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

    They weren’t a liberal democracy, which is different, they very much were a socialist democracy.

    • Valmond@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Okay so you really are a troll then lol.

      A socialist democracy, what’s next, a dictator-democracy?

      Wait, that’s your definition of China!

      Looooool

      • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just because you don’t know what terms mean doesn’t mean the person you’re interacting with is a troll. Socialist, especially in this context, has a lot more to do with the economic order. That’s why socialist democracy is not an oxymoron, nor is capitalist-autocracy for example. Dictator-democracy is not even similar, because you’re abutting two governmental structure systems, not one governmental structure system with one economic system. Dictator-democracy and Capitalist-Communism both don’t make sense as terms. Socialist democracy absolutely does.

        If you want to argue the veracity of the claim that they were a socialist democracy or not, go for it. But as it is, you are the one trolling here, either purposefully or just inadvertently due to not understanding what you’re responding to and thus assuming the person you’re responding to is speaking nonsense.

        • Valmond@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just because you don’t know what terms mean doesn’t mean the person you’re interacting with is a troll.

          So you start your “rebuttal” with a slight insult, well well, you are right of course, if I do not know something doesn’t mean you are a troll (or the person I responded to) but check out his posts and come back and say you see no trolling.

          • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            It wasn’t an insult at all. Plenty of ways to phrase what I said as an insult, and I used none of them. I was pointing out that: (1) you didn’t seem to know what terms meant, and thus (2) were using that as reason to assume the other person is a troll.

            I’m not defending the other person either, I just get annoyed when I see people assume everyone is trolling simply because they’re offering a contrasting opinion on something. If someone really is trolling, it shouldn’t be hard to point to why you think that. You also made up some fantasy in the latter part of your comment, putting words in the commenter’s mouth you responded to, which you obviously intended in a snide way by adding the “Looooool”:

            Wait, that’s your definition of China! Looooool

            • Valmond@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              He did say that the country of China, which is a dictatorship, is in fact a democracy.

              • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re right, I missed that. I removed that bit from my comment, as I think the rest still holds.

      • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s definitely better than what you have in the US, which whatever it is, it’s not a democracy.

        • orbit@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The US absolutely has its own set of issues, but I’m still not clear why you are unable to address the initial points made in regards to Xi and China and have instead changed the discussion to US flaws.