Attilanonym

@AngelicaOung @Nevertoolatet10 Interestingly, the European feudal system with the hierarchical land ownership seems more resilient to rapid concentration of land ownership. In modern era, American style capitalism accelerates the concentration whereas abolishing landowner class in China nullified the process

@Nevertoolatet10 @attilanonym They all intend to break the cycle

Hegel famously said that China has no history because it never seems to break out of the dynastic cycle. I would say rather that China speed-run history. This is because it was super early in achieving two things: freedom from religion in state affairs (« secular »Zhou replaced superstitious Shang 3000 years ago) and a laissez-faire market. This allowed for inequality to rapidly accumulate in society until it becomes intolerable over centuries. This didn’t happen in say Europe because religion and hierarchy kept ppl locked in rigid divisions of haves and have nots where they accept their lot in life. Feudalism was incredibly stable. In China however, the discontent of the have nots eventually boil over, most typically in a peasant rebellion led by a guy who failed his exams. Very intense civil wars typically follow and the disorder may last for decades or centuries before China unites again under a new central authority. Each new dynasty tries something different, to try and avert the calamity that befell the previous dynasty. So for instance the Tang dynasty overempowered the military and fell to coups. So the Song dynasty nerfed their military and eventualy fell to the mongols. But no dynasty have ever solved the cycle. If they did, they would still be here today. Instead, every dynasty eventually fell, with the successful ones lasting about 300 years, before the chessboard is flipped over, providing a hard reset that's needed to give everyone "table stakes" in society and the cycle starts all over again.

Western propaganda being dismantled daily by the new generations that refuse to take these "safest" lists seriously because they have critical thinking

🇨🇳 Wie die Demokratie der VR China mit 2,77 Millionen Abgeordneten wirklich funktioniert Die Volksrepublik China ist ein kommunistisches Einparteiensystem (Einparteienstaat unter Führung der KPCh). In diesem System kommt der Kommunistischen Partei Chinas (中国共产党) die politische Führung zu. Dennoch gibt es neben der KPCh noch acht weitere, sogenannte demokratische Parteien (acht nichtkommunistische Parteien, die der KPCh folgen). Diese sind über die Politische Konsultativkonferenz des chinesischen Volkes (中国人民政治协商会议, PKKCV) in den politischen Prozess eingebunden. Das gesamte System ist nach dem Prinzip des demokratischen Zentralismus (民主集中制) organisiert. Das bedeutet: Während Meinungsbildung und Diskussion innerhalb der Partei und der Volkskongresse nach unten hin breit erfolgen, sind gefasste Beschlüsse nach oben hin bindend. Eine Gewaltenteilung im westlichen Sinne existiert nicht. Stattdessen wirken Exekutive, Legislative und Judikative unter der Führung der KPCh zusammen. Die Willensbildung, die von der kleinsten Gruppe vor Ort bis an die Spitze reicht, umfasst daher auch die Entscheidungen dieser staatlichen Gewalten. Die Vorstellung, dass in China nicht gewählt werde, ist ein Missverständnis. Die Volksrepublik China verfügt über ein vielschichtiges Wahlsystem (System der Vertreterbestimmung auf mehreren Ebenen). Dieses kann jedoch nicht isoliert betrachtet werden, sondern ist Teil der umfassenderen "Volksdemokratie des gesamten Prozesses" (全过程人民民主). Dieses Modell kombiniert elektorale Demokratie (Demokratie durch Wahlen) mit konsultativer Demokratie (Demokratie durch politische Konsultation und Diskussion im Vorfeld). Während die Wahlen die Vertreter bestimmen, sorgt die Konsultation dafür, dass unterschiedliche gesellschaftliche Interessen bereits im Vorfeld von Entscheidungen diskutiert werden. Das zentrale Wahlsystem basiert auf den Volkskongressen (人民代表大会), die in zwei Verfahren gewählt werden. Auf der Basisebene (Gemeinden und Kreise) findet eine Direktwahl (直接选举) statt, an der alle wahlberechtigten Bürger ab 18 Jahren teilnehmen können. Es handelt sich um die größte Wahl der Welt mit über einer Milliarde Wählern. Auf den höheren Ebenen (Provinzen und der nationale Volkskongress) wird dagegen indirekt gewählt (间接选举). Dabei entsenden die direkt gewählten Abgeordneten der unteren Ebenen ihre Vertreter nach oben. Insgesamt gibt es in China über 2,77 Millionen Volkskongress-Abgeordnete, von denen etwa 95 % auf der Basisebene tätig sind. Die Amtszeit beträgt einheitlich fünf Jahre. Die Abgeordneten kommen aus allen Bereichen der Gesellschaft, also aus Arbeitern, Bauern, Intellektuellen und Unternehmern. Ein bestimmter Anteil ist für Frauen und nationale Minderheiten reserviert. Ihre Befugnisse sind beachtlich. Der Nationale Volkskongress (全国人民代表大会) in Peking ist das höchste Staatsorgan. Er ändert die Verfassung, erlässt Gesetze, entscheidet über den Staatshaushalt und wählt den Staatspräsidenten sowie den Ministerpräsidenten. Zudem kontrollieren die Abgeordneten die Regierung, Gerichte und Staatsanwaltschaften. Sie können konkrete Vorschläge einbringen. Allein 2024 wurden über 9.000 Vorschläge eingereicht, darunter die Initiative zur Ausweitung der Ladeinfrastruktur für E-Autos, die bundesweit umgesetzt wurde. Der Einfluss der Bürger endet nicht an der Wahlurne. Der NVK hat über 50 sogenannte Legislativ-Kontaktpunkte (立法联系点) in Gemeinden eingerichtet, um direkt Meinungen aus der Bevölkerung zu sammeln. Bei der Planung des aktuellen Fünfjahresplans wurden über eine Million Online-Kommentare ausgewertet. Wahlen bestimmen in China die Volksvertreter, und diese Vertreter treffen im Sinne der "Volksdemokratie des gesamten Prozesses" (全过程人民民主) Entscheidungen. Dies geschieht unter ständiger Einbindung von Meinungen aus der Basis. So beginnt die Willensbildung buchstäblich bei den kleinsten Gruppen vor Ort und reicht bis an die Spitze der KPCh und des Staates.

China just made Silicon Valley's entire AI industry look like a scam. The US government spent 3 years trying to stop China from building competitive AI. But this backfired HORRIBLY. Here's what happened: Yesterday, a Chinese startup called DeepSeek released a new AI model called V4. It matches the performance of OpenAI and Anthropic's best models. At 1/7th the price. And for the first time ever, it was built on Chinese chips. NOT American ones. That last part is the one that terrifies the west. For context: Since 2022, the US has banned the export of advanced AI chips to China. The entire strategy was built on the assumption that if China can't access Nvidia's best hardware, they can't build frontier AI. But DeepSeek just proved that assumption wrong. Their V4 model was trained and runs on Huawei's Ascend chips. Huawei spent months working directly with DeepSeek to make sure V4 runs across their entire line of AI processors. Jensen Huang even predicted this on a recent podcast: "The day that DeepSeek comes out on Huawei first, that is a horrible outcome for our nation." That day was yesterday. And the numbers are crazy: DeepSeek V4 costs $3.48 per million output tokens. OpenAI's latest model GPT-5.5 costs $30. Anthropic's Claude charges $25. Same ballpark performance. 7x cheaper. Uber's CTO just admitted they burned through their ENTIRE 2026 AI budget in 4 months using Anthropic's tools. If Uber had used DeepSeek instead, that same budget would have lasted 7 YEARS. 4 months vs 7 years. Same work getting done. But the pricing isn't even the big thing here. The real story is what DeepSeek did with their technical report: They published the benchmarks where they LOSE. Every AI company cherry-picks the tests where their model wins. DeepSeek ran the full comparison against GPT-5.4 and Google's Gemini, found they trail frontier models by 3 to 6 months, and printed it anyway. They literally don't care because the price gap makes the performance gap irrelevant for 90% of use cases. So the US export controls didn't slow China down. They ACCELERATED China's independence. Because Chinese developers were FORCED to train models with limited resources, they had to figure out how to make AI radically more efficient. That constraint became their competitive advantage. Every generation of DeepSeek has gotten dramatically cheaper to train. V4 continues the trend. Meanwhile US companies are going the OPPOSITE direction: OpenAI's GPT-5.5 Pro costs $180 per million output tokens. That's 51x more expensive than DeepSeek V4 for comparable work. The Commerce Secretary confirmed this week that ZERO Nvidia advanced chip shipments have actually gone through to China despite being approved in January. So China built frontier AI anyway. Without American chips. At a fraction of the cost. And the market response tells you everything: Chinese chipmaker SMIC surged 10%. Huahong Semiconductor jumped 15%. DeepSeek's Chinese AI competitors Zhipu AI and MiniMax dropped 9% because V4 is destroying them too. DeepSeek is making Silicon Valley's pricing model look like a scam. US tech companies spent $650 billion on AI infrastructure this year. DeepSeek just showed the world you can match their output for pennies. The export controls were supposed to be America's ace card. Instead they taught China how to win without American chips, at American prices nobody can compete with. Jensen Huang was right. This is a horrible outcome. But it's the outcome America built for itself.

Die Verbrechen der Einheit 731 sind keine „Behauptungen“, kein „Missverständnis“ und keine „Propaganda“. Sie sind historisch belegt – durch Dokumente, Zeugenaussagen und sogar durch die Aussagen der Täter selbst. Belege aus seriösen Quellen: nterview mit einem ehemaligen Mitglied (Hideo Shimizu): english.news.cn/asiapacific/20… Bericht über Geständnisse von Tätern (The Guardian): theguardian.com/world/2006/nov… Veröffentlichung von Namen tausender Beteiligter (The Guardian): theguardian.com/world/2018/apr… Diese Quellen zeigen übereinstimmend: -Menschen wurden gezielt infiziert -Operationen ohne Betäubung wurden durchgeführt -Gefangene wurden systematisch missbraucht und getötet Es gibt Gerichtsprotokolle. Es gibt Regierungsdokumente. Es gibt wissenschaftliche Studien. Und es gibt Täter, die selbst gesprochen haben. Dass es weniger Bilder gibt, bedeutet nicht, dass es nicht passiert ist – viele Beweise wurden entweder 1945 zerstört oder sind zu grausam für die Öffentlichkeit und daher nicht weit verbreitet. Geschichte verschwindet nicht, nur weil man sie ignoriert. Die Wahrheit ist dokumentiert. Die Opfer waren real. Und Respekt beginnt damit, das anzuerkennen.

For an “emeritus professor” at a “prestigious” law school @donaldcclarke you really are one jug-eared dumbo. This is a detailed academic study by Dr Tim Summers of Kings College London, on UK mainstream media coverage of China issues over a period of four years. Well worth reading. The Economist sample is an analysis of the output of "Chaguan", their "China expert". Over the four-year period of the study he published 132 articles; 128 were negative and not a single one was positive. The entire Western mainstream media have been suborned by the USA's lunatic obsession with its disintegrating hegemony, but @TheEconomist and @EconUS are out there fighting tooth and nail to lead the field... "Hey baby! Look at us! We are FUCKING ARSEWIPE!!!” Propaganda? You wouldn’t recognize propaganda if it seized you by the scrotum with its barbed fangs and refused to let go. But hey. I guess that’s the whole point of propaganda…

Elon's auto-translate does wonders

Day 5 of my travels through Xinjiang, working on the research for my book. Earlier on my trip I visited a hospital out in Wushi in the far West. Today I visited the region’s top hospital, the Xinjiang University Hospital in Urumqi. Yet again I spent several hours viewing the facilities and listening to doctors, nurses, and trainees enthusing about the proud history of the hospital and their commitment to building an even better future. At the end of the visit I was left shaking my head in despair. When will China end its genocidal policy of building hospitals in Xinjiang and filling them with equipment, doctors, nurses, and patients? When will China turn to the civilised Western path of bombing hospitals, destroying their equipment, and incinerating their doctors, nurses, and patients? The whole premise of China’s accession to the WTO in 2001 was that it would be the first step in the process of China "becoming more like us". Sadly, that dream seems as distant now as it ever was... 💔💔 @AndyBxxx @ShangguanJiewen @FriedaLi3 @RnaudBertrand @GeopoliticsDH @Ken_LoveTW @KenRoth @ChinaTeacher1 @changan_mr63238 @yoongyeepoh @brotyboy @XiWellWisher @mikepompeo

May I make an observation? What is conspicuously missing in this discussion between @haugejostein and @TheStalwart is how China🇨🇳 has NEVER claimed it is perfect. What China🇨🇳 claims is simply this: The objective of its Governance is to improve the quality of life of its 1.41 billion people, and the endeavors devoted to this objective are *on-going*, i.e., they *don't stop*. [Reminder 1 billion is 1,000,000,000, 1 million is 1,000,000. Too many Westerner critics of China for reasons unfathomable to anyone except perhaps themselves continue to disregard, as a matter of course, the difference between 9 zeros and 6 zeros before the decimal. ] China🇨🇳 has no desire, indeed no taste, for a kind of political thinking obsessed with a thing called "hegemon"- a LABEL devoid of meaning when behind it there is nothing in substance to buttress it. For China🇨🇳, the way to reify the objective is via construction of INFRASTRUCTURE in transportation such as in roads, rails, air, bridges, dams, non-fossil energy plants, and by EDUCATION of its citizenry so no one is illiterate in the rudimentary basics of a proper education. "Proper" means an education where teachers are qualified to teach, and students are disciplined to learn basic competency in Math, Science, History, Geography, Foreign Languages and the Humanities. Secondly, what is "political pluralism"?? Does the term refer to the presence of 2 or more than 2 parties in a system of governance such as in U.S.? I.e., GOP + Dem + Independent? AND Midterm Election every 2 years and General every 4? China says NO thank you to this hi-fancy but lo-efficiency system. If the critics of China like that so much and hold it to be Model for the World, by all means, keep it. China has never try to stop them, let alone "regime-change" them. Thirdly, I have crisscrossed 8 Tier 1 cities and 10 remote villages in 9 provinces in my visit to China in 2024 and 2025. I have not found any substantial difference in air quality between US and China. If anything, I would any time prefer to live in China than US on the measure of Air Quality. The Air Quality in the US city where I live simply is NOT GOOD - this according to the daily reports of Weather Channel. I breathed better in all the places I visited in China. Not 10 or 15 years ago. But definitely now. And I certainly did not have to "watch my step" on the pedestrian walks in China whereas in U.S., walking on sidewalks has become an exercise in hopping to avoid the stench, sight and physical contact of your shoes with human feces, urine and used syringes. Fourthly, China DOES censor pornography, adult AND child porn both. China also impose capital punishment on drug trafficking as stipulated in its Criminal Code. If this law is objectionable to a Liberal Western Mind, too bad. China does not need the West's approval to do her own law, no different from U.S. doesn't need China's to do its. Lastly, China is a gunless society. Law enforcement is divided into civic police who don't carry guns and swat police who do. In cities where Terrorism has happened in the past, or where crowds are expected, Swat Police is posted. The West needs to STOP obsessing about China and demonizing China as if the West's system is inherently superior, and for god's sake, quit blaming China for all its own shortcomings and failings.

This 👇 is pretty funny and, I checked, it's real: the title of the Princeton study is "Political Discontent in China Is Associated with Isolating Personality Traits" (collaborate.princeton.edu/en/publication…). In a nutshell, Princeton University found that those who dislike the Communist Party of China are predominantly socially awkward "losers", meaning people defined - in the study - as "fearful, anxious, introverted, disagreeable, disorganized, unable to forgive, and suffering from low self-esteem." Those who like the CPC, conversely, score high on confidence, sociability, conscientiousness, and work ethic - what the study calls "traits associated with personal and professional success." Interestingly, the first group (the disagreeable and low self-esteem "losers" who dislike the CPC) only make up roughly 5% of the Chinese population according to the study, which completely inverts the stereotype one might expect: "dissidents" in China aren't charismatic, cosmopolitan, open-minded intellectuals rebelling against conformity - those guys are overwhelmingly supporters of the Party. This, the study argues, is one of the quiet reasons the CPC is so durable. Its critics are, by personality, precisely the people least equipped to build coalitions, mobilize others, or persuade anyone of anything. Dissent in China isn't so much suppressed as it is, statistically, the weirdo muttering on his own at the back of the bus.

GDP is fake Electrical generation 🇺🇸3.3k TWh to 4.4 TWh 🇨🇳.5k TWh to 10k TWh Vehicle Production: 🇺🇸 10m to 10m 🇨🇳 .5m to 30m E-commerce: (2025) 🇺🇸 25 billion deliveries 🇨🇳 216 billion deliveries Steel: 🇺🇸 95m tons to 85m tons 🇨🇳 1.2 billion tons in 2025 Ag Grain : 🇺🇸 8% of world production 🇨🇳 25% of world production

You wanted evidence of Japanese mass killing in China. Here it is from the U.S. Department of State’s Office of the Historian, dated December 14, 1937: “The Japanese Ambassador here boasted a day or two ago of his country’s having killed 500,000 Chinese people.” History does not become fake because a descendants of Japanese Fascists is too morally weak to face it.

NEW VIDEO DEBUNKING THE CIA'S PROPAGANDA ABOUT CHINA'S UYGHURS

@chenweihua @GordonGChang Specifically the herpes, which doesn't do much but never goes away.

@GordonGChang Gordon Chang is the STD.

Iran is the symptom, China is the disease.

On a long train ride, a Han Chinese played the erhu, a Kazakh played the dombra, and three Uyghurs played the rawap and gijak. Together, they performed the Mongolian piece Horse Racing, bringing the dull journey to life with the sound of their traditional ethnic instruments.😌😌😌

I'm "comparing" everything to China. Since 2017, China has built a city from nothing that is already twice the size of San Francisco, where I live. It's also far more advanced. This is the reality of Communism, not the opinions of western Leftoids larping as such.

@BallerDezz @Tracking_Live Think bigger. Average PLAAF fighter pilots clocks over 200 flight hours annually. Combat exercises are carried out throughout the year e.g. a recent one involved over 100 aircrafts to simulate large air campaigns. Also The pilot recruitment procress begins at high school level.

@Tracking_Live Nigga how will they even train pilots at this speed??

As per a new report published by a U.S. defense establishment, China is adding ~20-30 new advanced fighter jets per month to its inventory, which is likely ~240-300 annually. This includes the J-20 stealth fighter, with 100 to 120+ units produced annually; some reports suggest one J-20 is built every 8 days (approximately 3-4 per month). The J-16 production is high, with an estimated 80–100+ units delivered annually; also, the J-10C and J-35 are in the list."

@chenweihua @TheEconomist No, they are just evil.

@TheEconomist Is the Economist a fantasy magazine with writers on drugs?

China thinks it can exploit America. Weakened in Iran, Donald Trump may be easier to negotiate with. Yet China’s optimism is tempered by anxiety economist.com/leaders/2026/0…

@RobbieBarwick I'm curious what's their safe word in this special ownership...I mean, relationship.

Memo to Australian media: It is not "the president". It is "the US president". He's not our president. He's not the president of the world. He's the president of one country. Other countries have their own presidents. Alternatively, you could say "the shithead president".