• zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.netBanned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 years ago

    Fixation on food security

    The man is OBSESSED with food security.

    All he thinks about is FEEDING PEOPLE.

    What kind of SICK FUCK just goes around all day wondering how to GENERATE ENOUGH FOODSTUFF FOR 1.4B PEOPLE

    Jesus FUCKING Christ, what a psycho.

          • alexei_1917 [mirror/your pronouns]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            For some reason, this reminds me of that time in the Cold War, that a rickety footbridge collapsed.

            Small accident, not a single injury directly resulting.

            This very small accident caused an international incident.

            Because the town was a US state border town, neither state would take responsibility and replace the bridge, the feds said it was a state matter for the states to sort between themselves, and the town certainly couldn’t afford it themselves nor did they have a municipal government to collect taxes for such things, and so this one townsperson, after weeks and weeks of the states arguing, he says to himself, I’m gonna get us a damn bridge. So he campaigns to every possibly responsible authority he can, newspapers pick up the story, still no bridge and the same nonsense about jurisdiction from both states and the feds. Finally, he decides to go for broke, and writes to the Soviet Union requesting foreign aid to rebuild their bridge. So, the Soviets send a journalist. And, ridiculously quickly, the feds say they’ll pay for the bridge. (The Soviet Union then promises, if the US Federal Government doesn’t actually follow through, the Soviet Union will get the bridge built.) The bridge is built at Federal expense. It still stands today. The generally accepted story among the general public is that the feds just built the bridge to get rid of the Soviet journalist before “US Federal Government Cannot Afford Basic Infrastructure, Local Authorities Seek Foreign Aid” ended up in a Moscow newspaper. Though I’m sure the US Government would give a different official explanation of the incident.

            (Specifically, “I can build my own infrastructure, thankyouverymuch!” reminds me a lot of the guy’s supposed line, “I’m gonna get us that damn bridge”.)

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      Why would this country that has a written history going back thousands of years recording famine and its resulting upheaval be concerned with food security?

      Must be the inscrutable oriental brainpan.

  • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    Yes. The single individual. Forcing this country of over a billion people against their will to have their own sustainable food supply. On his own. Like a dictator.

    • VILenin [he/him]@hexbear.netM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Believing that over a billion people are all unilaterally controlled by a single person is not only peak great man theory, but also just another extension of rabid racism

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        From observation it seems really handy for crushing all nuance, too. Who did the Holodumber? Stalin. By himself. WIth a big spoon. Don’t ask why Ukrainian communist officials in Ukraine were genociding Ukrainians. Stalin did it, alone, by himself.

        The cultural revolution? Mao did it. Just Mao. No one else was involved. We can condemn the entire country because the entire country is just one dude on a framed propaganda poster. Or like “we’re going to sanction Saddam” or whoever, because sanctioning hte dictator is justifiable, whereas people might ask why we’re pushing millions or tens of millions of people because we don’t like the guy that supposedly single handedly runs the entire country.

            • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 years ago

              That was such a brilliant, wonderful, terrible line. Just… so much… political bullshit and lies and dissembling and cruelty and indifference is tied up in that line.

                • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  I found it really authentic because everyone was totally bought-in to the camp. The things that would have been camp were part of these people’s lives, and there was so much attention to detail in how they spoke, moved, dressed, and acted that it sold the whole thing as real people in a real culture living their lives. Like the war boys weren’t dumb, mindless thugs throwing themselves to their death for nothing like in an 80s action movie. They took time to show how they were devoted to Joe, they had religious beliefs, they genuinely thought of themselves as heroes fighting for a worthwhile cause. They invested the warboys with so much depth and character that I, at least, never thought they were silly. These are warriors from a warrior culture who have their rituals of war, their symbols of valor, their pride, their pathos. When the one guy takes a bolt to the head and his buddies are praying for him to get up so he can die as a hero there’s just so much realness in that moment.

                  And for me, personally, I know a little bit about guys like General Butt Naked in the Liberian civil war, and some other pretty out-there gangs and warbands and mercenary companies, so a lot of the “over the top” elements were recognizably similar to things that warrior cultures do in real life.

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.netBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      In East Germany, no banana.

      In Venezuela, only banana.

      In Glorious People’s Republic of Walmart, choose any food you want and one of our child slaves will be by shortly to bring it to you.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        And it doesn’t even pay off, because you a very limited selection of flavorless fruits and veg because they’ve been bred solely to be stable for transport.

        It’s very “They have all this stuff but they don’t even enjoy it!”

        Like endless misery to deliver mediocre produce.

        Idk, I don’t know if that makes it worse, but it does feel more perverse somehow. Like in stories you expect the baddies to cause vast misery and suffering to procure the best, most exotic, most delicious luxuries, not bland bananas with barely any flavor or shitty mangoes that are almost all pit and taste vaguely of soap.

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.netBanned
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          Like endless misery to deliver mediocre produce.

          I mean, I think this would be somewhat overstated if not for the fact that everything is so crazy expensive.

          Like in stories you expect the baddies to cause vast misery and suffering to procure the best, most exotic, most delicious luxuries, not bland bananas with barely any flavor or shitty mangoes that are almost all pit and taste vaguely of soap.

          There’s plenty of high end food available in trendier and more upscale corners of the country. It isn’t as though grocery store mangos are the only mangos.

    • YearOfTheCommieDesktop [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      it’s not the feeding people that they’re even mad about so much as the freedom of action that a country has when it doesn’t rely on trade with other nations for essentials like food and energy

      • IceWallowCum [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Guevara has a bunch of speeches about this. IIRC, he differentiated between “political freedom”, the power of a people to make their own decisions and act on them, and “economical freedom”, the power of a people to decide over their production and trade. He argued that a revolution aims for the former; after that, the post-revolution state builds the latter.

        • MemesAreTheory [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          B-B-B-BUT muh COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE. This isn’t PARETO EFFICIENT, and that’s against the RULES. (Please ignore the inseparable intertwining of economic and political power and just play along like dupes)

  • Coolkidbozzy [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Xi jinping failed to consider that food isn’t a universal right under capitalism. How are we supposed to condemn China as capitalist and fascist if they do socialism?!?

    • Have you considered that food cannot be a right because it is the only recognized right that requires labor and you’re not entitled to other people’s labor?

      (I’m paraphrasing this fash-lite talking point because it lives rent free in my head and makes me extremely angry)

  • wombat [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    the maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Is there a moral case against prohibiting any The Economist staff member from having access to writing materials of any kind? BEcuase I think, for the good of humanity…