I remember liberals acting all terrified about what horrors Trump might unleash on the world as his previous term was coming to an end. But once again, Biden has proven to be far worse, trying to speedrun as many atrocities as he can while still holding the reigns like the petty war criminal that he is. And the libs just praise him.

I've long adored the pictures you've posted and even the mentions of him in many of your comments. Your relationship with Wolfie/Mr. Softie has reminded me of my own relationship with my best friend in this world, and I always appreciated when you'd share little bits about it with us. So thank you for that, and thanks to Mr. Softie wherever he is. I'm so sorry he's gone and I'm sorry for how painful that is and will be. Take care of yourself, comrade.

Imperialism much?

Wut? Oh, you think that's imperialism? Stating the fact that Taiwan is part of China and that Hong Kong is also just a region (SAR if you even know what that is) of China? All this shows is you have no fucking clue what imperialism even is. You literally don't know what that word means. Not by ML standards clearly, but not even by general layman standards. And it shows you know absolutely nothing about the history of this situation, which is typical of the sinophobic liberal. Taiwan is ran by a fascist nationalist government that tried to wipe out the workers movements and that still claims to be the "rightful" rulers not only of all of China but also other sovereign nations like Mongolia. And you're saying that China allowing them to continue to operate while slowly working towards future reunification is "imperialism." That's just sick. Take a look at what the US via the IMF and World Bank does to impoverished global south nations (that are impoverished solely because the US impoverished them for the purpose of subjugation and unequal exchange) to begin to understand what imperialism looks like. Then come back and tell me China's lenient position on Taiwan is "imperialism."

The US being bad doesn't make China good.

Never said it did. BUT part of why China is good is because it is overtaking the US which is unambiguously bad. This is one of the many things China is doing (in this case passively, but it does a hell of a lot of active good too) that is beneficial to humanity.

There is no nation in this world worth simping for.

I don't know what you think "simping" for a country even means, given it's a slang term involving romantic attraction, but if by "simping" for a nation, you mean "expressing vocal approval and ideologically supporting it," then yes, there are nations absolutely worth "simping" for. Cuba immediately comes to mind as the obvious one. But China also deserves the vocal approval and support of leftists since it is in fact a socialist state and is in fact doing much good in the world, both for the masses of people living within it as well as for most of the rest of the world through BRI and the fact that it is undermining the actual imperialist's ability to beat the global south into submission. Russia deserves critical support for the latter bit as well, seeing as it is doing more than any other state to actively fight imperialism and the monopolarity of US hegemony.

If China is so great then why does it feel the need to dictate over Hong Kong and Taiwan?

It doesn't. Taiwan and Hong Kong ARE China. If anything the high level of autonomy that China allows reactionary regional governments to have is what should be criticized.

Does China have gay marriage? Trans rights perhaps?

China allows for civil unions for LGBTQ. https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1162943.shtml It made civil unions legal across the nation before USA made gay marriage legal in every state. Like all places in the world (some more than others) China has a long way to go on LGBTQ rights. But that's just it, China is improving along those lines, while the US is rapidly regressing. China is improving with trans rights and has been punishing companies that violate them. So yes, we should absolutely support China in continuing to move in the correct direction.

It's a nation state (a far too big one at that), which are by definition tools of oppression.

Lol, by whose definition? A state is only as good or bad as the ruling class that wields it. A bourgeois (capitalist) state will always be oppressive. As a socialist state (and China is a socialist state), the CPC uses its power to suppress the constant attempts of the bourgeois to oppress the working class.

tankies claim to be communists but spend all day parroting their favorite Russian or Chinese state propaganda

Tell us how these "tankies" are "parroting" propaganda and we'll tell you exactly how your geopolitical opinions align with the US State Dept.

When did I say I agree with US propaganda?

For starters, right here where you showed your whole ass and said: "If China is a socialist state worth supporting then I'm a donkey with a laser dick"

You do seem to be quite a donkey but clearly it's just overconfident false advertisement about the laser.

Oh come on, didn't you know that more DPRK soldiers have been killed in the conflict than Russian soldiers?? You haven't been eating enough onion and beet slop, I can tell.

I think AssortedBiscuits answered your question in the first couple sentences of their comment:

Most Westerners already hate communists and carry the grudge against the USSR. Anarchists don't really deviate too much from some generic Westerner.

It's really not any deeper than that. There's no need or reason to single out anarchists from any other average westerner when analyzing the source of animosity for the USSR because the answer is going to be the same whether you're talking about chuds, liberals, or anarchists. Even the non-western anarchists who hold a grudge against the USSR, the answer is probably still the same just because of the prevalence of western cultural hegemony all over the world. In your edit, you specify:

I'm curious about what information sources - mentors, friends, books, TV, cultural osmosis, conveys that information to people. Where do individuals encounter this information and how does it become important to them.

But the answer to that is the same information sources you yourself were probably exposed to early on. It's all the same shit we're steeped in, the ubiquity of anti-communism throughout western culture. Animal Farm and 1984 were required reading for me in junior high and high school respectively. The class discussions around these books were centered around teaching us that the USSR was corrupt, oppressive, and that these communist ideals that may sound like good ideas will always and invariably lead to "authoritarianism" and "totalitarian dictatorships" like the Soviet Union. Everyone absorbs that shit young, even the people who might later go on to question the truth of what they were taught, like anarchists.

You say

Newly minted Anarchists have to learn to hate Lenin and Stalin and whoever else they have a grudge against.

But no they don't. Not as newly-minted anarchists anyway. That brainworm software was already installed long ago before they became anarchists. A major part of becoming a leftist is going through a process of uninstalling all that brainworm malware. Anarchists who still hate the Soviet Union are people who have been successful at uninstalling much of the brainworm malware, it's just that they haven't completed the process by uninstalling the anti-Soviet or anti-"tankie" worms... yet. And I say all this as someone who long considered themself an anarchist.

This is a bit tangential, but actually the original actor (or one of the earliest major ones) who played Ronald McDonald is now a vegan and hates what he did for the McDonalds corporation. Even refers to it as fascist food.

"I want to apologize for participating in helping to brainwash North America's young people into doing something that I know now to be contrary to the purpose of life."

https://geoffreygiuliano.com/portfolio/facist-food-confessions-of-a-corperate-clown/

Meanwhile, what is it that actually makes it to the front page of that shithole copaganda site?

According to some in here (even hexbears?!? blech), the genocide perpetrator you know is always better than the one you don't, so yeah, you'd better for the one you already know is committing a genocide to reduce harm. That's just facts and logic.

I'm not sure where the lines are in these definitions, or how much the difference really matters but I'm hoping he will be remembered not just as an enabler but as a direct accomplice, which he is. He could have chosen to stop it at any point, instead he has goaded it on and knowingly, unhesitatingly provided the material means to perpetrate it.

TIL far left is when you parrot the US State Dept line, shit on AES countries, and use the terms "tankie" and "authoritarianism" unironically.