That’s been absolutely painful for me when interacting with them. They have thousands of years of history on their own land. They never felt the existential threat that we have. It makes it hard to explain to them that I would consider it impossible to ally with the people who champion our ongoing genocide, and I would really struggle with a resolution that didn’t involve the dissolution of the colonial states.
It shows one big thing from which everything else flowers is that in a socialist state, much like in a liberal state, you can’t expect everyone to be political and follow the dominant ideology. XHS is apparently known to be mostly urban wealthier youth (I don’t want to say rich but let’s say a bit above median wage maybe).
They still have to read Fanon even with all the Chinese authors they have. And we have to read Chinese authors even with all the Marx and Fanon that we have.
But we can’t expect everyone to be a cadre and well-versed in everything. Actually, I would trust the CPC cadres to know about this kind of stuff. I believe this because China demonstrates time and time again that they don’t have the answers for everyone, but trust in the people to have their own answers. This is why their foreign policy is so hands off. They don’t dictate terms or give unsolicited advice, because they don’t believe that they have a one-size-fits-all answer. Maybe they do have the answers! Maybe they could totally say “oh you should do this” and it works out great. But they can’t be sure that they do.
It reminds us not to put people on a pedestal and treat them as, well, people. But we still share the common language of Marxism.
I’ve seen XHS users use “no investigation, no right to speak” on themselves to explain that while they have ideas, they don’t have a full understanding of the complexities and nuances we face. The fact that we’ve had this cultural exchange gives me how that there may be support in the future but now is the wrong time IMHO: The government is already wanting to start hostilities and that works be playing into their hands.
most of the messaging (both public relations/speaking trained and randos online) I have seen from Chinese people of various classes (including bourgeois class* like iirc Eric Li who is openly a venture capitalist) has been consistently: China’s model works for China, do not blindly copy China’s policies. Their current path is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, emphasis “chinese characteristics” which is not to be taken lightly.
*on this note I must emphasize that the national, political project of the PRC is collaboration of social classes with CPC at the leadership helm - don’t just believe me, look up what the stars on their flag represent, look up the Chinese constitution. This has been rocky at times, and shifts like Deng’s reform of course have been unhappy for certain groups. But in hindsight, choosing uneven (urban first,etc) but controlled acceleration in development, through but not around capitalist mode of production, has borne progress towards the goal of building socialism in the country. Anyway IMO Eric Li is an excellent speaker, very knowledgeable and I appreciate his economic analysis. I haven’t heard him go off in overt communist talk, though frequently presents CPC as good at making correct decisions, particularly in regards to being able to decide and plan in longer-term view instead of shortterm etc. His talking points are basically 0% theory and 100% talking about material events and going off of that for analysis. I think he presents himself this way (doesnt talk big communism, introduces himself as a venture capitalist) to prevent scaring off westerners, and encourage them to look into why China’s system works.
That’s been absolutely painful for me when interacting with them. They have thousands of years of history on their own land. They never felt the existential threat that we have. It makes it hard to explain to them that I would consider it impossible to ally with the people who champion our ongoing genocide, and I would really struggle with a resolution that didn’t involve the dissolution of the colonial states.
It shows one big thing from which everything else flowers is that in a socialist state, much like in a liberal state, you can’t expect everyone to be political and follow the dominant ideology. XHS is apparently known to be mostly urban wealthier youth (I don’t want to say rich but let’s say a bit above median wage maybe).
They still have to read Fanon even with all the Chinese authors they have. And we have to read Chinese authors even with all the Marx and Fanon that we have.
But we can’t expect everyone to be a cadre and well-versed in everything. Actually, I would trust the CPC cadres to know about this kind of stuff. I believe this because China demonstrates time and time again that they don’t have the answers for everyone, but trust in the people to have their own answers. This is why their foreign policy is so hands off. They don’t dictate terms or give unsolicited advice, because they don’t believe that they have a one-size-fits-all answer. Maybe they do have the answers! Maybe they could totally say “oh you should do this” and it works out great. But they can’t be sure that they do.
It reminds us not to put people on a pedestal and treat them as, well, people. But we still share the common language of Marxism.
I’ve seen XHS users use “no investigation, no right to speak” on themselves to explain that while they have ideas, they don’t have a full understanding of the complexities and nuances we face. The fact that we’ve had this cultural exchange gives me how that there may be support in the future but now is the wrong time IMHO: The government is already wanting to start hostilities and that works be playing into their hands.
most of the messaging (both public relations/speaking trained and randos online) I have seen from Chinese people of various classes (including bourgeois class* like iirc Eric Li who is openly a venture capitalist) has been consistently: China’s model works for China, do not blindly copy China’s policies. Their current path is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, emphasis “chinese characteristics” which is not to be taken lightly.
*on this note I must emphasize that the national, political project of the PRC is collaboration of social classes with CPC at the leadership helm - don’t just believe me, look up what the stars on their flag represent, look up the Chinese constitution. This has been rocky at times, and shifts like Deng’s reform of course have been unhappy for certain groups. But in hindsight, choosing uneven (urban first,etc) but controlled acceleration in development, through but not around capitalist mode of production, has borne progress towards the goal of building socialism in the country. Anyway IMO Eric Li is an excellent speaker, very knowledgeable and I appreciate his economic analysis. I haven’t heard him go off in overt communist talk, though frequently presents CPC as good at making correct decisions, particularly in regards to being able to decide and plan in longer-term view instead of shortterm etc. His talking points are basically 0% theory and 100% talking about material events and going off of that for analysis. I think he presents himself this way (doesnt talk big communism, introduces himself as a venture capitalist) to prevent scaring off westerners, and encourage them to look into why China’s system works.