Protests Erupt in China, calling for Xi Jinping to step down

[Punished UMN]

Since you guys were cheering for the protesters wanting to end the COVID policy in China I think it's time you guys admit that you were wrong:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04502-w
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/19/china/ch ... index.html

Anti-Lockdown protests in the West:
Libs/leftists: Jail them! Fire them! Dox them!
Ant-Lockdown protests in China
Libs/leftists: Heroes of the oppressed!

Interesting how the modern left always seems to side with imperialist interests, isn't it?

Yes.

[Mountains and Volcanoes]

Since you guys were cheering for the protesters wanting to end the COVID policy in China I think it's time you guys admit that you were wrong.

Ah yes, the argument in vacuum logic... wonderful. (Attributing major news publications as “left wing”)

[Laasmistan]

Since you guys were cheering for the protesters wanting to end the COVID policy in China I think it's time you guys admit that you were wrong:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04502-w
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/19/china/ch ... index.html

Anti-Lockdown protests in the West:
Libs/leftists: Jail them! Fire them! Dox them!
Ant-Lockdown protests in China
Libs/leftists: Heroes of the oppressed!

Interesting how the modern left always seems to side with imperialist interests, isn't it?

Yes, I have noticed these double standards as well.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

Since you guys were cheering for the protesters wanting to end the COVID policy in China I think it's time you guys admit that you were wrong:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04502-w
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/19/china/ch ... index.html

Anti-Lockdown protests in the West:
Libs/leftists: Jail them! Fire them! Dox them!
Ant-Lockdown protests in China
Libs/leftists: Heroes of the oppressed!

Interesting how the modern left always seems to side with imperialist interests, isn't it?

I don't know. Many liberals and leftists do still like the idea of a zero covid policy. I will see if I can find it again, but I remember even some American media having segments on how an end to the lockdowns in China are going to result in disastrous rise in Covid cases. Even critical segments state that these lockdowns have saved lives.

The sentiment that most of the media has though, is that China is going too far and ease restrictions slightly, and should push for greater vaccination rates, not so much an immediate end to all restrictions.

As for leftists, they too tend to advocate a slight easing of restrictions, whilst others - mainly tankies - tow the CCP line and defend the stringent lockdowns.

[Senkaku]

Anti-Lockdown protests in the West:
Libs/leftists: Jail them! Fire them! Dox them!
Ant-Lockdown protests in China
Libs/leftists: Heroes of the oppressed!

Interesting how the modern left always seems to side with imperialist interests, isn't it?

Yes.

Whenever you finish jerking each other off over your heterodoxy, consider that for this to happen, the Chinese state that you both occasionally fetishize is itself is conceding to imperialist interests and global capital, who have been screaming for the workshop of the world to re-open since the first lockdowns hit. What is your argument here, that outsiders should’ve been cheering for a state crackdown justified on the basis of public health? And why is it so remarkable that people might feel differently about anti-regime protests in nominally democratic societies vs. in police states, regardless of whether they’re motivated by data-driven public health concerns?

[Punished UMN]

Yes.

Whenever you finish jerking each other off over your heterodoxy, consider that for this to happen, the Chinese state that you both occasionally fetishize is itself is conceding to imperialist interests and global capital, who have been screaming for the workshop of the world to re-open since the first lockdowns hit. What is your argument here, that outsiders should’ve been cheering for a state crackdown justified on the basis of public health? And why is it so remarkable that people might feel differently about anti-regime protests in nominally democratic societies vs. in police states, regardless of whether they’re motivated by data-driven public health concerns?

My post wasn't intended to be pro-PRC. The reason I agree with Stylan here is that the argument from Western countries and people was not "we should support the protesters simply because they are pro-democracy activists" (which isn't necessarily true, the protests were not anti-regime in character), but that the talking point was that China's zero-Covid policy was a totalitarian nightmare and that the Western democracies had found a better solution that China needed to adopt to not be left behind on human rights, but the fact is that there was not a "better solution", the rest of the world just decided to bite the bullet and let millions die, and now China has decided to cave into this impulse too. There needs to be a rhetorical accountability there, that people who were, just two years ago, condemning the callousness with which conservative governments in the US and UK were throwing away the lives of poor and disabled citizens, are now very glad that China is doing the same. And these people will no doubt then be appalled at the lack of compassion which Chinese authorities are displaying in implementing a policy that they encouraged it to.

[Diarcesia]

Whenever you finish jerking each other off over your heterodoxy, consider that for this to happen, the Chinese state that you both occasionally fetishize is itself is conceding to imperialist interests and global capital, who have been screaming for the workshop of the world to re-open since the first lockdowns hit. What is your argument here, that outsiders should’ve been cheering for a state crackdown justified on the basis of public health? And why is it so remarkable that people might feel differently about anti-regime protests in nominally democratic societies vs. in police states, regardless of whether they’re motivated by data-driven public health concerns?

My post wasn't intended to be pro-PRC. The reason I agree with Stylan here is that the argument from Western countries and people was not "we should support the protesters simply because they are pro-democracy activists" (which isn't necessarily true, the protests were not anti-regime in character), but that the talking point was that China's zero-Covid policy was a totalitarian nightmare and that the Western democracies had found a better solution that China needed to adopt to not be left behind on human rights, but the fact is that there was not a "better solution", the rest of the world just decided to bite the bullet and let millions die, and now China has decided to cave into this impulse too. There needs to be a rhetorical accountability there, that people who were, just two years ago, condemning the callousness with which conservative governments in the US and UK were throwing away the lives of poor and disabled citizens, are now very glad that China is doing the same. And these people will no doubt then be appalled at the lack of compassion which Chinese authorities are displaying in implementing a policy that they encouraged it to.

The thing is China is on the opposite side of the spectrum. Remember the Urumqi fire that killed trapped people? The local government said it was the victims' skill issue.

[Bombadil]

Anti-Lockdown protests in the West:
Libs/leftists: Jail them! Fire them! Dox them!
Ant-Lockdown protests in China
Libs/leftists: Heroes of the oppressed!

Interesting how the modern left always seems to side with imperialist interests, isn't it?

Yes, I have noticed these double standards as well.

They're not double standards. At the beginning of the pandemic, whether right or not, it was deemed sensible to lockdown, contain the virus while working on a vaccine. Those people who refused, beyond not simply wearing masks, were selfish assholes.

In China it's different, lockdowns have been going on three years now, are random and often heavy handed and, on some occasions, have led to deaths. It's understandable why frustrations boil over.

There's a difference between following sensible advice for a couple of months to minimise the impact compared to continuing a draconian policy, due to a refusal to use western vaccines, and prolonging the misery when the rest of the world has moved on.

In each case, the right thing to do was apparent, just some people had their own little agenda and wouldn't do it, in the case of anti-lockdown in the US it was a political agenda, in the case of continued lockdowns in China it was, also, a political agenda. In both cases it was cheering on the right thing to do, not a double standard at all.

[Punished UMN]

Yes, I have noticed these double standards as well.

They're not double standards. At the beginning of the pandemic, whether right or not, it was deemed sensible to lockdown, contain the virus while working on a vaccine. Those people who refused, beyond not simply wearing masks, were selfish assholes.

In China it's different, lockdowns have been going on three years now, are random and often heavy handed and, on some occasions, have led to deaths. It's understandable why frustrations boil over.

There's a difference between following sensible advice for a couple of months to minimise the impact compared to continuing a draconian policy, due to a refusal to use western vaccines, and prolonging the misery when the rest of the world has moved on.

In each case, the right thing to do was apparent, just some people had their own little agenda and wouldn't do it, in the case of anti-lockdown in the US it was a political agenda, in the case of continued lockdowns in China it was, also, a political agenda. In both cases it was cheering on the right thing to do, not a double standard at all.

We did not minimise the impact, millions died.

[Laasmistan]

Yes, I have noticed these double standards as well.

They're not double standards. At the beginning of the pandemic, whether right or not, it was deemed sensible to lockdown, contain the virus while working on a vaccine. Those people who refused, beyond not simply wearing masks, were selfish assholes.

In China it's different, lockdowns have been going on three years now, are random and often heavy handed and, on some occasions, have led to deaths. It's understandable why frustrations boil over.

There's a difference between following sensible advice for a couple of months to minimise the impact compared to continuing a draconian policy, due to a refusal to use western vaccines, and prolonging the misery when the rest of the world has moved on.

In each case, the right thing to do was apparent, just some people had their own little agenda and wouldn't do it, in the case of anti-lockdown in the US it was a political agenda, in the case of continued lockdowns in China it was, also, a political agenda. In both cases it was cheering on the right thing to do, not a double standard at all.

Well, the pandemic is still killing a lot of people so pretending it's no longer a thing like most of the world is currently doing is not really the answer either.

[Mountains and Volcanoes]

They're not double standards. At the beginning of the pandemic, whether right or not, it was deemed sensible to lockdown, contain the virus while working on a vaccine. Those people who refused, beyond not simply wearing masks, were selfish assholes.

In China it's different, lockdowns have been going on three years now, are random and often heavy handed and, on some occasions, have led to deaths. It's understandable why frustrations boil over.

There's a difference between following sensible advice for a couple of months to minimise the impact compared to continuing a draconian policy, due to a refusal to use western vaccines, and prolonging the misery when the rest of the world has moved on.

In each case, the right thing to do was apparent, just some people had their own little agenda and wouldn't do it, in the case of anti-lockdown in the US it was a political agenda, in the case of continued lockdowns in China it was, also, a political agenda. In both cases it was cheering on the right thing to do, not a double standard at all.

We did not minimize the impact, millions died.

Whos fault is that? Oh yeah, the right wing and the former insurrectionist president...

[Punished UMN]

We did not minimize the impact, millions died.

Whos fault is that? Oh yeah, the right wing and the former insurrectionist president...

Okay? You say that as though it makes it better.

[Mountains and Volcanoes]

Whos fault is that? Oh yeah, the right wing and the former insurrectionist president...

Okay? You say that as though it makes it better.

Noo... just countering your poor description of US Stay-at-Home Orders & pointing out those who’s caused / influenced those millions of unnecessary deaths...

[Punished UMN]

Okay? You say that as though it makes it better.

Noo... just countering your poor description of US Stay-at-Home Orders & pointing out those who’s caused / influenced those millions of unnecessary deaths...

Show me where I said liberals counteracted US stay at home order or measures to curtail the pandemic? I said that liberals in Western countries supported the protests to stop anti-pandemic measures in China.

[Punished UMN]

Okay? You say that as though it makes it better.

Noo... just countering your poor description of US Stay-at-Home Orders & pointing out those who’s caused / influenced those millions of unnecessary deaths...

I also see your subtitle to your post. "Herd immunist?" I'm not sure where you could have gotten that idea, I'm literally arguing for stronger anti-transmission measures.

[Stylan]

Yes.

Whenever you finish jerking each other off over your heterodoxy, consider that for this to happen, the Chinese state that you both occasionally fetishize is itself is conceding to imperialist interests and global capital, who have been screaming for the workshop of the world to re-open since the first lockdowns hit. What is your argument here, that outsiders should’ve been cheering for a state crackdown justified on the basis of public health? And why is it so remarkable that people might feel differently about anti-regime protests in nominally democratic societies vs. in police states, regardless of whether they’re motivated by data-driven public health concerns?

I don't fetishize the Chinese state at all, despite my pfp. My point was that it was very hypocritical of liberals and some leftists to be virulently opposed to anti-lockdown protests in the West - I mean libs made these people out to be equivalent to Nazis or terrorists - yet support anti-lockdown protests in China. It shows to me at least the nature in which the left has been co-opted by Western imperialist forces. The left and liberals seemed to fall in line with whatever the view of capital was - if capital supported lockdown measures, as they did in the West, the left supported it. When capital opposed it, as in the East, the left opposed it too.

The lockdowns were deeply flawed but I do understand why they were necessary for a month or two.

[New-Minneapolis]

Whenever you finish jerking each other off over your heterodoxy, consider that for this to happen, the Chinese state that you both occasionally fetishize is itself is conceding to imperialist interests and global capital, who have been screaming for the workshop of the world to re-open since the first lockdowns hit. What is your argument here, that outsiders should’ve been cheering for a state crackdown justified on the basis of public health? And why is it so remarkable that people might feel differently about anti-regime protests in nominally democratic societies vs. in police states, regardless of whether they’re motivated by data-driven public health concerns?

I don't fetishize the Chinese state at all, despite my pfp. My point was that it was very hypocritical of liberals and some leftists to be virulently opposed to anti-lockdown protests in the West - I mean libs made these people out to be equivalent to Nazis or terrorists - yet support anti-lockdown protests in China. It shows to me at least the nature in which the left has been co-opted by Western imperialist forces. The left and liberals seemed to fall in line with whatever the view of capital was - if capital supported lockdown measures, as they did in the West, the left supported it. When capital opposed it, as in the East, the left opposed it too.

The lockdowns were deeply flawed but I do understand why they were necessary for a month or two.

I don't fetishize the Chinese state at all

I think you do, mate.

[Stylan]

I don't fetishize the Chinese state at all, despite my pfp. My point was that it was very hypocritical of liberals and some leftists to be virulently opposed to anti-lockdown protests in the West - I mean libs made these people out to be equivalent to Nazis or terrorists - yet support anti-lockdown protests in China. It shows to me at least the nature in which the left has been co-opted by Western imperialist forces. The left and liberals seemed to fall in line with whatever the view of capital was - if capital supported lockdown measures, as they did in the West, the left supported it. When capital opposed it, as in the East, the left opposed it too.

The lockdowns were deeply flawed but I do understand why they were necessary for a month or two.

I don't fetishize the Chinese state at all

I think you do, mate.

I did in 2020, though I don't know if you were here back then. I certainly don't now. What would I see in the Chinese state?

[El Lazaro]

It shows to me at least the nature in which the left has been co-opted by Western imperialist forces. The left and liberals seemed to fall in line with whatever the view of capital was - if capital supported lockdown measures, as they did in the West, the left supported it.

All leftists must provide critical support for the NATO vanguard party in order to stop the diseased para-fascist manifestation of ultra-capitalism and ultra-imperialism from colonizing Africa and Asia. The fight against the CCP and the fight for the international proletariat are one in the same.

[New-Minneapolis]

I don't fetishize the Chinese state at all

I think you do, mate.

I did in 2020, though I don't know if you were here back then. I certainly don't now. What would I see in the Chinese state?

I think I was..
Anyway, I think when it comes to the younger protesters, I think they do want to see radical reforms of the Chinese political system. They know how to get past the great firewall and learn about concepts like liberal anti-communism.

[Senkaku]

Whenever you finish jerking each other off over your heterodoxy, consider that for this to happen, the Chinese state that you both occasionally fetishize is itself is conceding to imperialist interests and global capital, who have been screaming for the workshop of the world to re-open since the first lockdowns hit. What is your argument here, that outsiders should’ve been cheering for a state crackdown justified on the basis of public health? And why is it so remarkable that people might feel differently about anti-regime protests in nominally democratic societies vs. in police states, regardless of whether they’re motivated by data-driven public health concerns?

My post wasn't intended to be pro-PRC.

Well, you know what the road to hell is paved with.

The reason I agree with Stylan here is that the argument from Western countries and people was not "we should support the protesters simply because they are pro-democracy activists" (which isn't necessarily true, the protests were not anti-regime in character), but that the talking point was that China's zero-Covid policy was a totalitarian nightmare

Just to be clear: it was a totalitarian nightmare in many places-- it's just that given the appalling scale of the crisis it was intended to prevent, it's much easier to argue that a bit of nightmarish totalitarianism was actually a pretty justifiable and responsible policy stance for a government to take in order to protect its people.

and that the Western democracies had found a better solution that China needed to adopt to not be left behind on human rights, but the fact is that there was not a "better solution", the rest of the world just decided to bite the bullet and let millions die, and now China has decided to cave into this impulse too.

The argument was always couched very explicitly in terms of economic performance, the human rights-iness was always just a garnish. Like, literally almost every story criticizing zero-Covid has highlighted the slowing Chinese economy and gone on about how China was going to be economically outcompeted or keep producing global supply shocks whenever they locked down industrial centers. I suppose someone would have to scrape articles to actually quantify, but my impression has been that the sort of human-interest stories focused on the plights of locked-down Shanghainese or whatever, aimed criticizing the human rights impact of the policy, were in fact quite outnumbered (in terms of production, anyway, if not engagement) by content focused on the macroeconomic angle. Maybe it shifted when that video of people saying "down with Xi" or whatever leaked, because that was enough for Western outlets to formally dub them "anti-regime" and to focus more on protester human-interest stories, but it really feels like you're inventing someone to be mad at who never actually existed here.

There needs to be a rhetorical accountability there, that people who were, just two years ago, condemning the callousness with which conservative governments in the US and UK were throwing away the lives of poor and disabled citizens, are now very glad that China is doing the same. And these people will no doubt then be appalled at the lack of compassion which Chinese authorities are displaying in implementing a policy that they encouraged it to.

Ok, fine, present me with examples of some of those people or groups of people and fucking rhetorically accountabilize them, then, but you and Stylan winding each other up about ~tHe hyp0critic@l Left~ is pathetic. Dismissing all of "the left" in all of the "the West" as having hypocritically lined up shoulder to shoulder with global capital interests' rhetoric on Covid policy in China just doesn't pass a basic smell test, which I think you know. If you actually go out to look for them, I think you'll find that the set of people who both A) were outraged about the lack of Covid restrictions in the West over the past two years and B) have been equally outraged about China's zero-Covid policy/are now publicly thrilled about it ending is in fact quite small, and largely restricted to the sort of politically inert middle-class creatures who think working for a Big 4 company means other people want to hear their opinions.

There's plenty of powerful elites both within and outside of China who were both fine with the West's approach and are happy that China's switched, and discussing their motives and tactics seems relevant here. Instead, you have rocked up to the thread demanding "you guys" in the general sense all please apologize for having "cheered on" (!) bad public health policy, and then smugly nodded along with a reply guy who showed up prattling about how this shows "the modern left always" does... whatever Stylan thinks "the modern left" does these days (?).

Whos fault is that? Oh yeah, the right wing and the former insurrectionist president...

Okay? You say that as though it makes it better.

You kicked off this silly little routine by explicitly agreeing we could lay the blame for these disasters at the feet of Western people and countries generally, and all of the Western left specifically, and now you're being obtuse when people point out that right-wing capital has actually been in the driver's seat of Western Covid policy since the start of the pandemic? What are we even doing here?

Whenever you finish jerking each other off over your heterodoxy, consider that for this to happen, the Chinese state that you both occasionally fetishize is itself is conceding to imperialist interests and global capital, who have been screaming for the workshop of the world to re-open since the first lockdowns hit. What is your argument here, that outsiders should’ve been cheering for a state crackdown justified on the basis of public health? And why is it so remarkable that people might feel differently about anti-regime protests in nominally democratic societies vs. in police states, regardless of whether they’re motivated by data-driven public health concerns?

I don't fetishize the Chinese state at all, despite my pfp.

Okay, well, we're clearly at odds on this, so I guess readers can search your posts for the word "China" and draw their own conclusions lol

My point was that it was very hypocritical of liberals and some leftists

Goalposts on the move!!

[Page]

Since you guys were cheering for the protesters wanting to end the COVID policy in China I think it's time you guys admit that you were wrong:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04502-w
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/19/china/ch ... index.html

First of all, China has had for the last 3 years way more infections and deaths than reported. Their reported numbers have been bullshit all along. They've HAD more than a million deaths and if you don't think so, may I sell you the Brooklyn Bridge?

Second, China's policies were outright counter-productive to the aim of beating covid. By summoning populations of entire cities to mass testing, they created superspreader events.

Third, as has been empirically demonstrated, lockdowns serve only to DELAY mass infection. Statistically, in terms of infections and deaths, the jurisdictions that implemented martial law like lockdowns are on the balance no better off per capita than those who did nearly nothing. A million dead is a foregone conclusion, it's only a question of now or later.

Three years ago, before vaccines were available, there was some sense in delaying, but the rules of the game have changed. The global population is now about as vaccinated as you could realistically hope for. Unless a 100% effective vaccine or a perfect cure is in development right now, the long-term outcome won't be changed by lockdowns.

The only policy that would have succeeded in measurably mitigating the fatalities of covid is paying holdouts to get vaccinated. It still can be done and make a difference but it won't be done because foolish deontological ethics prevail over rational consequentialism.

[Punished UMN]

Since you guys were cheering for the protesters wanting to end the COVID policy in China I think it's time you guys admit that you were wrong:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04502-w
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/19/china/ch ... index.html

First of all, China has had for the last 3 years way more infections and deaths than reported. Their reported numbers have been bullshit all along. They've HAD more than a million deaths and if you don't think so, may I sell you the Brooklyn Bridge?

Second, China's policies were outright counter-productive to the aim of beating covid. By summoning populations of entire cities to mass testing, they created superspreader events.

Third, as has been empirically demonstrated, lockdowns serve only to DELAY mass infection. Statistically, in terms of infections and deaths, the jurisdictions that implemented martial law like lockdowns are on the balance no better off per capita than those who did nearly nothing. A million dead is a foregone conclusion, it's only a question of now or later.

Three years ago, before vaccines were available, there was some sense in delaying, but the rules of the game have changed. The global population is now about as vaccinated as you could realistically hope for. Unless a 100% effective vaccine or a perfect cure is in development right now, the long-term outcome won't be changed by lockdowns.

The only policy that would have succeeded in measurably mitigating the fatalities of covid is paying holdouts to get vaccinated. It still can be done and make a difference but it won't be done because foolish deontological ethics prevail over rational consequentialism.

If they've had more than a million deaths already then you can prove it. Just going "noooo they had to have managed it worse than us because reasons" isn't convincing just because you preface it with it being your assumption.

[Bombadil]

They're not double standards. At the beginning of the pandemic, whether right or not, it was deemed sensible to lockdown, contain the virus while working on a vaccine. Those people who refused, beyond not simply wearing masks, were selfish assholes.

In China it's different, lockdowns have been going on three years now, are random and often heavy handed and, on some occasions, have led to deaths. It's understandable why frustrations boil over.

There's a difference between following sensible advice for a couple of months to minimise the impact compared to continuing a draconian policy, due to a refusal to use western vaccines, and prolonging the misery when the rest of the world has moved on.

In each case, the right thing to do was apparent, just some people had their own little agenda and wouldn't do it, in the case of anti-lockdown in the US it was a political agenda, in the case of continued lockdowns in China it was, also, a political agenda. In both cases it was cheering on the right thing to do, not a double standard at all.

We did not minimise the impact, millions died.

I didn't say it was minimised, I said there was sensible advice that simply wasn't followed by many, from wearing masks to breaking lockdown.

Personally I think wearing masks, washing hands, avoiding too much indoor contact would probably have worked best. Despite many missteps, HK never had a lockdown and hasn't seen much deaths, mostly because the population is conscientious and the scars of SARS remain.

Point being, it's not double standards to decry selfish assholes who wouldn't follow good advice, as well as praise protestors for wanting an end to a illogical approach.

[Tinhampton]

Students for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty (mass appeal libertarian-right groups; not affiliated to the Chinese-American community in particular) have decided that it would be a good idea to carry out blank-paper protests at American sporting fixtures for no apparent reason other than to express solidarity with blank-paper protests in PR China. This is... certainly a decision that could have been made, yes.