I mean everywhere that isn’t China or Russia or one of their satellites/annexes yeah.
Not sure where you got the billionaire thing, I’ve never defended them, in word or action. (Living in a capitalist country and needing a job for resources doesn’t make me a billionaire apologist)
Liberalism and billionaire worship are not the same thing, same as communism and xi are not the same thing.
To be clear: just because xi figuratively leads a communist country doesn’t mean this policy is perfectly communist.
Same thing goes for billionaires existing in a liberal society.
Lastly, the existence of either doesn’t invalidate the tenets of either ideology
Xi is no different than any other billionaire shit head most of the communist party top leaders use there position to gain control over the state controlled businesses
Xi first started geting so much hate from the west because he actually started purging communist party members for being too involved in the private sector. If he was encouraging the bourgeoisification of the CPC he would be hailed by the west.
This is incoherent. Xi has administrative control (or influence) over state enterprises, but he isn’t getting profits or stock options from them, so there are no grounds for calling him a billionaire
communist party top leaders use there position to gain control over the state controlled businesses
This is like saying you became a police commissioner to gain control over local police cars. Yeah, an explicit part of your job is that you can direct them, but the claim is so tautological that it looks like you are saying something else. It’s not like Xi will retain control of these enterprises after he leaves office.
I mean everywhere that isn’t China or Russia or one of their satellites/annexes yeah.
Not sure where you got the billionaire thing, I’ve never defended them, in word or action. (Living in a capitalist country and needing a job for resources doesn’t make me a billionaire apologist)
Liberalism and billionaire worship are not the same thing, same as communism and xi are not the same thing.
To be clear: just because xi figuratively leads a communist country doesn’t mean this policy is perfectly communist.
Same thing goes for billionaires existing in a liberal society.
Lastly, the existence of either doesn’t invalidate the tenets of either ideology
None of that makes any sense
Xi is no different than any other billionaire shit head most of the communist party top leaders use there position to gain control over the state controlled businesses
Tell me you know nothing about the PRC without saying you know nothing about the PRC
Sure dude xi is such a great leader real humanitarian bro I’ve read more about that scumbag than you will ever know
I’m sure you’ve read plenty of propaganda
Your right no propaganda in china from the state controlled no independent media allowed
You think corporate controled media is better?
The cia literally called him redder than red and unable to be corrupted by money lmao
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09BEIJING3128_a.html
Xi first started geting so much hate from the west because he actually started purging communist party members for being too involved in the private sector. If he was encouraging the bourgeoisification of the CPC he would be hailed by the west.
We can agree on that
Of course you agree on something that’s bullshit about an AES
This is incoherent. Xi has administrative control (or influence) over state enterprises, but he isn’t getting profits or stock options from them, so there are no grounds for calling him a billionaire
This is like saying you became a police commissioner to gain control over local police cars. Yeah, an explicit part of your job is that you can direct them, but the claim is so tautological that it looks like you are saying something else. It’s not like Xi will retain control of these enterprises after he leaves office.