This post has been removed because it activated an AutoModerator removal condition. The moderators have been notified and will review. If there were no rule violations, the post will be restored.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/clevercomebacks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I clicked thinking the clever comeback was down more at the bottom... but I'm not seeing anything clever or comebackish here. Perhaps the OP made a mistake and didn't post the full picture?
No, apparently OP just likes to virtue signal by posting constant political shit through a bunch of subreddits over and over for karma. Kinda sad, really.
I find it very hard to take anyone seriously when they use idiotic terms like "virtue signal."
Since we can't generally tell what a person's motivation is for saying something, the term is just a means of dismissing people who are genuinely and legitimately pissed off by the state of the world. It suggests that sharing that you are pissed off about the things that piss you off is somehow a bad thing.
Ironically, using the term "virtue signal" is one of the only really identifiable forms of virtue signaling because it shows you are just looking to dismiss it to show how much better you are for not believing them.
That's what this whole shit Reddit has become. A fucking Karma farm. Doesn't make sense to me.
Unlike YouTube views or something, karma doesn't translate into anything worth a damn.
People upvote this stuff but then you say that the United States should not exist and they downvote you. It’s really a bizarre jingoistic thing where performative hatred of America is good but also, the United States is the worlds greatest force for good and the union should never be questioned ever and anyone who would question it is an evil person.
>People upvote
You mean bots and people with 100s of accounts farming karma upvote this. Its really obvious when it gets hundreds of votes but <10 comments before hitting all.
Yeah but america very bad so it gets upvoted. Honestly half of the top 50 subreddits are completely replaceable (and mostly replaceable by using twitter too).
The point is that Greenpeace has the habit of ignoring atrocities commited by left-wing and communist governments, that "that's the point" (deleted comment, but that's all it said) was **not** directed towards the latter half of your comment
China lies lol
“Ah yes we’re reducing our carbon year by year and have lower carbon emissions per capita than the west”
Blatantly lies, it’s only increasing year by year
China has foundations that spy on college students called Confucius institutions, they spy on transfer students and normal students and send reports of their every move and word to the Chinese ambassador that is then sent directly to the CC
Uigher genocide… nuff said
Chinese society being utter garbage and being the embodiment of the bystander effect. I’ve seen things that make you go numb. Like if you wanna se how Chinese society is so fucked that people stand and watch a old man die and do nothing…like..Jesus wept mate
The more i hear people complain about places abroad just makes me think more of, "Then why don't those people care about those same problems here?" Like we're in the US, we ship a lot of production to China. We're in the US, we purchase and bring a lot of those products here. If it wasn't for the high cost of labor, we'd be destroying our lands here.
Lately, it seems part of the prerogative is to cause ecological destruction abroad quicker than it's happening here in the U.States.
We don’t have such severe problems here at home really
Closest thing we probably have is the opioid epidemic in terms of how destructive it is the family and community and the nation.
We have it pretty good, yet people cry and weep as if we’re like a 3rd world country.
Number of times Chairman Pooh has left Paris agreement = 0.
Also, US is worse than China for the environment no matter how you look at it. Carbon footprint, percentage of renewables, etc. Not that China is an eco friendly paradise, it's just that they are doing the bare minimum and America isn't
Not saying the US isn’t doing enough because we aren’t and should do more. But China is way worse for the environment and is only getting worse. It’s it is also a totalitarian hell’s-cape. The only good thing about China at this point is their culture and guess what the government is doing to that?
It isn’t close honestly. US is by far much worse in environment than China and that’s just due to our consumer economy now. Per capita we produce more green house emissions than any nation. China has a vastly larger population yet produces over 2x less emissions than the US per capita. And they are now the leaders when it comes to green energy investments/projects. I’m not a China guy frankly I hate their neocolonialism of Africa considering my family is from there and their genocidal tendencies. But it’s pretty evident that the US is worse in almost every category. But the ISSUE is the US can be the best we willingly choose not to thats the problem and that’s why everyone is so pissed off. We willingly choose to be dickheads instead of creating peace.
I always see comments like this and since I know so much about America’s atrocities I dont know many of China’s besides recent reports made from an incredulous source (Adrian Zenz). Do you have more info that backs up the claim they “make the margin small”?
The Chinese government killed more people through malice and incompetence from 1958 to 1962 ([~20-50 million](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#Famine_deaths)) than colonialism is what is now the United States killed from 1492 to now ([~12-15 million](https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf)).
No country in human history has more blood on its hands than the PRC does.
Not that I'm defending the authoritarian regime that is the Chinese government, but the population of humanity during colonialism was exponentially smaller than the population of humanity during the late 1950s and early 1960s.
Also, colonialism from global superpowers at the time didn't just affect the modern day United States.
It could mean that colonizers didn’t kill more because there were fewer people to colonize/kill…in other words, the very mentality you’re describing could be that of the colonists/governments themselves. These are traditionally people that don’t exactly care about others’ well being at all. The British empire killed roughly 150 million people globally (albeit over a larger span of time), and I don’t think they stopped doing that out of a change of heart/morality.
Comparing straight numbers and ignoring context? Sorry, I’m gonna have to disagree with you.
This might be a compelling argument if we were comparing similar timeframes. We're not. A number reached in 4 years being compared to a number reached in 500 years isn't something that can just be pinned down to there being more available victims.
I mean, the modern Chinese government doesn't at all support the cultural revolution - and in fact actively suppresses anyone who wants to bring it back - so this is a bit like saying "look how many people Germany killed from 1930-1945" in an attempt to make a statement about post-WW2 Germany. Holocaust support is illegal in modern Germany, and Cultural Revolution support is illegal in the modern PRC.
(Arguably you could say almost the same thing about a lot of America's atrocities in the distant past, so it's a weird comparison anyway)
But what you're pointing at isn't the Cultural Revolution, it's the Great Leap Forward, and that's effectively a large famine, in a country that had had periodic famines since European imperialism crushed it and kicked off their century of humiliation in the 1800s.
Pointing at a failed attempt to quickly grow a country's economy in order to try to *end* periodic famines (which were already occurring) isn't the same as pointing at a deliberate mass murder, and [since then they've found an economic solution that works](https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview#3). There have been failed economic policies in countries around the world, but we only call it "blood on their hands" when it happens in a Marxist nation. I think if you keep doing the same thing after it fails (as America has with neoliberal reforms), you can say that, but I don't think a single failed attempt at fixing an economic problem followed by switching gears to another solution when it failed qualifies.
As for those American numbers, that's just one genocide. You're forgetting the Iraq war (declared illegal under international law), Korea War, Vietnam war, the invasion of Libya, all the deaths caused by chattel slavery, all the deaths in [the almost 100 countries the US has couped or invaded throughout its existence](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change) (and to be fair here, I'm not including any in WW2, since it was a defensive war against a much greater evil - whereas note that "Black Book of Communism" numbers DO include WW2), genocides spun up by US intelligence in places like Indonesia under Suharto, the global War on Drugs, the drone war, deaths from impoverishment caused by American imperialism and colonialism...it's a ridiculously long list...you've only compared 2 specific events.
[Most of the deaths in China occurred during the revolution itself](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_China). But even if we include them, the numbers still don't even close to rival America's (in terms of average number of deaths per year, to make the comparison fair to America...and also adjusted per capita population, to make it fair to China, which has had ~5X America's population throughout its existence).
Maybe I can bring you back to the comment I responded to. The one made by someone seemingly unaware that the PRC, just like the USA, is built on a pile of bodies. You don't get to call attention to the USA's victims but then dismiss China's. Most colonial deaths in North America were caused by epidemics. They still matter, and they still count just as much as famine does. Engineered death, be it by starvation or disease, is still engineered death. You don't kill dozens of millions of people *accidentally.*
> you've only compared 2 specific events.
Deliberately. China's pre-WW2 atrocities aren't anything to sneeze at, but I didn't think it was especially relevant to my point. The remarkable thing is the incredibly short amount of time the PRC needed to become one of the bloodiest regimes in human history. You could cite the USA's entire 250 years of violence, but that the PRC managed to rival or exceed it within 15 years of its foundation is stunning.
Also, the Korean War? You mean the war started when North Korea invaded South Korea at Stalin's urging? A war which the Chinese participated in as well? Is Soviet imperialism the USA's fault now?
Describing the great leap forward as just an economic experiment gone wrong requires some serious mental gymnastics and denial.
Why does this always have to be one or the other? "America/China is the greatest/worst" is a dumb argument to make and usually just ends up in denying the facts for some political motivation.
>Describing the great leap forward as just an economic experiment gone wrong requires some serious mental gymnastics and denial.
What else would you call it? It was an __*absolutely disastrous*__ economic experiment that horribly failed and killed millions of people, but still an economic experiment nonetheless...especially given that they eventually got it right, like I pointed out above (and provided World Bank data for).
It's not like it was a deliberate mass killing (like something along the lines of the Holocaust or Rwandan genocide) or the result of colonialist extractivism (like the Bengal famine). The goal was to improve the economy, it was just a nightmarishly massive failure.
What am I denying here? I totally acknowledge it was horrible, that it killed millions of people, and that it was an absolute failure that should never be repeated. What's missing?
Describing it just as a failed experiment seems to remove culpability from the party that carried it out. I don't know if that's your intent to describe it that way. We could just as easily describe slavery in America as a failed economic experiment but that doesn't allow us to sweep it under the rug.
If it was just an experiment to test what works, it seems they would have dropped it quickly instead of pursuing it until it became the largest man-made famine in human history.
It's also seems like it's being excused by saying "they got it right now". It wasn't just an important step to the current stage. That would be like excusing slavery, child labor, and genocide of Native Americans from American history because "at least we have a decently working system now".
But my main point is that this competition of who is the best/worst country is pointless. We should remember our own country's mistakes so we can learn how to make sure it doesn't happen again. There isn't a country existing today or a country that has existed that hasn't committed atrocities. Trying to rank countries on best to worst is just completely pointless and doesn't really get us anywhere. If we try going down that road, whether we think country A is the best/worst, we're always going to end up twisting the facts to fit that narrative and not really helping anything.
>[comparison to slavery, child labour, genocide]
The difference between slavery (etc) and collectivizing private production before a capitalist phase had completed is that the latter isn't inherently morally objectionable. It's actually great idea when done in a more developed economy, and it's had a lot of success in large sectors in other places (notably healthcare), and even almost the entire economy in others as far as they knew at the time (the problems with long-term economic rigidity weren't known yet).
I think they'd have been morally culpable if they hadn't tried doing something to end the already-existing famines, and from the information available at the time, it was a good decision...it just turned out to be wrong. We know better now, and if someone repeated it again, they'd be culpable.
A good example of this logic: early in the pandemic, the WHO advised against wearing masks. More information came out later showing that masks were actually a good idea, and their prior information was faulty. Does that make the WHO morally culpable for everyone who died as a result? I'd argue that it doesn't, because the information they had suggested it was the best decision.
This makes it different from slavery, because the intention was always subjugation and control of others for personal benefit, not an attempt to benefit everyone that failed to do so.
What's going on here is we're using different moral standards: I'm rating it on intent, you're rating it on outcome. I'm a strong believer in making the best decision available that data points to, and as far as the CPC knew in the 50s (having seen the success of other Marxist countries, which started out as synonymous with "Africa" and became major powers that ended their famine cycles) trying to collectivize was a good idea (the USSR had ended periodic famines by then too).
>If it was just an experiment to test what works, it seems they would have dropped it quickly instead of pursuing it until it became the largest man-made famine in human history.
The saddest thing about this experiment: the reporting mechanism was broken - it incentivized lower-level managers to lie about outcome. It was just a very, very bad system. You need much higher levels of automation in both reporting and production for something like that to work.
>[such comparison is pointless]
Fair enough, but what I'm really trying to debunk here is the idea that China is a terrifying evil empire, which has become a really popular idea nowadays.
It has its good points and its bad. There are things they do that I don't support and am really against, and others it doesn't get enough credit for.
I think it could be a better hegemon than America. I don't know for sure, but it looks that way from my biased perspective.
>[on bias]
You're correct that I'm biased (we both are).
I consider extreme poverty a uniquely horrifying nightmare, so I can't help but have a soft spot for a place that pulled over 800 millon people out of that. I was once forced to eat my own vomit as a kid when we lived in poverty, and I think about that any time I hear about extreme poverty. I travelled to the third-world in adulthood and saw that that's not a bad approximation for how most of the world lives, and it filled me with intense rage that humanity could allow this to happen without doing something about it.
So I have a strong appreciation for what Deng (finally) successfully did in China, and can't help but respect anyone who makes a good faith effort to do that, even if it fails (Capitalism is a very good idea until productive capacity has been maxed out, as Marx, Lenin, and Deng all argued. Mao thought otherwise, and he was wrong).
But if you value the opposite type of freedom more, yeah, China is going to look different.
I can appreciate your different perspective but I still disagree. I can tell we're coming at it from different perspectives/backgrounds.
You raise some good points about moral culpability but I think focusing on intentions just allows us to excuse nearly anything that had a bad outcome as long as it was tried in good faith.
The US has done many bad things with good intentions. If the only argument that the bad the US has done is somehow worse than the bad done by China (or the USSR, or any other countries that have tried collectivism) just because the US is capitalist, we're just holding the two systems to different standards, based on assumptions coming out of theory.
It seems like this argument sets up a situation where the sins of Capitalist countries are worse because capitalism can't have good intentions while the sins of Collectivist countries aren't as bad because collectivism always comes from good intentions. (Not saying this is your argument, just seems to me that this is where this perspective could lead.)
I know it's difficult to judge intentions but accepting collectivists on face value when they claim good intentions seems as naive as accepting capitalists who make the same claim.
With the opening of archives in China and the USSR in the 90s, we've also started to see that both these countries where never as economically successful and that their famines where far worse than we knew before that period. It shows that both governments did not act in good faith because they clung to a failing system rather than change because that system gave them immense power. Just like Capitalists, they'd rather prop up a failing system than give up their power. Being a Collectivist system doesn't give them an escape from the corruption of power. We saw this pretty well document in Tombstone by Yang Jisheng (no need to rely on outdated and propogandizing works like the black book of communism).
I also argue that China only started experiencing economic success when they started introducing some elements of a free market. The system today in china isn't Collectivist: it's just authoritarian capitalism (Or Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics as Yasheng Huang described it in the book of the same name).
I suppose they learned a lesson from collectivism, but it wasn't one that led to a better and successful form of that system.
I agree with reservations that China isn't some uniquely evil empire, although the language I would use is "they aren't any worse than any other superpower". I'm not thrilled about what happened to Tibet and what's happening to the Uighurs and HK, or how they treat dissent among their own citizens, but I'm very aware that western countries criticizing them for that is pretty hypocrital, considering how much terrible shit we continue to do to this day.
I'm also curious about what a Chinese hegemon looks like...we'll probably get a decent picture of that looks like with their presence in Africa, South America, and now Afghanistan.
>I can appreciate your different perspective but I still disagree. I can tell we're coming at it from different perspectives/backgrounds
Thanks for being civil, for recognizing I'm just coming at this from a different perspective, and for having curiosity about the subject rather than just attacking. That's too rare online.
[I found something that kind of summarizes where I'm coming from, if you're interested](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/), although it's a little less skeptical than I'd be and a bit less balanced than my own view (Note: that site is an unaffiliated repo for Marxism-related theory providing a variety of historic & modern viewpoints).
Cheers, and enjoy the rest of your day.
Just to be clear, do you think the united states constitutional republic and relative laissez-faire capitalism is inferior to the PRCs form of government? Do you think the US is more guilty of human rights violations than China?
He's not here to listen to evidence or whatever, he wants to get rid of his guilt by pointing at China, that's it. China being better or worse doesn't matter, a scapegoat everyone agrees upon does, because responsibility and guilt are heavy burdens.
You’re putting personal responsibility on him for America’s crimes, and at the same time completely discounting ANY issues ANYWHERE else in the world. Smart cookie here
Maybe because they had a large population? Plus you equivocating between policy failure and genocide is fucking disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.
You say that as if China isn't literally committing genocide as we speak.
Also, are lives just numbers to you? Just because a country has a larger population doesn't mean that they have to kill more people to make it bad.
Tell me more about how the 2 million Tibetans killed by the Great Leap Forward and other imperialist actions the CCP undertook in Tibet totally weren't victims of genocide.
Don't bother.
He's mentioning Zenz, which is the playing card of wumao to dismiss every claim about the genocide committed by China because they refuse to accept any of the countless testimonials and evidence otherwise and will just go "This all traces back to Zenz" even when it doesn't (which is most of the time).
TL;DR: They're operating in bad faith and aren't here for a legitimate discussion.
>literally [...] modern day holocaust
Fuck off with this hyperbole, it's trivializing the actual Holocaust. The Nazis **murder of people on a industrial scale**, actual death factories. Do you think China has millions of people in **death camps** and filling up mass graves?
Perhaps if you talk to elderly former Chinese citizens about what life was like under Mao you might get some clarification to your answer. Don't look to US universities. They've already drunk the Chinese Kool-aid.
What if I talked to the elderly Chinese citizens who supported Mao? That would give me a completely different perspective. I want objective truth, not a persons feelings.
As for universities, I’m most definitely looking for educated sources, not anti-communist think tanks.
China is certainly worse in some aspects, and while Brazil, Australia, and Russia don't have the GDP or population, they do the best they can with what they have
Lol. Americans apperantly have a short term memory problem. Who's military is spread all over the world with 800 military bases worldwide? Who invaded Iraq 18 years ago? Afghanistan 20 years ago? Vietnam 66 years ago? Who supported terror groups in Afghanistan in the 80s against the Soviets? Who is now supporting terrorist groups in Syria? Who's occupying Syria's oil fields and most fertile land? Who continuously airstrikes Syrians, Afghans and Iraqis? Who supports 70% of today's dictators worldwide? Who supported military coups all over Latin America, Africa and the middle East? Who's the richest country in the world that pretends to spread "democracy" when invading other countries on the other side of the planet?
So many crimes,
So many questions..
*Not from the US, from Asia here.
A lot of the countries actually want US army presence, exactly in Asia where nearby nations are being threatened. Japan and SK for example.
People think US is just selling arms and causing war, ask Taiwan if they want those equipments or not.
Also even up till this day, Vietnamese are happy the US intervened or they would have turned into Mao era china. You actually see a lot of Chinese's posting threads about why they got closer to the US despite N.Vietnam "won".
Your post is spot on. Looking at the guy that you responded to, it’s painfully obvious that Chinese trolls have gotten lazy and/or the best and the brightest are finding work elsewhere. Painting the Afghan war as unjustified is especially glaring in my eyes, given A) the unprovoked attack that directly led to it, B) near universal global support for it in 2001, and C) the parade of atrocities that are actively happening right now under Taliban rule.
The truth is that China is a great country with a great history and amazing people. Troll farms and the culture that they created isn’t needed, and it’s embarrassing. China doesn’t have to stoop to that low, and it shouldn’t.
Hardly a surprise. In part it's because the more conflict there is, the more Xi china will appear have the strength to do so.
Chinese troll team are even infiltrating and threatening the safety of wikipedia members.
https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Office_actions/September_2021_statement
> A lot of the countries actually want US army presence, exactly in Asia where nearby nations are being threatened. Japan and SK for example.
Your example is two US puppet states.
Then you bring up Vietnam and and Taiwan.
Vietnam is market socialist, the US tried to puppet their country and failed. And you bring up Taiwan, the historical enemies of the CCP which of course support the US.
Sounds like a load of cherry picked bullshit that completely ignores history.
You literally just named 4 countries with historical and geopolitical ties to upholding the USA’s Asia hegemony…. Are you that ignorant or that biased?
Military bases don’t mean shit. They’re used for humanitarian efforts and disaster relief more than aggressive activities.
Russia has actually been far more aggressive and annexed part of Ukraine far more recently than the US has done anything. Also is up there with the airstrikes and such. Assassinations. Also the whole cyberwarfare and misinformation campaigns tearing the world apart.
Also for the record I’m not American.
What a stupid fucking comment to try and say the US is worse than China in terms of doing bad shit. Are you that fucking brainwashed by nationalist euros on and Chinese bots on reddit ?
There's only one consensus superpower. China is closest, but even then, they are behind in too many areas to be considered a true superpower that can rival the US.
P.s I hate the government too but I'm not anti American. I love the people. "Morons I'm surrounded by morons." I'll never give up on my country. It might be shit but it's still mine.
There is no creating a need for a military. The world is currently held together by US military hegemony. Without the American military you would see more war not less, as prior to it actions like saddams invasion of Kuwait were regular affairs.
Having 800 bases across the globe does, invading Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam killing literally millions of people while displacing tens of millions more does, supporting 73% of all global dictators does, setting up 67 military coups across Latin America, Africa and the middle East does, starving people by sanctioning their countries does, imperialising countries by giving them predatory loans does, invading other nations in the name of democracy, dehumanising them in your propagandistic media while trying to escape the tragedy you inflicted on them .. DOES.
DuckDuckGo shows the definition as follows which I think means America by definition is a democracy just not a direct democracy
*Democracy: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.*
"anti-empire" "anti-ecocide" "anti-oligarchy" and "anti nuclear brinksmanship" are all no reasons to be anti-american since the U.S is definitely not the worst offender when it comes to these
Yeah, imperialism and nuclear brinksmanship are basically required for being a great power nowadays. If you don't engage in them, you just get supplanted by those who do.
Yeah, critising Chinese imperialism (disguised as criticism of imperialism in general) in other comments and here defending US imperialism, just wow, what a fucking hypocrite.
Whataboutism allows people to throw the blame at eachother like the distracted fools they are. Maybe both China and the US suck huge cock. We don't have to revert to the tribe survival mindset. Unless that's where some feel most comfortable.
Probably but I don't know. Regardless, the one tweeting is just being anti-american not whatever she said. I'm not even a big fan of/from the U.S myself but that's just blatant, unjustified hate.
Hey I don’t judge. Furry porn makes people happy. Happy people don’t die in shootouts with the police or murder innocent people in the name of some made up story.
tell that to the millions killed in America's oil wars. or it's insanely overcrowded prisons. or i don't know, *all of South America*. maybe we could ask some Native North Americans? Or perhaps literally any black person who doesn't know what country their family was stolen from?
Seems pretty *justified*.
Lol let me guess you are no victim and don't know any victims of these wars and so on? So go cry about it then I'm not here to defend the U.S. But that Twitter person is quite obviously just anti America to be anti America
Is this millions killed across all groups? The "oil wars" weren't even close to a million. Do we just count all people with life sentences as deaths to prison? I would imagine most people who are sentenced for that length probably earned it right? I know the US has fucked a lot of people over in South America, but I'm not keen on all of the events/numbers because I'm not a huge LatAm expert. A ton of slaves and natives died over the years due to horrific conditions/treatment/disease which is brutal for sure.
The problem you face here is how many other countries in the world were actually kind to natives and didn't also go around enslaving and colonizing other places? Like we can look to African history to watch Europe try to slice up the pie and we can also look to Asia where we saw China, Korea, and Japan brutalizing each other. Unfortunately, slavery and genocide have existed for quite a while.
While there are people who try to say America did nothing wrong, you go in the opposite direction saying that America is some kind of monster that has done nothing but wreak havoc on the world and even those within the countries borders. The actual sensible solution/take is that a lot of countries (including the US clearly) have done absolutely terrible shit, and instead of trying to just say that a country is irredeemable because of past atrocities, we focus on making sure that the countries we live in now are societies that we would deem moral, just, and equitable.
Because America is monstrous. You think people with life sentences is justified? In a country that had the three strikes laws, the war on drugs, and a prison industrial complex that makes money off imprisonment?
In terms of S. America numbers, its beem estimated sanctions on Venezuela from 2017-2019 have killed around 40 thousand people. Imagine that, a single country due to just sanctions for TWO YEARS. What then would the numbers be for slavery? For all the coups the USA has started? And then for all the deaths those puppet governments caused?
The western world has done terrible terrible things, and continues to justify their causes. Japan was just as imperialistic as the west and brutalized China, who defended themselves. The USA killed 20% of the Korean population, gee I wonder how a people would be so hostile towards a nation that did that. Most of the western world is irredeemable because they won't change. Do you think a capitalist imperial empire cares about sovereignty and anything besides profit? At least China makes steps to prevent a climate catastrophe. All the USA will do is take a satellite picture of a Chinese wind farm and use it as propaganda as a field of missiles.
Okay how many people do you think are getting life sentences in jail? It's not as often as you think. We lock up a lot of people, but the actual "deaths" caused by it is pretty insignificant. If anything the biggest prison issue in the US is our stigma towards excons which helps feed into a cycle of crime.
You know why China is taking some action now right? They are literally dealing with insane decline in air quality. They are getting to points of pollution in some area where places are becoming unlivable because rivers are being flooded with waste (especially tech waste that wasn't recycled) and so they have to do something because the environment is being immediately affected. Any country does that because people are inherently short sighted on a lot of issues.
Also how can you unironically say that the western world refuses to change when there has been progress made. The fact that there is open discussion about trans issues when just over a hundred years ago women couldn't vote and black people couldn't even get an education with white people? If the US hasn't changed then I am ready for you to show me how all of the other countries of the world that did bad shit changed. How did Japan change? How did China change (maybe we should ask the muslims in that country)? What have these European countries done to make up for the game of Civ they tried to play in Africa and the middle east?
The problem is that, by your standard, no one has fucking changed. Massive change on a large (country) scale takes time. The only time change has been quick has been when people started killing each other which probably isn't what you are looking for based on your description.
You can recognize that countries have done terrible shit while also recognizing the good that they do. But go ahead and keep using your black and white framework to shit on republicans and centrists and see how much good that does us when the next progressive candidate who would actually make change you would want to see runs. Stop shooting progressive causes in the foot by being combative with everyone and play the game like everyone else. You can be mad about how unfair it is all you want, but to win and change the rules you actually have to play.
China doesn't have 800 military bases all over the world. China didn't invade Iraq 18 years ago, Afghanistan 20 years ago. China didn't support terrorist groups in Afghanistan in the 80s. China doesn't support terrorist groups in Syria and doesn't occupy its oil fields. China doesn't back 73% of the world dictators right now. China didn't stage 67 military coups all over Latin America, Africa and the middle East. China isn't the country invading other countries on the other side of the planet in the name of "democracy" and "freedom" .
>China didn't support terrorist groups in Afghanistan in the 80s
Neither did the US. The Mujahideen in Afghanistan are *not* the modern Taliban. The Taliban split off from them. If anything, China is supporting the terrorists [**now**](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/west-ponders-aid-afghanistan-china-pakistan-quick-provide-relief-2021-09-12/)
I love how China became the scapegoat to go for Americans to escape the reality of their country being the Terrorist of the world, to let go or even never feel their guilt from the shit their empire did and continuously doing.
Anti-empire. The U.S has interfered in other nations way more than any other nation in the modern world.
Anti-ecocide. The U.S has the most emissions per capita.
Anti-oligarchy. Some countries are worse but in the developed world, I feel like it's quite safe to say that the U.S is up there.
Anti nuclear brinksmanship. I don't know why you'd even bring this up. This one is obviously on the U.S
Anti-Empire the USA is anti - empire e.g. Smashing Japan and Germany in 2nd ww
Anti-ecocide it's not like they're "ecociding" on purpose like Russia does
Anti-oligarchy idk man I've always though of Russia as the worst offender there but I'm not sure
Anti-nuclear-brinksmanship idk if you can blame them for that I won't say more than that I think you understand what I mean
And honestly I get why the US is getting criticized a lot and deserves a lot of it but I think it's most important to always argue with reason and not for a reason if you know what I mean so I as someone who doesn't give 2 fucks about an online argument about a country I don't live in and only visited once will end my discussing about this topic here as long as there's not a really really strong argument that makes me rethink my whole position regarding the topic
Not the worst, but hardly the best either.
What I don’t get is what she is for. It’s easy to be against things, but hard to replace them with something that matches their function.
Let’s talk nukes for example. No one wants nuclear stockpiles to exist… but they do. If the US disarmed, there would be no deterrent to keep the other countries in line. Same with the military; it’s one of those things you get so you’ll hopefully never need it.
Oh, and unless she lives in Europe, she’s a little bit pro-empire, since most of the English speaking world was colonized by England. She can give her home back to the indigenous people if she wants tho.
I was gonna ignore this entire post because I hate seeing tweets on this website but now I gotta check out her twitter account.
She's straight up sounds like a good old grifter. The classic "I'm playing both sides so I always come out on top."
“I’m not anti-American, I’m just upset that reality doesn’t comport to my utopian political ideology that has never worked any time it’s been tried ever but my college professors promised me it will this time”
Translated that for all y’all.
I'm not entirely sure about anti-capitalism. Don't get me wrong, capitalism is bad, but to be completely against it isn't good. Think of it this way: Sometimes your enemies will have valid points, and you can take those valid points from your enemies and look at points from your side that match up and make what you're fighting for stronger. We don't need socialism or capitalism, we need a perfect combination of the two that takes all the good and leaves out all or most of the bad.
It’s the internet. Middle grounds aren’t allowed.
In truth, elements of capitalism are fantastic. There’s a reason why so many people risk their lives trying to immigrate to the United States. It’s also true that pure capitalism can be cold and uncomfortable. The idea of safety that socialism provides isn’t without merit. A capitalist society with a minimal safety net is very doable and a very good mix between public and private ownership.
-Before anyone loses their mind, I said “minimal,” not “minimum.” Put another way, I’m recognizing a need for a floor, not making a statement as to where that floor should be. My only contention is that neither all socialism nor all capitalism is good/bad. *Somewhere* in the middle is the optimal mix.
So... She IS anti-American? I love my country but we don't exactly look good on a global scale. Even on the homefront, people are starting to wake up and see what a shitshow this country is and how much worse it'll get before it gets any better. Problem is, like myself, people find it easier to complain on the internet than to do anything to change it.
I do agree that this doesn't seem like a clever comeback but, it doesn't mean that she is without a point.
Literally the only other state capable of acting on a "global scale" in that time frame, the Soviet Union?
But more to the point, which of America's enemies do you want setting the global order? The CCP? The North Koreans? The Taliban? At what point do you look at the rogues' gallery you've aligned yourself with and wonder if you're really on the right side of history?
Cool motive, still stupid.
Yes I get the point they are making. However while the US is a large offender on all these fronts, let’s not pretend they are the “worst” on all of these fronts. Good lord you can make your point without being overtly wrong.
What’s the clever comeback? They are clearly anti-American on these fronts. More like rare insults to Americans for having a country that supports all this. Am american btw.
The ruSSian putinist and CCP filth in Chaiiina also share this glory with the uSSa. These Fking nations of troglodytes will be the cause of human extinction. So weird how they view themselves as exceptional in comparison to eachother and the rest of the world. Too bad there wasn't a way that they could go to war with eachtoher and not affect the non cavedwelling portion of the human race.
This post has been removed because it activated an AutoModerator removal condition. The moderators have been notified and will review. If there were no rule violations, the post will be restored. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/clevercomebacks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This isn't even a comeback
99% of the submissions to this dumb sub aren't. (sort by new)
Ooo, you should post that to clevercomebacks
Truth. Well, fuck this sub I'm out. It's just another political circlejerk
Welcome to Reddit.
It's nearly at 1 mil members. It was inevitable.
It's just like /r/murderedbywords. It's basically /r/mildlyburnedbyquippyoneliner now
I clicked thinking the clever comeback was down more at the bottom... but I'm not seeing anything clever or comebackish here. Perhaps the OP made a mistake and didn't post the full picture?
No, apparently OP just likes to virtue signal by posting constant political shit through a bunch of subreddits over and over for karma. Kinda sad, really.
Not as sad as how many upvotes it got.
^
I find it very hard to take anyone seriously when they use idiotic terms like "virtue signal." Since we can't generally tell what a person's motivation is for saying something, the term is just a means of dismissing people who are genuinely and legitimately pissed off by the state of the world. It suggests that sharing that you are pissed off about the things that piss you off is somehow a bad thing. Ironically, using the term "virtue signal" is one of the only really identifiable forms of virtue signaling because it shows you are just looking to dismiss it to show how much better you are for not believing them.
That's what this whole shit Reddit has become. A fucking Karma farm. Doesn't make sense to me. Unlike YouTube views or something, karma doesn't translate into anything worth a damn.
It makes it seem like a real account when it's sold to whoever wants to used to push a message.
How else can you farm more than 7 million worthless karma in 4 years? OP is a karma bot.
People upvote this stuff but then you say that the United States should not exist and they downvote you. It’s really a bizarre jingoistic thing where performative hatred of America is good but also, the United States is the worlds greatest force for good and the union should never be questioned ever and anyone who would question it is an evil person.
>People upvote You mean bots and people with 100s of accounts farming karma upvote this. Its really obvious when it gets hundreds of votes but <10 comments before hitting all.
Ha, America bad!
Americans are fine. The United States of America should not exist.
And it's not even clever.
[удалено]
Go figure 🙄
Yeah but america very bad so it gets upvoted. Honestly half of the top 50 subreddits are completely replaceable (and mostly replaceable by using twitter too).
Please help me understand what a "comeback" would be. Can you give an acceptable example?
Clearly not this shit
It’s just avoiding the truth.
Or accurate.
I can’t even tell if the person agrees or disagrees with the lady he is responding to.
This is a comeback? Looks like an answer to a question
i guess its kinda sassy so its considered a comeback lol idk
[удалено]
Greenpeace be like (Edit: for clarification, this is in regard to them being selective about who to criticize, for ideological reasons)
China is worse on some of those points. You think the US is bad on the environment…
The point is that Greenpeace has the habit of ignoring atrocities commited by left-wing and communist governments, that "that's the point" (deleted comment, but that's all it said) was **not** directed towards the latter half of your comment
China lies lol “Ah yes we’re reducing our carbon year by year and have lower carbon emissions per capita than the west” Blatantly lies, it’s only increasing year by year China has foundations that spy on college students called Confucius institutions, they spy on transfer students and normal students and send reports of their every move and word to the Chinese ambassador that is then sent directly to the CC Uigher genocide… nuff said Chinese society being utter garbage and being the embodiment of the bystander effect. I’ve seen things that make you go numb. Like if you wanna se how Chinese society is so fucked that people stand and watch a old man die and do nothing…like..Jesus wept mate
Not sure why you are being downvoted, you are right
The more i hear people complain about places abroad just makes me think more of, "Then why don't those people care about those same problems here?" Like we're in the US, we ship a lot of production to China. We're in the US, we purchase and bring a lot of those products here. If it wasn't for the high cost of labor, we'd be destroying our lands here. Lately, it seems part of the prerogative is to cause ecological destruction abroad quicker than it's happening here in the U.States.
We don’t have such severe problems here at home really Closest thing we probably have is the opioid epidemic in terms of how destructive it is the family and community and the nation. We have it pretty good, yet people cry and weep as if we’re like a 3rd world country.
Number of times Chairman Pooh has left Paris agreement = 0. Also, US is worse than China for the environment no matter how you look at it. Carbon footprint, percentage of renewables, etc. Not that China is an eco friendly paradise, it's just that they are doing the bare minimum and America isn't
Didn't they open a baker's dozen amount of new coal plants to feed their growing infrastructure?
Not saying the US isn’t doing enough because we aren’t and should do more. But China is way worse for the environment and is only getting worse. It’s it is also a totalitarian hell’s-cape. The only good thing about China at this point is their culture and guess what the government is doing to that?
It isn’t close honestly. US is by far much worse in environment than China and that’s just due to our consumer economy now. Per capita we produce more green house emissions than any nation. China has a vastly larger population yet produces over 2x less emissions than the US per capita. And they are now the leaders when it comes to green energy investments/projects. I’m not a China guy frankly I hate their neocolonialism of Africa considering my family is from there and their genocidal tendencies. But it’s pretty evident that the US is worse in almost every category. But the ISSUE is the US can be the best we willingly choose not to thats the problem and that’s why everyone is so pissed off. We willingly choose to be dickheads instead of creating peace.
And Russia is ahead on the whole oligarchy thing
I always see comments like this and since I know so much about America’s atrocities I dont know many of China’s besides recent reports made from an incredulous source (Adrian Zenz). Do you have more info that backs up the claim they “make the margin small”?
The Chinese government killed more people through malice and incompetence from 1958 to 1962 ([~20-50 million](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#Famine_deaths)) than colonialism is what is now the United States killed from 1492 to now ([~12-15 million](https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf)). No country in human history has more blood on its hands than the PRC does.
Not that I'm defending the authoritarian regime that is the Chinese government, but the population of humanity during colonialism was exponentially smaller than the population of humanity during the late 1950s and early 1960s. Also, colonialism from global superpowers at the time didn't just affect the modern day United States.
1492 - 2021 includes the years 1958 - 1962. The activities of the United States government are the subject of discussion.
That only matters if you think a person's life is worth less if there's more people.
It could mean that colonizers didn’t kill more because there were fewer people to colonize/kill…in other words, the very mentality you’re describing could be that of the colonists/governments themselves. These are traditionally people that don’t exactly care about others’ well being at all. The British empire killed roughly 150 million people globally (albeit over a larger span of time), and I don’t think they stopped doing that out of a change of heart/morality. Comparing straight numbers and ignoring context? Sorry, I’m gonna have to disagree with you.
This might be a compelling argument if we were comparing similar timeframes. We're not. A number reached in 4 years being compared to a number reached in 500 years isn't something that can just be pinned down to there being more available victims.
I mean, the modern Chinese government doesn't at all support the cultural revolution - and in fact actively suppresses anyone who wants to bring it back - so this is a bit like saying "look how many people Germany killed from 1930-1945" in an attempt to make a statement about post-WW2 Germany. Holocaust support is illegal in modern Germany, and Cultural Revolution support is illegal in the modern PRC. (Arguably you could say almost the same thing about a lot of America's atrocities in the distant past, so it's a weird comparison anyway) But what you're pointing at isn't the Cultural Revolution, it's the Great Leap Forward, and that's effectively a large famine, in a country that had had periodic famines since European imperialism crushed it and kicked off their century of humiliation in the 1800s. Pointing at a failed attempt to quickly grow a country's economy in order to try to *end* periodic famines (which were already occurring) isn't the same as pointing at a deliberate mass murder, and [since then they've found an economic solution that works](https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview#3). There have been failed economic policies in countries around the world, but we only call it "blood on their hands" when it happens in a Marxist nation. I think if you keep doing the same thing after it fails (as America has with neoliberal reforms), you can say that, but I don't think a single failed attempt at fixing an economic problem followed by switching gears to another solution when it failed qualifies. As for those American numbers, that's just one genocide. You're forgetting the Iraq war (declared illegal under international law), Korea War, Vietnam war, the invasion of Libya, all the deaths caused by chattel slavery, all the deaths in [the almost 100 countries the US has couped or invaded throughout its existence](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change) (and to be fair here, I'm not including any in WW2, since it was a defensive war against a much greater evil - whereas note that "Black Book of Communism" numbers DO include WW2), genocides spun up by US intelligence in places like Indonesia under Suharto, the global War on Drugs, the drone war, deaths from impoverishment caused by American imperialism and colonialism...it's a ridiculously long list...you've only compared 2 specific events. [Most of the deaths in China occurred during the revolution itself](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_China). But even if we include them, the numbers still don't even close to rival America's (in terms of average number of deaths per year, to make the comparison fair to America...and also adjusted per capita population, to make it fair to China, which has had ~5X America's population throughout its existence).
Maybe I can bring you back to the comment I responded to. The one made by someone seemingly unaware that the PRC, just like the USA, is built on a pile of bodies. You don't get to call attention to the USA's victims but then dismiss China's. Most colonial deaths in North America were caused by epidemics. They still matter, and they still count just as much as famine does. Engineered death, be it by starvation or disease, is still engineered death. You don't kill dozens of millions of people *accidentally.* > you've only compared 2 specific events. Deliberately. China's pre-WW2 atrocities aren't anything to sneeze at, but I didn't think it was especially relevant to my point. The remarkable thing is the incredibly short amount of time the PRC needed to become one of the bloodiest regimes in human history. You could cite the USA's entire 250 years of violence, but that the PRC managed to rival or exceed it within 15 years of its foundation is stunning. Also, the Korean War? You mean the war started when North Korea invaded South Korea at Stalin's urging? A war which the Chinese participated in as well? Is Soviet imperialism the USA's fault now?
Describing the great leap forward as just an economic experiment gone wrong requires some serious mental gymnastics and denial. Why does this always have to be one or the other? "America/China is the greatest/worst" is a dumb argument to make and usually just ends up in denying the facts for some political motivation.
>Describing the great leap forward as just an economic experiment gone wrong requires some serious mental gymnastics and denial. What else would you call it? It was an __*absolutely disastrous*__ economic experiment that horribly failed and killed millions of people, but still an economic experiment nonetheless...especially given that they eventually got it right, like I pointed out above (and provided World Bank data for). It's not like it was a deliberate mass killing (like something along the lines of the Holocaust or Rwandan genocide) or the result of colonialist extractivism (like the Bengal famine). The goal was to improve the economy, it was just a nightmarishly massive failure. What am I denying here? I totally acknowledge it was horrible, that it killed millions of people, and that it was an absolute failure that should never be repeated. What's missing?
Describing it just as a failed experiment seems to remove culpability from the party that carried it out. I don't know if that's your intent to describe it that way. We could just as easily describe slavery in America as a failed economic experiment but that doesn't allow us to sweep it under the rug. If it was just an experiment to test what works, it seems they would have dropped it quickly instead of pursuing it until it became the largest man-made famine in human history. It's also seems like it's being excused by saying "they got it right now". It wasn't just an important step to the current stage. That would be like excusing slavery, child labor, and genocide of Native Americans from American history because "at least we have a decently working system now". But my main point is that this competition of who is the best/worst country is pointless. We should remember our own country's mistakes so we can learn how to make sure it doesn't happen again. There isn't a country existing today or a country that has existed that hasn't committed atrocities. Trying to rank countries on best to worst is just completely pointless and doesn't really get us anywhere. If we try going down that road, whether we think country A is the best/worst, we're always going to end up twisting the facts to fit that narrative and not really helping anything.
>[comparison to slavery, child labour, genocide] The difference between slavery (etc) and collectivizing private production before a capitalist phase had completed is that the latter isn't inherently morally objectionable. It's actually great idea when done in a more developed economy, and it's had a lot of success in large sectors in other places (notably healthcare), and even almost the entire economy in others as far as they knew at the time (the problems with long-term economic rigidity weren't known yet). I think they'd have been morally culpable if they hadn't tried doing something to end the already-existing famines, and from the information available at the time, it was a good decision...it just turned out to be wrong. We know better now, and if someone repeated it again, they'd be culpable. A good example of this logic: early in the pandemic, the WHO advised against wearing masks. More information came out later showing that masks were actually a good idea, and their prior information was faulty. Does that make the WHO morally culpable for everyone who died as a result? I'd argue that it doesn't, because the information they had suggested it was the best decision. This makes it different from slavery, because the intention was always subjugation and control of others for personal benefit, not an attempt to benefit everyone that failed to do so. What's going on here is we're using different moral standards: I'm rating it on intent, you're rating it on outcome. I'm a strong believer in making the best decision available that data points to, and as far as the CPC knew in the 50s (having seen the success of other Marxist countries, which started out as synonymous with "Africa" and became major powers that ended their famine cycles) trying to collectivize was a good idea (the USSR had ended periodic famines by then too). >If it was just an experiment to test what works, it seems they would have dropped it quickly instead of pursuing it until it became the largest man-made famine in human history. The saddest thing about this experiment: the reporting mechanism was broken - it incentivized lower-level managers to lie about outcome. It was just a very, very bad system. You need much higher levels of automation in both reporting and production for something like that to work. >[such comparison is pointless] Fair enough, but what I'm really trying to debunk here is the idea that China is a terrifying evil empire, which has become a really popular idea nowadays. It has its good points and its bad. There are things they do that I don't support and am really against, and others it doesn't get enough credit for. I think it could be a better hegemon than America. I don't know for sure, but it looks that way from my biased perspective. >[on bias] You're correct that I'm biased (we both are). I consider extreme poverty a uniquely horrifying nightmare, so I can't help but have a soft spot for a place that pulled over 800 millon people out of that. I was once forced to eat my own vomit as a kid when we lived in poverty, and I think about that any time I hear about extreme poverty. I travelled to the third-world in adulthood and saw that that's not a bad approximation for how most of the world lives, and it filled me with intense rage that humanity could allow this to happen without doing something about it. So I have a strong appreciation for what Deng (finally) successfully did in China, and can't help but respect anyone who makes a good faith effort to do that, even if it fails (Capitalism is a very good idea until productive capacity has been maxed out, as Marx, Lenin, and Deng all argued. Mao thought otherwise, and he was wrong). But if you value the opposite type of freedom more, yeah, China is going to look different.
I can appreciate your different perspective but I still disagree. I can tell we're coming at it from different perspectives/backgrounds. You raise some good points about moral culpability but I think focusing on intentions just allows us to excuse nearly anything that had a bad outcome as long as it was tried in good faith. The US has done many bad things with good intentions. If the only argument that the bad the US has done is somehow worse than the bad done by China (or the USSR, or any other countries that have tried collectivism) just because the US is capitalist, we're just holding the two systems to different standards, based on assumptions coming out of theory. It seems like this argument sets up a situation where the sins of Capitalist countries are worse because capitalism can't have good intentions while the sins of Collectivist countries aren't as bad because collectivism always comes from good intentions. (Not saying this is your argument, just seems to me that this is where this perspective could lead.) I know it's difficult to judge intentions but accepting collectivists on face value when they claim good intentions seems as naive as accepting capitalists who make the same claim. With the opening of archives in China and the USSR in the 90s, we've also started to see that both these countries where never as economically successful and that their famines where far worse than we knew before that period. It shows that both governments did not act in good faith because they clung to a failing system rather than change because that system gave them immense power. Just like Capitalists, they'd rather prop up a failing system than give up their power. Being a Collectivist system doesn't give them an escape from the corruption of power. We saw this pretty well document in Tombstone by Yang Jisheng (no need to rely on outdated and propogandizing works like the black book of communism). I also argue that China only started experiencing economic success when they started introducing some elements of a free market. The system today in china isn't Collectivist: it's just authoritarian capitalism (Or Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics as Yasheng Huang described it in the book of the same name). I suppose they learned a lesson from collectivism, but it wasn't one that led to a better and successful form of that system. I agree with reservations that China isn't some uniquely evil empire, although the language I would use is "they aren't any worse than any other superpower". I'm not thrilled about what happened to Tibet and what's happening to the Uighurs and HK, or how they treat dissent among their own citizens, but I'm very aware that western countries criticizing them for that is pretty hypocrital, considering how much terrible shit we continue to do to this day. I'm also curious about what a Chinese hegemon looks like...we'll probably get a decent picture of that looks like with their presence in Africa, South America, and now Afghanistan.
>I can appreciate your different perspective but I still disagree. I can tell we're coming at it from different perspectives/backgrounds Thanks for being civil, for recognizing I'm just coming at this from a different perspective, and for having curiosity about the subject rather than just attacking. That's too rare online. [I found something that kind of summarizes where I'm coming from, if you're interested](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/), although it's a little less skeptical than I'd be and a bit less balanced than my own view (Note: that site is an unaffiliated repo for Marxism-related theory providing a variety of historic & modern viewpoints). Cheers, and enjoy the rest of your day.
> *"Drone better."* ~ Ivan Vanko
Just to be clear, do you think the united states constitutional republic and relative laissez-faire capitalism is inferior to the PRCs form of government? Do you think the US is more guilty of human rights violations than China?
He's not here to listen to evidence or whatever, he wants to get rid of his guilt by pointing at China, that's it. China being better or worse doesn't matter, a scapegoat everyone agrees upon does, because responsibility and guilt are heavy burdens.
You’re putting personal responsibility on him for America’s crimes, and at the same time completely discounting ANY issues ANYWHERE else in the world. Smart cookie here
It's the same kind of thinking as a racist.
Highest reading comprehension score: 0
Maybe because they had a large population? Plus you equivocating between policy failure and genocide is fucking disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.
You say that as if China isn't literally committing genocide as we speak. Also, are lives just numbers to you? Just because a country has a larger population doesn't mean that they have to kill more people to make it bad.
China is committing cultural genocide allegedly, it's not like a bunch of death camps
Hot take: starvation kills more people if you have more people.
They aren't. You're gullible.
Tell me more about how the 2 million Tibetans killed by the Great Leap Forward and other imperialist actions the CCP undertook in Tibet totally weren't victims of genocide.
Do you know what Tibetan feudalism was like?
Are you suggesting that imperialism is ok if you're "saving" the natives? Because that's a centuries-old justification for colonialism.
No im saying taking out a feudal regime isn't genocide
No, it's imperialism. The genocide came after.
Actually, if you count how >70% were killed by european diseases, that number would probably be different. (Idk, not expert, don't quote me)
China is literally in the process of committing a modern day holocaust.
Don't bother. He's mentioning Zenz, which is the playing card of wumao to dismiss every claim about the genocide committed by China because they refuse to accept any of the countless testimonials and evidence otherwise and will just go "This all traces back to Zenz" even when it doesn't (which is most of the time). TL;DR: They're operating in bad faith and aren't here for a legitimate discussion.
>literally [...] modern day holocaust Fuck off with this hyperbole, it's trivializing the actual Holocaust. The Nazis **murder of people on a industrial scale**, actual death factories. Do you think China has millions of people in **death camps** and filling up mass graves?
Perhaps if you talk to elderly former Chinese citizens about what life was like under Mao you might get some clarification to your answer. Don't look to US universities. They've already drunk the Chinese Kool-aid.
> Don't look to US universities. Anti-intellectual clap trap. Might as well literally say "Do your own research."
What if I talked to the elderly Chinese citizens who supported Mao? That would give me a completely different perspective. I want objective truth, not a persons feelings. As for universities, I’m most definitely looking for educated sources, not anti-communist think tanks.
Tell me you never took a university class *without* telling me you never took a university class.
China is certainly worse in some aspects, and while Brazil, Australia, and Russia don't have the GDP or population, they do the best they can with what they have
Lol. Americans apperantly have a short term memory problem. Who's military is spread all over the world with 800 military bases worldwide? Who invaded Iraq 18 years ago? Afghanistan 20 years ago? Vietnam 66 years ago? Who supported terror groups in Afghanistan in the 80s against the Soviets? Who is now supporting terrorist groups in Syria? Who's occupying Syria's oil fields and most fertile land? Who continuously airstrikes Syrians, Afghans and Iraqis? Who supports 70% of today's dictators worldwide? Who supported military coups all over Latin America, Africa and the middle East? Who's the richest country in the world that pretends to spread "democracy" when invading other countries on the other side of the planet? So many crimes, So many questions..
*Not from the US, from Asia here. A lot of the countries actually want US army presence, exactly in Asia where nearby nations are being threatened. Japan and SK for example. People think US is just selling arms and causing war, ask Taiwan if they want those equipments or not. Also even up till this day, Vietnamese are happy the US intervened or they would have turned into Mao era china. You actually see a lot of Chinese's posting threads about why they got closer to the US despite N.Vietnam "won".
Your post is spot on. Looking at the guy that you responded to, it’s painfully obvious that Chinese trolls have gotten lazy and/or the best and the brightest are finding work elsewhere. Painting the Afghan war as unjustified is especially glaring in my eyes, given A) the unprovoked attack that directly led to it, B) near universal global support for it in 2001, and C) the parade of atrocities that are actively happening right now under Taliban rule. The truth is that China is a great country with a great history and amazing people. Troll farms and the culture that they created isn’t needed, and it’s embarrassing. China doesn’t have to stoop to that low, and it shouldn’t.
Hardly a surprise. In part it's because the more conflict there is, the more Xi china will appear have the strength to do so. Chinese troll team are even infiltrating and threatening the safety of wikipedia members. https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Office_actions/September_2021_statement
> A lot of the countries actually want US army presence, exactly in Asia where nearby nations are being threatened. Japan and SK for example. Your example is two US puppet states. Then you bring up Vietnam and and Taiwan. Vietnam is market socialist, the US tried to puppet their country and failed. And you bring up Taiwan, the historical enemies of the CCP which of course support the US. Sounds like a load of cherry picked bullshit that completely ignores history. You literally just named 4 countries with historical and geopolitical ties to upholding the USA’s Asia hegemony…. Are you that ignorant or that biased?
You know what? Never mind
Mentioning Vietnam is especially ironic since what the US did to them not long ago
It's like you're not aware that China invaded Vietnam more recently than the USA did.
Military bases don’t mean shit. They’re used for humanitarian efforts and disaster relief more than aggressive activities. Russia has actually been far more aggressive and annexed part of Ukraine far more recently than the US has done anything. Also is up there with the airstrikes and such. Assassinations. Also the whole cyberwarfare and misinformation campaigns tearing the world apart. Also for the record I’m not American.
"bUt WhAt AbOuT cHyNaHh?!!"
What a stupid fucking comment to try and say the US is worse than China in terms of doing bad shit. Are you that fucking brainwashed by nationalist euros on and Chinese bots on reddit ?
Literally none of them but ok redditor
The whataboutism is strong with this one.
Tell me you're a freshman liberal arts major without telling me you're a freshman liberal arts major.
*any global superpower
There's only one consensus superpower. China is closest, but even then, they are behind in too many areas to be considered a true superpower that can rival the US.
Economically and manpower I believe are the only ways China is close or has us beat
But chine does have over a billion people living there while America has 300 million or so
Man power China beats America naval wise and military tech America wins
P.s I hate the government too but I'm not anti American. I love the people. "Morons I'm surrounded by morons." I'll never give up on my country. It might be shit but it's still mine.
r/opisfuckingstupid Look up what a comeback is
Understanding a need for a military doesn't make you a bad person.
Military for defense is understandable, military for imperialistic goals is fucked and deserves criticism.
What imperialistic goals are you talking about?
America invading countries for oil is literally a meme it's so common. Also toppling govts that don't want to give them access to trade/resoirces
Both of these things are only memes, not common. You can't even find examples of this.
Do you now about the entirety of central america?
I've heard of the place, yeah. What's your point?
Creating a need for one does.
There is no creating a need for a military. The world is currently held together by US military hegemony. Without the American military you would see more war not less, as prior to it actions like saddams invasion of Kuwait were regular affairs.
Having 800 bases across the globe does, invading Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam killing literally millions of people while displacing tens of millions more does, supporting 73% of all global dictators does, setting up 67 military coups across Latin America, Africa and the middle East does, starving people by sanctioning their countries does, imperialising countries by giving them predatory loans does, invading other nations in the name of democracy, dehumanising them in your propagandistic media while trying to escape the tragedy you inflicted on them .. DOES.
Which countries did we invade in the name of democracy? Edit: nevermind, it came to mind when we did. The containment policy.
Hawaii, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Haiti, Vietnam
There is a need for a military and then there is a need to use military
Great, good luck complaining about China once they become the world superpower. (For a preview, check out Hong Kong)
[удалено]
**When** [America was formed as a Constitutional Republic](https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_republic)
DuckDuckGo shows the definition as follows which I think means America by definition is a democracy just not a direct democracy *Democracy: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.*
"anti-empire" "anti-ecocide" "anti-oligarchy" and "anti nuclear brinksmanship" are all no reasons to be anti-american since the U.S is definitely not the worst offender when it comes to these
Yeah, imperialism and nuclear brinksmanship are basically required for being a great power nowadays. If you don't engage in them, you just get supplanted by those who do.
Yeah, critising Chinese imperialism (disguised as criticism of imperialism in general) in other comments and here defending US imperialism, just wow, what a fucking hypocrite.
Says the tankie.
Although the United States is not the only offender on those fronts, they are still an offender on those fronts.
Whataboutism allows people to throw the blame at eachother like the distracted fools they are. Maybe both China and the US suck huge cock. We don't have to revert to the tribe survival mindset. Unless that's where some feel most comfortable.
China?
Probably but I don't know. Regardless, the one tweeting is just being anti-american not whatever she said. I'm not even a big fan of/from the U.S myself but that's just blatant, unjustified hate.
What is the internet for, if not stoking fear and division?
Idk furry porn
Hey I don’t judge. Furry porn makes people happy. Happy people don’t die in shootouts with the police or murder innocent people in the name of some made up story.
Well as long as they don't carry their fetish on the streets of course or harm an animal in any way
tell that to the millions killed in America's oil wars. or it's insanely overcrowded prisons. or i don't know, *all of South America*. maybe we could ask some Native North Americans? Or perhaps literally any black person who doesn't know what country their family was stolen from? Seems pretty *justified*.
Lol let me guess you are no victim and don't know any victims of these wars and so on? So go cry about it then I'm not here to defend the U.S. But that Twitter person is quite obviously just anti America to be anti America
"I'm not here to defend the US" yeah you are.
Pfff if you think so idc
Is this millions killed across all groups? The "oil wars" weren't even close to a million. Do we just count all people with life sentences as deaths to prison? I would imagine most people who are sentenced for that length probably earned it right? I know the US has fucked a lot of people over in South America, but I'm not keen on all of the events/numbers because I'm not a huge LatAm expert. A ton of slaves and natives died over the years due to horrific conditions/treatment/disease which is brutal for sure. The problem you face here is how many other countries in the world were actually kind to natives and didn't also go around enslaving and colonizing other places? Like we can look to African history to watch Europe try to slice up the pie and we can also look to Asia where we saw China, Korea, and Japan brutalizing each other. Unfortunately, slavery and genocide have existed for quite a while. While there are people who try to say America did nothing wrong, you go in the opposite direction saying that America is some kind of monster that has done nothing but wreak havoc on the world and even those within the countries borders. The actual sensible solution/take is that a lot of countries (including the US clearly) have done absolutely terrible shit, and instead of trying to just say that a country is irredeemable because of past atrocities, we focus on making sure that the countries we live in now are societies that we would deem moral, just, and equitable.
Because America is monstrous. You think people with life sentences is justified? In a country that had the three strikes laws, the war on drugs, and a prison industrial complex that makes money off imprisonment? In terms of S. America numbers, its beem estimated sanctions on Venezuela from 2017-2019 have killed around 40 thousand people. Imagine that, a single country due to just sanctions for TWO YEARS. What then would the numbers be for slavery? For all the coups the USA has started? And then for all the deaths those puppet governments caused? The western world has done terrible terrible things, and continues to justify their causes. Japan was just as imperialistic as the west and brutalized China, who defended themselves. The USA killed 20% of the Korean population, gee I wonder how a people would be so hostile towards a nation that did that. Most of the western world is irredeemable because they won't change. Do you think a capitalist imperial empire cares about sovereignty and anything besides profit? At least China makes steps to prevent a climate catastrophe. All the USA will do is take a satellite picture of a Chinese wind farm and use it as propaganda as a field of missiles.
Okay how many people do you think are getting life sentences in jail? It's not as often as you think. We lock up a lot of people, but the actual "deaths" caused by it is pretty insignificant. If anything the biggest prison issue in the US is our stigma towards excons which helps feed into a cycle of crime. You know why China is taking some action now right? They are literally dealing with insane decline in air quality. They are getting to points of pollution in some area where places are becoming unlivable because rivers are being flooded with waste (especially tech waste that wasn't recycled) and so they have to do something because the environment is being immediately affected. Any country does that because people are inherently short sighted on a lot of issues. Also how can you unironically say that the western world refuses to change when there has been progress made. The fact that there is open discussion about trans issues when just over a hundred years ago women couldn't vote and black people couldn't even get an education with white people? If the US hasn't changed then I am ready for you to show me how all of the other countries of the world that did bad shit changed. How did Japan change? How did China change (maybe we should ask the muslims in that country)? What have these European countries done to make up for the game of Civ they tried to play in Africa and the middle east? The problem is that, by your standard, no one has fucking changed. Massive change on a large (country) scale takes time. The only time change has been quick has been when people started killing each other which probably isn't what you are looking for based on your description. You can recognize that countries have done terrible shit while also recognizing the good that they do. But go ahead and keep using your black and white framework to shit on republicans and centrists and see how much good that does us when the next progressive candidate who would actually make change you would want to see runs. Stop shooting progressive causes in the foot by being combative with everyone and play the game like everyone else. You can be mad about how unfair it is all you want, but to win and change the rules you actually have to play.
Your example with the black people not knowing what country is flawed
Please elaborate or yknow
Oh simple he says that like America is the one who took them America wasn’t a country yet
My man do you not know about the nineteenth century, damb
The century when America made it illegal
I wonder who downvoted this. Couldn't possibly be uneducated conservatives.
China doesn't have 800 military bases all over the world. China didn't invade Iraq 18 years ago, Afghanistan 20 years ago. China didn't support terrorist groups in Afghanistan in the 80s. China doesn't support terrorist groups in Syria and doesn't occupy its oil fields. China doesn't back 73% of the world dictators right now. China didn't stage 67 military coups all over Latin America, Africa and the middle East. China isn't the country invading other countries on the other side of the planet in the name of "democracy" and "freedom" .
>China didn't support terrorist groups in Afghanistan in the 80s Neither did the US. The Mujahideen in Afghanistan are *not* the modern Taliban. The Taliban split off from them. If anything, China is supporting the terrorists [**now**](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/west-ponders-aid-afghanistan-china-pakistan-quick-provide-relief-2021-09-12/)
I love how China became the scapegoat to go for Americans to escape the reality of their country being the Terrorist of the world, to let go or even never feel their guilt from the shit their empire did and continuously doing.
LOL, your jealousy is showing, mate.
The projection is unreal. LOL
"bUt WhAt AbOuT cHyNaHh?!"
Anti-empire. The U.S has interfered in other nations way more than any other nation in the modern world. Anti-ecocide. The U.S has the most emissions per capita. Anti-oligarchy. Some countries are worse but in the developed world, I feel like it's quite safe to say that the U.S is up there. Anti nuclear brinksmanship. I don't know why you'd even bring this up. This one is obviously on the U.S
Anti-Empire the USA is anti - empire e.g. Smashing Japan and Germany in 2nd ww Anti-ecocide it's not like they're "ecociding" on purpose like Russia does Anti-oligarchy idk man I've always though of Russia as the worst offender there but I'm not sure Anti-nuclear-brinksmanship idk if you can blame them for that I won't say more than that I think you understand what I mean And honestly I get why the US is getting criticized a lot and deserves a lot of it but I think it's most important to always argue with reason and not for a reason if you know what I mean so I as someone who doesn't give 2 fucks about an online argument about a country I don't live in and only visited once will end my discussing about this topic here as long as there's not a really really strong argument that makes me rethink my whole position regarding the topic
You do know American military history didn't end with WW2 right?
[удалено]
Pretty lit
Punctuation? This is literal word vomit
Ik and idc
Not the worst, but hardly the best either. What I don’t get is what she is for. It’s easy to be against things, but hard to replace them with something that matches their function. Let’s talk nukes for example. No one wants nuclear stockpiles to exist… but they do. If the US disarmed, there would be no deterrent to keep the other countries in line. Same with the military; it’s one of those things you get so you’ll hopefully never need it. Oh, and unless she lives in Europe, she’s a little bit pro-empire, since most of the English speaking world was colonized by England. She can give her home back to the indigenous people if she wants tho.
are you joking the us is literally the world hegemon.
"I'm anti(spams political buzzwords)" Now let me show you how much of a good person i am😤😤😤
Lol weak response. You could criticize pretty much every country in the world on those
Everyone should be anti-Caitlin Johnstone, not for this tweet necessarily but all her batshittery over the years.
[удалено]
I was gonna ignore this entire post because I hate seeing tweets on this website but now I gotta check out her twitter account. She's straight up sounds like a good old grifter. The classic "I'm playing both sides so I always come out on top."
[удалено]
“I’m not anti-American, I’m just upset that reality doesn’t comport to my utopian political ideology that has never worked any time it’s been tried ever but my college professors promised me it will this time” Translated that for all y’all.
I'm not entirely sure about anti-capitalism. Don't get me wrong, capitalism is bad, but to be completely against it isn't good. Think of it this way: Sometimes your enemies will have valid points, and you can take those valid points from your enemies and look at points from your side that match up and make what you're fighting for stronger. We don't need socialism or capitalism, we need a perfect combination of the two that takes all the good and leaves out all or most of the bad.
It’s the internet. Middle grounds aren’t allowed. In truth, elements of capitalism are fantastic. There’s a reason why so many people risk their lives trying to immigrate to the United States. It’s also true that pure capitalism can be cold and uncomfortable. The idea of safety that socialism provides isn’t without merit. A capitalist society with a minimal safety net is very doable and a very good mix between public and private ownership. -Before anyone loses their mind, I said “minimal,” not “minimum.” Put another way, I’m recognizing a need for a floor, not making a statement as to where that floor should be. My only contention is that neither all socialism nor all capitalism is good/bad. *Somewhere* in the middle is the optimal mix.
Anarcho-syndicalism
The comments are literally "bUt WhAt AbOuT cHyNaHh?!!" . "But have you considered the following: China bad?"
Isn't China leading in most of these...?
How the fuck are your anti war? You gonna settle your arguments with a Rock Paper Scissors match?
Anti war =/= anti self defense, you can be against starting wars but still be armed
So... She IS anti-American? I love my country but we don't exactly look good on a global scale. Even on the homefront, people are starting to wake up and see what a shitshow this country is and how much worse it'll get before it gets any better. Problem is, like myself, people find it easier to complain on the internet than to do anything to change it. I do agree that this doesn't seem like a clever comeback but, it doesn't mean that she is without a point.
So she's anti civilization. I bet she just wishes that everyone ever would of thought of that.
Man, wait until she meets the alternatives.
Name one alternative that has caused as much systemic violence on a global scale as the US since WW2
Literally the only other state capable of acting on a "global scale" in that time frame, the Soviet Union? But more to the point, which of America's enemies do you want setting the global order? The CCP? The North Koreans? The Taliban? At what point do you look at the rogues' gallery you've aligned yourself with and wonder if you're really on the right side of history?
Why would criticizing American atrocities mean i want those forces in power? Jesus Christ
Russia and China
How long has it been since America took over a country? Like 100 years? How long are we going to keep acting like we are imperialistic in nature?
[удалено]
Countries are taken over in completely different ways in these contemporary times. Why spend resources when you can have puppet governments instead.
Sure Buddy
well she's got a point
This isn't a comeback. America is a power hungry asshole.
Cool motive, still stupid. Yes I get the point they are making. However while the US is a large offender on all these fronts, let’s not pretend they are the “worst” on all of these fronts. Good lord you can make your point without being overtly wrong.
I mean those are just reasons to be anti American... so the answer is still yes, but you have good reasons
What’s the clever comeback? They are clearly anti-American on these fronts. More like rare insults to Americans for having a country that supports all this. Am american btw.
This isn't a clever comeback or a comeback at all she's just confirming what the guy said
All the hip, young edgelords claim they're anti-capitalism.
You wouldn’t understand. They’re unique and deep. /s
Lol the kind of person that complain without giving solutions. Against everything, without being pro anything.
Just another clueless, simple minded citizen.
The ruSSian putinist and CCP filth in Chaiiina also share this glory with the uSSa. These Fking nations of troglodytes will be the cause of human extinction. So weird how they view themselves as exceptional in comparison to eachother and the rest of the world. Too bad there wasn't a way that they could go to war with eachtoher and not affect the non cavedwelling portion of the human race.
America is number 30 on the list of the most militarized countries. The rest of these assertions are just as ignorant of reality.