既要革命，就要有一个革命的党。没有一个革命的党，没有一个按照马克思列宁主义的革命理论和革命风格建立起来的革命党，就不可能领导工人阶级和广大人民群众战胜帝国主义及其走狗。
Its great for preserving cultures but not so great if you like to travel a lot.
Possibly but that wasn’t the intent of the Hukou system. It’s goal was the prevention of massive slums forming on the borders of the majority cities during rapid modernisation (which in turn leads to rapid urbanisation). There is currently massive hukou reform ongoing such as restrictions effectively being lifted for cities under 3 million population.
Yes they’re against Trumps manor of going about it and are all about virtue signaling when they have no power. Just like how Obama “was going to close Guantanamo”. In reality it was their nominee for president who called Iran the biggest threat to America and continued to position for intervention.
how old are you?
Mid-30’s
What is your experience
Personal experience with the USSR? None. But I never claimed to have any. Otherwise experience: I’m Chinese originally rural but through scholarships I was put in the position to be able to earn a PhD and 2 masters and now live in a city. But this really has nothing to do with what we were talking about. I never claimed to have personal experience of the USSR.
Pray tell what makes you an expert?
I wouldn’t call myself an expert but I’ve read many studies and books about the USSR as well as my second masters being in Marxist Theory so I would call myself relatively informed.
All of this is however a dodge that has nothing to do with the point at hand which is that appealing to experience when in reality you have effectively 0 makes no sense. If you’ve never worked or engaged with any facets of the state appealing to experience to draw general conclusions about it is plainly ridiculous.
Ok so you were 14 when the USSR fell and 8 when Gorbachev came to power. You were a child. At that age you simply don’t have the depth or breath of experience for it to be meaningful. Same as 14 or 8 year olds now don’t have the experience to really have wider political input. If you haven’t worked, had to get a house, engaged with the state using your “experience” to derive conclusions about it is nonsense. Not to say younger people can’t have opinions but they simply can’t defer to experience as generally they lack it but this can be substituted with study, statistics etc.
Edit:
Also again you were 8 when Gorbachev came to power and everything was going to shit you have 0 experience of the pre Gorbachev era. Appealing to personal experience to draw conclusions about that is even more nonsense.
Iran is bi-partisan as is Gaza same as Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq
I don’t think I’ve seen even a single person on ml claim personal experience but instead deffer to data and other sources which is entirely valid in my opinion
I never realised Lemmy is full of 60+ year olds who would have been old enough to have any meaningful experience of the USSR. (And even then at 61 you’d only just be catching the end where everything was going to shit due to many complex factors).
Off the top of my head I can’t think of a single non bi-partisan one.
I was very clearly responding to
Similarly that still doesn’t make it ableist bud.
Hence ending that particular sentence in bud not your attempt to weasel out of using ableist language as everyone knows thats bullshit. Daft could have 10,000 other definitions but everyone knows which you meant before you were called out. Trying to shrodingers bigot yourself has never worked for anyone.
It’s not at all what I implied and the fact you keep doubling down on this ridiculous strawman is what really makes no sense.
Yeah again were speaking English because it’s your language you couldn’t even speak to me in any of my more native languages so condescending about it is silly.
It’s an educated guess given how you talk about what is and isn’t science it’s the kind of attitude that would get you laughed out of a lab until you fixed your attitude. It’s the attitude of someone who watches science videos or has interest in some field of science like astronomy or astrophysics but has never actually studied it instead watching edutainment about it.
I wasn’t crying about anything simply pointing it out and the fact that instead of simply apologising and moving on you felt the need to double triple and quadruple down just shows the kind of person you really are.
You think Palestine is the only Bi-partisan machine? You really need to open a history book. Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Syria and all the rest are all bi-partisan.
If you are saying this unironically you need to open a history book and look outside your bubble. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Haiti, former Yugoslavia, Sudan, Gaza, Vietnam, Dominican Republic, Somalia and many many more attacked and or destroyed under democrats.
It doesn’t solely mean crazy or deranged, it can also mean plain stupid. Take a crack at which I meant. Similarly that still doesn’t make it ableist bud.
Yes it does bud. You are a an albeist asshole and should be ashamed of yourself.
That’s absolutely your implication hence the word imply.
But it wasn’t it was a straw man not even in the same area of thought of anything I said.
It’s not, there’s natural science, social sciences and humanities.
I wish I could be as confident as you in just saying shit it really is a skill for the privileged.
Pot
See the difference between us is I have interacted with and contributed to the scientific community through my PhD and time as a researcher at a university whereas you given everything I’ve seen most likely didn’t make it past mandatory schooling. You reek of YouTube university educated stemlord.
Daft is usually a pejorative, it isn’t however ableist that’s just crybaby bullshit you’re using to try move the conversation into culture war bullshit instead of the actual conversation.
Calling someone crazy or deranged is absolutely ableist. The only one here trying to change the conversation is you.
You’re implying at some point without any evidence whatsoever that we could end up finding everything is objectively provable through what I can only assume is psychohistory which isn’t likely our at all reasonable to assume
Entirely not what I said, like completely not even in the same area of anything I said genuinely impressive strawman building.
I wonder what you call the field to which the sub fields you call social sciences might belong, it couldn’t possibly be called social science as an umbrella term?!?!?!
You are unintelligent, uninformed and massively arrogant. You clearly have never interacted with or contributed anything to the scientific community and it really shows. Please take some time to reflect instead of continuing to be a debatepervert.
Daft when used as a pejorative (a stand in for calling someone crazy or deranged) absolutely is.
Again simply because the field is yet to be completed doesn’t make it illegitimate. Physics has yet to be unified, math has yet to be completed yet they remain science. You are severely uninformed and again I implore you to do some self reflection and actually engage with the science and scientific community. You are not as intelligent as you think and clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.
Wow abelism from a debatelord never seen that before. Apologies that my grammar isn’t perfect in my fourth language your majesty I’ll try do better in the future /s
The fact is you’re wrong and are simply trying to find anything you can to weasel out of facing that fact that the field of social science is real, it’s subfields are legitimate and you have nothing but vibes and misunderstandings behind your thought to try hold up some vague heir of superiority you feel.
First off you said social sciences were illegitimate also you have a very feeble grasp of what makes a field legitimate, we obviously have not found an encompassing theory for all society, but so what? The same is true fo physics, maths and so many other fields. You seem like a disgruntled stemlord and I would invite you to engage in some self reflection (and I understand in the west this may only be for the privileged few but) you should also try engage with these subfields a bit before denouncing the entire field.
Those are social sciences there isn’t however a social science.
That’s great but you said:
“there is no legitimate social sciences.”
Also this is nonsense like saying there is no physics because when it comes to study it’s broken into subfields.
As for the rest of your nonsense all science is, is:
A systematic method or body of knowledge in a given area.
Psychology is absolutely a science. As for history you’re probably right that in and of itself it is not a science but it is a core part of much of the rest of the social science fields, this however doesn’t do much to further your argument that the social sciences as a field are illegitimate.
Sorry I just think you dismissing anthropology, archaeology, economics, geography, history, linguistics, psychology, sociology, political science and more as entirely illegitimate would likely be fixed by you having a background in them off which to speak instead of spewing nonsense.
there is no legitimate social sciences.
Stemlords should be forced to study social sciences.
Pretending to be an arbiter of what is and isn’t science and not knowing weight is a force measured in Newton’s and mass is measured in grams is pretty funny. If they were doing a bit it would be gold. (If only)(One can dream).