But nazis systematically kill people of other ethnic groups.
Need a history lesson? Europeans in general have been practicing colonialism and killing other ethnic groups systematically for hundreds of years, before the nazis came into existence. They're still committing ethnic cleansing via the world bank and IMF in the global south too, to reduce potentially revolutionary population growth in "places we don't want it" (Bill Gates words)
Today I resigned from the staff of the International Monetary Fund after over twelve years, and after 1000 days of official Fund work in the field, hawking your medicine and your bag of tricks to governments and to peoples in Latin America and the Caribbean and Africa. To me resignation is a priceless liberation, for with it I have taken the first big step to that place where I may hope to wash my hands of what in my mind’s eye is the blood of millions of poor and starving peoples. Mr. Camdessus, the blood is so much, you know, it runs in rivers. It dries up too; it cakes all over me; sometimes I feel that there is not enough soap in the whole world to cleanse me from the things that I did do in your name and in the names of your predecessors, and under your official seal.
I haven't seen anything by him in many years, and even then he was barely a Sanders-socdem... is he more to the right now too (in addition to always being a grifter)?
Every time I check review sites to see what current phones are best, they almost all ignore chinese phones, and push only apple, samsung, and google.
And that's despite chinese smartphone companies like xiaomi, oneplus, huawei, nubia, being better, cheaper, and more globally popular, for years now.
It's almost already reached the point that the US is intentionally isolating themselves tech-wise, and are begging europe and the rest of the world to do the same.
Ultra-lefts love appointing kings for some reason, and think socialism is when one guy controls everything, and hand picks a sucessor. Look at the history of int'l trotskyist movement squabbles, or their historical attachment to the myth that "Lenin appointed trotsky king of the USSR".
To claim that SWCC is "pragmatic, and not Marxist", typifies the ultra-left stances of most western leftist orgs, in their standard condemnation of actually existing communist formations on the basis of a selective and dogmatic interpretation of Marxism, and their obsession with martyrdom and failure. PSL should have dropped this "gang of four" leftism a decade ago.
The biggest difference IMO, is the focus on integrating rather than de-linking with the world economy. The PRC and the USSR were both demonized cold war targets, so why did one thrive, and the other stagnate?
With the Deng Xiaoping era and the opening up to the world economy, we have the answer. The focus shifted away from a the ideological struggle that exemplified the Cultural Revolution. The lesson learnt there: you cannot better people's material conditions, and end poverty with ideological struggle, or isolationism.
The USSR, through historical inertia, and an emphasis on siege socialism, demonstrated an unwillingness to pursue opening up. Deng Xiaoping by contrast stated: "we don't need to be afraid to open the window just because a few flies might get in... The fresh air will do us good, and the flies are nothing to we can't handle."
Since then, the focus shifted to economic construction and technological advancements gained via an open market system with the west: the superiority of socialism over capitalism must come through it's better development of the productive forces, and better ability to feed your people.
The USSR had to use spycraft to get tainted western microchips already a few years old. Yet since the 1980s the west is falling over themselves to build factories and export tech to China.
There's a lot of nuance to this strategy, because integration with the west almost always means getting caught in the low-wage-trap, but SWCC organized this bargain in their favor. They traded limited wage exploitation, in exchange for long-term technological expertise... A strategy that's clearly been paying off.
The PRC has a strict policy of non-interference, informed by china's long history of live and let live with its neighbors, their own historical experiences and foreign-policy miss-steps, as well as in-depth study of the factors that lead to the downfall of the USSR, of which the arms race sucking tons of labor and vital resources away from other important economic sectors was a main reason.
They rightly view military involvement and weaponry as extremely dangerous traps, that can spiral out of control quickly. And unless you're using your own troops like Cuba did in Angola, you're going to lose control of that weaponry.
Africa has seen so much unecessary bloodshed because the west and Israel armed the Apartheid powers, and various other reactionary parties in the 70s-80s, most of those weapons being used to kill innocent people.
The west wants to keep Africa unstable, ruled by petty warlords and tearing itself apart. The CPC desires a stable Africa focused on economic development and construction.
It's not a strict dogmatism to never get involved ever, but a waryness informed by history.
China:
Iran:
Russia:
NATO stans hate these maps.