挂路灯人

你一开口就是“我们为全世界社会主义革命而进行的斗争”。好大的口气！一个连本国工人运动都组织不起来、连一个基层支部都建不起来的澳大利亚键盘政治家，倒有资格给全世界的革命道路制定标准，还能对十四亿人的实践经验盖棺定论了？更荒唐的是，你居然单方面把中国以及所有支持中国社会主义道路的力量都开除出了“我们的斗争”。这个“我们”到底是谁？是那些在历史上真正夺取过政权、真正搞过建设、真正让工人阶级掌握权力的严肃共产党，还是你和网上几个互相吹捧的熟人？现实世界里，凡是取得过任何实质性成就的共产党，几乎都承认中国的社会主义性质，并且认真研究中国经验。你所谓的“许多左翼”，拆开来看，无非就是托洛茨基主义者、极左宗派主义者和“无政府主义者”。其中绝大多数是白人、西方、尤其是北美的知识分子，一辈子连一次成功罢工都没组织过，选举没赢过，合作社也没建成过，却没完没了地“批判”别人几代人用鲜血和汗水走出来的道路。这种“批判”说到底不过是嫉妒，是无能者面对实践者时的一种精神胜利法。

你把中国共产党称作一个“统治阶级”。凡是受过一点基本政治经济学训练的人，都能看出来你连《资本论》第一卷都没有真正读懂。什么叫阶级？阶级不是幼儿园水平的“谁坐在上面、谁待在下面”。阶级是由其在生产关系中的地位决定的；核心标准，是对生产资料的所有权，以及由此产生的、私人地无偿占有他人劳动所创造剩余价值的能力。在中国，土地实行全民所有和集体所有；金融、能源、通信、交通等关系国民经济命脉的重要部门掌握在公有制经济手中；国有资本所产生的收益归全民所有，并通过财政体系重新用于教育、医疗、基础设施建设和大规模扶贫等公共事业。你把“国有化比例很高的资本主义国家”和“社会主义”混为一谈，恰恰说明你根本分不清形式上的国家资本主义与事实上处于无产阶级专政条件下的公有制经济。你连最基本的经济概念都没弄明白。

接着，你又“简单地”宣布中国工人对社会没有民主控制。注意，你没有提供任何证据，没有调查，没有数据，只有一句轻飘飘的“就是如此”和一个“毫无疑问”。那事实是什么？哈佛大学阿什民主治理与创新中心连续多年的调查显示，中国公众对中央政府的满意度长期维持在90%以上。爱德曼信任度调查中，中国公众对政府的信任度也多年位居世界前列。这些可不是什么中国官方宣传数据，而是第三方机构、甚至是西方机构做出的调查。你一句“工人没有控制权”就想把这些全部抹掉，可你所谓“民主控制”的标准到底是什么？是不是非得长得像威斯敏斯特议会那样，才配叫民主？

你大概不知道，在中国，县级和乡镇级人民代表大会代表实行直接选举，选民登记率超过90%。你大概也不知道，中国存在一整套自下而上的意见表达、反馈和纠错机制：从村委会、居委会到街道办事处，从地方党委信访部门到12345政务服务便民热线，从人民网“领导留言板”到各级纪检监察举报平台。你大概还不知道，在“十四五”规划编制过程中，中央通过网络向社会征集了数以百万计的意见建议，其中相当一部分被直接吸收到相关文件中。你不知道这些，不是因为它们不存在，而是因为你从来懒得认真了解一个你早已决定鄙视的国家。

你说你“和中国人聊过”，然后得出结论，说中国实行的是一种“善意的等级制政府”。行啊，那我也可以跑到澳大利亚一家酒吧里，找几个喝醉了的矿工聊聊天，然后宣布澳大利亚其实是“封建君主制”。拿几次私人谈话代替社会调查，拿游客式的印象代替阶级分析，这就是你的方法。

说到“等级”，你好像还觉得自己发现了一个多么高明的论据：中国存在层级，因此中国不是社会主义。稍微读过点书的无政府主义者恐怕都不敢把逻辑讲得这么粗糙。巴枯宁过去一百五十年以后，就连当代无政府主义理论都不得不把“废除一切等级”修改成“废除不合理的等级关系”，因为他们自己也承认，只要协作规模超过几十个人，就必然需要协调机制、劳动分工以及某种形式的指挥体系。社会主义要消灭的是剥削性的阶级等级，是资本对劳动的支配，而不是消灭一切组织形式、一切管理结构和一切必要的集中。把“存在层级结构”等同于“不是社会主义”，这已经不只是把孩子连洗澡水一起倒掉了，你倒掉的那个“孩子”本身都是你自己想象出来的稻草人。

然后你又说，中国“缺乏能够实现有意义政治改变的途径”。又是“直接下结论”，又是毫无证据。你似乎不知道党内有民主生活会，有批评与自我批评的传统，有纪律检查和监察制度；不知道中国人民政治协商会议是一个涵盖各民主党派、人民团体、各民族和各界人士的协商平台；不知道还有立法听证、基层协商民主以及“枫桥经验”式的矛盾纠纷化解机制。你说“加入其他政党不算”，可以，那你知不知道中国的八个民主党派不是反对党，而是参政党，直接参与国家大政方针的协商讨论，而且其成员在各级政府、人民代表大会和人民政协中都担任实职？你要么根本不知道，要么明明知道，只是因为这些事实不符合你预设的模板，所以就宣布它们“不算”。

你还谈到工会，说中国没有工会，说“唯一的工会被中共控制”。拥有三亿多会员、世界上规模最大的工会组织（中华全国总工会）到了你嘴里居然就等于“不存在”。你的理由是，它和社会主义国家“纠缠在一起”。可是同志，在无产阶级专政条件下，工会同国家之间本来就不是敌对关系。在资本主义社会里，工会的重要意义在于同资本以及资产阶级国家进行斗争；而在社会主义社会里，国家本身就是工人阶级的国家，工会的任务是组织工人参与管理、维护劳动权益、促进生产发展、教育工人阶级，它的基本方向自然同社会主义国家是一致的。拿衡量资本主义国家工会的同一套“独立性”标准去衡量社会主义国家的工会，就跟按照鱼的标准去判断鸟会不会飞一样荒谬。

你又提到对罢工的“严厉镇压”，却故意无视中国《劳动法》《劳动合同法》《工会法》对劳动者权益的明确保护，无视劳动仲裁制度，也无视近年来大量工人通过法律渠道和集体协商成功维权的案例。你只是选择性地盯住那一小部分符合你预设结论的材料，然后假装除此之外什么都不存在。

最后，你说：“只有中国以外的人才会说中国是社会主义。”中国共产党拥有一亿多名党员，再加上共青团、工会、妇联等组织的覆盖，这个国家有数以亿计的人直接参与社会主义制度的组织和运转。你随便去问一个生活、工作在中国工厂、农村、社区或者学校里的人，问他知不知道自己生活在社会主义制度之下；难道还非得由你来告诉他：“其实你们不是社会主义”？

一个澳大利亚人拿旅游签证来过几次中国，跟几个人喝过几次茶，回去以后就宣布十四亿人都误解了自己社会的性质。这种傲慢，说到底不过是殖民心态的左翼变种：我比你更懂你的国家，我比你更有资格定义你应该走什么道路，你们自己的实践都不算数，只有我的标准才算数。

The best way to avoid being nuked is to ensure those interested in nuking you don’t have first strike capabilities no matter the cost.

just multiple numbers and blacklists for specific things, so what?

Literally one blacklist for people/businesses who default on credit that stops them buying luxuries until they settle their debts.

You claim to be against propaganda yet you spread propaganda in your comment history. Might be worth doing some reflection.

The quest to be one of the millions of tourists who visit Xinjiang every year.

Plenty of “pro-palestinians” around who condemn hamas and the rest of the resistance groups or call them terrorists etc.

I don’t think you really understood what I’m saying. You claimed every UN source is from every member nation this isn’t true, the UN has many members under the US umbrella this is true. Being skeptical is thus reasonable given these 2 facts.

Also the UN report on Xinjiang explicitly did not call it a genocide but that there were abuses which is true, during the ETIM crackdowns there definitely were abuses genocide however is another story the only “source” for which is a German evangelical on a mission from god to destroy china who speaks neither Uyghur nor mandarin and works for the victims of communism memorial foundation (I really should have to explain why that would cast doubt in this case I hope).

It’s not party bullshit it’s reality Spavor sued Korvig and the Canadian government and won $6million for them turning him into an intelligence asset without his knowledge leading to his arrest. Espionage is a capitol offence in China it was Canada holding Meng Wanzhou hostage at the behest of the Americans that spared them. Also I don’t think Canadians (or any other US satellite like the Europeans) get to decide who is “a benign member of the international community” after you helped the Americans rampage across the world committing non stop atrocities for the last 81 years.

You claim that Marx described alienation as the effect of capitalism on workers, completely ignoring the fundamental material reality that China is still in the primary stage of socialism. The alienation currently experienced by Chinese workers is precisely because private ownership and wage labor still objectively exist at this stage. However, this is by no means the state-led capitalism you claim, but rather a necessary material compromise during the transition period. Your remark about retaining private capital for fun completely exposes your superficial, vibes based analysis, devoid of any serious political economy. Retaining and developing the non-public sector is for the rapid development of productive forces. If you have even a basic understanding of history, you will know that the Soviet Union’s absolute egalitarianism and complete nationalization, even eliminating all private small and micro-enterprises, resulted in a massive black market small/micro firms. It was these black markets and underground economies, detached from the interests of the masses, that were easily exploited in the 1990s, ultimately leading to the collapse of the Soviet Union and widespread suffering. China allows the existence of private capital to avoid repeating the Soviet Union’s mistakes; it is about utilizing capital while simultaneously controlling it, not surrendering to it.

As for your second paragraph, it’s utter nonsense, rife with baseless conspiracy theories and Western-centric arrogance. You conjure up a group of leaders who crave privilege and cling desperately to power, a complete misinterpretation of the behavior of Western bourgeois politicians and corrupt oligarchs and their application to China. You lack even the most basic common sense, consistently using the abbreviation “CCP,” a common Western media term, while refusing to use the official English abbreviation “CPC.” This directly exposes that you haven’t conducted even the most basic research on China; your understanding is entirely based on secondhand information fed by American anti-communist media.

The Chinese Communist Party has over 100 million members, the vast majority of whom are farmers, workers, frontline laborers, and professional technicians. This is a true vanguard representing the broad masses of working people, not the gang of a few greedy elites you imagine. Your claim that those in power enjoy extra privileges is utterly untenable in the face of the vast grassroots Party organization. The vast majority of government and Party cadres are at the grassroots and county levels; frankly, their living standards are exactly the same as ordinary workers, and sometimes even worse due to the heavy workload at the grassroots level. As for provincial-level and above cadres, the vast majority enjoy a standard of living comparable to ordinary workers, far inferior to that of Western politicians or genuine capitalists.

Your assumption that once the means of production are completely centralized, workers must wrest power from the cold hands of leaders is an anarchistic paranoia that completely ignores democratic centralism and the mass line. The source and maintenance of power do not rely on the selflessness or morality of leaders, but on strict organizational discipline, continuous party rectification, and direct supervision by the people. Attributing the demise of the state apparatus to whether leaders are willing to relinquish privileges is using vulgar personal interests to deconstruct the grand process of historical materialism. When class differences truly disappear on the basis of highly developed material conditions, the public power governing society will naturally lose its nature of political oppression. This requires no one’s benevolence; it is an inevitable objective law arising from the development of productive forces to a certain stage.

I don’t think you understand what constitutes a class.

It’s silly to hold evidentiary standards?

They definitely can social science is just as much a science as “hard” sciences and extrapolating anecdotes to make general statements is equally garbage in both fields.

How much do you know about quantum mechanics and how gravity works differently at that scale and thus the need for an entire new field called quantum gravity?

Your lived experience of gravity as an attractive force of on earth roughly 9.8m/s^2 would be in direct opposition to quantum gravity

Feel free to believe that but social sciences are a science and there’s a reason anecdotal evidence is not valued highly.

Should we discard all of quantum mechanics because of your lived experience with gravity? Obviously not.

You’re the one who tried to play the age card to dodge the fact that your worldview is misanthropic garbage based on nothing of substance while you entirely misunderstand Marx and Marxist points then fight those misunderstandings as if they are the points themselves. No Marxist advocates for “if everyone would just…” or benevolent dictators or any of the nonsense you’re spewing. I really think we should leave this here.

I hope you don’t commit to your misanthropy too hard and end up on the news.

There’s a reason anecdotal evidence generally isn’t worth much. Talking about your experience is great but using it to extrapolate to the sweeping remarks this person is making is dangerous and generally should be avoided.

60+ and still an edgy teenager with a misanthropic mass shooter ideology who speaks with authority on subjects without any study or investigation very impressive. For someone who allegedly read Marx your ability to not understand a single point Marxists make and instead spout off right wing talking points and strawmen is equally impressive.

Wow uneven development is not something Marxists have ever studied /s

I’m sorry but you don’t even have the faintest idea of what you’re talking about I don’t think we can hold a productive conversation. I hope you can educate yourself and move beyond your edgy teenager mass shooter ideology phase.

You. Insufferable Hitlerite Reddit dorks I spelled it out pretty clearly last comment are you illiterate on top of everything else? (Rhetorical question answer is obviously yes)

You’re just reiterating your observably false nonsense. Humans have improved from actual barbarians to slavers to civilised groups. Also “if everyone would just…” is not at all a communist position.

Also unsure if you realise this or not but you have the same misanthropic ideology of a mass shooter.

You are.

Insufferable Hitlerite Reddit dork isn’t a race or ethnicity.