• 23 Posts
  • 1.99K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 29th, 2023

help-circle

  • Fascism is defined by the destruction of capital in non-military sectors, the dominance of some sectors of capital over others (beyond as laid out in imperialism to the point of contravening the typical form of the dictatorship of capital)and imperialist policies like forced labor being directed inward to compensate for a decline of empire.

    Given that DPRK has industrialized throughout its history, has taken steps to shrink its military expenditures in comparison to the rest of the economy, has no dictatorship of capital within the country, doesn’t use slave labor and is a historically imperialized nation as opposed to a former imperial power, I do not see how you can define the DPRK as fascist.



  • Are you using the formal or informal definition of imperialism here? Because I don’t see how it meets the formal definition based on my understanding of the underlying economic mechanisms. For example, if they were engaging in imperialism why would Tibetan’s own their own homes instead of the land being taken over and the average peasant being proletarianized/forced into urban centers or large scale production agriculture to work?

    Why would them taking over Tibet be expansionist? Tibet has been part of China for hundreds of years, only breaking off during instability caused by foreign imperialist powers.













  • Also even if you believe that the democratically elected leadership of China are a new distinct class, they are empirically not capitalists and empirically not violent on anywhere close to a comparable scale to capitalist leadership. Their politics are that of mutual cooperation and advancement because 1a) they understand imperial extraction is economically inefficient in the long term 1b) have sufficient control over the state and economy to prevent it 2) they need strong allies to protect themselves from imperialist encirclement and imperial powers keep trying to weaken the rest of the world

    (I don’t agree that the Chinese elected leadership constitute a new class, I’m just saying for the sake of talking to folks who do)




  • Hell, some women are attracted to boobs themselves, is it bad when they do it as well, or is it only bad when men are attracted to boobs?

    I really like boobs too. But I don’t get distracted by them in normal non-sexual situations. The issue isn’t being attracted, it is the gaze.

    I think you’re kind of being dismissive of what that commenter is saying. It is really uncomfortable being looked at like that.


  • Hey I’m not trying to tell you it isn’t normal to be attracted to people, lord knows I’d be a hypocrite. It just seems like you’re describing a learned behavior associated with the sphere of attraction that might make women uncomfortable. I know one of the replies to your comments mentioned being so uncomfortable by men doing it that they thought about getting a cosmetic mastectomy.