• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I disagree that China is committing genocide, but ignoring that for now I think it’s interesting to tackle the concept of “freedom of speech” in the PRC.

    Fundamentally, you cannot allow Capitalists to have free-reign in the world of speech if you want to have a long-running and successful Socialist system, because Capital has the ability to push whatever it wants, regardless of truth, and dominate all platforms if they are given control. Speech will be controlled, whether that be through the government or through the flow of Capital is a decision to make.

    In the instance of a proletarian-controlled government, it is better for it to restrict the speech of Caputalists than it is to let them go unopposed. The Soviet Union’s later reforms showed how quickly liberalism can take root if you have dedicated hostile actors pushing propaganda from the outside.

    I consider this restriction of speech a necessary one, as long as the Working Class feels and is represented. In China, polls show that that is indeed true, so while we can critique aspects of their system, ultimately it seems to broadly be on the right path.

    • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      I agree that it is necessary in the current world, just making it clear that this isn’t a fundamental issue with being a communist, it’s a matter of policy.

      Whether or not that policy makes sense right now is different, and I agree that it absolutely does in the current climate, but once there are more socialist countries, I think it’ll become a non-issue. Like I said, only authoritarian methods like controlling speech can allow socialists/communists to hold onto power in the world right now.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Fair enough. I guess my central point is that the fact that the PRC’s model exists is not proof that a system that takes away tools like control of media can also exist. I would agree that eventually, when more Socialist countries exist and especially the US Empire crumbles, this may be able to weaken, but I would also say that this depends on internal development as well, ie the Bourgeoisie must no longer exist anywhere for control of their speech to no longer be relevant, and this is abolished through development, not simple decree.

        Really, it’s getting into the weeds and being nitpicky over theory, your comment was generally good, but I wanted to highlight that there are Material reasons for the PRC’s control of information.