Comradeship // Freechat

2448 readers

61 users here now

Talk about whatever, respecting the rules established by Lemmygrad. Failing to comply with the rules will grant you a few warnings, insisting on breaking them will grant you a beautiful shiny banwall.

A community for comrades to chat and talk about whatever doesn't fit other communities

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

felipeforte@lemmygrad.ml

Anyone familiar with what the OP is talking about or is this more anarlib slop? (www.instagram.com)

submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by 666@lemmygrad.ml to c/comradeship@lemmygrad.ml

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Just curious, because this account has had an interesting pattern. Also, 15% is the problem?

all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Commiejones@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 6 months ago

Royal Dutch Shell owns 40% of LNG Canada and a Malaysian company owns 25%.

LNG C are only responsible for building a port and liquification plant. They have no control over where the pipeline is going. I can almost guarantee both PetroChina and LNG C pitched ports in other places to the canadian government because Kitimat is a horrible place for a port but they will take whatever port they can get from the canadian government because they want the gas.

It'd be hypocritical for China to not build a terminal regardless of the internal land disputes because the entire nation is built on white supremacist genocide. If they turned their nose up at this they'd have to turn their nose up at the entire global north.

[–] 666@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

feel like the highlighted part is what made me extremely suspicious

[–] Lemmygradwontallowme@hexbear.net 13 points 6 months ago

Yeah, look at their funding

[–] OrnluWolfjarl@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 6 months ago

I haven't heard about this, but that NGO seems to be almost entirely funded by the US and UK, so highly suspect as a source.

[+] pancake@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] King_Simp@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well, it's a little more complex but I think it has the same conclusion. You have to look at a theoretical perspective as well. You have to ask "is this a fundamental issue with the political-economic system of the people's republic of China, or is it some form of mistake or flaw natural of the economic period existing within and without china" Because you technically could make a maoist or anarchist argument that China should be replaced with a new system, so youre not replacing China with "the average nation." However the answer is more along the lines that it is flaw but not indicative or damning of the general progressive trend of the people's republic.

Also, like this is so many degrees removed from China. It's a company owned by the state, who owns a minority stake in another company, being criticized for a pipeline in a foreign country.