Comment on Chinese propaganda is rampant on the fediverse

• Cowbee@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Can you elaborate? The US isn’t adopting PRC style domestic policy, nor is the PRC adopting British nor US-style imperialism, so I have no idea what you’re talking about.

  source

  • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Sure. US takeover of TicTok is really direct example. The current ethnic cleasing operation empowering state protected slavery. Tighter interaction between buisness and goverment where failure to toe the party line is punished through unfavorable legal action and loss of goverment contracts for them or assoiciates. A heavy investment into domostic survellence and again forced cooperation for survellence capitalists.

    On the US side.

    On the PRC side, the expainsion Hong Kong style loan aggreements in order to establish maritime control globally. The attempt to expand territorial rights in the south china sea in order to expand their of control on their neighbors. Exporting survelence and censorship systems and models to keep favoriable dictatorships in power (as well as probally establish backdoors though that is an assumption). The funding of any group that fights their rivals influence as well. Just things imperialist do.

    source

    • Cowbee@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      The US taking over Tik Tok isn’t “PRC style domestic policy,” though. The PRC has knowledge transfer agreements with any company that does business with China, I think this may be what you’re hinting at, but this is just the standard “sell it to us or we’ll ban it” style of US policy.

      The PRC isn’t committing ethnic cleansing nor is it enslaving Uyghur peoples in Xinjiang, just like South Africa wasn’t committing “white genocide,” nor is there “christian genocide” in Nigeria. These are all examples of atrocity propaganda, where the west heavily distorts and often fabricates narratives in order to foment resistance and to give their own populations free excuses to not support anti-imperialism, in essence supporting it.

      In the case of Xinjiang, the area is crucial in the Belt and Road Initiative, so the west backed sepratist groups in order to destabilize the region. China responded with vocational programs and de-radicalization efforts, which the west then twisted into claims of “genocide.” Nevermind that the west responds to seperatism with mass violence, and thus re-education programs focused on rehabilitation are far more humane, the tool was used both for outright violence by the west into a useful narrative to feed its own citizens. I highly recommend Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation for more on this subject.

      In the context of tighter control between the state and business, it’s important to understand the class dynamics. The US Empire is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the large firms and key industries are privately owned, and the state entrenches their power. In the PRC, public ownership is the principle aspect, and the working class is in control of the state. The commanding heights of industry in China are all SOEs, and the bourgeoisie that controls small and medium firms are kept in check by the socialist state. You’re confusing form for essence, by only looking at similarities and ignoring the differences, you come to false conclusions.

      Here’s more on the SOEs governing the commanding heights of industry in China:

      Image

      As for surveillance, the US Empire has a far deeper level, the PATRIOT Act makes that clear. The US never copied China on this, they’ve always been worse. Further, in China surveillance is largely used against capitalists, while in the US Empire it’s used against the working classes.

      On to the PRC side.

      The PRC is expanding trade, but not dominance, nor does its trade deals come at the barrel of a gun. The PRC recognizes territory that has been consistent with what China had while the ROC held the UN seat for China, until it was transfered over to the PRC, leading to territorial disputes, not naked piracy and invasion like the US Empire does. They also are not “exporting surveillance and censorship systems.” They trade with pretty much everyone, and support their allies, but this is not imperialism.

      To the contrary, the PRC is acting against imperialism.

      • The CPC punishing Chinese landlords for improper treatment of Africans, mass arresting the landlords, passing reforms, and apologizing to the African Union

      • China has forgiven over 10 billion in foreign debt

      • Belt-Road Initiative: An Anti-thesis of Colonialism

      • Evo Morales speaks on claims of "Chinese imperialism

      • Five Imperialist Myths About China’s Role in Africa

      • Is China a Better Partner for Africa than Europe and the West?

      • Challenging US Imperialism with Chinese Multilateralism

      • The Fallacy of Denouncing Both Sides of the US-China Conflict

      And many, many more sources back this up. It’s no secret that imperialists have been trying to smear China into being “no better” than the west, but the reality on the ground is that partnering with China results in mutual development and cooperation, while partnering with the west results in stripped autonomy, underdevelopment, and exploitation.

      source