I mean… I kinda get it, but nowadays it’s starting to get absurd.

(EDIT: This was supposed to be a “blow air out my nose and get on with my life” meme…)

  • satxdude@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    25 days ago

    You may or may not think China is “authoritarian” but how on earth are they fascist?

    • StraponStratos@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      Tradition is big. E.g TCM crap over science

      You cannot disagree with the state

      Stokes fear and hatred of outsiders

      Blames social frustrations on those outsiders

      Appeals to restore past glory

      Han ethnic supremacy

      You could go through all of Eco’s points and apply them to China pretty fittingly.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        24 days ago

        Appeals to restore past glory

        Genuinely, what on earth are you talking about? China’s past is full of poverty, humiliation, and exploitation, literally, “The century of humiliation!” The only people who “appeal to restore past glory” are the CIA-funded Shen Yun performances romanticizing “China before communism.” The Chinese people I talk to will specifically point to the Qing as a clear demonstration of the danger of clinging to tradition and the necessity of adapting and looking forward.

        China literally had a cultural revolution seeking to abolish tradition. I expect you would call that fascist just as you call if fascist whenever some people still follow tradition, after all:

        “During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology… What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”

    • Eheran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      25 days ago

      Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

      Far right? Hm, maybe not. Otherwise: Check, check, quasi-check, check, check, check, …

      • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        25 days ago

        China has become a psudo Capitalist country in its quest for world domination.

        Capitalism goes hand in hand with right wing extremism

        I think China would have to do a lot more for the avg person before they could be considered socialist or communist again

        • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          Socialism isn’t when the government does stuff for the people, it’s when the people take matters into their own hands and do stuff for the good of each other. Even if a state behaves in the most benevolent way possible, it is not socialist unless the workers have collective ownership of the means of production.

          • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            25 days ago

            By that definition there are no socialist countries.

            When people talk about socialism in the real world it doesn’t mean owning the means of production

            • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              25 days ago

              Only because the very concepts of ownership and the collective-individual dichotomy are necessarily vague and subjective. China considers themselves socialist because they equivocate the people with the state. If the people are collectively represented by the state and the state owns (some of) the means of production, then at least transitively the people own (some of) the means of production.

              As an anarchist I don’t believe the state adequately represents the interests of the people, nor do I think it could even if it were radically democratic and egalitarian, though I would still certainly prefer that to the existing status quo. Somewhere a line must be drawn arbitrarily and I prefer to draw it on the other side of authoritarian state control.