Not a suprise .world is like the most liberal instance I come across,

There is no evidence of the "genicide in Xinjiang" besided the US, US allies and other sources stemming from Radio Free Asia, a known CIA mouth peice. when an idependent investigation came out by the orginasation of Islamic and Turkic States, investigated, they found no evidence of genocide.

You know how often I have this exact argument in a year IRL, I am a communist, I hear "You wouldn't be allowed to critise the government in a communist country" all the time so I have a habit of once I have to use a constitution of an AES county, or a specific edition I save it

You are free to look it up for yourself, I do not expect yoy tp trust me on absolutely anything, but I am not going to be uploading an entire PDF into a comment

Also if we want to refraim, I will happy argue the PRC is better than The USA, if that is what you would rather be arguing?

no it was not for critisizing the government it was for being a class colaberationist, there is a massive MASSIVE diffrence. you know... they where just fighting Facism ... he was a facists... or atleast acting for a long period of time like a facist...

Second he is being treated worse, Assange's treatment is classified as torture, the PRC by all reputable sources I have found in the time we have been talking did not resort to torcher

I can go to China and Critisize China too... Agian it is not a right exclusive to the west, the point I was making BACK AT YOUR ORIGIONAL POINT, before you moved the goal posts multiple times.

Murdoch is a stanch Capitalist, arguably a facists, we are not the same

I am not claiming those 2 statements, I am saying 1) Mao's PRC was not totalitarian, it was a free society that we can expect given they just emerged from a civil war. 2) the PRC is while not perfect and free of all censor ship significantly better than atleast the United States if not the west, 3) There is significant censorship in the west"

I never made the claim that the west and maos china are the same this is a claim you have ascribed to me and that I have not made, my origional clame, and the one I am still making is that The PRC has freedom of speech and that said right is not exclusive to the west, and is arguable better upheld by the PRC.

Last I have still heard nothing about your false claim that I did not provide the Mao Era constitution text when I in my reply 2 ago did do so, and you blatantly ignored it, because it was inconvenent to your argument.

I brought up articles from the Pre 1982 constitution, or are you conveniently ignoring that I provided the evidence you requested, interesting that when I provide requested evidence you ignore it.

Second you have now ignored my request for information about asange. Strange, who id assagne kill or phisicaly harm, did he sell secrets? last I checked he merly did a journalism... or are we going to also ignore this and make it so only I do the responding here. It is a wonderful retorical trick to make it seem like I am always on the back foot, so to an outside observer it apears as though your winning, dispite the fact you have contributed nothing to the conversation, well besides throwing new accusiation, not responding to my counters and moving the goal posts.

Third you have to understand the material conditions of China at the time, those being coming right out of s civil war* with a US and other capitalist funded side the ROC who flead but where not fully defeated going over to tiwan. For a state in this postion to sucseed, Especialy in the earlie years they have to be hyper vigilent, if not the US usualy will be the one to come in and cut them where they stand, just look at Most of latin america, the exception proving the rule is cuba with their over 600 attempts. or the attempts the US made to destroy the USSR. If you read the works of Wu Han, during this period, he was a class colaberationist (read facists) his play, that agian was not the reason he was arrested but was likely used as point to prove the class colaberation. If you do not think the US does not do similar you are fooling yourself, the seddition act is still on the books in the United States so "Seddicious Speach" will land you in jail too.

No your starting postion is that you cannot critisize the government in the PRC... I have pointed out they have the same rights in the PRC as in the west documented in the same way.

ARTICLE 45 Citizens enjoy freedom of speech, correspond- ence, the press, assembly, association, procession, demonstration and the freedom to strike, and have the right to "speak out freely, air their views fully, hold great debates and write big-character posters."

Also just to rub a little salt into your wounds ARTICLE 52 Citizens have the freedom to engage in scientific research, literary and artistic creation and other cultural activities. The state encourages and as- sists the creative endeavours of citizens engaged in science, education, literature, art, journalism, publishing, public health, sports and other cultural work.

Let me look ever so quickly at your Wikipedia link really quick, and may I note that wikipedia is known for being increadably inacurate and reactionary at all times. After just a little bit of digging I found his arrest was not due to the play in question, but general subsersive activities, that where found to be a threat to the state. Fun fact if you do this in the United States you will also find yourself in prison. I would also like to point out, why is Sweedish Citizen Julian Assange Rotting in Prison at the request of the United States government for the crime of Journalism

3rd you have moved the goal posts, from You cannot critisize the government in china, to what does the constitution have to do with anything, to I was never talking about that you are muddying the waters, to what about this person who tried to tear down a newly formed just after its civil war government jailed. This is moving the goal posts.

They did update it after Mao died, yes but the freedom of speech was listed in the origial.

I do think that the PRC is better than the west, and it does infact have more political parties. however my responce was to your claim that their you can critisize the government in the west but not in China, a patently false claim.

I do not know what you are talking about mudying the waters I assure you it is not intenrional, however it was not me who has moved the goal posts ... geez 4 times now?

The Peoples Republic of China is very much Communist, I do not even know what you are talking about with this state capitalist thing. They are a run by and for the working class. I brought them up because you brought up 2 sources about a communist nation that was illegaly desolved and so can no longer make amends for past wrongs, I feel it is only fair to talk about an Actualy Existing Socialist State, however if an argument icluding an AES state is too much protesting from me I feel that proves my point better than anything I could say.

how, are they both not leaders of foreign nations?

Russia's Casus Belli is 2 fold, and I cannot speak to what one is the stronger motivator, though I can speculate, I will refrain from doing so here, One is a military aliance with the Express Purpos of destroying the ~~USSR~~ Russia at any cost, that has both denied the USSR & Russia Entry (I add this so no one can deny my previous point) on many occasions and denied its repeated promise not to expand past Germany, to be frank NATO has vastly outlived its usefulness and purpous, and is going to be on its way our with our without trump, The United States Intrests no longer lie with Europe as heavily. The second reason for the war, and the stated one was the ongoing genocide of the Russian Speaking population in the dunbas region (now a part of Russia), and the flagrent violation of the Minsk agreements, that Ukraine had been carrying out sense 2014.

Democrats standing in Russias way? Russia has effectivly won the war, the onlything happening now is the US is telling their puppet of Ukraine to not sign the peace treaty, or any cese fire agreements, while draining the wests arsonals, Privitizing Ukraine at breakneck pase, and causing senseless loss of life in Ukraine. From the first week the Russian Federation offered a Peace Treaty, and about twice a month after that either a peace treaty or cese fire,to end the killing, the Dems are not "standing in the way" they are activly prolonging the war sure but the war is over in all but treaty.

Also last I remember, the aleged 2020 and 2016 election interfearence, came up as inconclusive, I understand my memory may be faulty, and it was a heavily pushed narritive, but at the end of the day not only is saying that unproductive because it does not let us look at ourselves in the mirror and see how we caused Trump to hapen (well as much as we could with him loosing the popular vote) but agian, if my memory serves, it being incorrect.

Look what I am trying to say is that this fraiming and spinn is disingenuous, I understand, and could belive that it is in Russia's best intrest for Trump to be elected president, however I feel as though using this as evidence is more of a hinderance to that argument than a bost. The argument you laied out, in absence of his statement is more compelling than with his statment. I understand this is forign politics and not everything is always taken at face value, but that being said, this argument of "Putin said X so he means Y" is not as effective as you think it is.

How do you get that, Like you took the longer and harder to understand path here, there is a path where he would prefer Biden for reasons of IDK deplomacy, now I do not understand why, as Biden has been just as bad as trump on that front, but there are some potential reasons.

Look if Justin Trudou said he wanted Biden to win, would you say he was pushing for trump?