Before the current Ukraine war people would have said fighting Russia would be a lost fight, but we’ve learned a lot since then about what their readiness actually looks like. This makes me wonder if China is all that tough, or if they just talk a good game.
China is socialist and Russia is historically the anti-imperialist communist power. You wanted to spread your vile Anglo bullshit but are now unsuccessful.
I am Hungarian, and it would have made more sense to bring up any other post-socialist country instead. One of the most popular historical leaders of Hungary is János Kádár, who was the one who requested help from the Soviet Union in 1956 after Imre Nagy announced that he would withdraw from the Warsaw Pact.
Also, at the second parliamentary election after the socialist era, MSZP (one of the successor parties of the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party, alongside the Hungarian Workers’ Party) campaigned on the promise of democratically restoring all the “good things” (they put it this way) from socialism, which immediately won them all the parliamentary seats that could be won by one party in 1994. Of course, the MSZP did not keep any of their campaign promises and implemented more neoliberal policies with strong austerity (the infamous Bokros package). The then-prime minister, Gyula Horn, also made explicitly anti-strike statements. As a result, there was a significant chance that the still-Marxist Hungarian Workers’ Party would enter parliament in the 1998 parliamentary election. Therefore, the parliamentary parties voted to raise the electoral threshold in common agreement, so that this could not happen.
TLDR:
In Hungary, the assessment of the socialist era is not as black and white as many people think.
That was disrespectful, literally no one in Hungary thinks positively of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and the oppression of the Habsburg Empire. It was not a coincidence that in 1918 the monarchy was overthrown by revolution and replaced with a people’s republic then with a soviet republic in 1919.
China is not socialist mate, it’s technically a market economy with “chinese characteristics” and is run by one massive coalition. there’s private property ownership in China, there is stock exchange for example.
Its funny how you just wiped off “socialist” from the term used to describe mainland – market socialist economy with Chinese characteristics. Screaming about the miniscule existence of private property or stock exchange is a delusional and dishonest way to portray China as not being socialist. Their socialism comes from prosperity of over a billion people on their land, and prosperity of rest of the world via cheap manufactured goods that increase purchasing power of literally every person on earth that is not a rich capitalist pig.
I stand by my opinion. My ancestors did not escape communist rule from China just for me to be splained by some westerners about politics of China.
China is very much a market economy, it is not any different compared to Vietnam. I currently live in another parliamentary democracy in Asia, I would say to an extent the level of market interference is way higher in mine compared to China.
You can say all you want about CCP and Xi’s regime, and China and market their economic system all the way, to me it will always be a market economy with the level of interference no different from other NIC’s around the globe
As a commie linux user I fight nazi and microsoft
But not china or Russia?
Fighting China is like fighting a lost fight.
Russia is currently destroying itself,no help needed.
Before the current Ukraine war people would have said fighting Russia would be a lost fight, but we’ve learned a lot since then about what their readiness actually looks like. This makes me wonder if China is all that tough, or if they just talk a good game.
But what about your Komerades?
China is socialist and Russia is historically the anti-imperialist communist power. You wanted to spread your vile Anglo bullshit but are now unsuccessful.
Lmao, ask Hungary how “anti imperial” the USSR was
I am Hungarian, and it would have made more sense to bring up any other post-socialist country instead. One of the most popular historical leaders of Hungary is János Kádár, who was the one who requested help from the Soviet Union in 1956 after Imre Nagy announced that he would withdraw from the Warsaw Pact.
Also, at the second parliamentary election after the socialist era, MSZP (one of the successor parties of the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party, alongside the Hungarian Workers’ Party) campaigned on the promise of democratically restoring all the “good things” (they put it this way) from socialism, which immediately won them all the parliamentary seats that could be won by one party in 1994. Of course, the MSZP did not keep any of their campaign promises and implemented more neoliberal policies with strong austerity (the infamous Bokros package). The then-prime minister, Gyula Horn, also made explicitly anti-strike statements. As a result, there was a significant chance that the still-Marxist Hungarian Workers’ Party would enter parliament in the 1998 parliamentary election. Therefore, the parliamentary parties voted to raise the electoral threshold in common agreement, so that this could not happen.
TLDR: In Hungary, the assessment of the socialist era is not as black and white as many people think.
Yeah, Hungary (Austria-Hungary), one of the 8 Nation Alliance powers?
That was disrespectful, literally no one in Hungary thinks positively of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and the oppression of the Habsburg Empire. It was not a coincidence that in 1918 the monarchy was overthrown by revolution and replaced with a people’s republic then with a soviet republic in 1919.
Not aligning with the United States does not socialism nor anti-imperialism make
China is not socialist mate, it’s technically a market economy with “chinese characteristics” and is run by one massive coalition. there’s private property ownership in China, there is stock exchange for example.
Its funny how you just wiped off “socialist” from the term used to describe mainland – market socialist economy with Chinese characteristics. Screaming about the miniscule existence of private property or stock exchange is a delusional and dishonest way to portray China as not being socialist. Their socialism comes from prosperity of over a billion people on their land, and prosperity of rest of the world via cheap manufactured goods that increase purchasing power of literally every person on earth that is not a rich capitalist pig.
You can scratch your neckbeard all you want, it’s very much a market economy. Whether there’s the term socialist or not
Too bad its not about being a neckbeard, its about not being delusional and not spreading delusion to cope with some ADV China tier bullshit.
I stand by my opinion. My ancestors did not escape communist rule from China just for me to be splained by some westerners about politics of China.
China is very much a market economy, it is not any different compared to Vietnam. I currently live in another parliamentary democracy in Asia, I would say to an extent the level of market interference is way higher in mine compared to China.
You can say all you want about CCP and Xi’s regime, and China and market their economic system all the way, to me it will always be a market economy with the level of interference no different from other NIC’s around the globe
Save the BS and don’t be a smartarse
What is anglo?