Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30

Thread: Has China become a fascist state?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Lower Mainland, B.C.
    Posts
    2,307

    Has China become a fascist state?

    This article below from a few years ago would suggest so. And recent events, such as China's treatment of 2 Canadian citizens thrown into jail for clearly potlitical reasons and it's treatment of it's own citizens in Hong Kong makes the argument that much stronger.

    https://ipolitics.ca/2017/10/12/the-...-means-for-us/

    JD

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    1,012
    Its a Communist State... If by Facist you mean the rich oligarchy runs things and the rich/powerful have more rights than the rest of the chinese population. Its run by a dictator for life... oh sorry president for life....

    The communist state in Russia fell to the oligarchs, after the Berlin wall fell and communism collapsed because the states starved it of food and out spent it in military buildup. China is doing the same to the US now, only the technological gap keeps the US ahead. That is closing. China if allowed access to 5G communication in the west would be able to spy on the technological gap and close it. China will have a bigger GNP than the US in the near future and has the capability to expand further. This is what the US is worried about. The other big country to watch is India....

    The Chinese government works on the idea of keeping itself in power, through show of power and crushing any rebellion. It does not want to lose control of its power. Stalin killed millions. The Chinese will kill tens of millions and silence them and their relatives/friends.

    Hong Kong will declare its independence from China. The younger generation in HK sees the writting on the wall and are now rebelling. You see China needs HK for access to the western world.

    You see in the 1990's alot of Asian mutual funds went belly up that were based in HK. All that money went somewhere....

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby1968 View Post
    Since Tibet, Chinese Communist Party is clearly fascistic

    Since Darfur genocide, CCP is clearly fascist:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttMuKo5usd0&t=14m35s
    I would disagree on Tibet; The massacre was not done on racial grounds, but on religious and politics.

    Sudan is also not based on racial, but on national interest.

    While methods are similar, the practices originate from different ends of the political spectrum.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby1968 View Post
    CCP is clearly supremacist. Relations with all other peoples are called “barbarian management”. The Arab Janjaweed deployed to create a cordon sanitaire around oil operations were explicitly racialist and hollered the Arab equivalent of “burn niggers” while razing whole villages. “Those who’ve interviewed refugees from Darfur also allege that Janjaweed commanders are using racism as a rallying point, encouraging their charges to rape the dark-skinned villagers they encounter during their raids.”

    Time to wake up.

    Source:
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...janjaweed.html
    "Barbarian management" was used in the Qing dynasty some 150 years ago and no longer in common practice. In fact the only place one would hear it is in Chinese TV shows.

    CCP is supremacist, but not racially. Communist ideologie forbids racial discrimination and the CCP isn't known to act based on racial grounds.

    Protecting economic interests isn't racist. Just because a few commanders decide to shout it doesn't mean it's based off racist tendencies.

    This doesn't make CCP less dictatorial or exonerate them from war-crimes or crimes against humanity. But the definitions of traditional fascism doesn't apply to the Communists.

  5. #5
    Ever hear of the *Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact? Hitler and Stalin's cozy little arrangement to carve up Poland? Fascism and communism are near Siamese twins. It should be noted Mao was Stalinist. It's why he was appalled by Khrushchev. Hence the Sino-Soviet split.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by 80watts View Post
    The communist state in Russia fell to the oligarchs, after the Berlin wall fell and communism collapsed because the states starved it of food and out spent it in military buildup.
    If they're the biggest country in the world and still couldn't feed their own people it was their own government's fault.

    What actually happened was that the hardliners hated Gorbachev and overthrew him, but the hardliners had little support outside of Soviet Central Asia for a return to the Brezhnev era. So Yeltsin filled the void.
    Last edited by testicles; 10-02-2019 at 10:00 PM.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby1968 View Post
    Ever hear of the *Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact? Hitler and Stalin's cozy little arrangement to carve up Poland? Fascism and communism are near Siamese twins. It should be noted Mao was Stalinist. It's why he was appalled by Khrushchev. Hence the Sino-Soviet split.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact
    Fascism and Communism are both dictatorships. But they don't approach problems the same way.

    Fascism is dominated by nationalism, racial purity and social Darwinism.

    Communism is dominated by socialism, patriotism and common ownership.

    Odd comparison, considering CCP isn't founded on racist ideologies, doesn't believe in social ideology nor does it believe in glory through war and conquest as evident in fascist states in Germany and Japan.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Lower Mainland, B.C.
    Posts
    2,307
    Quote Originally Posted by nightswhisper View Post
    Fascism and Communism are both dictatorships. But they don't approach problems the same way.

    Fascism is dominated by nationalism, racial purity and social Darwinism.

    Communism is dominated by socialism, patriotism and common ownership.

    Odd comparison, considering CCP isn't founded on racist ideologies, doesn't believe in social ideology nor does it believe in glory through war and conquest as evident in fascist states in Germany and Japan.
    But neither does the CCP believe in common ownership, not any more at least. It may have started out that way. In some ways, China is now more capitalist than the USA.

    And does the following article not seem familiar to the rise of Natzi Germany, parading weapons, etc ?

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/c...rade-1.5304891

    Heil Xi Jinping
    https://i.cbc.ca/1.5304973.156996387...ary-parade.jpg

    China may not have a eugenics program (at least not that we know of), but it does have "re-education" camps which hold hundreds of thousands of its own people that did not drink voluntarily the Chinese koolaid; and try to get a Chinese passport if you are white, it is almost impossible.

    JD
    Last edited by JimDandy; 10-02-2019 at 04:11 PM.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by JimDandy View Post
    But neither does the CCP believe in common ownership, not any more at least. It may have started out that way. In some ways, China is now more capitalist than the USA.
    China just nationalized about a 100 of its top businesses with most of those executives stepping down.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...ts-tech-sector

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/03/b...nterprise.html

    Quote Originally Posted by JimDandy View Post
    And does the following article not seem familiar to the rise of Natzi Germany, parading weapons, etc ?

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/c...rade-1.5304891
    Military parades is not a Fascist-exclusive phenomenon.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimDandy View Post
    That's just how Chinese people wave.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimDandy View Post
    China may not have a eugenics program (at least not that we know of), but it does have "re-education" camps which hold hundreds of thousands of its own people that did not drink voluntarily the Chinese koolaid; and try to get a Chinese passport if you are white, it is almost impossible.
    Re-education is based on ideology. Most of them are tortured but eventually let go.

    Concentration camps are based on race. Most of them are tortured and eventually killed.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby1968 View Post
    Around 30 million girls have been aborted or killed by infanticide in China. In Jiangxi the sex ratio is an astounding 143 males to 100 females. Using Deutsche Welle’s figure, there are ~170 million surplus males in Asia. Many of these males are now buying girls or women from poorer, “lesser” countries. Many are migrating and attempting to reproduce with Europeans and Africans to advance what is believed to be the master race. Definitely a form of eugenics.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._from_1800.jpg
    Do you even know what you're talking about? Sexual discrimination has nothing to do with eugenics.

    Eugenics is the systematic breeding of superior genes often at the lives and expendability of lesser beings in the gene pool. There's no evidence of such practice in China. Most Chinese people want to marry Europeans for prestige, not genetic superiority.

    I'm not excusing or condoning these acts but your grasp of concepts relating to politics is terribly diluted and disconnected from reality.

  11. #11
    I don’t know about China being fascist but is certainly totalitarian. I know someone who went to teach English there some years ago. He said he saw in Beijing condemned prisoners being driven through the streets in the back of a gravel truck. They were taken to a soccer stadium and shot in the back of the head. The public was encouraged to attend lest they get the idea that crime paid.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by nightswhisper View Post
    Do you even know what you're talking about? Sexual discrimination has nothing to do with eugenics.

    Eugenics is the systematic breeding of superior genes often at the lives and expendability of lesser beings in the gene pool. There's no evidence of such practice in China. Most Chinese people want to marry Europeans for prestige, not genetic superiority.

    I'm not excusing or condoning these acts but your grasp of concepts relating to politics is terribly diluted and disconnected from reality.
    I heard that the Chinese government got the tallest man and tallest woman they could find in China to have a child and they were the parents of Yao Ming the basketball player.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby1968 View Post
    Many of the 30 million surplus Chinese males are trying to import females from lesser countries e.g. Cambodia, Vietnam. Others are travelling around the world trying to mate with native females. In both scenarios, the plan is to impart Chinese genes into “barbarian” populations. Ergo, it is a form of eugenics whereby barbarian males are displaced in favour of Chinese genetics.

    There is also China’s CRISPR babies:

    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6...earlier-death/
    You're drinking way too much cool-aid.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by nightswhisper View Post
    You're drinking way too much cool-aid.
    It was actually Flavor Aid.

    “As for the enigmatic Reverend Jim Jones, who was he? The Indiana-born Jones, a former community organizer, was a committed Marxist since at least the age of 18. His idol was Mao Tse-tung.”

    We recommend Shiva Naipaul’s Journey to Nowhere - the definitive text on Jonestown - “universal mental retardation”. Our data points are tight, baby. Are yours?

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/...nes-j-delgado/

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby1968 View Post
    It was actually Flavor Aid.

    “As for the enigmatic Reverend Jim Jones, who was he? The Indiana-born Jones, a former community organizer, was a committed Marxist since at least the age of 18. His idol was Mao Tse-tung.”

    We recommend Shiva Naipaul’s Journey to Nowhere - the definitive text on Jonestown - “universal mental retardation”. Our data points are tight, baby. Are yours?

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/...nes-j-delgado/
    You have a great grasp of facts but little grasp of interpretation. You're caught on semantics but lack central thesis to your arguments.

    It's sort of like talking to someone who doesn't know the difference between apples and oranges.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •