Thanks for linking the UN Report - really horrific stuff:

Two-thirds of the twenty-six former detainees interviewed, reported having been subjected to treatment that would amount to torture and/or other forms of ill-treatment, either in VETC facilities themselves or in the context of processes of referral to VETC facilities. These claims of mistreatment took place either during interrogations or as a form of punishment for (alleged) wrongdoing. Their accounts included being beaten with batons, including electric batons while strapped in a so- called “tiger chair”; being subjected to interrogation with water being poured in their faces; prolonged solitary confinement; and being forced to sit motionless on small stools for prolonged periods of time.

Some also spoke of various forms of sexual violence, including some instances of rape, affecting mainly women. These accounts included having been forced by guards to perform oral sex in the context of an interrogation and various forms of sexual humiliation, including forced nudity. The accounts similarly described the way in which rapes took place outside the dormitories, in separate rooms without cameras. In addition, several women recounted being subject to invasive gynaecological examinations, including one woman who described this taking place in a group setting which “made old women ashamed and young girls cry”, because they did not understand what was happening. The Government has firmly denied these claims, often through personal or gendered attacks against the women who have publicly reported these allegations.

The extent of arbitrary and discriminatory detention of members of Uyghur and other predominantly Muslim groups, pursuant to law and policy, in context of restrictions and deprivation more generally of fundamental rights enjoyed individually and collectively, may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.

You’re right it’s incorrect to call it a genocide but I’m glad you at least agree that “rape”, “torture”, “deprivation of fundamental rights” and probable “crimes against humanity” are being committed in the “re-education” camps against non-Han ethnic groups with the government being at the very least complicit by denying any wrongdoing - so it’s good to know you don’t blindly believe the CCP to be a benevolent force for good but can recognize the harm they’ve already caused to Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks and Huis in Xinjiang.

So you consider a state censoring all it’s citizens from discussing certain words and topics to not be authoritarian?

The article you’ve linked says they’ve forgiven less than 5% of the total amount lended so not sure I’d classify that as “frequent”

Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development.

I agree this is definitely a good thing but I want to acknowledge they do also directly profit from all this development - they’re not doing it to help others for the socialist ideal but for strategic geopolitical goals

they just fundamentally don’t have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit.

But they still operate in the same system which is why even their renegotiated loans never fall below the 2% inflation rate.

Idk I can understand critical support of China when it comes to challenging western imperialism I just don’t agree with their approach of rejecting egalitarianism and enforcing material inequality as a means to supposedly reach communism

So you’re saying that China didn’t extend or take advantage of western debt traps for their own economic and geopolitical goals?

So

• Sri Lanka desperately needs $1.12 billion to avoid defaulting to Western bondholders
• China provides that cash immediately
• In exchange they get 99-year control of a $1.4 billion strategic asset
• Sri Lanka still owes them the original construction debt
• China now controls 70% of future port profits for a century (or two)

And look I’m not claiming that this crisis wasn’t caused by western imperialism - but calling it a “trade” or “multilateral exchange” when China very obviously took advantage of a country in crisis for almost exclusively their own benefit is disingenuous.

Do you really see no issues with such predatory lending (irrespective of it being done by the IMF or BRI)?

Didn’t Mao do the Cultural Revolution specifically to prevent (not that it was implemented well or that it worked) what he saw the USSR was becoming and wanted to prevent China from following in the same capitalistic footsteps?

As in do you believe the person who said

(2) The imperialist powers have forced China to sign numerous unequal treaties by which they have acquired the right to station land and sea forces and exercise consular jurisdiction in China, [17] and they have carved up the whole country into imperialist spheres of influence. [18]

(3) The imperialist powers have gained control of all the important trading ports in China by these unequal treaties and have marked off areas in many of these ports as concessions under their direct administration.[19] They have also gained control of China’s customs, foreign trade and communications (sea, land, inland water and air). Thus they have been able to dump their goods in China, turn her into a market for their industrial products, and at the same time subordinate her agriculture to their imperialist needs

would approve of the belt and road debt trap or the actual 99 year lease China used to take over the port of Colombo in Sri Lanka ?

Or is it fine to exploit other countries if the people in your country benefit?

Even then you believe they’re socialist when Deng Xiaoping says (and Xi repeats this “common prosperity” rhetoric) that

“Our policy is to let some people and some regions get rich first, in order to drive and help the backward regions, and it is an obligation for the advanced regions to help the backward regions.”

So you recognize the failure of neoliberal “trickle down” economics but refuse to accept that if the same capital accumulation happens in a “socialist” country its suddenly not a problem?

And you really think that Jack Ma and his family won’t fight tooth and nail to keep their private jets and offshore million dollar houses instead of forgoing them voluntarily for the good of the socialist project? please…

ITT: Guys making jokes under an article about British soldiers murdering and mutilating Agnes Wanjiru and dumping her body in a septic tank 13 years ago without facing any consequences.

Stay classy Lemmy…

huh?

You know what would reduce it by almost 50%? Not spending half your salary on rent…

Maybe then people could afford solar panels, insulation, heat pumps and general home improvements with their newly discovered 100% increase in spending

denied was implied by comparing musk’s salute to that of the pope waving his arm - but fair, she didn’t outright say it

still the timing is most definitely not coincidental - but I can see how that can seem that way if you didn’t browse xitter when it happened

her tweet was made a day after musk’s salute and consequent “funny” nazi puns - alongside posts denying the salute as sincere, therefore enabling nazi normalization

the issue isn’t if JK is a swastika waving nazi - she most likely isn’t - the issue is she’s siding with fascists because they share the same hateful rhetoric and is willing to defend and normalize their behavior because she sees them as allies and the “woke leftists” as the enemy.

we couldn’t agree on an illustrator. He wanted Eva Braun, but the sample sketches he showed me were shit.

If he wanted Eva Braun to be the illustrator why would he show JK his own sketches and not hers? Why even mention Eva at that point?

Idk but imma head out as I don’t have the energy to dissect a poorly written attempt at a joke by a known nazi apologist…

I mean Eva Braun was a photographer so not sure why her sketches would have been good? But I guess she was trying to shoehorn hitler being a bad artist but just didn’t know how to tie it in?

Call be old-fashioned but I prefer my jokes to be funny because they’re clever not because “haha hitler couldn’t draw amirite”

Also just to note - that “trans” account posting AI slop is actually a terf masquerading as a trans person to “own the libs”

she did retweet a joke minimizing elmo’s salute… - multiple times…

nooo, you don’t understand - she was just saying this a day after the inauguration to defend musk doing his nazi salute - I’m sure all of this has nothing to do with her doing trans Holocaust denial either…

damn snowflakes always getting triggered by lighthearted fun from nazi apologists… 😤😤😤

Ah yes the super duper wholesome chungus billionaire just had to meet many times with Epstein (after he was a convicted child rapist) to do such amazing “philanthropy” that his wife had to divorce him for it 😍

100% agree - I think people shouldn’t use somebody’s inborn body features as an insult.

However, based on OP’s post history I do believe they’re a fragile man that really ought to touch more grass.