but this does not come across like a serious argument. China is not ramming fishing vessels because the US once clandestinely deployed mines in the 1960's. If you genuinely believe that I don't know what to say except I hope you develop a more nuanced and realistic understanding of the world.
Re: China beating innocent people with clubs, I didn't quite say that. I am sure some random innocent people have been caught up in it and beaten but on balance I think it has primarily been mutual combat involving provocations from both sides in the India/China border dispute.
I don't think "40 years of non-violent growth" is an accurate statement at all. I can agree that contemporary Chinese imperialism doesn't look like US imperialism and has utilized less violence overall. I think your framing of China vs. violent psychopaths is inherently flawed. China may or may not have fewer of those kinds of people in power compared to other governments, but it has plenty. It's an inescapable fact of humanity that those people exist and have a tendency to seek power, and that power has a tendency to bring out those characteristics in people. There is nothing special about the people of China that make them better than the rest of humanity, the same problems of humanity manifest in China as everywhere else on the planet.
So what you're saying is that China has no valid security concerns behind their actions?
Let's see why.
Well, since 1992 the US has conduct major kinetic military operations against over 14 countries, completely destroying at least 3 of them. Since 1992, China hasn't fired a shot against anyone. So, yeah, doesn't look like it at all. Less as in zero.
Fair. White supremacist Christian Eurocentric empire has only dominated every continent for 600 years, with most national borders across the whole world defined by genocidaires and child rapists, and military bases all over the world that are immune to local laws where young women are kidnapped, raped, and murdered by soldiers weekly and everyone knows it but no one can do anything about because of the violent psychopaths (sorry, I meant USians, who are just like everyone else). Not to mention the US criminal justice system monitoring and managing at least over 3x the number of prisoners and parolees as the next highest country in the world with some of the worst outcomes, worst recidivism rates, and economic extraction practices compared to literally anyone.
But fair, maybe my framing is uncharitable.
Granted. Is it driving the same outcomes? No. It's not. The outcomes are substantially and consistently better and have been for decades without interruption.
And it is the job of a society to develop the social technologies necessary to manage those characteristics effectively. Eurocentric society is the world-crowning pinnacle of what happens when you fail - patriarchal white supremacist ChristoFascist genocidal child raping oligarchs committing mass murder on every inhabited continent to prove how civilized they are.
And yet, the outcomes are different. Is that because Chinese people are racially superior? No. It's because Chinese society has developed superior social technology for managing these problems.
WTF dude. No, that is not what I said. I quit right there because this is a complete non sequitur. Good luck with your ideas, I am out.
I don't see how you don't see the connection. China is asserting that control over the SCS is part of its national security requirements. One of the reasons for this is that the US has been hard at work for over a century projecting power in the region and one of the pillars of that power projection is through its navy. Control over the SCS means asserting territorial boundaries that match Chinese security assessment. It can easily be said that fishing boats are not a threat, and yet, historically, the US has taken advantage of the fact that civilian fishing is not considered a threat to violate the Geneva conventions at in fact use fishing boats to project force and create national security threats for nations in the region. China, therefore, is not willing to accept anything less than total territorial control over the SCS for national security reasons and that means even fishing boats must be expelled from the area.
Do you think there's some other reason for them to expel fishing boats from the SCS? Do you think it's totally unconnected to national security and history? Do you think it's some sort of problem with the personal psychology of Chinese leaders?
The problem is you keep asking if they think this or think that, when their replies clearly show they aren't thinking at all, they're just regurgitating the propaganda they've internalized.