CHINA IS THE BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD AND EVERYONE SHOULD ASPIRE TO BE LIKE THEM. ITS NOT BAD TO HAVE LABOR CAMPS OR SOCIAL CREDIT SCORES.
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)
GenZedong
4242 readers
13 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ITS NOT BAD TO HAVE LABOR CAMPS OR SOCIAL CREDIT SCORES
Okay, let's go see about these so-called "labor camps" and "social credit scores"
Social credit system: China's "Social Credit Score System" - Fact or Fiction?
Xinjiang "labor camps": Deep Dive: Adrian Zenz & Claims of "Coerced Labor" in Xinjiang China
When I think of governments helping their people, I think of Beijing 👍🏻
China's been busy working on doing things like eliminating poverty, creating public infrastructure, providing healthcare, housing, food, and education for all citizens. Chinese government practically eliminated poverty, building infrastructure having used more concrete in 3 years than US in all of 20th century, building 27,000km of high speed rail in a decade.
China has also been doing things like ensuring that everyone has housing with 90% of families in the country own their home giving China one of the highest home ownership rates in the world.China's been improving real wages (i.e. the wage adjusted for the prices you pay) that have gone up 4x in the past 25 years, more than any other country, and making sure people have high social mobility.
Congratulations on being unintentionally correct.
Tell me something, if China is so great, why do so many Chinese want to immigrate to the US, where they can get a better education and a better job and provide a better life for themselves and their family?
Where did you get the notion that many Chinese want to immigrate to your shithole country? For example, 80% of Chinese students, including the US, return home. If things are so bad in China and so great in the west then why are they coming back, and why are thousands of scientists fleeing to China from US?
It depends on which government.
The US is still a federal system with states acting as sovereign entities with powers and responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is for disaster relief. FEMA is there to provide guidance and resources, but disaster relief is supposed to be deployed at the state level. This is one of reasons why the National Guard has responsibilities to individual states.
Hawaii has never seen any wildfire or wildfire conditions like this before: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/10/climate/hawaii-fires-climate-change.html
Of course there should be preparations to counter climate change as it continues to aggravate situations like this, but I don't like the excuse where the feds can blame the states and the states can blame the feds when shit hits the fan. It has become an excuse for inaction. Hurricane Katrina, Texas ice storms, California wildfires, the Kentucky floods, this could have been sorted out looonng ago.
Why do we make the choice to keep things this way when they always lead to disasters?
Don't you know? It's far more important to toss the blame football around than to actually prevent or alleviate disasters. Helping people? Bah! Far more important that we can blame someone else for the problem.
The problem is that the alternative is having the federal government immediately intervene in any emergency, which states would likely complain about.
Then let the states complain or, better yet, dissolve the fuckers
I guess the problem then is I care about having a government that doesn't want to kill me or leave me to die, then. Excuse me, I should have been caring about civility within our decaying governing structure while people roast alive on the street! Oh you've made me see the light, you sure have.
I'm not trying to convince you this is correct, just explaining the politics behind why the situation exists. Or maybe you want a strongman who will protect you until they don't.
Or maybe you want a strongman who will protect you until they don't.
Are you seriously doing the Tough Independent Rugged Real American LARP here? 
Did you build your own home? Do you repair your own roads? Do you check your own food for botulism? 
I was noting that the failure of the disaster response seems to be due to local government officials failing in their job.
What is the responsibility of a larger government entity for the governance of cities?
It's the responsibility of the larger government entity to step in in some cases. Like in the cases of natural (or semi-natural) disasters or if the local governance shits the bed to the extent that people are dying. We're not dealing with free imperial cities of the Holy Roman Empire here, cities aren't sovereign entities they're administrative regions for the government.
But how long does it take to figure that out? A few days?
This isn't the Holy Roman Empire, but the bureaucracy isn't as fast as people think it is and the initial response is still expected to be lead by the state. By the time it becomes apparent the federal government should step in, the response has already failed.
Presenting a oh-so-large-its-scary government entity assisting locally during a disaster as a bad thing is certainly a take. 
The federal government can assist, it just needs local permission to do so.
The federal government can assist, it just needs local permission to do so.
This skews awful close to typical AM radio "the SHERIFFS need to have DIRECT CONTROL of the counties to BRING LAW AND ORDER back to THE STREETS" chud rambling. Local isn't always better, especially not in Sundown State petty tyrannies with echoes of the Confederacy.
And the federal government is mobilizing to assist, but they aren't going to be in the initial response.
What does any of that dialing back of your tough independent American rhetoric have to do with this?
Or maybe you want a strongman who will protect you until they don't.
I wasn't giving you a tough independent American rhetoric, I was explaining how American government works and you took it as something else.
Federalism is baked into how the USA governs itself. I can't explain disaster response without noting who the lead government agency is.
I wasn't giving you a tough independent American rhetoric
I was explaining how American government works
Yeah it works through tough independent rhetoric as domestic policy as an excuse to neglect and fuck over people with a thin veneer of that neglect being for their own good.
Federalism is baked into how the USA governs itself.
That's the fancy word for the alienated independence ideology that drives the incompetent and neglectful system, yeah sure.
It you know better, how do you make the federal government the lead agency in responding to natural disasters?
Give a detailed and working governmental policy platform in a single response post and do it in response to your presumptions which you are presenting as a default position which does not require the same homework assignment. 
EDIT: Here's a freebie, just for you and your 
style debatebro bullshit: China's response is clearly better than what's going on in Maui.
China's response is clearly better than what's going on in Maui.
In this one case, but there is also the 90 tonnes of steel AI Weiwei straightened after the 2008 Sichuan Earthquake.
In this one case, but there is also the 90 tonnes of steel AI Weiwei straightened after the 2008 Sichuan Earthquake.
In this one case
But your own this one case makes Burgerland superior to the See See Pee because that's different! 
I never said better.
I never said better.
So you were doing some exhaustive and tiresome devil's advocate nonsense and/or are trying to dial back your ridiculously bad original take where you presented a strong centralized government response as some sort of scary nanny state that only the weak yearn for, and that you have a knee-jerk reaction about. 
I never said a strong centralized government was bad, just that it wouldn't be tolerated in the current political framework.
You interpreted that as being bad.
I never said
You're waffling and playing sophistic games that are not unlike 
and your political ideology seems to come from the same source.
Checks out.
You interpreted that as being bad.
Or maybe you just want someone to argue with.
That's rich coming from you, especially after your 
flag-humping session that started with this:
Or maybe you want a strongman who will protect you until they don't.
The crumbling and neglected infrastructure and decaying social institutions of Freedomland are cool and good and no worse than the evil See See Pee because something something federalism and how that's totally working out great promise guys for real guys 
I was mentioning it in the context of the USA. I've been bringing up Trump as an example of a person in charge of the federal government who didn't respond to requests from states for aid. During COVID, the federal government denied assistance to states that were politically against Trump. Putting all disaster response in the hands of the federal government could cause a similar case to happen in the future.
Putting all disaster response in the hands of the federal government could cause a similar case to happen in the future.
Claiming that the federal/central government should by default rely, especially in the context of the crumbling and eroding infrastructural and social conditions of the United States, on alienated and isolated first responses from counties or townships or whatever is left in impoverished parts of the country is idealistic nonsense that ignores the actual conditions of those places.
And Maui isn't even nearly one of the most impoverished areas and look how badly that went.
I'd rather be protected "until they don't" than not protected at all.
But maybe you don't need a "strongman" to do that, but a robust system designed to deal with disasters. Doesn't matter how strong an individual man is, he can't fight wildfires alone.
Maybe just coldly explaining why the system doesn't help people isn't actually the "gotcha" argument you think it is. Maybe you should be demanding the system should help people, instead of just shrugging and saying that it doesn't because of reasons.
But in the end, there needs to be a specific authority to answer to disasters. Right now, and for a while, it is state governments as making the federal government responsible erodes state sovereignty.
Outside of Trump, the federal government is there to help when asked, but it is still the responsibility of the states to manage response efforts.
Just FYI, I'm not American, and our state and federal governments have no problem co-operating when it comes to disaster relief, regardless of who is in charge. Our states will send firefighters around the country to where they're needed, no questions asked, or hand-wringing about budgets or finger pointing at shitty politicians.
This idea about "states rights" is monstrous. A state is an intangible, it is just lines drawn on a map. You know what's more important than that? Saving people's lives. You guys are so worried about imagined tyranny that you'll literally subject yourselves to far worse fates just in the name of some abject "freedom." What freedom does a dead person have?
Just because something happens in America doesn't mean it happens in the rest of the world. We look at your state of affairs with abject horror most of the time.
Our state and federal governments also don't have issues working together outside of a Trump led administration, but the first emergency response is expected to be led by local and state governments that the disaster happens in.
My state routinely lends state disaster response units around the country to make sure that they are up to speed on different methods of disaster response in disasters that my state expects to see. However, it isn't all disasters as my state doesn't get all disasters.
And I'm explaining the American thinking as the disaster is occurring in the United States of America.
I know you Americans can't remember anything outside of the last 4-8 years, but I assure you, bungling disaster relief has been a thing for much longer than Trump. He didn't come out of nowhere and ruin everything cause he felt like it one day, he's a symptom of the systematic issues your country faces. He's a clown, there to distract people from the larger issues and general incompetence of your entire government. Don't fall for the mindless sports team politics. These issues run far deeper than a single person.
If you want to bring up Katrina, W Bush wasn't asked to bring in more resources by the state of Louisiana after landfall.
Name a time outside of Trump where the federal government denied aid to a state requesting it.
Oh, terribly sorry. I wasn't aware that your people were from the sea and struggle with our strange land mammal ways of communicating.
This should be more helpful:
I responded to a direct question regarding a failure in government aid. It isn't sealioning to ask for an example to a claim that something is commonplace.