You're not making any sense. Chinese rulers completely abandoned decades ago even PRETENDING to follow Stalin/Mao ideas. And if stalinism was NOT market oriented,THAN MARKET STALINISM IS OXYMORON! Contradiction of terms.
where was the human rights when european massacre native american ? where was the human rights when the white people killed,torture,rape,destroyed black people during 16th-18th Century? where was the human rights during the anti chinese Rock Springs massacre and the chinese exclusion in north america in 1882-1964? where is the human rights in afgaynistan and iraq? and now u call chinese evil?perhaps u are not sure who are the real evil here do u?
where was the human rights when european massacre native american ? where was the human rights when the white people killed,torture,rape,destroyed black people during 16th-18th? where was the human rights during the anti chinese Rock Springs massacre and the chinese exclusion in north america in 1882-1964? where is the human rights in afgaynistan and iraq? and now u call chinese evil?perhaps u are not sure who are the real evil here do u?
LOL.....Yea Naomi, China only started to become repressive in 1979 AFTER they started economic reforms. Since Maos time there has only been a regression from when socialist ideals were still adhered to there was liberty and real political and social rights.
On what earth does Nao Klein live? Other then her talking points where does she get that capitalism is more inclined to be anti-democratic or anti-liberty then a centralized, planned, and state based economies?
idiots like Naomi Klein will always nag people to sleep.. they have no concept of reality... they're purely academic retards who dream of a mythical utopia where every living organism on the planet is the same.
@nfusionlabs Fuck you. If there was a scumbag academic engaged in a circle squaring exercise it was that crackpot motherfucker Milton Friedman and his school of economic terrorists and Nazis in Chicago. Absolutely nothing those jerkoffs came up with works and Friedman was a huge suppirtre of the Communists in China and their brutal class crackdowns.
where was the human rights when european massacre native american ? where was the human rights when the white people killed,torture,rape,destroyed black people during 16th-18th? where was the human rights during the anti chinese Rock Springs massacre and the chinese exclusion in north america in 1882-1964? where is the human rights in afgaynistan and iraq? and now u call chinese evil?perhaps u are not sure who are the real evil here do u?
Why america jail their citizens highest rated in the world 33.5 percent..? and why black people dont have their true family tree, or their true last name. Why use their whitemaster last name?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
READ
Capitalism is a system that builds on the knowledge that humans, will in general choose the "best" product, some chose "wrong", but they believed it was the "best". And then result in that the "best" products are made more often.
Trade is exchange with mutual consent, both parties believes they will be better off after the trade is made.
Just to clarify, trade is what makes the world a better place, capitalism is what makes trade possible, regulations makes the effect of capitalism worse.
So intelligent, Naomi Klein, god, what a genius, very perceptive.
But even if the migrant workers had equal rights , they still wouldnt be equal, because they dont have the education, social connections to succeed on an equal status anyway.
The economic system being imposed throughout the world is corporate socialism--in former times called Fascism. It is most definitely not a "free market" system. In the USA, we have not enjoyed anything close to a free market since the first half of the 19th century. Modern "Capitalism" is the wedding of world corporate and banking institutions with world government. Competition exists only between giant corporations, & they do create terror incidents to gain control.
Look the bottom line is people vote with their feet. Where have people in the 20th century fled from and to? East Berlin to West Berlin, Mainland China to Hong Kong, North Korea to South Korea, Communist country to Capitalist country-- not the other way around.
If you espouse a socialist economy, you naturally espouse government management of virtually all aspects of life. Where do you suppose you will find these angels who will run your perfect society?
The Olympics would not have been possible this year had China not embraced markets and opened up to the rest of the world. Would you prefer if they remained socialist? In time, China will open up politically as it has already done economically. It is only inevitable- as the average Chinese becomes more wealthy they have the leisure to worry about such things as politics and human rights. You are quite mistaken if you wish for China to open up politically before it does economically.
Heh. You don't think the average Chinese worker worries about their rights because they don't have time to? As I said above, in 2005, by the government's own measure, there were at least 87,000 "mass incidents" — governmentspeak for large-scale protests or riots. That hasn't opened them up politically - since the police throw them in jail (to never be seen again, some of them).
Also the government wants the businesses there so they will make sure the wages remain lower than other places.
tkrm333: Yea that's true, people criticize China for not being a democracy; but they don't realize that it's already happening gradually. Economic changes must happen slowly overtime. It cannot happen drastically or else there will be chaos.
That's fucking bullshit. Freedom is also a double-edged sword. It's not good enough to solve the problems in Africa and Middle east. And don't forget India is a country actually gives democracy a bad name. Dmubass.
capitalism is a necessary condition for freedom, not the other way around. name me a country that has political freedom without economic freedom. "democratic socialism" that western leftists propose is a myth.
China's embrace of the market system has and continues to lift millions out of poverty. let us not forget that the majority of Chinese are still poor, and do not have the luxury to worry about human rights like miss klein and all the other western leftists who criticize china.
Oh dear. China was not free before and it is not free now they're capitalist. The Chinese people have been forced into these low-paying, unsafe factory jobs many times out of circumstances created by their lovely authoritarian capitalist government. A great deal of farmers and people living in rural areas were run off their land so that the people would have to move and work in factories. And the people who protest and go on strike are brutally repressed by the Chinese government.
The protests and strikes never get covered in our news but in 2005, by the government's own measure, there were at least 87,000 "mass incidents" — governmentspeak for large-scale protests or riots.
So don't go mouthing off about Naomi Klein or anyone else who is worried about human rights and tyrannical governments. I doubt that if you were living under an authoritarian capitalist regime you would be saying what you're saying now.
You use "authoritarian capitalist" like it is a catch all. I am not saying China is NOT authoritarian, because its obvious they are. I am saying that they are a lot better off now that Beijing has embraced markets and left collectivism behind.
I am also speaking out against western leftists who do not see that capitalism is a necessary condition for freedom. I ask you all again, name me a country that has political freedom without capitalism? you cannot.
Left collectivism behind? How? Do you even know what that means? Capitalist proponents tend to fling around words like collectivism without knowing what it means and think it means one type of system. I don't think the Chinese encourage individualism since they don't tolerate free speech at all. I find it funny how free marketeers somehow fail to see the irony of holding up an extremely protectionist, interventionist country that claims it is communist to prove that the free market still works.
I also don't think it's fair to say that capitalism encourages freedom because it clearly hasn't in many cases. I think you can have political and civil freedom with socialism and with capitalism and you can have authoritarian socialism and authoritarian capitalism. They can be mixed successfully (in "mixed economies") also. There isn't just one type of socialism and capitalism - there's plenty of room in both of them for nuance.
I encourage you to do some reading on the Mao era, specifically the Great Leap Forward as well as the Cultural Revolution.
Regarding your question whether I know what collectivism means, the answer is yes. However you are correct as to assert there are more than one types of collectivism. The collectivism which began in 1949 in China and more or less ended with the death of Mao Zedong was a top-down government managed command economy based on the Soviet model.
I've read about Mao but since I've never said that I want a top-down centralized bureaucracy and I've never claimed to be a follower of Mao, why are you mentioning him?
However the relationship between capitalism and freedom has been proven throughout history. There can be no political freedom without economic freedom. I never said capitalism guarantees freedom, only that it is a necessary ingredient to a free society. There has been no historical case where a communist economy has adopted a democratically run government. In fact, orthodox communism demands a "Dictatorship of the proletariat" as a necessary stage. Key word is dictatorship.
I've done my share of Ayn Rand reading (thankfully I'm past that phase - it was scary) and I can say that your comments are totally typical (to the point of cliché) of what she and said what pretty much all right-wing libertarians say. For a philosophical idea that claims to be individualistic, you don't half sound the same. e.g., "There can be no political freedom without economic freedom." I can't count how many times I must have said that exact line and how many times I've read it.
I've never defended communist countries and never claimed that was my ideal society, so why are you talking about it? Are you trying to demonize me as a Maoist or are you so misinformed that you know no more ideologies?
"Dictatorship of the proletariat" is a derogative euphemism for what's normally called "democracy".
The proletariat are the majority in society, by definition, how do things get decided in democracies? Majority vote.
Nor is capitalism required for free society,and in fact, unrestrained, it's a force for enslavement.
Also, communism was thought to require an industrial society which russia didn't have, to industrialise they implemented a system of state capitalism, and never got to communism.
ok fine, lets blame communism's failure on the fact that russia "was not ready".
then do you truly believe that communism is possible in industrial societies such as the United States or western Europe? Where is this "proletariat" in industrial societies who will uphold communism? There isn't any as far as I can think. You know why? Because the vast majority of people in industrial societies benefit greatly from global capitalism whether they realize it or not.
Lol how can communism have failed if it wasn't implemented? State capitalism failed.
Of course actual communism/socialism are possible, why wouldn't they be?
I don't hold to Marxian philosophy, so why would I care about the whereabouts of the proletariat? You should answer this yourself though, since you're the one afraid of their dictatorship.
We all know that the vast majority of people in the west(not in industrialised societies) profit from capitalism, that's not at issue, so who cares?
Then let me ask YOU a question. How is unrestrained capitalism a form of slavery? In a free society, one is free to settle for a low paying job, and one is also free to acquire skills which would boost ones human capital therefore qualify for a higher paying job. You are free to choose.
If capitalism is unrestrained, everything is a commodity, including rights, and people themselves.
There's no particular within capitalism which imposes freedom, human rights are imposed on capitalist systems, and it's rarely, if ever, the capitalists that do it.
Capitalism by definition reduces people to economic cogs, so that people are there to support the system rather than vice versa.
Not free to choose, pay to choose.
Btw are you agreeing about being wrong earlier or just ignoring it?
China is not just "authorative capitalism", maybe in some ways it's heading to that, but it's not. Certain elements of their economy are simply too "socialized" and the promotion of "capital interests" is not as big as less authoritarive countries.
I never liked Klein, his political commentary is mediocre into my eyes. You can critizice China, but I think that someone has to go beyond her preconceptions.
Though she's putatively criticising China, both of them re actually warming the American public to the ultimate Capitalist "success", untrammelled by democracy. Elections just exert drag
They keep using the American buzz words "success", "effective"
They are softening America up for what Rockefeller has wanted since 1973 when he returned from a visit to China oh, so impressed
So what if it cost 80 million lives?
US would never have attacked Russia via Georgia wt Chinese backing
This woman is right. All you people who is afraid of China is really ignorant. Compare what the U.S has done in terms of death to China. China is one of the most peaceful countries in the world, it has not invaded a foreign country in its total 5,000 years of history.
No. China "invading" its own province? Its like saying the U.S invading California. Please learn about the history of China first before you consider what is right or wrong okay?
FanBoy, you forgot to mention that the world simply ignored the crazy monks who went beserk and killed innocent Chinese last month.
How can reasonable people simply ignore what happened there? How can they continue to support a stupid old man who thinks he's a living god and ignore the historical truths about Tibet?
If only westerners would stop and think critically rather than opening their mouths and spewing arrant nonsense that their media poops all over them.
Because 1: Western goverments want China divided from Tibet; they brainwash the western media and play with words to make China look like the bad guy. Same with the recent Georgia crisis. Western media is blaming it on Russia and ignores the 1400 Russian civilians that the Georgians killed. I live in the U.S but I do not like this corrupted goverment
"There was suzerainty, that Ming titles were only nominal, that Tibet remained an independent region outside Ming control, and that it simply paid tribute until the reign of Jiajing (1521--1566), who ceased relations with Tibet."
CCP, as its successor, took over the Qing Dynasty's central government position, and tibet thus were too had to make its transaction to become an autonomous region under the new china
People dying from hunger does not equate to killing by the government. Those many millions are killed by hunger mainly caused by drought and poor government policies.
Naomi Kline is a brilliant journalist but she too is under the corporate wing with regards to her publishing. And if the time ever comes when China will have new leadership I hope Naomi is there to tell them how to run a country of a billion plus. I'm not kidding.
Do you feel coerced all the time?? I don't know where you're finding all this violence out there, but I have a sneaky suspicion it's mainly in your head. Your belief that "anything less than 100% requires violence" is your fantasy and is not shared by normal humans from planet Earth. I don't know what planet you're from, but here on Earth people have been paying taxes for a long time even in capitalist societies. When you come back to planet Earth, let me know.
Name me one political system that DOESN'T believe in the distribution of wealth. That's like saying, "All Socialists drink water." So do most others around the world.
I see you're in need of dictionary as well. Might I suggest Dictionary(dot)com:
"so·cial·ism --noun 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."
For those of you who might not be aware of a classic statement of blind prejudice, discrimination and thoughtlessness, allow me to explain:
ANY political statement ANYWHERE that states "All xxx are yyy," is invariably a lie. 100% of any political group doing the same thing is by its very definition false. And the person(s) espousing such remarks are shallow, ignorant and prejudiced. That these same people endorse Hitler comes as no surprise to me.
"ANY political statement ANYWHERE that states "All xxx are yyy," is invariably a lie"
Isn't that what YOU just did?: "All [people that state "All xxx are yyy" are liars." I guess that makes you a liar, and a hypocrite. And an idiot, for not knowing that some definitions are not all-inclusive. "All socialists believe in the redistribution of wealth." ...because that's what socialism is. D'uh!
"That these same people endorse Hitler comes as no surprise to me."
I understand why you would want to be evasive to my request, " Tell ya what, if you can find a definition for all see my quote above) forms of Socialism as having a violent political agenda, I'll eat my words."
You cannot find such a definition. Therefore, you choose to change the topic. Typical.
Did you even know that welfare in the US is a very real form of socialism. Please show me the violence in that system.
Typical, when you can answer 'cuz you know you're wrong, deviate.
"if you can find a definition for all see my quote above)"
"You cannot find such a definition."
I cannot find such a QUOTE!
ALL socialists believe in a redistribution of wealth, which - in a pluralistic society, where some people do not agree with such - REQUIRES the use of force to implement it. Therefore socialism requires violence.
"welfare in the US is a very real form of socialism. Please show me the violence in that system."
You're kidding?! Try not paying all or part of your taxes!
You can quote from the KKK all day long. I just don't believe in their statements. Here's one though, Mahatma Ghandi (you may have heard of him):
My Socialism
I have claimed that I was a socialist long before those I know in India had avowed their creed. But my socialism was natural. It came out of my unshakable belief in non-violence.
Watch Freedom to Fascism by Aaron Russo. Many people have stopped paying their taxes. You ignorance is not my problem.
You're a real piece of work. We're talking economic ideologies, and you keep trying to bring race into it. What has the KKK got to do with any of this?
"Watch Freedom to Fascism"
Those people have stopped paying taxes on the basis of the 16th Amendment being unconstitutional, NOT on the basis of taxes being socialist. And many are in jail, or dead.
The fact that you can't admit the State uses coercion to enforce payment shows how vacuous you are.
Since you can't quote me properly, here's what I said: "welfare in the US is a very real form of socialism." I don't see the word tax there at all.
So we've established that NOT all socialism is violent AND that the US practices some forms of socialism without coercion. BTW, there are hundreds of different taxes out there. I don't want to have to say this after you make some ridiculous statement like we only have one form of tax in the US. Just trying to help you look less dumb.
You really need to pay more attention. I hate to constantly have to repeat myself just because you have no memory.
Welfare is paid through taxes and there are hundreds of them. The US never coerces anyone at the gas pump, for starters. Gandhi's form of Socialism is completely nonviolent. All this has been established. Please try to stay up with the comments. And if you can't remember one, review it before you ask stupid questions again.
What proportion of those taxes are *100% voluntary*? Any answer less than "100%" requires violence.
"The US never coerces anyone at the gas pump"
So I can go to a gas station, and pay for the gas LESS the taxes?
"Gandhi's form of Socialism is completely nonviolent"
Ghandi's "nonviolence" was with respect to overthrowing British rule. Even Ghandi's socialism would have been violence-based, if less than 100% of people agreed to redistribution of THEIR wealth.
toeg1: I mean, really, how retarded must you be to misread an anarcho-libertarian's statement AGAINST Corporatism/Fascism to be an ENDORSEMENT of fascism and Hitler??
Were you away the day they taught comprehension at school, or are you *really* just retarded? Or are you just another piece-of-shit, no-life troll?
When people make the absurd argument that socialism in the USSR failed because of Authoritarianism, just point to China.
De Jure Private Property rights and Rule of law work everywhere it is tried.
Capitalism brings more people out of poverty than any other source, just get rid of the authoritarianism in China, and you have created a Great Britain.
kokex: You were right, I was wrong. I got my Naomi's mixed up. It is Naomi WOLF that has swallowed the Obama lie and endorsed him, unfortunately
But Naomi *Klein* still thinks it's a Left/Right issue, when both sides are the same group. She needs to evolve beyond her current paradigm to realize Corporatism (ie fascism) is a merger between Big Biz and Big Gov, and being a MERGER, to feed one side of the two-headed beast is to feed the other, so calling for more regulation only makes things worse
Boy, there's nothing like generalizing bs in public, is there?? What cracks me up is Bush saying that "it would be an insult if he didn't attend these games." hahahahaha
NO American president EVER attended the games held in another country. What he was really saying is, "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."
China OWNS the US. If they alone reneged on our money and stopped buying US bonds, our economy would collapse. I hope Bush can kiss butt well.
toeg1 said: "Boy, there's nothing like generalizing bs in public, is there??"
I get his(?) point. Socialism requires redistribution of wealth, despite not everybody agreeing to such. This is generally done via taxes, etc, but if a non-socialist refuses, then the State uses coercion/force against that person, via the person being put in jail, at threat of shooting. To enforce socialism *requires* State violence, so socialists are violent-by-proxy, at least
I'm surprised at your comment, but after seeing you endorsing fascism, I understand why. If you endores Mousilini and Hitler, then I guess you would be under the false impression that Socialism means violence. Tell ya what, if you can find a definition for all see my quote above) forms of Socialism as having a violent political agenda, I'll eat my words. Until that time, all I can say is that you are dilusional and prejudiced since you agree that ALL Socialists are violent.
WTF?? I'm an anarchist/libertarian, the exact *OPPOSITE* of fascist, and you claim that I am *endorsing* fascism?? Fool!
If socialism isn't violent, explain how wealth is redistributed from someone that doesn't want you to do so...without using coercion. Socialism is State-endorsed- and State-enforced- armed robbery. Socialists initiate, aid and abet such violence. You think because it's done by someone else (the State), that your hands are blood-free? Ha!
No intend to jump into the discussion. But I see the need to point out the fact that you are reading the ideology of communism with the capitalist way of understanding how society works. In an ideal communist society, wealth are gatherd through collective cooperation, and then distributed in means of social supply system. There is no gap of income to start with, there is no monetary transactions, there is no existence of ownership of capital property. hence, there is no need of coercion.
It is far too late to provide news and information to the public. LOL, it is so sad that the people of this news org, believe that real information will help at this point.
The public cannot even process the most basic political information, the have been educated not to. They don't even understand the most basic fundamentals of our Constitution and bill of rights, they don't even understand they are slaves o the state, and subservient to the state. Sorry but you are 75-100 years too late.
Naomi is too sensitive to rational criticism because she supports Communist China style censorship. She can't stand up to rational arguments because she's empty-headed. Don't expect any useful plans of action for any political or economic issues coming out of her, she is just a passive intellectual couch potato like most hardcore socialists. Remember people, if some citizens don't want to socialize your wealth, your only option is violently taking it. That means all socialists are violent.
There has been never Socialism in China or USSR...
Socialism is country run by the people for the people - does it exist anywhere today?
Capitalism is an ideology of the power by ownership
while 'Communism' has been an ideology of the power through doctrine
Communism is a society of the future, when Man accepts that we are all evolving Spirit in Manifestation. It will be based on the power of being who you truly are, rather than the present ideologies which makes you be what your are not
Thank you for that positive spin on Communism. You forgot the part about how most Communist governements leads to ruthless totalitarism to promote equality. That kinda reminds me of what the US and British governments do BTW home and abroad. You also forgot about the part that the communist idology is responsible for the needless deaths of millions including in the USSR, more so that Hitlers's Germany.
The problem is that any ideology when it becomes the master instead of servant will become oppressive and imperial. The grip of ideology makes people being ruled by the mind and not by the heart.
'Communism' believes to have the intellectual solution for life, which of course is a dangerous illusion.
Capitalism, though prophases freedom, is conditioning our lives too, so the most of humanity today are slaves to various ideologies.
Well said. Only idiots think by ideologies. True reformists look at each situation - in its entirety - anew - and discovery what's best for each situation.
As much as I respect Naomi Klein, I feel that she has much to learn about the Chinese people, their values and customs. I'm a leftist, but I feel quite embarrassed after watching this video.
Normally I would applaud her criticisms of government, but she applies her ideas too easily to China and the Chinese people. Yes, there are many similarities between western and eastern society, but their social/political differences deserve to be analyzed. As one of the earlier comments stated, the whole of Asia does not have a radical individualism.
Good that someone articulates the academic meaning of these Olympics. I've been thinking too, but just that Bush, who was sitting in the stadium during the opening, is obligated by his freemason lodge, to be present as an accomplished elite, at the top of the all-seeing hierarchy, when the power structure shifts from the US to China, for the capitalists. Iraq was intentional, to destroy the US economy and build the patriarchal societies in China. The middle aged men occupy now the skyscrapers
Also while we moan about the Chinese human rights record when are we gonna get around to critizing Israel for it's treatment of the Palestinians? I my opinion Israel's human rights record is no differnent than China's, and maybe more so. China may kick people out of they're homes, but at least they dont bulldozer the homes while the PEOPLE ARE STILL INSIDE unlike Isreal.
I'm sick of white liberals like her and neoconservatives telling the rest of the world how to behave. Not only is that arrogant it's hypocricitical especially when your own house isnt in order.
We shouldn't be so tough on China as in China women have more rights than the Gov't Bush set up in Iraq. Under Saddam women could wear shorts in sports, now they must be covered. Iraq is sending 1 women to the Olympics & it'll be interesting to see what she wears.
Also China has more religious freedom than Iraq. Saddam set up protections for Christians & Jews & even had Christians on his cabinet. Now most have left the country as we've turned Iraq into an Islamic Sharia state.
Why should I read her book? I don't want to spend my dollars on a book of an author that speaks exactly the same as any reporter of Fox, CNN or other Western media. These people don't understand the words 'ethic and professional' of their profession. Every time I turn on a TV and see this kind of reporters and writers each speaking with two mouths, one inside of the other, my ears becomes itchy.
America is already a Communist Fascist Dictatorship. The rulers are the private shareholders of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Rockefellers of the U.S. and the Rothschilds of Europe. In true capitalism, business and government are strange bedfellows rather than a married couple as they are today. Intertwining corporate activity with government activity is the primary cause of the immorality of America today, not capitalism itself. Naomi should be donkey punched for being stupid.
People who radically oppose capitalism these days tend to look at 'evil' capitalism... What they're experiencing, I call, "Marxist Capitalism" - which is the opposite of "Anarcho Capitalism".
Capitalism can be good if carefully watched and regulated by the community -domestic or global- and when that doesn't happen, then we see the socialists and other radical-non capitalists scurry to protest against capitalism, thinking that's all there is to capitalism.
McCommunism? Is she trying to put Capitalism with Socialism? That is kind of odd because I still don't see anything that doesn't read government controlled on it. The government of china owns every McDonalds and every Wal-Mart that is on chinese soil. Just because china has a booming economy doesn't mean corporations are all the sudden controlling china. We have been trading with china for over 30 yrs. and our adventures over seas has made china's economy sky rocket as well not to mention russia
This is WHY global capitalism is growing endlessly & why corporate power is the model they're looking for in the West, to replace democratic politics.
I personally believe the reason we are getting so many political despots around the world now is so that when they f**k it up completely, the plan to implement this sort of Chinese style system of control, will already be waiting in the wings to be implemented by the corporates.
I could care less what the Chinese do in their own country. What is important is what lesson we take away form their example. If we don't start paying attention to what is happening in this country, we could very well end up with a gov that exemplifies the Chinese gov. Our task is to stop our gov fron emulating what the Chinese are doing. Bush and Co. have taken us a long way down that road. Stop trying to change the world, and prevent the world from changing us. Preserve the Constitution.
However, since we get most of our products from China, and the fact that around 70% of all products in Walmart are Chinese-made, i think it's a good idea to understand the world at the other end of our products' assembly line.
Without China, our manufactured habitat of plasticine, AKA, USA, would lose everything it depends on, whether or not we should be dependant on China and it's useless products; America wouldn't be prepared for the whiplash.
It's not the Chinese economy that bothers me. It's the iron-fisted rule that the US is beginning to emulate that is the problem. Bush is chastising China on it's human rights abuses while we lock up 2.3 million with millions more on parole and probation, the majority for non-violent drug crimes. The US has been engaged in behavior control for decades. The welfare/warfare mentality has overtaken liberty and personal responsibility to the extent that civil rights no longer have meaning.
in the end, what's really matters is not these political or coporate arguments on the system. it's the need for introspection so as to find humanity's common root and search for the essence of human existence.
and i think the opening ceremony did great in showing the aspect of wholeness as a path and way of nature which we are also a part of and demand our respect for its balance.
and that's an important part of the chinese culture,which i believe, signified by this opening ceremony, would open a new age in human quest for truth and understanding.
But, could they do this if people were not socialized to live in it (to be uncritical, etc.)? We were all raised by the state, otherwise known as mass schooling. Maybe if we were all raised differently, we'd be different people - not as easily used. Perhaps what saves the future is the home schooling movement that grows larger every year. The first unschooled generation simply won't be indifferent enough to be exploited.
China gets more awards from the United Nations than any other country in the world. What does this tell you about the future of America.
Everybody say hello to the future of authoritarian, fascist, ultra-communist USA...give or take 5-10 years, after the global war when the superpowers on are their knees.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I have no idea who she is; but looks like her view about China is similar to any Westerner. I have no respect for such a writer (heard that she's an author of some book)
Why should I read her book? I don't want to spend my dollars on a book of an author that speaks exactly the same as any reporter of Fox, CNN or other Western media. These people don't understand the words 'ethic and professional' of their profession. Every time I turn on a TV and see this kind of reporters and writers each speaking with two mouths, one inside of the other, my ears becomes itchy.
What the heck is capitalism or Stalinism? If there's less gut in her brain, then she should know that these words are understood differently in China and Russia. Talk about capitalism, when did this English word started to be used in China, where people have been trading for thousands of years? Oh, the Chinese are going to stick 'capitalism' in the middle of a line of Mandarin to describe their economy?
Please defer NK form China.
240kankan 6 months ago
MARKET STALINISM??????????
Is she totally deranged?
ssmusic214 9 months ago
@ssmusic214 What's not to understand? The authoritarianism of Stalinism with market economics. Perfectly sums up China.
modlany 8 months ago
@modlany Neither she nor you have a clue what "Stalinism" is.
ssmusic214 8 months ago
@ssmusic214
It makes perfect sense, I can't see what you (pretend that you) fail to understand.
drizztf88 8 months ago
@drizztf88 You are deranged. Under Stalin you'd pay with your life for mentioning market economy.
ssmusic214 8 months ago
@ssmusic214
That's not the point dude.
China's system is stalinist as far as authoritarianism and restriction of freedom is concerned.
She didn't say stalinism was market oriented.
You seem to like that word; deranged
drizztf88 8 months ago
@drizztf88 It IS THE POINT!
You're not making any sense. Chinese rulers completely abandoned decades ago even PRETENDING to follow Stalin/Mao ideas. And if stalinism was NOT market oriented,THAN MARKET STALINISM IS OXYMORON! Contradiction of terms.
ssmusic214 8 months ago
@ssmusic214
*Stalinist* is often used instead of *authoritarian* or *totalitarian*. *that's* the use here.
drizztf88 8 months ago 4
@drizztf88 It is "used" by blabbering demagogs (Like Naomi Klein) promoting their "ideas" by meaningless buzzwords, slogans, empty phraseology.....
Authoritarian is NOT TOTALITARIAN. And Stalin was totalitarian, not authoritarian.
ssmusic214 8 months ago
where was the human rights when european massacre native american ? where was the human rights when the white people killed,torture,rape,destroyed black people during 16th-18th Century? where was the human rights during the anti chinese Rock Springs massacre and the chinese exclusion in north america in 1882-1964? where is the human rights in afgaynistan and iraq? and now u call chinese evil?perhaps u are not sure who are the real evil here do u?
rufullofshitusa 11 months ago
where was the human rights when european massacre native american ? where was the human rights when the white people killed,torture,rape,destroyed black people during 16th-18th? where was the human rights during the anti chinese Rock Springs massacre and the chinese exclusion in north america in 1882-1964? where is the human rights in afgaynistan and iraq? and now u call chinese evil?perhaps u are not sure who are the real evil here do u?
rufullofshitusa 11 months ago
LOL.....Yea Naomi, China only started to become repressive in 1979 AFTER they started economic reforms. Since Maos time there has only been a regression from when socialist ideals were still adhered to there was liberty and real political and social rights.
On what earth does Nao Klein live? Other then her talking points where does she get that capitalism is more inclined to be anti-democratic or anti-liberty then a centralized, planned, and state based economies?
woodandsosa 11 months ago
This is more of an argument against fascism/"state capitalism" than an argument against capitalism.
bmtimv 1 year ago
wow, I think Milton Friedman just got blown away, there is another system other than the Free Market that works
pcbb01 1 year ago
I can't quite tell if the questions the Chinese government and their methods or has a hard-on for them.
kagasan2008 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
youtube Johan Norberg vs. Naomi Klein and The Shock Doctrine
whitesox889 1 year ago
idiots like Naomi Klein will always nag people to sleep.. they have no concept of reality... they're purely academic retards who dream of a mythical utopia where every living organism on the planet is the same.
can anyone pie this bitch in the face please? lol
nfusionlabs 1 year ago
@nfusionlabs go 'pie' her yourself you pussy
deathtrip10 1 year ago
@nfusionlabs Fuck you. If there was a scumbag academic engaged in a circle squaring exercise it was that crackpot motherfucker Milton Friedman and his school of economic terrorists and Nazis in Chicago. Absolutely nothing those jerkoffs came up with works and Friedman was a huge suppirtre of the Communists in China and their brutal class crackdowns.
ChrisDutch 1 year ago
@ChrisDutch I coulldn't have said it better.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
I am loving this woman more and more.
ashutoshmikku 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
where was the human rights when european massacre native american ? where was the human rights when the white people killed,torture,rape,destroyed black people during 16th-18th? where was the human rights during the anti chinese Rock Springs massacre and the chinese exclusion in north america in 1882-1964? where is the human rights in afgaynistan and iraq? and now u call chinese evil?perhaps u are not sure who are the real evil here do u?
RUFULLOFSHIT 1 year ago
Why america jail their citizens highest rated in the world 33.5 percent..? and why black people dont have their true family tree, or their true last name. Why use their whitemaster last name?
RUFULLOFSHIT 1 year ago
@RUFULLOFSHIT
Hello Mr. Chinese netizen likely paid by the CCP.
woodandsosa 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
READ
Capitalism is a system that builds on the knowledge that humans, will in general choose the "best" product, some chose "wrong", but they believed it was the "best". And then result in that the "best" products are made more often.
Trade is exchange with mutual consent, both parties believes they will be better off after the trade is made.
Just to clarify, trade is what makes the world a better place, capitalism is what makes trade possible, regulations makes the effect of capitalism worse.
SB9101 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Olympics say nothing about a political system, other than that it's similar to Hitler's regime.
ReX342 2 years ago
Funny that the picture of protest that is shown are the people from Hong Kong (which runs a different system)
alibrabraa 2 years ago 9
cool :) how did you see that?
SB9101 2 years ago
its just one of the shot, i can recognize the politian and the police uniform @ 2:15
alibrabraa 2 years ago
So intelligent, Naomi Klein, god, what a genius, very perceptive.
But even if the migrant workers had equal rights , they still wouldnt be equal, because they dont have the education, social connections to succeed on an equal status anyway.
jingfengchen24 2 years ago
The economic system being imposed throughout the world is corporate socialism--in former times called Fascism. It is most definitely not a "free market" system. In the USA, we have not enjoyed anything close to a free market since the first half of the 19th century. Modern "Capitalism" is the wedding of world corporate and banking institutions with world government. Competition exists only between giant corporations, & they do create terror incidents to gain control.
patrickhazell 2 years ago 5
Let us show the world oppressors that we can wear poverty like Prada ~
LarkaSojourn 2 years ago
sooo hot!
sooo informative!
sooo hot!
denbenenki 3 years ago
The difference between India and China is in the economic systems.
India is highly centralized and therefore reduces the freedom and innovation that its citizens can enjoy.
China has opened up its economic system and is enjoying the benefits of the free market.
I'm not saying that India isn't advancing, just that it could be faster with a freer structure.
I believe China will eventually have to go democratic or contract its economy because a free market system with communism cannot work.
bn6658 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Worthy read that will enlighten you is, "The Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party".
Also consider watching,
watch?v=ynqyI5s3WoM
watch?v=Fkf2u1Umzi4
Best Wishes,
Mitch
mitchee009 3 years ago
a lot of what she says is correct.
she's a brilliant girl , i would say.
brutuschina 3 years ago
Brilliant, and possessing a necessarily refreshing worldview. But don't label her a girl brutus, she's a professional.
pkscolax 3 years ago
she's also not sexually unattractive. that's why i say "girl" hoho
brutuschina 3 years ago 2
can she put all these" ism" away and just look at the realities?
epicurian101 3 years ago
Communism is fascism, like zionism and nazism.
And its all coming out of europe.
that was my point.
maelstone 3 years ago
Communism is in reality Imperialism.
Mao and Lenin was educated in France and Switzerland.
Like Pol pot and ayatollah Khomenei etc.
China is only under communist reign because of western influence.
So...this is what you get..
maelstone 3 years ago
Although the rulers go on calling themselves communists there's no communism in China anymore. That's a facist regime.
marcelo602 3 years ago 3
Look the bottom line is people vote with their feet. Where have people in the 20th century fled from and to? East Berlin to West Berlin, Mainland China to Hong Kong, North Korea to South Korea, Communist country to Capitalist country-- not the other way around.
If you espouse a socialist economy, you naturally espouse government management of virtually all aspects of life. Where do you suppose you will find these angels who will run your perfect society?
tkrm333 3 years ago
The Olympics would not have been possible this year had China not embraced markets and opened up to the rest of the world. Would you prefer if they remained socialist? In time, China will open up politically as it has already done economically. It is only inevitable- as the average Chinese becomes more wealthy they have the leisure to worry about such things as politics and human rights. You are quite mistaken if you wish for China to open up politically before it does economically.
Go China!
tkrm333 3 years ago
totally true and very intellently said
!
alicelin1990 3 years ago
Heh. You don't think the average Chinese worker worries about their rights because they don't have time to? As I said above, in 2005, by the government's own measure, there were at least 87,000 "mass incidents" — governmentspeak for large-scale protests or riots. That hasn't opened them up politically - since the police throw them in jail (to never be seen again, some of them).
Also the government wants the businesses there so they will make sure the wages remain lower than other places.
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
tkrm333: Yea that's true, people criticize China for not being a democracy; but they don't realize that it's already happening gradually. Economic changes must happen slowly overtime. It cannot happen drastically or else there will be chaos.
Creator01 3 years ago 3
Freedom never brings chaos. This is the oppressors' argument to keep on oppressing.
marcelo602 3 years ago 10
@marcelo602
That's fucking bullshit. Freedom is also a double-edged sword. It's not good enough to solve the problems in Africa and Middle east. And don't forget India is a country actually gives democracy a bad name. Dmubass.
maomao667 1 year ago
capitalism is a necessary condition for freedom, not the other way around. name me a country that has political freedom without economic freedom. "democratic socialism" that western leftists propose is a myth.
China's embrace of the market system has and continues to lift millions out of poverty. let us not forget that the majority of Chinese are still poor, and do not have the luxury to worry about human rights like miss klein and all the other western leftists who criticize china.
tkrm333 3 years ago
Oh dear. China was not free before and it is not free now they're capitalist. The Chinese people have been forced into these low-paying, unsafe factory jobs many times out of circumstances created by their lovely authoritarian capitalist government. A great deal of farmers and people living in rural areas were run off their land so that the people would have to move and work in factories. And the people who protest and go on strike are brutally repressed by the Chinese government.
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
The protests and strikes never get covered in our news but in 2005, by the government's own measure, there were at least 87,000 "mass incidents" — governmentspeak for large-scale protests or riots.
So don't go mouthing off about Naomi Klein or anyone else who is worried about human rights and tyrannical governments. I doubt that if you were living under an authoritarian capitalist regime you would be saying what you're saying now.
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
You use "authoritarian capitalist" like it is a catch all. I am not saying China is NOT authoritarian, because its obvious they are. I am saying that they are a lot better off now that Beijing has embraced markets and left collectivism behind.
I am also speaking out against western leftists who do not see that capitalism is a necessary condition for freedom. I ask you all again, name me a country that has political freedom without capitalism? you cannot.
tkrm333 3 years ago
Left collectivism behind? How? Do you even know what that means? Capitalist proponents tend to fling around words like collectivism without knowing what it means and think it means one type of system. I don't think the Chinese encourage individualism since they don't tolerate free speech at all. I find it funny how free marketeers somehow fail to see the irony of holding up an extremely protectionist, interventionist country that claims it is communist to prove that the free market still works.
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
I also don't think it's fair to say that capitalism encourages freedom because it clearly hasn't in many cases. I think you can have political and civil freedom with socialism and with capitalism and you can have authoritarian socialism and authoritarian capitalism. They can be mixed successfully (in "mixed economies") also. There isn't just one type of socialism and capitalism - there's plenty of room in both of them for nuance.
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
I encourage you to do some reading on the Mao era, specifically the Great Leap Forward as well as the Cultural Revolution.
Regarding your question whether I know what collectivism means, the answer is yes. However you are correct as to assert there are more than one types of collectivism. The collectivism which began in 1949 in China and more or less ended with the death of Mao Zedong was a top-down government managed command economy based on the Soviet model.
tkrm333 3 years ago
I've read about Mao but since I've never said that I want a top-down centralized bureaucracy and I've never claimed to be a follower of Mao, why are you mentioning him?
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
However the relationship between capitalism and freedom has been proven throughout history. There can be no political freedom without economic freedom. I never said capitalism guarantees freedom, only that it is a necessary ingredient to a free society. There has been no historical case where a communist economy has adopted a democratically run government. In fact, orthodox communism demands a "Dictatorship of the proletariat" as a necessary stage. Key word is dictatorship.
tkrm333 3 years ago
I've done my share of Ayn Rand reading (thankfully I'm past that phase - it was scary) and I can say that your comments are totally typical (to the point of cliché) of what she and said what pretty much all right-wing libertarians say. For a philosophical idea that claims to be individualistic, you don't half sound the same. e.g., "There can be no political freedom without economic freedom." I can't count how many times I must have said that exact line and how many times I've read it.
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
I've never defended communist countries and never claimed that was my ideal society, so why are you talking about it? Are you trying to demonize me as a Maoist or are you so misinformed that you know no more ideologies?
themonkeywrench 3 years ago
"Dictatorship of the proletariat" is a derogative euphemism for what's normally called "democracy".
The proletariat are the majority in society, by definition, how do things get decided in democracies? Majority vote.
Nor is capitalism required for free society,and in fact, unrestrained, it's a force for enslavement.
Also, communism was thought to require an industrial society which russia didn't have, to industrialise they implemented a system of state capitalism, and never got to communism.
pietzsche 3 years ago
ok fine, lets blame communism's failure on the fact that russia "was not ready".
then do you truly believe that communism is possible in industrial societies such as the United States or western Europe? Where is this "proletariat" in industrial societies who will uphold communism? There isn't any as far as I can think. You know why? Because the vast majority of people in industrial societies benefit greatly from global capitalism whether they realize it or not.
tkrm333 3 years ago
Lol how can communism have failed if it wasn't implemented? State capitalism failed.
Of course actual communism/socialism are possible, why wouldn't they be?
I don't hold to Marxian philosophy, so why would I care about the whereabouts of the proletariat? You should answer this yourself though, since you're the one afraid of their dictatorship.
We all know that the vast majority of people in the west(not in industrialised societies) profit from capitalism, that's not at issue, so who cares?
pietzsche 3 years ago
Then let me ask YOU a question. How is unrestrained capitalism a form of slavery? In a free society, one is free to settle for a low paying job, and one is also free to acquire skills which would boost ones human capital therefore qualify for a higher paying job. You are free to choose.
tkrm333 3 years ago
If capitalism is unrestrained, everything is a commodity, including rights, and people themselves.
There's no particular within capitalism which imposes freedom, human rights are imposed on capitalist systems, and it's rarely, if ever, the capitalists that do it.
Capitalism by definition reduces people to economic cogs, so that people are there to support the system rather than vice versa.
Not free to choose, pay to choose.
Btw are you agreeing about being wrong earlier or just ignoring it?
pietzsche 3 years ago 2
Sure, and the moon is made of cheese.
marcelo602 3 years ago
the moon IS made out of cheese
sneaaens 3 years ago
btw, you never actually answered anything I said, well done.
pietzsche 3 years ago
you never actually asked a question!
tkrm333 3 years ago
But she has a good argument, that authoritarism and capitalism are not contraries, and that both could work together in successful ways.
DogEditus 3 years ago
China is not just "authorative capitalism", maybe in some ways it's heading to that, but it's not. Certain elements of their economy are simply too "socialized" and the promotion of "capital interests" is not as big as less authoritarive countries.
I never liked Klein, his political commentary is mediocre into my eyes. You can critizice China, but I think that someone has to go beyond her preconceptions.
DogEditus 3 years ago
humain right?
150 000 000 population ?
communiste red?
nucleaire ?
produit chinese?
dafour ?
tibet?
what alse? so waht ? so how?
china exist as it's . china will be there for ever.
hing1378 3 years ago
vous n'avez pas compris la chine...
après la révolution culturelle, la chine se marche sur le chemin de capitalisme "mais avec un drapeau communisme"! ça c'est vrai.
hing1378 3 years ago
Though she's putatively criticising China, both of them re actually warming the American public to the ultimate Capitalist "success", untrammelled by democracy. Elections just exert drag
They keep using the American buzz words "success", "effective"
They are softening America up for what Rockefeller has wanted since 1973 when he returned from a visit to China oh, so impressed
So what if it cost 80 million lives?
US would never have attacked Russia via Georgia wt Chinese backing
D2
SilverRedIndigo 3 years ago
The Irony is Democracy FAILED many states including India
Just Compare India with China
ammannojacku 3 years ago
BOYCOTT CHINA. Tourism is down from last year
mastior 3 years ago
Very objective and refreshing observation. We often lose our openness of mind when it comes to the issue of China.
lustdog 3 years ago
Naomi.. youre hot
and your books are good
grobmark 3 years ago
"McCommunism" ... no doubt about young Naomi ... she works hard on the media grabs.
One of the greatest self-promoters of our time.
Such a pity that so many people seem to accept her hyperbole as properly researched analysis.
terencelaoshi 3 years ago
Any freedom loving individual should boycott anything about these games.
OmarThePug 3 years ago
Dork!
"You'ze" all work for the same company!
Find a valid revolution to save the human spirit!
Spare us Mc-Progressivism.
nombriliste 3 years ago
This woman is right. All you people who is afraid of China is really ignorant. Compare what the U.S has done in terms of death to China. China is one of the most peaceful countries in the world, it has not invaded a foreign country in its total 5,000 years of history.
IAmSonyFanBoy 3 years ago
.
Do you think that the Chinese take-over of Tibet in the 50s was not an invasion?
.
woodencloud 3 years ago
No. China "invading" its own province? Its like saying the U.S invading California. Please learn about the history of China first before you consider what is right or wrong okay?
IAmSonyFanBoy 3 years ago
FanBoy, you forgot to mention that the world simply ignored the crazy monks who went beserk and killed innocent Chinese last month.
How can reasonable people simply ignore what happened there? How can they continue to support a stupid old man who thinks he's a living god and ignore the historical truths about Tibet?
If only westerners would stop and think critically rather than opening their mouths and spewing arrant nonsense that their media poops all over them.
Wake up people!
terencelaoshi 3 years ago 2
Because 1: Western goverments want China divided from Tibet; they brainwash the western media and play with words to make China look like the bad guy. Same with the recent Georgia crisis. Western media is blaming it on Russia and ignores the 1400 Russian civilians that the Georgians killed. I live in the U.S but I do not like this corrupted goverment
IAmSonyFanBoy 3 years ago
"There was suzerainty, that Ming titles were only nominal, that Tibet remained an independent region outside Ming control, and that it simply paid tribute until the reign of Jiajing (1521--1566), who ceased relations with Tibet."
Quote from Wikipedia
woodencloud 3 years ago
Tibet was an autonomous in Qing Dynasty
CCP, as its successor, took over the Qing Dynasty's central government position, and tibet thus were too had to make its transaction to become an autonomous region under the new china
warset 3 years ago
this is a grey area, the region has been disputed for millenia....
SFwizardoakland 3 years ago
Yet the Communist Party has killed 80 MILLION Chinese people in PEACETIME.
Peace under the CCP has killed a comparable number of people than WWII.
louissamuel1 3 years ago
People dying from hunger does not equate to killing by the government. Those many millions are killed by hunger mainly caused by drought and poor government policies.
Fayadi 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
she is an idoit.
you can't use captialism and communism in a same sentence, sounds like rounded cycle.
bg24955 3 years ago
well thats how the chinese goverment works
maykolee 3 years ago
Wow it's not 100,000 secret police, their in the open is that secret! Also the security guards are there to protect against any terrorism and bombs.
Powa2 3 years ago
Naomi Klein is shockingly ignorant.
jd24717 3 years ago
? why do you say that...
xAgitoxx 3 years ago
Naomi Kline is a brilliant journalist but she too is under the corporate wing with regards to her publishing. And if the time ever comes when China will have new leadership I hope Naomi is there to tell them how to run a country of a billion plus. I'm not kidding.
duinay2 3 years ago
Poor Sparky,
Do you feel coerced all the time?? I don't know where you're finding all this violence out there, but I have a sneaky suspicion it's mainly in your head. Your belief that "anything less than 100% requires violence" is your fantasy and is not shared by normal humans from planet Earth. I don't know what planet you're from, but here on Earth people have been paying taxes for a long time even in capitalist societies. When you come back to planet Earth, let me know.
toeg1 3 years ago
sparky is right, toeg.
xAgitoxx 3 years ago
Well xagitoxx,
Thanks for taking the time to show your detailed analysis of his statements.
If you could help me here on this point of his: "What proportion of those taxes are *100% voluntary*? Any answer less than "100%" requires violence."
I'd appreciate your explanation of the above statement since you consider it to be 100% exact.
toeg1 3 years ago
Sparky,
Name me one political system that DOESN'T believe in the distribution of wealth. That's like saying, "All Socialists drink water." So do most others around the world.
And your useless point was???
toeg1 3 years ago
Sparky,
I see you're in need of dictionary as well. Might I suggest Dictionary(dot)com:
"so·cial·ism --noun 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."
toeg1 3 years ago
For those of you who might not be aware of a classic statement of blind prejudice, discrimination and thoughtlessness, allow me to explain:
ANY political statement ANYWHERE that states "All xxx are yyy," is invariably a lie. 100% of any political group doing the same thing is by its very definition false. And the person(s) espousing such remarks are shallow, ignorant and prejudiced. That these same people endorse Hitler comes as no surprise to me.
toeg1 3 years ago
"ANY political statement ANYWHERE that states "All xxx are yyy," is invariably a lie"
Isn't that what YOU just did?: "All [people that state "All xxx are yyy" are liars." I guess that makes you a liar, and a hypocrite. And an idiot, for not knowing that some definitions are not all-inclusive. "All socialists believe in the redistribution of wealth." ...because that's what socialism is. D'uh!
"That these same people endorse Hitler comes as no surprise to me."
You're clearly retarded, as well.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Yo Sparky,
I understand why you would want to be evasive to my request, " Tell ya what, if you can find a definition for all see my quote above) forms of Socialism as having a violent political agenda, I'll eat my words."
You cannot find such a definition. Therefore, you choose to change the topic. Typical.
Did you even know that welfare in the US is a very real form of socialism. Please show me the violence in that system.
Typical, when you can answer 'cuz you know you're wrong, deviate.
toeg1 3 years ago
"if you can find a definition for all see my quote above)"
"You cannot find such a definition."
I cannot find such a QUOTE!
ALL socialists believe in a redistribution of wealth, which - in a pluralistic society, where some people do not agree with such - REQUIRES the use of force to implement it. Therefore socialism requires violence.
"welfare in the US is a very real form of socialism. Please show me the violence in that system."
You're kidding?! Try not paying all or part of your taxes!
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Yo Sparky,
You can quote from the KKK all day long. I just don't believe in their statements. Here's one though, Mahatma Ghandi (you may have heard of him):
My Socialism
I have claimed that I was a socialist long before those I know in India had avowed their creed. But my socialism was natural. It came out of my unshakable belief in non-violence.
Watch Freedom to Fascism by Aaron Russo. Many people have stopped paying their taxes. You ignorance is not my problem.
toeg1 3 years ago
"You can quote from the KKK all day long"
You're a real piece of work. We're talking economic ideologies, and you keep trying to bring race into it. What has the KKK got to do with any of this?
"Watch Freedom to Fascism"
Those people have stopped paying taxes on the basis of the 16th Amendment being unconstitutional, NOT on the basis of taxes being socialist. And many are in jail, or dead.
The fact that you can't admit the State uses coercion to enforce payment shows how vacuous you are.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Sparky,
Since you can't quote me properly, here's what I said: "welfare in the US is a very real form of socialism." I don't see the word tax there at all.
So we've established that NOT all socialism is violent AND that the US practices some forms of socialism without coercion. BTW, there are hundreds of different taxes out there. I don't want to have to say this after you make some ridiculous statement like we only have one form of tax in the US. Just trying to help you look less dumb.
toeg1 3 years ago
""welfare in the US is a very real form of socialism." I don't see the word tax there at all"
How is welfare in the US paid for if not through the tax system? You can't examine the "benefits" without looking at the costs
"we've established that NOT all socialism is violent"
Where?
"AND that the US practices some forms of socialism without coercion"
Where?
Just because you choose to view only benefits and not consider costs doesn't make your argument. The costs - and violence - ARE there
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Sparky,
You really need to pay more attention. I hate to constantly have to repeat myself just because you have no memory.
Welfare is paid through taxes and there are hundreds of them. The US never coerces anyone at the gas pump, for starters. Gandhi's form of Socialism is completely nonviolent. All this has been established. Please try to stay up with the comments. And if you can't remember one, review it before you ask stupid questions again.
toeg1 3 years ago
"Welfare is paid through taxes"
What proportion of those taxes are *100% voluntary*? Any answer less than "100%" requires violence.
"The US never coerces anyone at the gas pump"
So I can go to a gas station, and pay for the gas LESS the taxes?
"Gandhi's form of Socialism is completely nonviolent"
Ghandi's "nonviolence" was with respect to overthrowing British rule. Even Ghandi's socialism would have been violence-based, if less than 100% of people agreed to redistribution of THEIR wealth.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
toeg1: I mean, really, how retarded must you be to misread an anarcho-libertarian's statement AGAINST Corporatism/Fascism to be an ENDORSEMENT of fascism and Hitler??
Were you away the day they taught comprehension at school, or are you *really* just retarded? Or are you just another piece-of-shit, no-life troll?
lastnymleft 3 years ago
When people make the absurd argument that socialism in the USSR failed because of Authoritarianism, just point to China.
De Jure Private Property rights and Rule of law work everywhere it is tried.
Capitalism brings more people out of poverty than any other source, just get rid of the authoritarianism in China, and you have created a Great Britain.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Such a pity she has swallowed the Obama lie.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
No , she didnt.... search for """" It's the End of the World as We know it and I feel FINE #35 """"
kokex 3 years ago
kokex: You were right, I was wrong. I got my Naomi's mixed up. It is Naomi WOLF that has swallowed the Obama lie and endorsed him, unfortunately
But Naomi *Klein* still thinks it's a Left/Right issue, when both sides are the same group. She needs to evolve beyond her current paradigm to realize Corporatism (ie fascism) is a merger between Big Biz and Big Gov, and being a MERGER, to feed one side of the two-headed beast is to feed the other, so calling for more regulation only makes things worse
lastnymleft 3 years ago
"All Socialists are violent"
Boy, there's nothing like generalizing bs in public, is there?? What cracks me up is Bush saying that "it would be an insult if he didn't attend these games." hahahahaha
NO American president EVER attended the games held in another country. What he was really saying is, "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."
China OWNS the US. If they alone reneged on our money and stopped buying US bonds, our economy would collapse. I hope Bush can kiss butt well.
toeg1 3 years ago
??? said: "All Socialists are violent"
toeg1 said: "Boy, there's nothing like generalizing bs in public, is there??"
I get his(?) point. Socialism requires redistribution of wealth, despite not everybody agreeing to such. This is generally done via taxes, etc, but if a non-socialist refuses, then the State uses coercion/force against that person, via the person being put in jail, at threat of shooting. To enforce socialism *requires* State violence, so socialists are violent-by-proxy, at least
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Wowe last,
I'm surprised at your comment, but after seeing you endorsing fascism, I understand why. If you endores Mousilini and Hitler, then I guess you would be under the false impression that Socialism means violence. Tell ya what, if you can find a definition for all see my quote above) forms of Socialism as having a violent political agenda, I'll eat my words. Until that time, all I can say is that you are dilusional and prejudiced since you agree that ALL Socialists are violent.
toeg1 3 years ago
"after seeing you endorsing fascism"
WTF?? I'm an anarchist/libertarian, the exact *OPPOSITE* of fascist, and you claim that I am *endorsing* fascism?? Fool!
If socialism isn't violent, explain how wealth is redistributed from someone that doesn't want you to do so...without using coercion. Socialism is State-endorsed- and State-enforced- armed robbery. Socialists initiate, aid and abet such violence. You think because it's done by someone else (the State), that your hands are blood-free? Ha!
lastnymleft 3 years ago
No intend to jump into the discussion. But I see the need to point out the fact that you are reading the ideology of communism with the capitalist way of understanding how society works. In an ideal communist society, wealth are gatherd through collective cooperation, and then distributed in means of social supply system. There is no gap of income to start with, there is no monetary transactions, there is no existence of ownership of capital property. hence, there is no need of coercion.
lustdog 3 years ago 2
It is far too late to provide news and information to the public. LOL, it is so sad that the people of this news org, believe that real information will help at this point.
The public cannot even process the most basic political information, the have been educated not to. They don't even understand the most basic fundamentals of our Constitution and bill of rights, they don't even understand they are slaves o the state, and subservient to the state. Sorry but you are 75-100 years too late.
putittogether 3 years ago
Naomi is too sensitive to rational criticism because she supports Communist China style censorship. She can't stand up to rational arguments because she's empty-headed. Don't expect any useful plans of action for any political or economic issues coming out of her, she is just a passive intellectual couch potato like most hardcore socialists. Remember people, if some citizens don't want to socialize your wealth, your only option is violently taking it. That means all socialists are violent.
jakewayd 3 years ago
hey therealnews i see you good job brother
DANKIETRAIN 3 years ago
Why are my comments on Naomi Klein being deleted? Rational discourse?
vryheid88 3 years ago
The big plan globally is to have slaves and elite. No rules apply to the elite except personal failure is punished severely.
This is Luciferean at it's core. Lucifer's pride to rebell against God.
paultherolls 3 years ago 2
There has been never Socialism in China or USSR...
Socialism is country run by the people for the people - does it exist anywhere today?
Capitalism is an ideology of the power by ownership
while 'Communism' has been an ideology of the power through doctrine
Communism is a society of the future, when Man accepts that we are all evolving Spirit in Manifestation. It will be based on the power of being who you truly are, rather than the present ideologies which makes you be what your are not
abilityoflove 3 years ago
abilityoflove -- Your ignorance is astounding.
putittogether 3 years ago
prove it
abilityoflove 3 years ago
Thank you for that positive spin on Communism. You forgot the part about how most Communist governements leads to ruthless totalitarism to promote equality. That kinda reminds me of what the US and British governments do BTW home and abroad. You also forgot about the part that the communist idology is responsible for the needless deaths of millions including in the USSR, more so that Hitlers's Germany.
xxashyy 3 years ago
The problem is that any ideology when it becomes the master instead of servant will become oppressive and imperial. The grip of ideology makes people being ruled by the mind and not by the heart.
'Communism' believes to have the intellectual solution for life, which of course is a dangerous illusion.
Capitalism, though prophases freedom, is conditioning our lives too, so the most of humanity today are slaves to various ideologies.
We give too much power to words...
abilityoflove 3 years ago 4
Well said. Only idiots think by ideologies. True reformists look at each situation - in its entirety - anew - and discovery what's best for each situation.
kailangyu 3 years ago 4
As much as I respect Naomi Klein, I feel that she has much to learn about the Chinese people, their values and customs. I'm a leftist, but I feel quite embarrassed after watching this video.
dis1kid 3 years ago
Why is that?
SKClouD 3 years ago
Normally I would applaud her criticisms of government, but she applies her ideas too easily to China and the Chinese people. Yes, there are many similarities between western and eastern society, but their social/political differences deserve to be analyzed. As one of the earlier comments stated, the whole of Asia does not have a radical individualism.
dis1kid 3 years ago
Naomi has one of the best open minds out there. The shock doctrine should be required reading for economists.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago 2
Good that someone articulates the academic meaning of these Olympics. I've been thinking too, but just that Bush, who was sitting in the stadium during the opening, is obligated by his freemason lodge, to be present as an accomplished elite, at the top of the all-seeing hierarchy, when the power structure shifts from the US to China, for the capitalists. Iraq was intentional, to destroy the US economy and build the patriarchal societies in China. The middle aged men occupy now the skyscrapers
teemuruskeepaa 3 years ago 2
In other words, it's a REPIG NEOCON dream come true.
dustynbones 3 years ago
is she supporting or opposing China?
NewFutureAmerica 3 years ago
corporate paradise? Karl Marx is crying somewhere.
PersonalJesus348 3 years ago
crying is reserved for those who have souls
hennitherover 3 years ago
umm what?
PersonalJesus348 3 years ago
Also while we moan about the Chinese human rights record when are we gonna get around to critizing Israel for it's treatment of the Palestinians? I my opinion Israel's human rights record is no differnent than China's, and maybe more so. China may kick people out of they're homes, but at least they dont bulldozer the homes while the PEOPLE ARE STILL INSIDE unlike Isreal.
xxashyy 3 years ago
Just understand you're now at the point of favoring the lesser of two evils.
There's a time for bitching about China, as there's a time for bitching about Israel.
This vid is about China.
dusteroo 3 years ago
I'm sick of white liberals like her and neoconservatives telling the rest of the world how to behave. Not only is that arrogant it's hypocricitical especially when your own house isnt in order.
xxashyy 3 years ago
its called having an opinion.
PersonalJesus348 3 years ago
I bet her house is in better order than yours! You should vent the closet with your skeletons.
teemuruskeepaa 3 years ago
We shouldn't be so tough on China as in China women have more rights than the Gov't Bush set up in Iraq. Under Saddam women could wear shorts in sports, now they must be covered. Iraq is sending 1 women to the Olympics & it'll be interesting to see what she wears.
Also China has more religious freedom than Iraq. Saddam set up protections for Christians & Jews & even had Christians on his cabinet. Now most have left the country as we've turned Iraq into an Islamic Sharia state.
DillonX 3 years ago 2
Am I the only person on the planet who doesn't give a fuck about the olympics?
FarangBalls 3 years ago
Why should I read her book? I don't want to spend my dollars on a book of an author that speaks exactly the same as any reporter of Fox, CNN or other Western media. These people don't understand the words 'ethic and professional' of their profession. Every time I turn on a TV and see this kind of reporters and writers each speaking with two mouths, one inside of the other, my ears becomes itchy.
nartin86 3 years ago
America is already a Communist Fascist Dictatorship. The rulers are the private shareholders of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Rockefellers of the U.S. and the Rothschilds of Europe. In true capitalism, business and government are strange bedfellows rather than a married couple as they are today. Intertwining corporate activity with government activity is the primary cause of the immorality of America today, not capitalism itself. Naomi should be donkey punched for being stupid.
jakewayd 3 years ago
People who radically oppose capitalism these days tend to look at 'evil' capitalism... What they're experiencing, I call, "Marxist Capitalism" - which is the opposite of "Anarcho Capitalism".
Capitalism can be good if carefully watched and regulated by the community -domestic or global- and when that doesn't happen, then we see the socialists and other radical-non capitalists scurry to protest against capitalism, thinking that's all there is to capitalism.
dusteroo 3 years ago
McCommunism? Is she trying to put Capitalism with Socialism? That is kind of odd because I still don't see anything that doesn't read government controlled on it. The government of china owns every McDonalds and every Wal-Mart that is on chinese soil. Just because china has a booming economy doesn't mean corporations are all the sudden controlling china. We have been trading with china for over 30 yrs. and our adventures over seas has made china's economy sky rocket as well not to mention russia
peterjamesfulgham 3 years ago
This is WHY global capitalism is growing endlessly & why corporate power is the model they're looking for in the West, to replace democratic politics.
I personally believe the reason we are getting so many political despots around the world now is so that when they f**k it up completely, the plan to implement this sort of Chinese style system of control, will already be waiting in the wings to be implemented by the corporates.
ejbh3160 3 years ago
I could care less what the Chinese do in their own country. What is important is what lesson we take away form their example. If we don't start paying attention to what is happening in this country, we could very well end up with a gov that exemplifies the Chinese gov. Our task is to stop our gov fron emulating what the Chinese are doing. Bush and Co. have taken us a long way down that road. Stop trying to change the world, and prevent the world from changing us. Preserve the Constitution.
bbburton 3 years ago
true - in some aspects.
However, since we get most of our products from China, and the fact that around 70% of all products in Walmart are Chinese-made, i think it's a good idea to understand the world at the other end of our products' assembly line.
Without China, our manufactured habitat of plasticine, AKA, USA, would lose everything it depends on, whether or not we should be dependant on China and it's useless products; America wouldn't be prepared for the whiplash.
Boycott Walmart.
dusteroo 3 years ago
It's not the Chinese economy that bothers me. It's the iron-fisted rule that the US is beginning to emulate that is the problem. Bush is chastising China on it's human rights abuses while we lock up 2.3 million with millions more on parole and probation, the majority for non-violent drug crimes. The US has been engaged in behavior control for decades. The welfare/warfare mentality has overtaken liberty and personal responsibility to the extent that civil rights no longer have meaning.
bbburton 3 years ago 5
christianlonelyheart.
forumotion.
net
rottenegg0 3 years ago
in the end, what's really matters is not these political or coporate arguments on the system. it's the need for introspection so as to find humanity's common root and search for the essence of human existence.
tylerzw711 3 years ago
is there a profit in that?
Signzit 3 years ago
and i think the opening ceremony did great in showing the aspect of wholeness as a path and way of nature which we are also a part of and demand our respect for its balance.
and that's an important part of the chinese culture,which i believe, signified by this opening ceremony, would open a new age in human quest for truth and understanding.
tylerzw711 3 years ago
But, could they do this if people were not socialized to live in it (to be uncritical, etc.)? We were all raised by the state, otherwise known as mass schooling. Maybe if we were all raised differently, we'd be different people - not as easily used. Perhaps what saves the future is the home schooling movement that grows larger every year. The first unschooled generation simply won't be indifferent enough to be exploited.
prayfertrey 3 years ago
China gets more awards from the United Nations than any other country in the world. What does this tell you about the future of America.
Everybody say hello to the future of authoritarian, fascist, ultra-communist USA...give or take 5-10 years, after the global war when the superpowers on are their knees.
QbanNewWave 3 years ago 2
I feel sorry for this woman.
nartin86 3 years ago
why ?? shes one of the few women out there talking about the distructive force of free market economic policies
hazukisan7 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I have no idea who she is; but looks like her view about China is similar to any Westerner. I have no respect for such a writer (heard that she's an author of some book)
nartin86 3 years ago
thumbs down you ignorant fool
mosfonotoc 3 years ago 2
read her book then judge
COAnews 3 years ago
Why should I read her book? I don't want to spend my dollars on a book of an author that speaks exactly the same as any reporter of Fox, CNN or other Western media. These people don't understand the words 'ethic and professional' of their profession. Every time I turn on a TV and see this kind of reporters and writers each speaking with two mouths, one inside of the other, my ears becomes itchy.
nartin86 3 years ago
What the heck is capitalism or Stalinism? If there's less gut in her brain, then she should know that these words are understood differently in China and Russia. Talk about capitalism, when did this English word started to be used in China, where people have been trading for thousands of years? Oh, the Chinese are going to stick 'capitalism' in the middle of a line of Mandarin to describe their economy?