Fine, I'll admit, I have a problem. I hear obvious bullshit and I sort of automatically filter it out because it's clearly bullshit and nobody will buy into it, and then sometimes it turns out it was actually a Really Big Deal that I probably should have paid some attention to. Made that mistake with Bitcoin, could have been rich but noooo, I ignored it because it was obviously dumb as hell. Another example: I distinctly remember going "What is this Gamergate shit? It'll probably blow over but let me try to see if there's a point to it" and then I got a booty-call from my then-girlfriend that her roommate was heading out to class so I went up to her dorm room, and that was the last I really paid attention to gamergate until years later when it turned out to have become a whole thing. My eyes would just glaze over anytime I saw the word because I basically went "oh yeah its that bullshit that dumbasses were losing their minds over and nobody cares about, I ain't got time to pay attention to that shit" and then it turns out it was actually this major flashpoint for the rise of the particularly bizarre new far right dweebs we get nowadays.
I did the same thing with "tankies". Never heard the term until maybe 2017? and largely ignored it. It just seemed to be a nothingburger, some new term for a few terminally online weirdos who hated Communists, and I assumed they were just fascists because you know who hated the Communists the most? Nazis. But then it spread and more people started using it, and then applying it more broadly (even Bernard Brethren are tankies, apparently?) which meant that it was such a varied term as to have no meaning. And I basically wrote off anyone hating on tankies as some dumbass who wasn't worth listening to because they were too ill informed to have anything of value to say.
It's probably not all of a sudden but it's really dawning on me that this is not some flash in the pan that'll just go away. I've been expecting it to just burn itself out because it's so obviously on its face bullshit. But, fast forward and the term seems to have taken on a whole life of its own. So many people hate on "tankies". Even anarchists I know irl hate on "tankies". Supposedly radical leftists hate on "tankies". I went on a date with an anarchist who started ragging on "tankies" and I just left because what even is that shit? It's become so prevalent I feel I can't ignore it anymore.
Don't support the NATO proxy war that's grinding up Ukrainian lives? Ebil tankie. Don't support genocide in Palestine? Ebil tankie. Wouldn't vote for Genocide Joe or Holocaust Harris? Ebil tankie. Not racist against Chinese people? Ebil tankie. Think Cuba and Venezuela are cool actually? Ebil tankie. Don't like NATO? Ebil tankie. Post on Hexbear? Ebil tankie.
I didn't grow up during the Cold War so idk how AmeriKKKan society was about Communists, but I don't remember any of this level of prevalent rabid anti-Communism from liberals and even people who fancy themselves as so-called radical leftists in like, 2000 - 2015. This is getting absurd and frankly baffling. Not too long ago a bunch of these same people were saying socialism is cool, war is bad, black and brown lives matter. But now all of a sudden it seems like you actually apply those slogans and you're an "ebil tankie".
What makes it seem extra insidious is that basically all of this seems to feed back into supporting USAdian warmongering and imperialism. Like, what is a "tankie"? When you ask people they'll say "Authoritarian Communists" but it really just seems that they call anyone who isn't deepthroating the boot of the AmeriKKKan Empire a "tankie".
How did this happen? What is going on?
Seems the 'coup' in 2014 was caused by mass protests by Ukrainian people, and then a 328-0 vote to remove the previous government, although some parliament members either didn't show up or didn't vote. The counter protests supporting Russia were drastically smaller. Invading Crimea is an invasion. Also Donbas like a month or two later.
Damage is more than just war. In the same way that the US likes to fuck with people's governments, so does China. The US has definitely done damage to my country but you won't find a war that is US vs Australia. The US is just more successful at it because people think they are the good guys, regardless of reality, and kinda just let them get away with it.
Finding specific things for China is a pain because if you search it you'll find recent stuff that is just dickheads at news.com.au fearmongering about bullshit that doesn't matter and isn't China actually doing something.
General abuse of ocean territory rights, general human rights abuses with sweatshops and the like, along with the excessive control of the people. Releasing CFCs again, like we got rid of that shit for a reason if they could stop pumping it out that would be fantastic.
I don't know how to conclude this in a way that says I don't think China is the only problem for shit, they aren't the worst, the US at least currently is doing way more damage than China ever has and most countries do evil shit in a way that sounds reasonable so just deal with this shitty disclaimer that I'm not rewriting a fourth time because what I type will never match what I'm trying to say properly.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957
Russia openly interferes, the US tries to quietly interfere and then Russia leaks it. That's not exactly a good piece of evidence to say it was a coup. Funny that the US fucked up hard enough to have that ever leak though.
If enough of the population were on the Russian side the protest numbers would've looked very different, that's not the way the people chose.
By doing a coup d'etat, replacing the government, and pushing Russia to war. 'Quietly'.
Overthrowing a government in this manner is a coup d'etat.
Oh! I can play this game too!
'If enough of the population was on the side of trans people, the harassment of trans people wouldn't be happening. That's not what the people keep choosing'.
Or how about 'If enough of the population was on the Jewish side, the Holocaust wouldn't have happened. That's not what the people chose'.
I can come up with more examples of 'the people' making 'choices'.
What's especially funny, is Eastern Ukraine, the majority Russian speaking areas, were very much against the coup.
They did look different in the eastern portion of the country. In Odessa the Nazis literally burned protesters alive and shot them for trying to escape the conflagration.
Your perception of this is entirely driven by CIA propaganda.
Odessa is pretty fucked up and the deputy mayor, Gordienko and anyone else who caused the further march on the camps definitely should be in jail.
So, we are in agreement that NATO and Ukrainian leadership should face justice. Good.
The Banderite murderers were elevated by the coup, not brought to any kind of justice. They are the people in photo ops against "Russia's war of aggression" with black sun tattoos and via Azov they have produced the internal propaganda that has filtered down into your comments here.
Why do you suppose they didn't see any consequences? It couldn't be that the government the perpetrators helped to install approved of those actions and immediately brought Nazi formations into the military, could it? I mean it's not like the government that they support are steadily erasing Soviet names from public spaces and replacing them with Banderas and other fascists, because that would be the kind of thing an objectively fascist government would do. It's all just totally isolated incidents that had nothing to do with anything else.
Victoria Nuland was literally talking about which successors they would choose.
And who cares about the aesthetics of "interference"? What matters is what is actually sought, with what power, in what interest, and to what effect.
I didn't know Victoria Nuland and other higher-ups of the USian empire were 'Ukrainian people' who were merely protesting. I suppose, you will also consider members of the Ukrainian government who participated in that and organised that as merely 'Ukrainian people' 'protesting', as well.
By the way, why were they 'protesting' purely after the the government opted to not accept a bad deal with the EU, and why were they so fond of Bandera, and why were they picking who will be in what position in the government weeks before the finalisation of the coup?
Ah, so you are just going to try to invent a bullshit reason to demonise the PRC.
The PRC has also not engaged in coups like the ones in Ukraine, Brazil, etc. or invasions like those of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Palestine, etc., nor has the PRC engaged in the IMF-style debt-entrapment, contrary to the popular myths that your empire likes spreading.
So, no, this 'so does China' is unwarranted there.
You are extremely uninformed about these topics.
Because Australia is a settler colony in the imperial core.
Also, it's incredible to present white European Australians as victims in this regard when they are literally colonisers.
Because the PRC simply hasn't been doing what you claim it has been doing. Whenever somebody tries to claim that the PRC are these malicious demons, if one looks at actual investigations of such topics, one finds things like 'The UN finds no evidence of such-and-such' and 'We have examined if the PRC engages in debt-trapping and have found that that does not happen', etc.
HAHAHAHA.
Gods forbid the PRC has agency in its waters.
Oh, not any specific ones, just vague 'general' ones that you can't point to? Meanwhile, when Australia invades everywhere with its NATO buddies, it's all fine and dandy to inflict the worst abuse on people there, including kidnapping and torturing people, I take it?
The PRC has been one of the few places on this planet to improve people's standards of living in the past couple of decades or so.
Ah yes, a white European coloniser is going to complain about their (former) colonies being forced to have worse living conditions than what labour aristocracy at home enjoys.
Meanwhile, your empire literally has child labour.
Not to mention that this 'sweatshop' thing is likely yet another myth meant to demonise the PRC, but I haven't looked into it myself, as your empire seems to have stopped making those accusations a while ago. Probably because nobody with a brain is buying those anymore.
Oh no, not the vague 'excessive control of the people'. This is totally so much worse than white European Australians invading everywhere and torturing people. /s
You mean the thing that was being made there illegally? And which the government cracked down on?
Oh? What are the abuses, exactly? Are you familiar with maritime territorial claims and what they tend to look like? The history of island disputes? The nature of shipping lanes in the region and how this intersects with US imperialism? Who otherwise controls sais shipping lanes, de facto, and why?
Where did you learn of these "abuses" and did you read the sources critically? Did you ask whether you should take the Director of the US National Defense Maritime Research Organization (etc) at their word?
And here you see how human rights have become a diluted tool for chauvinist thinking. Can't even be specific! What human rights abuses? How do they compare to others countries'? What is the government response? Why did they happen? No, no, don't ask such questions, right? The important thing is that you've terminated thinking with a negative view of China. This is the essence of the "tankie" epithet, it is the left-punching insult of chauvinist incuriosity.
Sweatshops are the workshops of the poor and exploited. They are usually in service of imperialists, literally owned by companies like Target, and they operate in more exploitable countries like Bangladesh and Indonesia. When thinking of sweatshops, you should direct your anger at the OECD imperialists that own and run them. Understand that the countries with them operate under incredible pressure from imperialists, often including coups by said imperialists to install capital-friendly leaders.
China has generally done away with sweatshops. They have automated and industrialized. There is still difficult work and long hours, but the image you have in mind is likely chauvinist on multiple levels.
Again, incredibly vague. This is an arbitrary yardstick, you could say this about literally any governance structure of any size. I have seen "horizontalists" disrupt meetings because they thought the existence of open committees / working groups in an organizing space was "authoritarian". Who knows what you're talking about, though it again rings the bell of orientalism.
Okay so the situation you're complaining about is that some companies were releasing CFCs and then the Chinese government cracked down on it, reversing this. That's what makes you bigoted towards China? Is this the "excessive control of the people" you were talking about?