4 ms·

> I cannot speak to these specific villages, but the amount of people lifted out of poverty in China in the last 50 years is probably one of the greatest achiev

> I cannot speak to these specific villages, but the amount of people lifted out of poverty in China in the last 50 years is probably one of the greatest achievements in human history And you forget to say that the amount of people verged into absolute poverty by CPC is also the biggest shame of human history. Nowhere else in history few hundred million people verge forcibly degraded back into stone age out of somewhat moderately industrialised economy. Chinese people have nothing to thank communists for. Any opinion differing from this is preposterous.

blackrock 6y ago
You don’t think the British and the Americans had any blame for this? For why China was so poor, and had to dig themselves out of a hole in the ground? After all, the criminal British Empire made their fortunes, by shoving opium down the throats of the Chinese for 100 freaking years! And then Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who never had a job his entire life, and just one day became the American president, well, where did his family get their money from? Yes, that’s right. Opium. The Delano’s were also the biggest American drug smugglers during the opium era. And yes, when the Americans were talking about trading success with the Asians, they were specifically referring to opium, but they were too ashamed to admit it. The Chinese opium era was the greatest theft, and the greatest transfer of wealth in human history! Google it man. Educate yourself about the sins of the British and American empires. At least after the CPC and Mao came into power in China, they finally eliminated the opium scourge, and kicked out the British dickheads from their country (except for Hong Kong).
- baybal2 6y ago
  > At least after the CPC and Mao came into power in China, they finally eliminated the opium scourge, and kicked out the British dickheads from their country (except for Hong Kong). And then, he killed, and starved 60m of his countrymen. How many English killed, and how many Mao killed. I feel, you are under influence of Maoism.
  - blackrock 6y ago
    Getting personal huh? I feel, you are under the influence of moronism. You just cannot see the bigger picture and connect the dots. Even though it’s right in front of your face. If the British and Americans did not do what they did in the 1840s, then do you think someone like Mao would’ve come into power in the 1900s? Were you also aware that China was under heavy sanctions from the United States, Australia, and the rest of the world after the CPC came into power? They could not buy food from abroad, since the white countries wanted to starve them to death. They could not trade to make money from their commodities. The ultimate goal of the white western nations was to starve China (but let’s not talk about any of that, because that would disrupt our brainwashing of the masses). The British subsequently killed more people than Mao, because they set into motion a series of disastrous events. Did you even realize China had a civil war in the 1850s, because of the British? But of course, let’s ignore everything else, and focus our attention on Mao, since he’s an easy target. And forget about everything else that led up to him.
  - porpoise 6y ago
    If you are referring to the Great Leap Forward, here's what Britannica says of its causes: poor planning + natural disasters. Sorry, there is no moral comparison between them. Mao "killed" millions of his countrymen in the same sense in which Trump did via his poor Covid response. > Under the commune system, agricultural and political decisions were decentralized, and ideological purity rather than expertise was emphasized. The peasants were organized into brigade teams, and communal kitchens were established so that women could be freed for work. The program was implemented with such haste by overzealous cadres that implements were often melted to make steel in the backyard furnaces, and many farm animals were slaughtered by discontented peasants. These errors in implementation were made worse by a series of natural disasters and the withdrawal of Soviet support. The inefficiency of the communes and the large-scale diversion of farm labour into small-scale industry disrupted China's agriculture seriously, and three consecutive years of natural calamities added to what quickly turned into a national disaster; in all, about 20 million people were estimated to have died of starvation between 1959 and 1962.
  - blackrock 6y ago
    Why didn’t this guy’s comment get flagged? While my counter-reply did get flagged. He’s accusing anyone that doesn’t see things the same way he does, as being brainwashed.
dirtyid 6y ago
In context of a stacked deck: century of colonial ravaging, postswar destruction and western bloc containment, the CCP had the ambition to pursue rejuvenation over stagnation and prevented the historic pattern of collapse and fragmentation. Of course there was incredible human costs, but on balance the right decisions were made. IMO Mao was more than 30% bad, but he maintained territorial integrity and the conditions for PRC to thrive. The generation he fucked over have nothing to be thankful for, but the generations that came after does, 30% bad is going to shrink with each year as Chinese comprehensive power grows. CCP today is not the same as CCP from 50 years ago, even if ideology seems to be once again converging. With exception of nuclear war, increasing comprehensive power will insulate the cost of making mistakes. There's simply more resources and tools for "harmonious" governance now, the soldiers that shot students because they didn't have access to riot gear is not going to need bullets when they have access to lethal alternatives, if social credit even allows situations to devolve that far in the first place. At the end of the day, CCP build modern China to credibly deter against external forces, situation is still far from good for many, but it's better than what most (arguably all other) countries could accomplish, and considering sheer Chinese scale, many Chinese are thankful for the outcome. Even the ones who fled and continues to flee with their wealth. There's something to be said for building indigenous nuclear, space and military program in the face of western sanctions, while simultaneously uplifting coastal populace in per capita GDP/PPP to rival the aggregate wealth and living standards of fellow developed Asian countries who got to where they are with US assistance.
- baybal2 6y ago
  > IMO Mao was more than 30% bad, but he maintained territorial integrity and the conditions for PRC to thrive And ceded 1m+ square kilometres to USSR. > The generation he fucked over have nothing to be thankful for, but the generations that came after does, 30% bad is going to shrink with each year as Chinese comprehensive power grows Unless the country is not steered back into the abyss, which is seemingly is the case. They blew it all. > China to credibly deter against external forces, situation is still far from good for many, but it's better than what most countries could accomplish, and considering sheer Chinese scale, many Chinese are thankful for the outcome. Every Chinese citizen I know, hates the party with deep, deep passion, and that includes not so few party members themselves. > CCP build modern China to credibly deter against external forces You have to really turn on the TV. I feel, you are in denial of objective reality under influence of virulent Xiism.
xster 6y ago
It's a powerful sentiment. But it needs to withstand the objective test of demonstrating, numerically, its narrative against historical data. When the CPC took power, the GDP per capita was 54 USD in 1952 (earliest date in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China). If you chose your words carefully and still state "forcibly degraded back into stone age out of somewhat moderately industrialised economy", one would expect the GDP per capita to revert to 1 USD. In reality, GDP per capita grew to 89 USD in 1960, at its worst reverted to 71 USD during the height of the famine and recovered 3 years later to 98 USD.
- baybal2 6y ago
  > It's a powerful sentiment. But it needs to withstand the objective test of demonstrating, numerically, its narrative against historical data. And millions of very real starving Chinese did no need your data. Statistical data of every Eastern bloc country was faked, and the data you cite is fake.

blackrock 6y ago

You don’t think the British and the Americans had any blame for this? For why China was so poor, and had to dig themselves out of a hole in the ground? After all, the criminal British Empire made their fortunes, by shoving opium down the throats of the Chinese for 100 freaking years! And then Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who never had a job his entire life, and just one day became the American president, well, where did his family get their money from? Yes, that’s right. Opium. The Delano’s were also the biggest American drug smugglers during the opium era. And yes, when the Americans were talking about trading success with the Asians, they were specifically referring to opium, but they were too ashamed to admit it. The Chinese opium era was the greatest theft, and the greatest transfer of wealth in human history! Google it man. Educate yourself about the sins of the British and American empires. At least after the CPC and Mao came into power in China, they finally eliminated the opium scourge, and kicked out the British dickheads from their country (except for Hong Kong).

baybal2 6y ago
> At least after the CPC and Mao came into power in China, they finally eliminated the opium scourge, and kicked out the British dickheads from their country (except for Hong Kong). And then, he killed, and starved 60m of his countrymen. How many English killed, and how many Mao killed. I feel, you are under influence of Maoism.
- blackrock 6y ago
  Getting personal huh? I feel, you are under the influence of moronism. You just cannot see the bigger picture and connect the dots. Even though it’s right in front of your face. If the British and Americans did not do what they did in the 1840s, then do you think someone like Mao would’ve come into power in the 1900s? Were you also aware that China was under heavy sanctions from the United States, Australia, and the rest of the world after the CPC came into power? They could not buy food from abroad, since the white countries wanted to starve them to death. They could not trade to make money from their commodities. The ultimate goal of the white western nations was to starve China (but let’s not talk about any of that, because that would disrupt our brainwashing of the masses). The British subsequently killed more people than Mao, because they set into motion a series of disastrous events. Did you even realize China had a civil war in the 1850s, because of the British? But of course, let’s ignore everything else, and focus our attention on Mao, since he’s an easy target. And forget about everything else that led up to him.
- porpoise 6y ago
  If you are referring to the Great Leap Forward, here's what Britannica says of its causes: poor planning + natural disasters. Sorry, there is no moral comparison between them. Mao "killed" millions of his countrymen in the same sense in which Trump did via his poor Covid response. > Under the commune system, agricultural and political decisions were decentralized, and ideological purity rather than expertise was emphasized. The peasants were organized into brigade teams, and communal kitchens were established so that women could be freed for work. The program was implemented with such haste by overzealous cadres that implements were often melted to make steel in the backyard furnaces, and many farm animals were slaughtered by discontented peasants. These errors in implementation were made worse by a series of natural disasters and the withdrawal of Soviet support. The inefficiency of the communes and the large-scale diversion of farm labour into small-scale industry disrupted China's agriculture seriously, and three consecutive years of natural calamities added to what quickly turned into a national disaster; in all, about 20 million people were estimated to have died of starvation between 1959 and 1962.
- blackrock 6y ago
  Why didn’t this guy’s comment get flagged? While my counter-reply did get flagged. He’s accusing anyone that doesn’t see things the same way he does, as being brainwashed.

dirtyid 6y ago

In context of a stacked deck: century of colonial ravaging, postswar destruction and western bloc containment, the CCP had the ambition to pursue rejuvenation over stagnation and prevented the historic pattern of collapse and fragmentation. Of course there was incredible human costs, but on balance the right decisions were made. IMO Mao was more than 30% bad, but he maintained territorial integrity and the conditions for PRC to thrive. The generation he fucked over have nothing to be thankful for, but the generations that came after does, 30% bad is going to shrink with each year as Chinese comprehensive power grows. CCP today is not the same as CCP from 50 years ago, even if ideology seems to be once again converging. With exception of nuclear war, increasing comprehensive power will insulate the cost of making mistakes. There's simply more resources and tools for "harmonious" governance now, the soldiers that shot students because they didn't have access to riot gear is not going to need bullets when they have access to lethal alternatives, if social credit even allows situations to devolve that far in the first place. At the end of the day, CCP build modern China to credibly deter against external forces, situation is still far from good for many, but it's better than what most (arguably all other) countries could accomplish, and considering sheer Chinese scale, many Chinese are thankful for the outcome. Even the ones who fled and continues to flee with their wealth. There's something to be said for building indigenous nuclear, space and military program in the face of western sanctions, while simultaneously uplifting coastal populace in per capita GDP/PPP to rival the aggregate wealth and living standards of fellow developed Asian countries who got to where they are with US assistance.

baybal2 6y ago
> IMO Mao was more than 30% bad, but he maintained territorial integrity and the conditions for PRC to thrive And ceded 1m+ square kilometres to USSR. > The generation he fucked over have nothing to be thankful for, but the generations that came after does, 30% bad is going to shrink with each year as Chinese comprehensive power grows Unless the country is not steered back into the abyss, which is seemingly is the case. They blew it all. > China to credibly deter against external forces, situation is still far from good for many, but it's better than what most countries could accomplish, and considering sheer Chinese scale, many Chinese are thankful for the outcome. Every Chinese citizen I know, hates the party with deep, deep passion, and that includes not so few party members themselves. > CCP build modern China to credibly deter against external forces You have to really turn on the TV. I feel, you are in denial of objective reality under influence of virulent Xiism.

xster 6y ago

It's a powerful sentiment. But it needs to withstand the objective test of demonstrating, numerically, its narrative against historical data. When the CPC took power, the GDP per capita was 54 USD in 1952 (earliest date in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China). If you chose your words carefully and still state "forcibly degraded back into stone age out of somewhat moderately industrialised economy", one would expect the GDP per capita to revert to 1 USD. In reality, GDP per capita grew to 89 USD in 1960, at its worst reverted to 71 USD during the height of the famine and recovered 3 years later to 98 USD.

baybal2 6y ago
> It's a powerful sentiment. But it needs to withstand the objective test of demonstrating, numerically, its narrative against historical data. And millions of very real starving Chinese did no need your data. Statistical data of every Eastern bloc country was faked, and the data you cite is fake.