About the picture, old news from Henan, China in Oct 2021: https://english.henan.gov.cn/2021/08-25/2300682.html

Over the past few days, a nucleic acid testing campaign for all residents was started in many regions of China. In the campaign, the medical staff were all facing a difficulty that the thick protective suits are too stuffy for them in such a hot summer.

However, the difficulty abated at the nucleic acid testing site in Changyuan Maternity and Child Health Hospital on August 19, because new-type positive-pressure protective suits, designed by Tuoren Group in Changyuan (a county-level city of Henan province), had been provided for the medical staff there. During the break time, the medical staff could inflate cool air to their protective suits with a special air conditioner to help them feel cooler. Those medical staff in the inflated protective suits looked “fatty” and lovely, while the residents were still worried about them due to their heavy workloads.

Some people like to use pictures from China and pass them off as Japan.

Another angle:

I have no clue either, so I started with the CCAMLR’s website, they have all the reports of meetings since 1982. However, the report for the meeting mentioned in the news (June 19-23) isn’t available yet.

If you look through the reports from previous years, the relevant information is under the title “Spatial Management”>“Review of proposals for new MPAs”, or “Marine Protected Areas” for earlier reports. If you want to see what the representatives from each country said, search for “COUNTRY made the following statement”.

This is a lot of material to go through, might come back to comment again if I get around to finding out why.

allowing members of the bourgeoisie to hold political power is pretty much the definition of revisionism

I’m also curious as to where this is defined.

Note that out of the 96.7 million CPC members (as of 2021), there are

• 25.9 million farmers/herdsmen/fishermen
• 15.5 million technical personnel
• 10.9 million in management positions
• 7.8 million party/government workers
• 6.6 million skilled workers
• 3.1 million students
• 7.5 million in other professions
• 19.4 million retired personnel

Not saying that private entrepreneurs don’t have any voice, but they are a very small minority in both political representation and political power.

The amendment to the constitution of the CPC in 2002 allowed “any advanced element of other social strata” to join the party, this was and still is controversial even among party members.

Private entrepreneurs do not equate to capitalists, though they do attract the same negative sentiments due to capitalistic tendencies. There are national laws and party rules/regulations that prevent both civil servants and party-member leading cadres from holding posts in private enterprises. So private entrepreneurs can join the party, but cannot hold government or party posts unless they stop participating in private businesses.

From Law of the People’s Republic of China on Civil Servants:

Article 59 Civil servants shall abide by disciplinary rules and laws. They shall not commit any of the following acts:

(16) Engaging or participating in for-profit activities and concurrently holding a post in enterprises or other for-profit organizations in violation of relevant regulations;

we should be careful about trusting individual self-proclaimed Marxists

I agree with this, which is why I don’t read or quote from them, but their work might be relevant to others which is why they seem popular.

and instead should work more to propagate and organise the material that already exists

marxists.org is a great resource but doesn’t actually have Xi Jinping’s work on it, or any of the past 3 Chinese leaders for that matter, even though they are available in Chinese and English from official sources. ProleWiki is what this site promotes, though more work is definitely needed.

To be fair, I have no clue to who these people are, I don’t read the writings of any non-Chinese marxist besides Marx, Engels, Lenin (and maybe Stalin). I also don’t like the idea of linking increased literacy to willingness to learn.

Crowd-sourcing information is not a new idea, that’s how humanity has advanced, the internet does make it much easier, and with better translators it’ll be even better in future. The main issue is moderation as you mentioned, which goes back to having an authoritative person or group that most people can trust to delegate the tedious work of moderating to.

I want to note that English-speaking people might be comfortable with applying “anti-authority” to everything due to their imperalist environment, but this causes a lack of awareness of socialist authorities that are in power, such as China. That is why it is important to move away from “anti-authority” to anti-capitalism.

Two people in this thread say that with the internet, we can move away from “big public figures”/“big thinkers”. While I appreciate this optimism, it just sounds very anti-authoritarian, and I quote from Engels On Authority:

Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority.

There are anti-government and anti-“big corp/business” tendencies in the US/West, which I will call “anti-authority” for now. The essense of “anti-authority” in capitalist countries is anti-capitalism, or anti-“dictatorship of the bourgeoisie”, but there is a gap in this logic that stops people from turning into marxists right away, as they might instead become anarchists. This gap in logic will not be closed just by having everyone have access to free information through the internet, as there is too much information to digest, and imperialists will also interfere with the propagation of marxist ideology.

“Anti-authoritarian” sentiments do have positive outcomes, like decentralized technologies (think internet, bittorrent, p2p, fediverse etc.), the open source software movement, but these only serve as tools, they are the means and not the end.

Reform and opening up has always been controversial up to this day, but it doesn’t stop there, market economy, One Country Two Systems, supporting private enterprises, not meddling in the internal affairs of other countries, largest trading partner of the US, all used as evidence by different people to call the CPC “revisionist”/“class traitor”.

History has no ifs or buts, the Cultural Revolution has shown that those who claim to be Maoists could not defend their ideals, even from within a socialist country, this is a disgrace to Mao whose banner they hold high. High respect for Mao is one thing, but using said respect to lure people into a cult of Mao is what some people are doing now in China to erode the legitimacy of the CPC.

Maybe there was another path, maybe not, doesn’t matter now to China, and other countries should definitely learn from the lessons and mistakes of the CPC. Turns out that running a country isn’t as easy as what people imagine, and the dictatorship of the proletariat isn’t easy when you have to worry about underdevelopment, poverty, corruption, global imperialists, the list goes on.

Theory is nice and all, but it only matters when you put it into practice, that’s why Marxism is scientific socialism, and that’s what kept the CPC going for 102 years. If you don’t hold the reins, nothing else will matter, and any ideals you’d want to protect won’t be worth a damn.

Here are some common “criticisms” of Xi from different angles (not meant to be serious):

• West (imperialists, neoliberals, anarchists, racists): Xitler
• Ultras: revisionist, nationalist
• Maoists: Dengist, revisionist, pacifist
• Dengists: Maoist

Jokes aside, I think Socialism with Chinese characteristics focuses more on how to maintain and build upon a socialist country, rather than how to become a socialist country (Mao’s great achievement). That doesn’t mean other countries can’t learn from China’s experience, but it means keeping in mind China’s historical background when researching. This includes its 5000 year-old history as a civilization with some setbacks but still going strong today. If you learn Chinese, you’ll be able to read text from ye olden days. Ancient Chinese philosophies still have influence in modern-day China, like how people still read the works of ancient Greek philosophers.

How is any of this relevant to Xi’s ideology? Xi Jinping Thought is the latest theory of the CPC put into practice, it includes new theory, but also builds upon tried and tested theory from past leaders. Xi is an important foreman of this period (since 2012), but also part of the collective leadership of the CPC. Collectivism doesn’t exclude individual ideas, but is more resilient to corosion from individualism. The CPC upholds a long list of theory from Marxist-Leninism, Mao, Deng, Jiang, Hu and now Xi, so when we talk about “Xi’s ideology”, do not forget the collective body of knowledge and people surrounding it in the background.

What a hot mess of a person. I see these type of people roaming the Internet acting like they have no idea that actual Chinese people living in China are on the Internet. Yes most people can’t access a lot of content due to Internet regulations, I wonder what Microsoft did to be allowed in China, oh I know, comply with the local laws and regulations!

These people think that society will improve just by being “compassionate”, but look at all the hateful things they spew.

From Article 22 of the Constitution of the CPC:

Empty seats on the Central Committee shall be filled by alternate members in order of the number of votes they were elected by.

Empty seats usually appear when members are expelled from the Party due to violations, less often when they pass away during the term.

In the published list of alternate members, the names are listed in descending order by votes received, as opposed to the list of official members which are listed by the number of strokes in their surnames.

There are also alternate members for other levels of Party committee, not just the Central Committee.

(Repost due to comments disappearing)

Xi isn’t the first General Secretary (总书记) of the CCCPC (Central Committee of the CPC, 中共中央委员会) to serve a third term, Jiang served 13 years from 1989~2002 for 3 terms, and Xi is only in his 11th year since Oct 2022. Deng was General Secretary for 10 years in 1956~1966 (this was just 1 term), back when the Central Committee still had a President position.

In short, serving 10 years for 2 terms as a General Secretary was never the norm, only Hu Jintao fits this description. As for the President of the PRC (中华人民共和国主席), Mao (1949~1959, and technically only 1954~1959 counts, he was President of the PRC People’s Government in 1949~1954, but we’ll let that slide), Jiang (1993~2003) and Hu (2003~2013) served 10 years for 2 terms, hardly a tradition/norm. Xi is indeed serving an unprecedented third term as President of the PRC, after limits were removed in 2018’s amendment to the constitution.

Now for the various scenarios in 2027:

1. Xi continues serving from 2027~2032 (5 years), not unthinkable.
2. New leader in 2027~2032, and depending on the merits of the term, will continue serving until 2037/2042.

If scenario 2 occurs, the candidates to look at are:

1. Current 7 members of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the 20th CCCPC. (中央政治局常委)
2. Current 24 members of the Political Bureau of the 20th CCCPC. (中央政治局委员)
3. Current 205 members of the 20th CCCPC. (中央委员)
4. Current 171 alternate members of the 20th CCCPC. (中央候补委员)

Link (in Chinese) to all the 205+171 candidates mentioned above, good luck finding the next leader!

Xi isn’t the first General Secretary (总书记) of the CCCPC (Central Committee of the CPC, 中共中央委员会) to serve a third term, Jiang served 13 years from 1989~2002 for 3 terms, and Xi is only in his 11th year since Oct 2022. Deng was General Secretary for 10 years in 1956~1966 (this was just 1 term), back when the Central Committee still had a President position.

In short, serving 10 years for 2 terms as a General Secretary was never the norm, only Hu Jintao fits this description. As for the President of the PRC (中华人民共和国主席), Mao (1949~1959, and technically only 1954~1959 counts, he was President of the PRC People’s Government in 1949~1954, but we’ll let that slide), Jiang (1993~2003) and Hu (2003~2013) served 10 years for 2 terms, hardly a tradition/norm. Xi is indeed serving an unprecedented third term as President of the PRC, after limits were removed in 2018’s amendment to the constitution.

Now for the various scenarios in 2027:

1. Xi continues serving from 2027~2032 (5 years), not unthinkable.
2. New leader in 2027~2032, and depending on the merits of the term, will continue serving until 2037/2042.

If scenario 2 occurs, the candidates to look at are:

1. Current 7 members of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the 20th CCCPC. (中央政治局常委)
2. Current 24 members of the Political Bureau of the 20th CCCPC. (中央政治局委员)
3. Current 205 members of the 20th CCCPC. (中央委员)
4. Current 171 alternate members of the 20th CCCPC. (中央候补委员)

Link (in Chinese) to all the 205+171 candidates mentioned above, good luck finding the next leader!

Not sure how rampant fake news is in other non-English speaking countries, but the Chinese Internet is riddled with sensational stories that are hard for individuals to verify, but easily forwarded to friends and family.

Now with ChatGPT/Deepfake and the like more readily available, the situation will be even worse. To combat this kind of disinformation, an actual “Ministry of Truth” will be required, based on a database of verified information and using logic to verify new stories and claims. Things like Wikipedia or Baidu百科 won’t cut it.

It’s in China, but as all “shocking” news go, the original story depends on where you look, because anti-China sources (like Falungong) will tell a different story. There’s a question on Zhihu discussing what the actual case behind this photo was: https://www.zhihu.com/question/35185664. Also, this was during a period of “严打”(crackdown on crimes, severe punishment etc.) in the 90s.