Europe
News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org
view the rest of the comments
You're doing the same both sides shit as the fascist mayor.
Total control by the working class is not the same as total control by the bourgeois we live under or the total control by fascist weirdos the bourgeois settle for when their system is in crisis.
You are acknowledging total control in both systems, but are arguing against the word totalitarian to describe them. What is your actual argument?
That totalitarian and authoritarian are dumb words because they equate the working class being in control with the bourgeois being in control. Its as silly as saying we need a healthy balance between tyranny and democracy.
Do you think that you specifically, as a worker, would have more power under totalitarian communism? Your voice and your opinions would be taken into account by the unaccountable leaders? Do you really think you would even be allowed to critique party policy?
I would simply not vote for a leader who I didn't like.
The average Chinese or Cuban feels more represented than the average American, in Vietnam it seems like the more rural areas feel strongly represented, while the urban residents are more likely to feel they have no power and the whole system has become rotten.
A few years ago, Cuba had a referendum on a new constitution. After years of local discussions, revisions, and more discussion, they came up with a document that most everyone agreed with, it passed with over 90% support.
That's a great statistic, >90%. Shows up all over the place in communist literature. I'm sure it's a sign of a well functioning democracy with diverse opinions represented.
If you think Cuba lied about the 85% turnout and 90% in favor vote, it should be trivial to disprove via statistics. Hell just ask 30 randos how they voted.
I didn't say they lied. I implied it's illegal for citizens to disagree. Putin also wins with similar percentages, and maybe there's some fuckery, but our best evidence is that Putin is similarly extremely popular in capitalist totalitarian Russia.
You can just go to Cuba and ask them. Don't book a flight from America or mention that you did or the US state department might cause problems, but its not like Russia.
You're right, it's not like Russia, except they are both totalitarian.
Could you please cite a source? How much of that is toeing the party line so they don't get asked out for tea?
https://ash.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/final_policy_brief_7.6.2020.pdf
But the og source is just talking to people who live in China, either in China or traveling to nearby countries.
Looking at the Soviet take in the topic: both were totalitarian, though. I wouldn't call them "two sides of the same coin" as that mayor, but each on their own used a totalitarian approach to achieve their goals.
In the end it won't matter much to you if you're locked up because you have the wrong religion or because you are the wrong social class.
If I was a rich landowner in Soviet Russia or Mao's China, and I didn't want to go to jail or be made to wear a silly hat and paraded around town, I would simply not burn my crops and instead support the workers. But maybe I'm just built different.
Hm, but you wouldn't say that everyone persecuted in China or the Soviet Union deserved said persecution, would you?
No, there were definitely mistakes made, which are worth studying. I don't believe the solution is less worker control, which nearly every western perspective on any such cases aims to make.
Edit: Life and terror in Stalin's Russia is a pretty good book on the subject.
That sounds like although you see some errors, you overall agree with their approach of totalitarianism?
Was/is there actual worker control in these systems, though? Are the migrant workers from rural areas in China actually in control of the country? How much influence did the ordinary workers actually have on the party elites running the countries in the Soviet Bloc? In the end, the ordinary workers didn't seem to be so happy with their control, when they opposed and toppled the system.
I have never been to the USSR and its too vast a subject spanning too long a period for me to develop strong opinions, but I know all but the lowest ranking party members had to be elected, and during purges, every member would be tested and their constituents were invited to air any flaws in the members actions or character.
In the end, Yeltsin shot the congress building with a tank to stop them from meeting and carrying out what they were elected to do.
I haven't had too many political conversations in rural China, but I did see more nostalgia for the past and individual patriotic displays. Mao print mugs aren't uncommon, but in the city a young person told me it was all passe.
But to answer your original question, the question is like "do you think there can be too democratic of a system?" The alternative to total worker control is partial or total control by the bourgeois or aristocracy or w/e.
That was 1993, so after the coup attempt by the Communist Party and after the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Up until that point, there already had been widespread cracks throughout the entire Union and its bloc - or what was left of it. What happened a few years prior in Beijing's Tiananmen Square is certainly known to you. Somehow, the average workers were of the opinion that this system didn't work for them, there was widespread discontent. Isn't that something that should be considered in a form of reflecting self-criticism, given that officially, the power should be in the hands of the working class.
Imo, there absolutely can be a "too democratic" of a system. If everything is decided by majority alone, there will be very little room for minorities. The real value of a system comes from how minorities are treated in it.
Yet, in stable democracies, you find awfully few labour camps for political opponents. Why don't these systems need totalitarianism to be stable and widely accepted by their citizens? Why do these countries regularly score highest in terms of happiness of their citizens?
When a liberal country says this, the only minority they're protecting is the capitalist class.
Are China and Vietnam less democratic because they grant autonomy and special representation to minorities? I wouldn't say so, because democracy means rule by the people and those people's unique situations mean they're affected differently by the same rules, so its more democratic for them to have their own institutions and protections.
Honestly I am divided on the subject; you have a hmong sending their children out to beg or dance on a school night, its the end result of a cascade of social failures. I don't think it could be solved by giving the minority fewer tools to deal with it.
All prisoners are political.
But also spending a few months working alongside the people you're supposed to represent is an ideal punishment for failures to represent them, IIRC both president Xi and his father were purged at various points.
Imagine if the people of Arizona/WV could have recalled Kyrstyn Synoma/Manchin and sent them to plant trees for 6 months in 2020.
It all comes down to, do you believe that it's possible to mislead people? And relatedly, can you deceive a whole population? I have seen so much evidence that propaganda works, living in our shared capitalist hellscape. I cannot see a >90% agreement, on pretty much any question ever formulated, without a loooot of programming. Nothing is ever that popular naturally. These are not populations that are routinely exposed to differing opinions. Totalitarianism, in all it's forms, has these same indicators: screwy election numbers, cults of personality, government enforced and socially enforced orthopraxis and orthodoxy, etc. It is not a system where you have anything resembling agency.
You can't imagine anything that 90+% of people would agree on?
Because I sure can.
People need to be fed, have a place to sleep and hide from nature.
And what agency do we have now in the west? Can we stop the climate catastrophy? PFAS and microplastics from entering our bloodstream? The US couldn't even stop a fascist takeover.
I very much dislike people who try to paint politics as an opinions game, while foregoing the basic function of state as caring for its citizens.