• diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.deBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        It’s not going to show up on the graph if it’s unreported.

        EDIT: like when they are in prison/camp, dead, unregistered immigrant or just unwritten

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 day ago

          Lol, so you think any evidence that conflicts with your presumptions about reality is just fake.

          Even the fucking World Bank acknowledges that this data is accurate. Are you claiming they’re faking numbers to make China look good? What, is George Soros behind it? How far does your conspiracy theory go?

          Maybe you should try basing your beliefs on evidence instead of propaganda and ignorant assumptions.

          • diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.deBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            1 day ago

            Everyone’s data on this sux. Not a representative of anything. Like the USSR once had a homeless rate of a grand total of zero because it was made illegal (I know I could bring the US or something into the example but it’s actually funny seeing you get triggered by mention of the USSR). There are other biases like someone promising a bonus inside of the govt if there aren’t any (reported) homeless people.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              1 day ago

              You asked someone earlier:

              How would I know you aren’t the one cherry picking?

              That’s a great question. If we all just blindly believe whatever we feel is true, then there’s no possible way to determine who’s right and who’s wrong. That’s why it’s important to ground your beliefs in evidence. Because that way, we can actually determine who’s right and who’s wrong.

              But there’s clearly no point discussing anything with you, your views cannot be changed by evidence because they’re not based on evidence. They’re based solely on blind faith. They are fully unfalsifiable, and no matter what the world looks like in reality, there could never be any evidence that would change your mind. It’s no different from arguing with a Flat-Earther.

              If you ever get tired of worshipping at the alter of anti-communist propaganda and decide to start basing your beliefs on evidence instead of faith, hmu and we can continue this discussion then.

              • diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.deBanned from community
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                14
                ·
                1 day ago

                I don’t feel like bringing evidence right now, I am having fun in these arguments. I also know I am not changing your opinion. I am not even that anti-communist, I am fine with siding with non-stalinist communists. Look around references in the wiki I mentioned before if you want evidence.

        • BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 day ago

          During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.

          If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

          • Michael Parenti (RIP)
    • BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      Your argument against the average citizen in China being unable to feel a massive decline in poverty is… A vague gesture towards survivorship bias? I swear to god you people just throw shit at the wall and type out whatever sticks as your argument