— The Council for Foreign Relations rose to prominence in the 1930’s, after receiving millions of dollars in donations from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations. A subset within the Council known as the “security and armaments group” was lead by Allen Dulles, who would later go on to become the director of the CIA. 57% of United States government officials were members of the Council during Lyndon B. Johnson’s presidency, leading many of the Councils “non-partisan” beliefs to almost-exclusively reflect those of the sitting government. In 1979, David Rockefeller — then-chairman of the Council — used his position to pressure Jimmy Carter to admit the Shah of Iran into an American hospital to be treated for lymphoma, enraging Iranians who believed this was a sign of a coming US-backed coup; the Iran Hostage Crisis began just thirteen days later.
— You’re citing atrocity propaganda about the current largest enemy of the United States as written by a group directly funded by United States military intelligence and posing it as a legitimate source. The Council for Foreign Relations have been documented to have directly incited multiple international diplomatic incidents and have solved none. Other sources you’ve linked elsewhere in the thread have suffered similar problems; the CFR has direct funding from the CIA, the Jamestown Foundation has direct funding from the Department of Defense, the ASPI has direct funding from Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin. All of these groups that you cite demonstrate clear conflicts of interest when they publish articles that are frothingly anti-China while filling their pockets with money from those who want nothing more than a casus belli to try dismantling China.
A response to my multitude of points that I collected for a week in this source is… an article from a single Washington think tank with deep ties to the U.S. state department (almost all members have held positions in the U.S. government).
The article repeatedly incorrectly refers to the Communist Party of China (CPC) as the “Chinese Communist Party (CCP).” Whatever, what sources are used? U.S. government officials and the line of the U.S. government; “satellite images” which tell you absolutely nothing about what is going on inside these buildings, and certainly don’t prove the claim of genocide; a report by ASPI, a propaganda arm of the western military industrial complex, which has already been disproven; the OHCHR report, which has been critiqued on several grounds [1] [2]; a Washington Post article which cites Radio Free Asia, a CIA propaganda arm funded by U.S. Congress; a BBC report relying on unsworn testimony (which contradicts earlier testimony by the same person) and verification by Adrian Zenz (discussed in the carrd I made and linked); a New York Times report (using fraudulent documents) that purposely misrepresented a speech by Xi Jinping is cited for a continuation of this misrepresentation; the ASPI “Uyghurs for Sale” report, which has already been refuted; another ASPI report which uses satellite imagery to prove the demolition of mosques, you can understand by skepticism with ASPI and this method; Adrian Zenz’s report on “forced sterilization” which misrepresents the issue [1] [2]; the bs Xinjiang Police Files.
There is no mention of U.S. support for terrorism in Xinjiang (see the carrd) when terrorism is discussed (and evidence for the ETIM not being active for a decade is the U.S. government saying it’s not active for a decade, because these sycophantic parrots think this is all that is necessary). Honestly fair try attempting to skip the reading, but unfortunately it didn’t work.
It’s a shame they picked some of the less convincing AI generated images. There are a couple with hair texture detached from the head and the impossible shadow lines on the one guy’s neck. I know we don’t talk about that conspiracy theory much for fear of being dismissed as loons but several of them are pretty obvious.
I’m a Marxist. My perspective on history, my theory of change, beliefs about capitalism and socialism, do not require morality.
The belief in the role the proletariat will play in transforming society is not based on moral superiority. It is based on the existence of class conflict and that they are the class with revolutionary potentional.
Capitalism is not a stable or static system, and it cannot sustain itself forever because its existence demands perpetual growth. As it reaches this endpoint, the contridictions in this system heighten, as will the conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeois. The proletariat will prevail, not for any moral reason, but because they are the class on which the entire system relies.
As a human being i feel its a vastly morally superior project. But my feeling is completely immaterial, as is whatever judgment you place on my opinion
because it’s the end of capitalism that’s inevitable, not communism. we could also wind up with the common ruin of the contending classes and a dead world
Not necessarily extinction, but certainly ruin. It’s already doing that with the climate crisis, but even if we could make that magically disappear today, the contradictions of capitalism lead only to a) the overthrow of capitalism and the capitalist class by the workers (socialism/communism) or b) the capitalist class resorts to ultraviolence to maintain its power and brings ruination to society (fascism)
You don’t think small appeasement of the masses is possible? I think the apparatus has gotten pretty good at giving just enough comfort that it’s too much work to shift the status quo.
It has been possible so far in the imperial core, owing to superprofits gained by exploiting the workers of other countries outside of the imperial core. However, the inherent contradictions of capitalism like the tendency of the rate of profit to fall mean that this can’t be sustained indefinitely, especially not once the third world shakes off the imperialists and refuses to be exploited any longer.
But seriously, the point i was making was not about inevitability. It was making a distinction that Marxism as an ideology is based on scientific principles (this was a differentiation from early utopian socialists). We believe in theory, practice, and refinement of theory informed by practice.
While i as an individual believe that communism is morally correct, that belief is immaterial from the truth that Marxism illuminates
So would actions by nations that move towards that good also be good?
Also, what do you mean by communism? Does it need to be democratic communism, or is USSR authoritarianism fine, or China’s communism in name only? What makes communism good?
All socialism is democratic. It is a broadening of democracy and a transfer from a dictatorship of the bourgeois to a dictatorship of the proletariat. There us no “authoritarian” communism
Is communism morally good?
Yes. Now here’s a complete post debunking “China’s genocide”: https://xinjiangahr.carrd.co/
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-xinjiang-uyghurs-muslims-repression-genocide-human-rights
I don’t see how that connects? I’m just confused.
The CFR is a not a nuetral source. Its a mouth piece for natsec ghouls
sounds like Kremlin propaganda to me
I’m glad your against Kremlin propaganda
She Lin on my krem till I propaganda
ctrl-f “Zenz”
Would you look at that
A response to my multitude of points that I collected for a week in this source is… an article from a single Washington think tank with deep ties to the U.S. state department (almost all members have held positions in the U.S. government).
The article repeatedly incorrectly refers to the Communist Party of China (CPC) as the “Chinese Communist Party (CCP).” Whatever, what sources are used? U.S. government officials and the line of the U.S. government; “satellite images” which tell you absolutely nothing about what is going on inside these buildings, and certainly don’t prove the claim of genocide; a report by ASPI, a propaganda arm of the western military industrial complex, which has already been disproven; the OHCHR report, which has been critiqued on several grounds [1] [2]; a Washington Post article which cites Radio Free Asia, a CIA propaganda arm funded by U.S. Congress; a BBC report relying on unsworn testimony (which contradicts earlier testimony by the same person) and verification by Adrian Zenz (discussed in the carrd I made and linked); a New York Times report (using fraudulent documents) that purposely misrepresented a speech by Xi Jinping is cited for a continuation of this misrepresentation; the ASPI “Uyghurs for Sale” report, which has already been refuted; another ASPI report which uses satellite imagery to prove the demolition of mosques, you can understand by skepticism with ASPI and this method; Adrian Zenz’s report on “forced sterilization” which misrepresents the issue [1] [2]; the bs Xinjiang Police Files.
There is no mention of U.S. support for terrorism in Xinjiang (see the carrd) when terrorism is discussed (and evidence for the ETIM not being active for a decade is the U.S. government saying it’s not active for a decade, because these sycophantic parrots think this is all that is necessary). Honestly fair try attempting to skip the reading, but unfortunately it didn’t work.
GOOD post
All the Xinjiang police files links, here and in the caard appear to be dead on my end. I’ve tried both firefox and chrome.
https://archive.is/jeCII < This one takes me to a bot check page that just refreshes every time I do the captcha.
Yeah Mango Press is gone, wasn’t when I made the carrd. For me the link works, but archive.is/.ph does sometimes redirect to captchas that go nowhere. Here’s the archive.org link: https://web.archive.org/web/20230605230819/https://www.mango-press.com/the-xinjiang-police-files-are-actually-boring-zenzs-reality-warping/
Thank you
It’s a shame they picked some of the less convincing AI generated images. There are a couple with hair texture detached from the head and the impossible shadow lines on the one guy’s neck. I know we don’t talk about that conspiracy theory much for fear of being dismissed as loons but several of them are pretty obvious.
Are you incapable of reading?
I’m a Marxist. My perspective on history, my theory of change, beliefs about capitalism and socialism, do not require morality.
The belief in the role the proletariat will play in transforming society is not based on moral superiority. It is based on the existence of class conflict and that they are the class with revolutionary potentional.
Capitalism is not a stable or static system, and it cannot sustain itself forever because its existence demands perpetual growth. As it reaches this endpoint, the contridictions in this system heighten, as will the conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeois. The proletariat will prevail, not for any moral reason, but because they are the class on which the entire system relies.
As a human being i feel its a vastly morally superior project. But my feeling is completely immaterial, as is whatever judgment you place on my opinion
So why work for communism if it’s inevitable?
because it’s the end of capitalism that’s inevitable, not communism. we could also wind up with the common ruin of the contending classes and a dead world
Hmm. Okay, so capitalism will drive us to extinction unless stopped?
Not necessarily extinction, but certainly ruin. It’s already doing that with the climate crisis, but even if we could make that magically disappear today, the contradictions of capitalism lead only to a) the overthrow of capitalism and the capitalist class by the workers (socialism/communism) or b) the capitalist class resorts to ultraviolence to maintain its power and brings ruination to society (fascism)
You don’t think small appeasement of the masses is possible? I think the apparatus has gotten pretty good at giving just enough comfort that it’s too much work to shift the status quo.
concessions have been increasingly off the table since 1991
https://redsails.org/concessions/
It has been possible so far in the imperial core, owing to superprofits gained by exploiting the workers of other countries outside of the imperial core. However, the inherent contradictions of capitalism like the tendency of the rate of profit to fall mean that this can’t be sustained indefinitely, especially not once the third world shakes off the imperialists and refuses to be exploited any longer.
Capitalism is doing such a great job mitigating climate change.
Because the entire theory of change is struggle
But why struggle for it? If it’s going to happen anyways, may as well do what’s best for yourself and not stick your head up.
Because I’m not a lib like you.
But seriously, the point i was making was not about inevitability. It was making a distinction that Marxism as an ideology is based on scientific principles (this was a differentiation from early utopian socialists). We believe in theory, practice, and refinement of theory informed by practice.
While i as an individual believe that communism is morally correct, that belief is immaterial from the truth that Marxism illuminates
So how does the truth Marxism illuminates determine policy decisions?
Can you rephrase the question? Are you asking how Marxists in positions of power, like in the former USSR or China use Marxism to determine policy?
Is this you being proud about being a coward?
yes
So would actions by nations that move towards that good also be good?
Also, what do you mean by communism? Does it need to be democratic communism, or is USSR authoritarianism fine, or China’s communism in name only? What makes communism good?
https://redsails.org/why-marxism/
not that you’ll read it, this is for other people who don’t have their head up their ass
Thanks, that seems a little more digestible than the manifesto.
The Manifesto is a short pamphlet designed to be easily digestible
As an ML I fully agree with this take. The manifesto is kind of shit
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific is a much better introduction to Marxism.
I’d say Wage Labour & Capital is the best
All socialism is democratic. It is a broadening of democracy and a transfer from a dictatorship of the bourgeois to a dictatorship of the proletariat. There us no “authoritarian” communism
So is drnk not communist or not authoritarian?
Do you mean the DPRK? Yes they are a socialist nation
You think their hereditary supreme leadership is democratic?
That’s not what they practice there. That’s just what your lib propaganda tells you
Really? Is the supreme leader actually democracy elected?
are you gonna show us your penis yet or what
No
sad
Sorry to disappoint
Post hog