They largely were. If you disagree it would be extremely interesting to get your analysis of each major turning point in modern Chinese history (from the fall of the Qing through the cultural revolution and the modern reform period) and explain what the better choices that should have been made are given the material conditions and constraints of the times.

There is literally no communist country where people are acceptably free and don’t or didn’t want to get out to flee to one of the not communist countries

Lmao. Clearly not looking very hard. The CPC even by western sources has an approval rate somewhere between 85 and 98%.

“become a cesspool”

As if it wasn’t a settler colonial monstrosity built on genocide, slavery and massive violence from it’s very inception right through to the modern day (from “manifest destiny” to modern imperialism).

We’ve arranged ourselves to be in compliance with the content of one, doddering racist’s fever dream of America.

This war is possibly the most American thing he has ever done. He’s simply following the long tradition of American imperialism in the Middle East: from the CIA-backed coup that overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Mossadeq in 1953 to protect oil interests, to arming the Mujahideen against the Soviets, funding the very networks that would fracture into the Taliban and al-Qaeda; from Bush Sr.'s 1991 Gulf War that entrenched permanent bases in the region, to Bush Jr.'s 2003 invasion of Iraq built on fabricated WMD claims; to Obama’s 2011 NATO intervention in Libya that toppled Gaddafi under a “responsibility to protect” mandate, then abandoned the country to militia warlords and slave markets. Each chapter follows the same script: regime change, chaos, retreat, and the next generation of blowback.

Yeah except those charities all happen to need to spend 90% of Bill’s donations on Microsoft products.

I was born in the 90s. I lived through that period too. My family was rural, and because of minority status we experienced the system differently so while I understand what that era felt like on the ground, I can only sympathize with what you went through.

I don’t support the one-child policy. A lot of people on the mainland don’t. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand where it came from. It was created under extreme poverty, food insecurity, and rapid industrialization. The intention was to slow population pressure, but the execution was harsh and often cruel. What you experienced was real, terrible, and not something I would ever support or want repeated. I’m not denying or justifying those practices.

But what you’re doing now is turning personal trauma into a judgment on an entire country and decades of development and progress.

When I was a kid, my parents’ home village and surrounding villages still had no proper roads, no clinics, no stable electricity. That was normal. Look at what followed: hundreds of millions lifted out of extreme poverty, infrastructure reaching remote areas, near-universal schooling, massive housing programs, healthcare expanded nationwide. Corrupt officials actually getting investigated and punished, including high-level ones. The one-child policy ended over a decade ago but the positive policies remain, and so do their effects.

You can hate that policy. I think it was deeply flawed too. But saying “nothing changed” or that the whole project is meaningless is just ignoring reality.

You ask why the state had power over reproduction that’s a great question, why do states have that control, but you talk like this only happens in China. Western governments regulate reproduction too: abortion bans, forced sterilizations in prisons and detention centers, child removal through foster systems, welfare penalties for having kids. States everywhere control bodies in different ways. So don’t pretend this is some uniquely mainland evil.

And no I obviously don’t hate you I know nothing about you. I don’t think your existence is a crime. You’re turning my defense of China’s overall development into a personal attack on you.

Your experience deserves sympathy. I genuinely mean that. But a country isn’t built around any one person’s trauma. You judge a government by whether it feeds people, educates them, houses them, provides healthcare, and raises living standards, not only by individual suffering, even when that suffering is real and tragic.

You can resent the policy. That’s fair. But don’t erase the entire historical process because of it.

And since we’re talking about flawed policies, I also think the hukou system is deeply broken. It affected me personally too. Not to the extent the one-child policy affected you, obviously, but enough that I know what it feels like to be limited by bureaucracy and birthplace. I don’t pretend these systems were harmless or well-designed. But you also can’t let real mistakes erase the whole picture. Depending on how cynical I’m feeling, my assessment of the government ranges from 60/40 to 90/10 in its favor but even at my most critical, it’s still obvious they’ve done far more good than harm overall.

You’re focusing on one painful chapter and pretending the rest didn’t happen. That’s not honest, especially to the hundreds of millions who no longer live in desperation.

You sound extremely comfortable judging from overseas without bothering to do any investigation into the history, current happenings or theory that explains why things are how they are.

China didn’t start in 1949 as some middle-class country waiting to “finish” a revolution. It started destroyed by war, invasion, famine, and colonial humiliation. Then it immediately faced embargoes, military threats, and nonstop pressure from the US-led order. Try rebuilding a civilization under siege from a globe spanning empire and see how fast it goes.

While you’re asking “where’s the egalitarianism,” nearly 900 million people were lifted from abject poverty. Villages got roads, electricity, clinics, schools, normal and high-speed rail links and corrupt officials actually started to get punished, including high-ranking ones.

You treat history like a vibe. Revolution isn’t a personality phase, it’s decades or more of infrastructure, education, stability, and survival in a hostile world.

And yes, strong centralized leadership still exists because capitalism didn’t disappear and imperial powers didn’t suddenly become friendly. We already saw what happens when countries relax too early, look at the USSR or if you’re too weak to defend yourself(Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Peru, Palestine).

Leadership gender balance and patriarchal tendencies are still real issue. But pretending nothing has improved since your grandma’s childhood is insulting to hundreds of millions of women who now read, work, own property, and live longer fuller lives.

What’s actually “weird” is sitting safely in America, benefiting materially from the empire, then mocking a country that had to claw its way out of devastation for not becoming perfect in 75 years. You have a very interesting way of interpreting things.

But you were getting hostile with me personally. We do vote just not directly for the top (honestly a better way to do it imo but sort of beside the point). Also I support a majority of what the current government does with anti corruption and targeted poverty alleviation (which has really helped my parents home village). Taiwan is not important enough to me either way to jeopardise that I’m sorry to say. I think the status quo of posturing and both sides doing nothing works for now and I think most people on the mainland and the island agree with me on that to some degree. If Taiwan reunifies I think it would be nice for some personal reasons I don’t particularly want to get into with strangers but I don’t support use of force I think if Taiwanese wants to break away and go it alone that’s good too if a majority support it.

Tldr: I’m a fence sitter (probably slight lean to reunify but I don’t think that’s my choice to make for other people) on this issue break away reunify not much changes for me outside of thoughts which doesn’t really mean much.

So you blame me for that and that’s why you’re being hostile to me despite how I was just politely asking your opinion on things?

That’s very hostile for no reason.

Not sure why anyone thinks they get to have an opinion.

White saviour complex is a big part imo.

Not at all related to anything I said?

If the USSR didn’t fall hundreds of thousands of women and children would have been saved from being pushed into prostitution and trafficking, millions would have avoid being plunged into morbid poverty, life expectancy wouldn’t have fallen by nearly 10 years due to the brutal conditions of capitalist shock therapy, there would be no war in Ukraine killing the sons of Russia and Ukraine by the thousand, the socialist block would still be together and would have enough strength that militant resistance against the omnicidal American empire would be more than just a pleasant thought for the future.

You’re very hateful for a third party. The collapse of the PRC that they seemingly “jokingly” called for would be devastating we’ve seen what happened to the USSR already. When did I call them a traitor that’s you putting words in my mouth. And to be able to look through this comment section and say there is no racism against Chinese people is genuinely astounding. Maybe it’s because you agree with the racists.

Why are you still speaking for them. “Apologetics” is when I try explain history to an American illiterate. And I call it spam because you have seemingly sought me out across multiple conversations in this thread you weren’t involved in to insert your idiocy.

Who are you to say what they agree or disagree with. I pointed out we have elections and democracy. That is a fact that they seemingly didn’t know. Why are you here spamming me and accusing me of bullshit just because you are illiterate.

I asked a question out of curiosity after someone came to me and self identified as pro independence. They answered about no democracy, I pointed out we also have democracy. Please just learn to read or fuck off.

I would. Why pro reunification people hold their opinions is equally as interesting as pro independence or status quo believers.

I think you are illiterate. I have commented with you a few times and you seem incapable of grasping basic premises. I don’t care if Taiwan reunifies I was just curious why he holds the belief he does. He provided a reason that I’m my view starts from a flawed premise so I explained my thoughts on that. None of this was lecturing or chauvinism. Please learn what words mean and figure out how to grasp through lines before you talk to me further so we can have meaningful discussions as opposed to you just arguing in circles about bullshit you made up in your mind.

Calling Lenin and Stalin “two peas in a pod” is pure ignorance. Lenin was a theorist of imperialism and revolutionary strategy in a semi-feudal Russia. Stalin governed an already-existing socialist state under siege and focused on industrialization and survival. Their political contexts, priorities, and theoretical contributions were radically different. Collapsing them together just tells everyone you’ve never seriously engaged with either.

Now about “dictionary imperialism.”

Western dictionaries define imperialism as broadly as possible on purpose: “extending power,” “influence,” “big country doing stuff.” Why? Because that conveniently erases the material reality that Europe and the US built their wealth through capitalist imperialism, finance capital, colonial extraction, unequal exchange, and permanent underdevelopment of the Global South. If imperialism just means “strong states exert power,” then suddenly everyone is equally guilty and nobody has to confront who actually runs the system.

Imperialism only has value as an analytical concept when it means something specific.

Lenin’s definition does exactly that: monopoly capital + finance capital + export of capital + division of the world + super-profits from subordinate nations. That explains the modern world. Your dictionary definition doesn’t explain anything.

We already have words for generic force: war, conquest, invasion.

“Imperialism” exists to describe a capitalist global structure, not your vibes-based “power is bad” framework.

You’re hiding behind dictionary entries because you don’t want to deal with political economy.

This isn’t a semantic debate. You’re choosing a deliberately vague definition because it lets Western countries off the hook and lets you posture without understanding systems.

Honestly, grow up. Stop lecturing people while proudly demonstrating you haven’t studied the topic. Being arrogant doesn’t make you informed, it just makes you loud.