Are you somehow under the impression that the only possible identity is ethnic? Like when people say “I’m a New Yorker” do you reply back “Um, actually, New Yorker isn’t an ethnicity”?
And would the lack of ethnic New Yorkiness justify a ban on people labeling themselves or organizing as New Yorkers? Should we abolish the city of New York in the name of national unity then?
They’re ML. ML generally think cultural identity, gender identity, etc are all bourgeoisie attacks on class solidarity. There is only one identity to them. Government.
Not making anything up. I’ve seen the sentiment plenty of time’s and I’m not alone. And I wouldn’t go to an ML for “truth” about themselves or anyone else any more than I could go to a capitalist for similar.
Either you’re lying, misunderstanding, or you found someone with insane views. I kinda suspect its a mix of all 3, I can imagine someone pointing out that gender identity, race, national identity are all exploited to keep the working class divided against itself, but you have to have the most bad-faith interpretation to think they mean marginalized people should be ignored instead of that their struggle is a part of the struggle against capitalism. There’s a lot of marxist takes on intersectionality, but none of them are “your only identity is government”, that sounds like something a conservative would make up.
I could go to a capitalist
Capitalist=someone who owns capital. Liberalism is the philosophy of capitalism.
It’s literally the justification I’ve seen many times for the way minority groups are treated in China and other similar areas. It’s kind of the whole point of the stupid One China initiative. If that doesn’t describe you, then great. Maybe you’re a slightly reasonable statist. But even you slipped and started to acknowledge the lunacy of others that espose that ideology. Statist have a ton of insane views. Not just on the left. I have no issue acknowledging the good things places like China has done. I legit hope they break the current RAM cartels. The system I am posting from is currently using a fanxiang ssd. None of that makes up for the crimes of the state. And this sort of BS defending it. Yeah the headline here was hyperbolic and wildly editorialized. Just as much as your defense is dismissive of the same issues.
It’s literally the justification I’ve seen many times for the way minority groups are treated in China and other similar areas.
Minorities in China have special rights and autonomy. Cultural chauvanusm exists, but the government tries to prevent it, such as the law in question which increases penalties for discrimination against ethnic minorities. I have no idea where you’re seeing people justifying something China doesn’t do. Or by treatment did you mean building schools and using affirmative action?
one china initive
Did you mean the One China Policy? Where PRC won’t work with countries that acknowledge the RoC, due to both parties claiming to be the government of all of China?
Minorities in China are treated like second class citizens. If you’re not Han Chinese, you aren’t “good enough”. People complain about the US being xenophobic, but it’s mature hour compared to China.
I just love the way you say special rights and autonomy. Acting as if it’s some good or laudable thing. While unconsciously telling on yourself. That and the fact that you cannot engage with anyone even when they try in good faith. And return that good faith.
Initiative, policy. The fact that this is what your quibbling over is extremely telling. As if it’s meaningful or there’s some big Grand difference. Maybe it was a policy initiative. The fact is you still didn’t deny the existence of it.
I think you and I would both agree that the xenophobic white supremacist bigots in the United States for instance. That believe that there is one America, and immigrants/people with cultures they don’t like aren’t part of it. Is a bad thing. Yet you don’t acknowledge the irony and hypocrisy of your stance.
I can tell you’ve never been part of a vulnerable group afforded “special rights and autonomy”. As someone who has. It’s 💯% bullshit. No group should have special rights. If it’s acceptable for one it should be accessible to all. Anything else is just another regular failure of the state. At least I can be consistent and straight about it. Not twisting into pretzels like so many leninist defending their pet states.
Tibet, like the other autonomous areas has unique factors and circumstances, including an insurgency. If 1 house is on fire, would you recommend spraying all houses with water? Well 1 place needs economic development, education, preservation of the Tibeten language more than beijing or Shanghai.
The fact is you still didn’t deny the existence of it.
I told you what it was, its China’s policy regarding Taiwan, HK, Macao, and other areas with various levels of autonomy, but are still regarded as part of China, not some kind of policy supporting oppressing minorities or whatever the hell you’re implying it is.
Not really though. It’s a cudgel against political autonomy used against those the CPC declares dominion over, regardless of how those people feel about the fact.
Are you somehow under the impression that the only possible identity is ethnic? Like when people say “I’m a New Yorker” do you reply back “Um, actually, New Yorker isn’t an ethnicity”?
And would the lack of ethnic New Yorkiness justify a ban on people labeling themselves or organizing as New Yorkers? Should we abolish the city of New York in the name of national unity then?
They’re ML. ML generally think cultural identity, gender identity, etc are all bourgeoisie attacks on class solidarity. There is only one identity to them. Government.
There’s plenty of mls around if you want to ask them what they actually believe instead of just making shit up.
Not making anything up. I’ve seen the sentiment plenty of time’s and I’m not alone. And I wouldn’t go to an ML for “truth” about themselves or anyone else any more than I could go to a capitalist for similar.
Either you’re lying, misunderstanding, or you found someone with insane views. I kinda suspect its a mix of all 3, I can imagine someone pointing out that gender identity, race, national identity are all exploited to keep the working class divided against itself, but you have to have the most bad-faith interpretation to think they mean marginalized people should be ignored instead of that their struggle is a part of the struggle against capitalism. There’s a lot of marxist takes on intersectionality, but none of them are “your only identity is government”, that sounds like something a conservative would make up.
Capitalist=someone who owns capital. Liberalism is the philosophy of capitalism.
It’s literally the justification I’ve seen many times for the way minority groups are treated in China and other similar areas. It’s kind of the whole point of the stupid One China initiative. If that doesn’t describe you, then great. Maybe you’re a slightly reasonable statist. But even you slipped and started to acknowledge the lunacy of others that espose that ideology. Statist have a ton of insane views. Not just on the left. I have no issue acknowledging the good things places like China has done. I legit hope they break the current RAM cartels. The system I am posting from is currently using a fanxiang ssd. None of that makes up for the crimes of the state. And this sort of BS defending it. Yeah the headline here was hyperbolic and wildly editorialized. Just as much as your defense is dismissive of the same issues.
Minorities in China have special rights and autonomy. Cultural chauvanusm exists, but the government tries to prevent it, such as the law in question which increases penalties for discrimination against ethnic minorities. I have no idea where you’re seeing people justifying something China doesn’t do. Or by treatment did you mean building schools and using affirmative action?
Did you mean the One China Policy? Where PRC won’t work with countries that acknowledge the RoC, due to both parties claiming to be the government of all of China?
That is entirely irrelevant.
Minorities in China are treated like second class citizens. If you’re not Han Chinese, you aren’t “good enough”. People complain about the US being xenophobic, but it’s mature hour compared to China.
I just love the way you say special rights and autonomy. Acting as if it’s some good or laudable thing. While unconsciously telling on yourself. That and the fact that you cannot engage with anyone even when they try in good faith. And return that good faith.
Initiative, policy. The fact that this is what your quibbling over is extremely telling. As if it’s meaningful or there’s some big Grand difference. Maybe it was a policy initiative. The fact is you still didn’t deny the existence of it.
I think you and I would both agree that the xenophobic white supremacist bigots in the United States for instance. That believe that there is one America, and immigrants/people with cultures they don’t like aren’t part of it. Is a bad thing. Yet you don’t acknowledge the irony and hypocrisy of your stance.
I can tell you’ve never been part of a vulnerable group afforded “special rights and autonomy”. As someone who has. It’s 💯% bullshit. No group should have special rights. If it’s acceptable for one it should be accessible to all. Anything else is just another regular failure of the state. At least I can be consistent and straight about it. Not twisting into pretzels like so many leninist defending their pet states.
Tibet, like the other autonomous areas has unique factors and circumstances, including an insurgency. If 1 house is on fire, would you recommend spraying all houses with water? Well 1 place needs economic development, education, preservation of the Tibeten language more than beijing or Shanghai.
I told you what it was, its China’s policy regarding Taiwan, HK, Macao, and other areas with various levels of autonomy, but are still regarded as part of China, not some kind of policy supporting oppressing minorities or whatever the hell you’re implying it is.
This is about a law pertaining to ethnicities.
Not really though. It’s a cudgel against political autonomy used against those the CPC declares dominion over, regardless of how those people feel about the fact.