Some Swifties are based. Emphasis on some. Some Swifties prevented ICE from kidnapping Latinos.

I don’t think Adam’s character is insufferable, though that probably says more about me than him.

I figured that would be the case, but good to know. Do you mind if I keep in touch and ask you any questions I come up with?

From what I’ve read, don’t worry too much about it. Tones come naturally, eventually.

I have a stupid question. I doubt that this would make a big difference, but like, if my grandma is like 2 percent Chinese, would that help my family and I get citizenship, even slightly?

Or 3. Liberals who still won’t get with the program.

I get behind and totally support “ruthless criticism” of everything. And dialectical materialism is baked into my blood.

I’m also skeptical if China does have a bourgeoisie class. I can definitely see China currently having something analogous to the bourgeoisie class, but the relationship to the means of production and capital is in my view, too different to directly describe as being bourgeoisie. Words have specific meanings, but also the general sentiment often matters more. There is no doubt a metric-shit ton of work still to do, and even China isn’t exactly a worker’s paradise.

I have no doubt that billionaires and corrupt CPC members have lots of power, but my partial understanding was that most of China’s billionaires seemed to be “billionaires-in-name-only.” Sure, they may have net worth in the billions, but only if they are at the head of or play an important part in state-owned enterprises or if the CPC thinks it’s necessary to have the capitalist on a leash, which I think is fundamentally different than classical bourgeoisie and proletariat. I still kind of scoff at people that point out that China has billionaires, and view it as a false equivalence. How often does the CPC seem to kick their shit in, fire or imprison billionaires, expropriate their wealth, and limit their power and reach at every step of the way? The BiNO’s can afford slightly fancier cars and houses, but they seem to have almost zero real practical power. I’m not naive about the risks, though.

Though I do think that no government is ever likely 100 percent efficient or 100 percent uncorrupt, and for instance I think it’s a fucking travesty that the 696 work schedule and culture still exists, and that the CPC should do more to combat it.

I used to like Fellow Traveler, but I immediately view with suspicion anyone who denies that China is socialist.

China is arguably “more socialist” than the USSR was, and if China isn’t socialist, than the USSR never was.

While there are many ways and thought experiments to quantify socialism, and there isn’t and probably shouldn’t be just one ultimate factor, I think the simplest measuring stick is something like this:

Is China run as a country where the means of production are used to produce things primarily for use value? Yes.

Is private property and investment and commodity production tolerated and all, yet limited to a way greater extent than in neoliberal “democracies”? Also yes.

Is the commanding heights of the economy controlled by the proletariat, or at least by the state in the name and practical results of favoring the proletariat? Yes.

That isn’t to say that China isn’t above criticism or that socialism isn’t a constant struggle, but I can’t take seriously anyone who seriously questions if China is socialist or not.

What did I miss?

Do you mean the Amerikkkan White House or the Yugoslavian equivalent? Sorry if stupid question.

Is it true that Stalin tried to have Tito assassinated? I thought it was mostly neoliberal propaganda.

But if true, this is all fucking horrible and terrifying.

As Anarcho-Bolshevik and multitotal have noted, and in my personal view, Yugoslavia was definitely, firmly socialist. It had more markets and concessions to capital than the USSR for instance, but the commanding heights of the economy were controlled by the state in the name of the working class, and commodities were mostly produced to generate profit for Yugoslavia to survive in a capitalist world and provide for it’s citizens. This is something that every single socialist country has and had to do, for now.

That all being said, just because a country is socialist doesn’t mean it’s not above criticism. I’m not saying that you said or thought that, it’s just important to keep in mind.

Allegedly, Yugoslavia murdered Soviet and classical Marxist-Leninist-aligned politicians.

I think that the Nazis wouldn’t have cared enough to invade at the time, the Nazis were busy fighting their biggest threats.

I explain it as that modern China would be nothing without Mao, but also may not have gotten as far as it has without Deng.

I find that labeling one-self as an anti-revisionist is kind of a misnomer. Practically all well-read communists are anti-Gorbachev and anti-revisionist. But anti-revisionism shouldn’t be treating communism akin to a religious dogma, it should be recognizing that it is a constantly-evolving science, not a holy book, which is the mistake that most who call themselves “anti-revisionist” seem to make.

The DPRK does have some market reforms though, just not to the same extent as China.

Just shoot this fucker already.

That and also fetishization of the women of other countries.

In a massive potential show of force, I could theoretically see the U.S. pulling out across the world but retaining it’s gear, ships and military to act as a threat that they could invade anyone they want, while they focus on internal oppression.

But you’re right in that it would be ridiculously stupid and unlikely.

Liberals think that the Russians fighting nazis are the actual nazis.