Current Events > Is China the 2020 Nazi Germany?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Not enough gas

---

Averagejoel is a communist and Soviet apologist lol.

You get all butthurt when people say US is like Nazi Germany but have no problem saying it about China,

hey if you can't take it don't dish it out. you sound like a crybaby

---

CloneTheHero posted...

name them. take your time. ill wait

I will do so as soon as you address that paragraph that you haven't addressed yet

---

CloneTheHero posted...

says the guy defending people calling america literal nazi germany. yea im trolling lol.

good god. this is physically painful

Dude, I'm pretty sure dunc was telling you to mark him.

---

The USA is basically Nazi Germany if the Nazis had several less successful Holocausts in the past and we're now pretending that they didn't happen, or weren't all that bad, in order to look good.

---

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

The USA is basically Nazi Germany if the Nazis had several less successful Holocausts in the past and we're now pretending that they didn't happen, or weren't all that bad, in order to look good.

Tbf, we almost drove native Americans to extinction, and the president who did the whole march of tears thing is widely popular

America is kind of shitty

---

Nazi Germany was heavily influenced by the US and admired it, and after the war the US brought over the Nazi scientists and gave them high level positions in research and intelligence in order to continue their efforts they were working on. In the years that followed, they conducted horrific trials and experiments all over the United States, South America, many of which were on US soldiers but often on civilians. The US learned a lot from the Nazis in regards to how to effectively control the population by putting members of the lower classes against one another, using a reactionary right alliance with a centrist bourgeoisie to stamp out any left wing dissent across the globe before fomenting outright facist takeovers. In the 1940s, the US policy was to align with other democratic states and the communists to defeat facism. In 2020, it's policy is to overthrow communists and replace them with facist states who will be loyal allies. Seems pretty clear who is what now.

Zikten posted...

in terms of oppressing their own people yes. I think most people are not aware of the genocide going on in china. that's why so many voted "not even close". what china has been doing doesn't get talked about much in western news

MuayThai85 posted...

China is currently 1937 Nazi Germany but with better technology and propaganda. Already committing 2 separate genocides (Falun Gong and Uighur Muslims).

Agreed with both of these. The Chinese government is horrific.

In most ways yes. Their a dictatorships in the purist sense. Interested only in power, control, expansion, and ethnic cleansing. And any they dont bother to get rid of they probabaly just keep around to use as easy scapegoats to single out and blame for their wrongdoings such as blacks.

Also this is a good thread for identifying and marking the American hating communist on CE so take advantage folks.

---

Holy shit. I had no idea things were this bad. Since we all know our fake president doesn't care, I can only hope that Biden does something about this.
---

fohstick posted...

those prisoners are gonna have their organs harvested

Whats the story behind this? Ive heard about this as well.

Not even close. Even their practice of tossing minorities in camps stems from shit they'd previously done. There's no nation on Earth close to Nazi Germany, although I suppose if you wanted to highlight a country for its brutal practices, you could look at Myanmar's recent governent-sanctioned genocides although those fall far, far, far short of Nazi genocides.

---

People also have to realize that the population of China is quite a bit more than that of every other country. They have over a billion people so it isn't surprising that there is corruption. Doesn't help that their leader Meow isn't stable either.

Zeus posted...

Not even close. Even their practice of tossing minorities in camps stems from shit they'd previously done. There's no nation on Earth close to Nazi Germany, although I suppose if you wanted to highlight a country for its brutal practices, you could look at Myanmar's recent governent-sanctioned genocides although those fall far, far, far short of Nazi genocides.

What do you mean by that exactly? They murdered over a million Falun Gong and sold their organs, what did they ever do?

---

MuayThai85 posted...

What do you mean by that exactly? They murdered over a million Falun Gong and sold their organs, what did they ever do?

I heard they were a weird cult that was supported by the CIA/U.S. trying to disrupt shit in China

ssome evil regime shit

---

BigB0ss13 posted...

I heard they were a weird cult that was supported by the CIA/U.S. trying to disrupt shit in China

Let's pretend that's true. Like 100% let's assume everything the Chinese government claims about them is true. At what point does it justify killing them and selling their organs?

---

lol wat, no one nuking anyone, espec not an actual Country...

MuayThai85 posted...

What do you mean by that exactly? They murdered over a million Falun Gong and sold their organs, what did they ever do?

The alleged Falun Gong organ harvests have been claimed for what, 15 years now, with only anecdotes and conjectures to support the claim? Not to mention that China's organ harvesting had been noted as being exceptionally fast for DECADES before the Falun Gong was a thing (or, at least, popular). (Which isn't to say that it might not be happening, but you'd *think* you'd have a shit ton of proof given how widespread it supposedly is and how long it's allegedly gone on for.)

More importantly, prior to the Nazi Party ever being a thing, the Chinese government was murdering religious dissidents (The Boxer Rebellion, anyone?). It also predates the CCP, but it's been a long-standing problematic aspect of China -- and, I might add, China was hardly the only country murdering people on the basis of religion.

Comparing China to Nazi Germany is a ludicrously offensive trolling of the worst kind. The only possible parallels could be drawn between any other number of repressive regimes and are in no way unique to the Nazi Party. Meanwhile you purposefully gloss over actual, substantiated genocides being committed elsewhere...

---

They are very likely to be worse. they haven't commited a single act as bad as the holocaust, but the sum of all their acts added up may be worse than the sum of all nazi germany's acts added up. and chinas only going to get worse because nobody seems willing to stop them right now

---

I don't often agree with Zeus, but he's right to point out that (a) this is very late in the day to suddenly start focusing upon a lack of civil liberties and human rights in China, and (b) China is by no means the only -- or even the worst -- repressive regime anywhere in the world.

It seems this focus has narrowed on China only since the country has come to be viewed as a serious economic competitor to the US. No one throws around comparisons to Hitler's police state when it comes to anti-democratic, violently repressive regimes in small countries that aren't rivals to American power, no matter how brutally they treat their own citizens.

So what's really the problem here? Are you suddenly going all Amnesty International on China because this issue isn't really about human rights or democracy at all (since you show little to no interest in bad governance in other countries), but because it's really about staring down a rival superpower?

---

averagejoel posted...

I will do so as soon as you address that paragraph that you haven't addressed yet

@CloneTheHero

here's the paragraph in question:

averagejoel posted...

American racism was extremely influential on Hitler's ideas, and Hitler's ideas were extremely influential on the US, and remain so to this day. there are many, many, many similarities.

though post 60 is a slightly more detailed explanation -- that would also be a good post to address

---

Zeus posted...

The alleged Falun Gong organ harvests have been claimed for what, 15 years now, with only anecdotes and conjectures to support the claim? Not to mention that China's organ harvesting had been noted as being exceptionally fast for DECADES before the Falun Gong was a thing (or, at least, popular). (Which isn't to say that it might not be happening, but you'd *think* you'd have a shit ton of proof given how widespread it supposedly is and how long it's allegedly gone on for.)

Lol so much bullshit in this paragraph. Prior to 1999, China was barely performing any transplant operations. Suddenly once the Falun Gong members start disappearing they're suddenly performing 40,000+ kidney transplants per year alone.

How does this happen? Well, the CCP would like you to believe that they're all organs harvested from executed prisoners yet they only execute about 3,000 people per year, how do they account for the rest of the organs? China and its inhabitants are the least charitable people in the world. Chinese people do not donate their organs upon their death. So tell me, where do all the organs for these surgeries come from?

Literally talks of a "halal" organ transplant industry now for international patients. Basically if you're a rich Muslim, you can visit China and get yourself a new kidney or lung cancer recently harvested from a Uyghur Muslim.

BigB0ss13 posted...

I heard they were a weird cult that was supported by the CIA/U.S. trying to disrupt shit in China

They are a bunch of people who liked to mediate in the park. Jiang Zemin just needed someone to scapegoat and because of some protests the Falun Gong had lead, Jiang Zemin chose them.

---

As to them becoming a competitor, yes in some ways.

A huge, powerful, and rich nation doing such things is always going to be much more worrying than a smaller nation doing similar things. Especially from a global perspective .

It seems a little silly to ask why people are more worried about a country with massive influence and reach than a smaller one.

---

China is extremely bad and we are bad for doing business with them. Every country that claims to be good needs to pull out of China and the entire Middle East if they want to prove it.

---

MuayThai85 posted...

They are a bunch of people who liked to mediate in the park.

yikes this cult is crazy

Things such as organized crime, homosexuality, and promiscuous sex, etc., none are the standards of being human.

https://en.falundafa.org/eng/lectures/1996L.html

---

Alteres posted...

As to them becoming a competitor, yes in some ways.

A huge, powerful, and rich nation doing such things is always going to be much more worrying than a smaller nation doing similar things. Especially from a global perspective .

It seems a little silly to ask why people are more worried about a country with massive influence and reach than a smaller one.

Yeah, like, North Korea is probably worse, but its evil is mostly contained within the borders of North Korea and affects the people who have the misfortune of being born there.
Superpowers like China and the United States, on the other hand, have the power(hard and soft) and motivation to meaningfully effect foreign nations worldwide. The U.S. , of course, has a very, very long and sordid history of supporting(and, on some occasions, directly instigating) coups against governments it doesn't like(most recently in Bolivia). China has been building up influence abroad via economic investments in the developing world and, of course, has been clamping down ever-tighter on internal dissent(real and imagined).

The discussion has been about China's treatment of its own citizens. Since Tienanmen Square in 1988, Americans generally were not worried about how China treated its own citizens -- until, strange coincidence, the last few years since China has become more prosperous and powerful. Suddenly, Americans have discovered that (gasp!) freedoms and human rights are limited in China!

If you're worried about the external reach of Chinese influence, then that's a different issue. But let's not pretend that how the Chinese government represses civil liberties for 1.4 billion of its own people is anywhere on the list of concerns. Because if you were genuinely concerned about human rights and democracy, then you'd be concerned about such matters even in smaller countries -- instead of shrugging off even the most appalling government abuses so long as "they only do it in their own country" and making artificial distinctions between home-grown and exported repression.

What really threatens freedom and democracy is a readiness to tolerate their denial anywhere behind the cloak of national sovereignty. What moral difference does it really make if it's one country spreading its influence to 18 million people in five other countries, or it's those five other countries repressing 18 million of their own people?

There are valid concerns about the danger of other countries' democracy being compromised, of buckling under Chinese external pressure: censorship, handing over exiled dissidents or denying them asylum, etc. Those concerns should be recognized and that pressure should be resisted. But please, just stop connecting dots in a short straight line between China and Nazi Germany, as if governments treating their own citizens like an occupied enemy population is something new or unique to China. And start caring about this sort of shit in other countries too.

---

Are you unironically arguing that people in the West didn't care about Tienanmen Square? You should maybe read about what happened at that time or something, because as much as I don't like the US myself, that's not at all true that they didn't care at the time.

There's an entire Wikipedia article on how countries reacted:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests

"The United States Congress and media criticized the military action. President George H. W. Bush suspended military sales and visits to that country. Large scale protests against the Chinese government took place around the country.[38] George Washington University revealed that, through high-level secret channels on 30 June 1989, the US government conveyed to the government of the People's Republic of China that the events around the Tiananmen Square protests were an "internal affair".[61] U.S. public opinion of China dropped significantly after the Tiananmen Square protests, from 72% having favorable opinions of China before the Tiananmen Protests to only 34% in August, 1989.[62]"

---

ssjevot posted...

Are you unironically arguing that people in the West didn't care about Tienanmen Square? You should maybe read about what happened at that time or something, because as much as I don't like the US myself, that's not at all true that they didn't care at the time.

No, I'm saying that after Tienanmen Square it took a year or less for the initial outrage to fade, and then there was generally a kind of fatalistic acceptance that "well, this is just how China is". Interest spiked again in 1997 when the fate of Hong Kong after the hand-back became an issue.

But it's only really been since China has started rubbing shoulders with Uncle Sam in the superpower stakes -- in fact, only the last two or three years, really -- that people have again paid much attention to what kind of government is running China. And my thinking is that because Chinese government and politics haven't really changed since Tienanmen Square, this latest concern isn't really sparked by its record on human rights but by discomfort at the prospect of the US finally having a serious economic competitor. In other words, it's the thought that Uncle Sam might not always be #1 that's really grinding Americans' gears, not any crackdown by the Chinese authorities.

I'm just hoping that critics of China's human rights record are sincere enough about human rights to be concerned about them even in other countries that don't pose an economic threat the the US, but I'm pessimistic.

---

The Chinese government has changed many times since then. Xi has been the driving force between all the new problems that have occurred. One of the biggest things Xi has done (besides making himself president for life) is make it so criticism or him and his regime can't even come from within the party. This makes it very hard for China to change course now compared to how it had been before. Before there were factions in the CCP pushing for different directions and now being in the anti-Xi faction results in things like going to jail. Being a party member doesn't make you safe anymore.

The whole communism part of China doesn't mean anything anyway (unless you're one of these weird Westerners with a fetish for anything claiming to be communist), the CCP is simply the governing party of China and has many people with different ideas on what direction China should go. What has happened in the last few years is that there is only one direction, one view, that is allowed in the party now. And it's not one that is compatible with basically any country outside of China's interests so naturally you hear more criticism from any country that isn't China or one of the despotic regimes supporting them out of self-interest to check the US's power in the region.

This isn't simply the West didn't realize China was a threat until Trump got elected, you think Obama's policies in the region and the TPP wasn't designed specifically to check China's rise?

---

Firewerx posted...

I'm just hoping that critics of China's human rights record are sincere enough about human rights to be concerned about them even in other countries that don't pose an economic threat the the US, but I'm pessimistic.

I want to make another post to specifically address this. Almost no one in the US or elsewhere, care about human rights very much. In the US concern for things like war or indefinite detection or deporting immigrants or whatever issue people allegedly care about evaporate if their guy is in charge and doing the exact same shit. People largely care about their in-group succeeding and only feel bad for some other group if they can use it as a tool to criticize their out-group. However a common mistake to make is to then think you should oppose caring about something because people are doing the right thing for the wrong reason. So regardless of why people care about bad things that are happening in China, you shouldn't suddenly think that makes those things okay. I don't care why people do or don't oppose the US bombing countries in the Middle East, it doesn't suddenly become okay or not okay depending on who drops the bombs on a wedding.

---

ssjevot posted...

The Chinese government has changed many times since then.

Were there policies of liberalization that allowed an independent media, or allowed ordinary citizens to openly criticize policies or politicians without consequences? If not, then while politics at the top may have changed (and despite the bureaucratic infighting or lack thereof), for most Chinese the business of government has been pretty much business as usual.

I'm not ascribing the change of Western attitudes to a change in US presidents. It's more that criticism of China's human rights record doesn't seem to have gained much popular traction (which is to say, outside of people who are normally active in politics) for many years until quite recently. That may be due to the administration temporarily shining a public spotlight on it; but I'll bet you once that spotlight moves onto somewhere or something else, those concerns will quickly fade. The only thing that's going to keep China in the spotlight is the size of its economy, which is the real issue here.

---

ssjevot posted...

Almost no one in the US or elsewhere, care about human rights very much. In the US concern for things like war or indefinite detection or deporting immigrants or whatever issue people allegedly care about evaporate if their guy is in charge and doing the exact same shit. People largely care about their in-group succeeding and only feel bad for some other group if they can use it as a tool to criticize their out-group. However a common mistake to make is to then think you should oppose caring about something because people are doing the right thing for the wrong reason. So regardless of why people care about bad things that are happening in China, you shouldn't suddenly think that makes those things okay. I don't care why people do or don't oppose the US bombing countries in the Middle East, it doesn't suddenly become okay or not okay depending on who drops the bombs on a wedding.

I agree with all of that. I've tried to make the point that while criticism of the Chinese government is deserved and should be welcomed, people should care about the same sort of shit in other countries too, and not just the one that the president has turned the blowtorch onto this week. But like I say, I'm pessimistic and unfortunately, you've hit the nail on the head.

---

Firewerx posted...

Were there policies of liberalization that allowed an independent media, or allowed ordinary citizens to openly criticize policies or politicians without consequences? If not, then while politics at the top may have changed (and despite the bureaucratic infighting or lack thereof), for most Chinese the business of government has been pretty much business as usual.

I'm not ascribing the change of Western attitudes to a change in US presidents. It's more that criticism of China's human rights record doesn't seem to have gained much popular traction (which is to say, outside of people who are normally active in politics) for many years until quite recently. That may be due to the administration temporarily shining a public spotlight on it; but I'll bet you once that spotlight moves onto somewhere or something else, those concerns will quickly fade. The only thing that's going to keep China in the spotlight is the size of its economy, which is the real issue here.

Yes, the media was much more liberal and free before. It has been getting progressively worse. If you mean was it the same as most Western countries, no, but this isn't an all or nothing thing. There are grades of repression, and recently it has been the most repressed in modern times by far. This is not business as usual. Do you have family/friends that live in China? If you can communicate with them outside the Chinese internet (and they aren't a nationalist who supports this crap) they will tell you how things have gotten worse and how strict the crackdowns have gotten. The size of China's economy is not an issue at all for human rights abuses. If economic size factors into how much you care about or don't care about human rights abuses, you should rethink your moral priorities.

---

ssjevot posted...

The size of China's economy is not an issue at all for human rights abuses. If economic size factors into how much you care about or don't care about human rights abuses, you should rethink your moral priorities.

This is in fact exactly the argument I was trying to make.

---

Except you're falling back on the "if they support the right thing for the wrong reason, it's wrong" fallacy. It really shouldn't matter to you why they care about what is right, you don't suddenly start opposing it because they're doing it for the wrong reason. If everyone supported doing the right thing for the wrong reasons, we would end up in a world where nothing wrong was happening anymore. I couldn't care less why we ended up in that world. "Oh he just opposes torture because he doesn't like the guy doing the torture, so I'm okay with torture" is a morally bankrupt stance to have. You will spend the rest of your life waiting for things to get better if you only want people to support them for the right reason.

You think Democrats changed their heart on gay marriage in the US because they actually care about gay people and not because polls conveniently showed over 50% of the population now supported gay marriage? Did you freak out and yell at Obama for being a hypocrite because he said he believed marriage was between one man and one woman until it was no longer popular for him to think that? Did you suddenly decide you need to oppose gay marriage because they're supporting it for the wrong reasons?

---

They don't have the death toll, but they are close to larger scale genocide.

No but the USA is

---

CloneTheHero posted...

lol liberals man. they hate being american. like i always say, canada's not far no ones keeping you here

Actually, Canada is keeping them there. You can't just walk into Canada and start living here.

---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Actually, Canada is keeping them there. You can't just walk into Canada and start living here.

a trumper cant even analyze a basic election poll so what makes you think he or she will understand sovereign borders?

---

I wonder how many people in the US think if you don't like the government it means you hate the US, while also thinking that hating the Chinese government doesn't mean you hate the Chinese people. They have a lot more in common with Chinese nationalists than they think. Probably would literally be a Chinese nationalist had they been born there. "You have to love everything our government does/did or you hate it and the people."

---

ssjevot posted...

Except you're falling back on the "if they support the right thing for the wrong reason, it's wrong" fallacy.

No, I'm making a plea to support the right thing for the right reason because: If people support it only because the government's fickle foreign policy has shone a spotlight on it, then (a) they'll lose interest as soon as the government does, and (b) they'll continue to ignore whatever their government doesn't want to spotlight -- and maybe even wants to hide. Supporting the right thing then becomes a hostage to political fortune, a pawn of politicians and policymakers pursuing their own agenda.

You've written: "If economic size factors into how much you care about or don't care about human rights abuses, you should rethink your moral priorities." Why doesn't that make you guilty of the same "if they support the right thing for the wrong reason, it's wrong" fallacy? Because you've said essentially what I've been saying. If you shackle your global concerns simply to whatever the government tells you is in this month's national interest, or to notions of patriotic sentiment, then that's neither a moral decision nor even necessarily a wise one. Sometimes, the right thing to do is to campaign against what the government tells you is in the national interest.

Yes, obviously it can be a good thing if -- for whatever reason -- the government or some organization highlights an issue you weren't aware of in a distant country that you know nothing about, and makes you want to talk about it and do something about it. I've campaigned on behalf of human rights organizations and I don't question the importance of raising awareness. But do it because it's the right thing to do, not because it fits the purposes of your government's foreign policy plans.

---

Firewerx posted...

You've written: "If economic size factors into how much you care about or don't care about human rights abuses, you should rethink your moral priorities." Why doesn't that make you guilty of the "if they support the right thing for the wrong reason, it's wrong" fallacy?

Because I don't care why they support the right thing? I'm not going to stand up for violations of human rights because you aren't against them for the right reason. I absolutely don't care and as I explained earlier caring about it doesn't make sense. You aren't going to get anything good to happen if that's your driving force. I noticed you skipped my gay marriage example, did you oppose gay marriage because Obama only changed his mind once it was popular or did you just not care, because what matters is allowing gays to have the same rights as everyone else?

If Trump said he wanted to stop bombing people in the Middle East to save money I wouldn't start begging for bombings to continue until they stop for the right reason.

---

ssjevot posted...

If Trump said he wanted to stop bombing people in the Middle East to save money I wouldn't start begging for bombings to continue until they stop for the right reason.

Whereas obviously, what I've done is to vigorously defend the Chinese government imprisoning critics until people learn to start opposing it correctly.

All I'm simply asking for is for people not to wait for their government to green-light opposition to brutally repressive policies, but to pick up that banner independently -- and just as importantly, not to forget about it as soon as their government quietly shoves it to the back of the bottom drawer. Genuine human rights campaigns can take years, decades of work before they start to bear fruit; trendy bandwagon-hopping from one foreign policy change to another doesn't sustain momentum. I'm also saying, take off the blinkers and look around a bit more -- don't look only at where your government is pointing its finger. Maybe there are places it doesn't want you to look.

If you're got an issue with anything I've said in that paragraph, then I give up; because it'll prove you're simply just arguing for the sake of argument. I'm definitely not saying, "shut up about China, because it makes you look like a Trump stooge." Got it yet?

And yes, caring about this stuff does work. That's how and why in a democracy, reforms are forced through, bad laws are repealed, and governments are forced to make U-turns on policy: it happens because eventually, enough people care about these things -- and most of the time, it's not because they waited for a cue from their government.

---

Firewerx posted...

And yes, caring about this stuff does work. That's how and why in a democracy, reforms are forced through, bad laws are repealed, and governments are forced to make U-turns on policy: it happens because eventually, enough people care about these things -- and most of the time, it's not because they waited for a cue from their government.

Democracies are a great demonstration of how little people do care about these things as demonstrated by the statement you told me you agree with earlier:

ssjevot posted...

I want to make another post to specifically address this. Almost no one in the US or elsewhere, care about human rights very much. In the US concern for things like war or indefinite detection or deporting immigrants or whatever issue people allegedly care about evaporate if their guy is in charge and doing the exact same shit. People largely care about their in-group succeeding and only feel bad for some other group if they can use it as a tool to criticize their out-group. However a common mistake to make is to then think you should oppose caring about something because people are doing the right thing for the wrong reason. So regardless of why people care about bad things that are happening in China, you shouldn't suddenly think that makes those things okay. I don't care why people do or don't oppose the US bombing countries in the Middle East, it doesn't suddenly become okay or not okay depending on who drops the bombs on a wedding.

You are saying human nature needs to change. That isn't going to happen. Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth.

---

Yes because China is the worlds largest imperialist superpower, they have an insatiable thirst to expand by force (Hong Kong, Taiwan, South China Sea) and debt trap diplomacy.

---

ReignFury posted...

Yes because China is the worlds largest imperialist superpower, they have an insatiable thirst to expand by force (Hong Kong, Taiwan, South China Sea) and debt trap diplomacy.

Hong Kong belonged to China anyways. Hong Kong should remain politically separate and be whatever they want but China should still own them just like Hawaii is part of the U.S. but they aren't even close to each other.