Scholz says Carlson interview with Putin tells 'absurd story' (news.yahoo.com)

submitted 7 months ago by naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

48 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] stratosfear -3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Then where is it working? Why in our greatest examples of communism is there still an elite class in control?

Edit: And if nature is not our greatest example of "how the world works" what do you suggest? Again, not at all a defense of capitalism, just an example for why it is. There are countless examples in nature of mimicry and deception to eat the fucking prey. Like capitalists. So tell me obtuse fuck, where is the example of what you're preaching?

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

Maybe spend some time to learn about how socialist countries actually work instead of just spewing nonsense constantly. Here's a concrete example for you. When USSR fell and former countries transitioned to capitalism, life got worse for majority of people. Homelessness appeared, crime shot through the roof, wealth inequality went up. People lost access to basic needs such as healthcare and education. These are all tangible differences between the two systems. The fact that you can't understand this is frankly depressing.

[-] stratosfear -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Wealth inequality absolutely exists in both China and Russia, which is my whole point. No place on earth has a true socialist/communist economy. Because people are going to take money when they have the opportunity, no economic system is going to solve that today. Whether it's "theft" or "legal theft" it happens. Furthermore both China and Russia have dictatorship governments, where there is less freedom. So I'm not sure how you can say anything is [edit: substantially ] better than anything else. Maybe you want to live (or do) in a dictatorship which, fine, I won't fault you for that. And free healthcare exists in capitalist economies. So that's not mutually exclusive to communism.

It sounds to me more like you just care more about the words or definitions than the actual reality. If you believe life is better in Russia or China because they are communist so be it, but the freedom in those countries is measurably and proven worse. Which, has nothing to do with their economies, because this is far more complex than two stupid words.... So bottom line from my perspective, there is no example whatsoever of a quality functioning communist economy and lifestyle on the planet and the best thing we can achieve at this point in human evolution is a social democracy with strong regulations to keep capitalism in check.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 months ago

First of all Russia is now capitalist, the whole point I was making was the difference between what it was like under communism and what it's like under capitalism today. It's not a question of whether inequality exists, the question is whether the system works in the interest of the majority and whether conditions are improving for regular people. You're just making a false equivalence while missing the forest for the trees. It sounds to me like you're just regurgitating nonsense on a subject you have a very tenuous grasp on.

Actual tangible freedoms are far better in a country like China where people have freedom from homelessness, freedom from starving on the street, and freedom from being excluded from education because they can't afford it. These are real freedoms that empower people to self actualize and give them opportunities as opposed to ephemeral freedoms people in the west claim to enjoy. An economy that works in the interest of the working class is what gives people actual tangible freedoms.

[-] stratosfear -2 points 7 months ago

I don't disagree that the world should be far more left as a whole and people should not have to suffer at the whims of systems that don't care about them. But yeah "freedom from homelessness" while the Chinese government dictates what you can say and what knowledge you can access is just an absurd argument to me. How about freedom from concentration camps? I guess in your opinion that's a home. It doesn't matter what color the boot is on your neck, they both suck.

And yeah I really dgaf about Russia, I just assumed they were still "communist" in some way shape or form. Anyways, I was never saying capitalism is the savior, just that "it makes sense" from a human standpoint. Humans will still take advantage of other humans in some way, shape, or form whether it be with money or rights, religion or speech, some form of control until I dunno, people figure out how not to give other people their power. That's a human thing that humans need to achieve, I just don't see a government or economic system doing that. Except of course when humans do that they will still have to form some government and economy so I guess it's just a question of the chicken and the egg.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

This framing of yours is absolutely nonsensical. What the Chinese government says is that certain ideas are harmful to society. And every government, including western ones, does that.

Meanwhile, the concentration camps you keep yammering about have zero basis in reality. On the other hand, US has the highest incarceration rate per capita in the world. So, if we want to look at a society that actually has forced labor camps that's the US.

All you're doing here is just regurgitating fallacies and nonsense born out out ignorance. I implore you to spend a bit of time actually educating yourself.

[-] stratosfear -2 points 7 months ago

I brought up the Chinese concentration camps once, so not sure how I "keep yammering" about that. And I just searched, there is a considerable level of discussion here by large news outlets so I'm hardly spewing conspiracy theories. But sure, it could be all fake.

I really have no interest in arguing and the irony is we likely agree far more than has been indicated through this 4/10 effort to have a conversation on the internet. I do my best to educate myself so I will continue to do that as you have implored. I wish you the best...

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Sigh, alright I guess I'll address the "concentration camps" nonsense in detail for you. The whole conspiracy theory started with a claim of millions of Uyghurs being supposedly imprisoned story is based on two highly dubious “studies.”.

However, this claim is completely absurd when you stop and think about it even for a minute. That figure 1 million is repeated again and again. Let's just look at how much space would you actually need to intern one million people.

This is a photo of Rikers Island, New York City's biggest prison. The actual size of a facility interning ten thousand people.

According to Wikipedia, "The average daily inmate population on the island is about 10,000, although it can hold a maximum of 15,000." Let's assume this is a Xinjiang detention camp, holding ten to fifteen thousand people. How many of these would it take to hold one million people?

Let's do some math:

Rikers Size	Rikers Prisoners	One Million Uyghurs Size
413.2 acres (0.645 square miles)	10,000 to 15,000	43 to 64 square miles

In reality, one million people would probably take more space; all the supposed detention camps we see are much less dense than Rikers.

For comparison, San Francisco is 47 square miles. Amsterdam is 64 square miles. You'd literally need detention camps that total the size of San Francisco or Amsterdam to intern one million Uyghurs. It'd be like looking at a map of California. There's Los Angeles. There's San Diego. And look, there's San Francisco Concentration City with its one million Uyghurs.

Literally visible to the naked eye from space.

CHRD states that it interviewed dozens of ethnic Uyghurs in the course of its study, but their enormous estimate was ultimately based on interviews with exactly eight Uyghur individuals. Based on this absurdly small sample of research subjects in an area whose total population is 20 million, CHRD “extrapolated estimates” that “at least 10% of villagers […] are being detained in re-education detention camps, and 20% are being forced to attend day/evening re-education camps in the villages or townships, totaling 30% in both types of camps.” Furthermore, it doesn't even make sense from logistics perspective.

Practically all the stories we see about China trace back to Adrian Zenz is a far right fundamentalist nutcase and not a reliable source for any sort of information. The fact that he's the primary source for practically every article in western media demonstrates precisely what I'm talking about when I say that coverage is divorced from reality.

Zenz is a born-again Christian who lectures at the European School of Culture and Theology. This anodyne-sounding campus is actually the German base of Columbia International University, a US-based evangelical Christian seminary which considers the “Bible to be the ultimate foundation and the final truth in every aspect of our lives,” and whose mission is to “educate people from a biblical worldview to impact the nations with the message of Christ.”

Zenz’s work on China is inspired by this biblical worldview, as he recently explained in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. “I feel very clearly led by God to do this,” he said. “I can put it that way. I’m not afraid to say that. With Xinjiang, things really changed. It became like a mission, or a ministry.”.

Along with his “mission” against China, heavenly guidance has apparently prompted Zenz to denounce homosexuality, gender equality, and the banning of physical punishment against children as threats to Christianity.

Zenz outlined these views in a book he co-authored in 2012, titled Worthy to Escape: Why All Believers Will Not Be Raptured Before the Tribulation. In the tome, Zenz discussed the return of Jesus Christ, the coming wrath of God, and the rise of the Antichrist.

The fact that this nutcase is being paraded as a credible researcher on the subject is absolutely surreal, and it's clear that the methodology of his "research" doesn't pass any kind of muster when examined closely.

It's also worth noting that there is a political angle around the narrative around Xinjiang. For example, here's George Bush's chief of staff openly saying that US wants to destabilize the region, and NED recently admitting to funding Uyghur separatism for the past 16 years on their own official Twitter page. An ex-CIA operative details US operations radicalizing and training terrorists in the region in this book. Here's an excerpt:

US has been stoking terrorism in the region while they've been running a propaganda campaign against China in the west. In fact, US even classified Uyghur separatists as a terrorist group at one point https://www.mintpressnews.com/us-was-at-war-uyghur-terrorists-now-claims-etim-doesnt-exist/276916/

Here's an interview with a son of imam killed in Xinjiang https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-06-19/Son-of-imam-assassinated-in-Kashgar-s-2014-mosque-attack-speaks-out-RqNiyrcRuo/index.html

Here's an account from a Pakistani journalist who has been all over Xinjiang (which borders Pakistan) claims that western media reports on "atrocities" are lies. https://dailytimes.com.pk/723317/exposing-the-occidents-baseless-lies-about-xinjiang/

It's also worth noting that the accusations originate entirely from the west while Muslim majority countries support China, and their leaders have visited Xinjiang many times.

Also notable that whenever western media actually deigns to visit Xinjiang, which is not often, they're unable to produce support for any of their claims of mass imprisonment and oppression, so they opt for insinuations instead https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-lifestyle-china-health-travel-7a6967f335f97ca868cc618ea84b98b9

There's a further list of debunking here if you're interested https://redsails.org/the-xinjiang-atrocity-propaganda-blitz/

The whole thing is very clearly a propaganda blitz that US is cynically using to manipulate impressionable people in the west.