I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite >intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
Short version: the full voting data was released and it is full of >bizarreness, from books being listed twice, sums not adding up, and
people being declared ineligible for no clear reason. The admins
responsible are either mum or in the case of Dave McCarty respond
with obfuscation.
In article <l1du0rFoemqU1@mid.individual.net>,
Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite >>intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
Short version: the full voting data was released and it is full of bizarreness, from books being listed twice, sums not adding up, and
people being declared ineligible for no clear reason. The admins
responsible are either mum or in the case of Dave McCarty respond
with obfuscation. The Chinese concom does not reply to email. To sum:
1: Some weird, arguably sketchy stuff happened.
2: Nobody involved will explain what happened or why.
3: People are now theorizing at high speed.
There are many competing models to explain what happened, ranging from "Officials declared certain people and works persona non grata,"
"Hugo admins took it upon themselves to drop people and works they
thought might displease officials" to "there was a giant cockup running the numbers (there were definitely cut and paste errors) and nobody
wants to admit it", and many more. The truth could be any of the
explanations or a combination or something nobody has thought of.
Since the admins won't talk, we may never know what happened.
Oh! And since each WorldCon is its own soveriegn entity, there is
no higher organization that believes it has the power to intervene
when a WorldCon goes rogue and eithr subverts or screws up the
process. There's no legal mechanism (or at least nobody at the WSFS
believes there is) to overrun a clearly broken, possibly completely fraudulent Hugo process.
There are million articles on this but this is an OK starting point.
https://camestrosfelapton.wordpress.com/2024/01/22/hugo-stats-where-are-we-today/
This isn't on the voters or the finalists. This is a problem with the
people administrating the award.
I should add this is not like the Puppy grumbling that there had to
be cheating or thumbs on the scales for the people who won to win.
They had no evidence. In this case data Changdu released literally do
not add up. Clearly something went horribly wrong and that as as
consequence I do not trust the results of the Chengdu Hugo.
On a scale of one to ten, where one is the Clams trying to get L Ron
a Hugo and the Puppy slates are a nine, this is about one hundred.
The odd pattern of voting is definitely concerning, but may have
reasonably innocent explanations. For instance, if somebody
influential in Chinese fandom a year ago said
"Let's make this the most popular WorldCon in history to show
our Chinese spirit. Please nominate your favorite books. Some of the
most popular books of the past year were ... (8-9 suggestions) ...
<other categories>"
we could get the anomalous behavior pointed out by Jones of 8-9 novels >standing out above all others. Chinese students do remarkable things
in support of their passions (and would read all 8-9 books) but are
perhaps too easily influenced by authority. Unfortunate, but not
intentional ballot stuffing and I don't see how to stop it.
Oh! And since each WorldCon is its own soveriegn entity, there is
no higher organization that believes it has the power to intervene
when a WorldCon goes rogue and eithr subverts or screws up the
process. There's no legal mechanism (or at least nobody at the WSFS
believes there is) to overrun a clearly broken, possibly completely >fraudulent Hugo process.
There are million articles on this but this is an OK starting point.
https://camestrosfelapton.wordpress.com/2024/01/22/hugo-stats-where-are-we-today/
This isn't on the voters or the finalists. This is a problem with the
people administrating the award.
I should add this is not like the Puppy grumbling that there had to
be cheating or thumbs on the scales for the people who won to win.
They had no evidence. In this case data Changdu released literally do
not add up. Clearly something went horribly wrong and that as as
consequence I do not trust the results of the Chengdu Hugo.
On a scale of one to ten, where one is the Clams trying to get L Ron
a Hugo and the Puppy slates are a nine, this is about one hundred.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Thanks for the added link (which includes links to other discussion).
It looks like there are two distinct problems which are perhaps being
linked together too much in the discussions.
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
Oh! And since each WorldCon is its own soveriegn entity, there is
no higher organization that believes it has the power to intervene
when a WorldCon goes rogue and eithr subverts or screws up the
process. There's no legal mechanism (or at least nobody at the WSFS >>believes there is) to overrun a clearly broken, possibly completely >>fraudulent Hugo process.
The Hugos are supposed to remain independent of the Worldcon itself. I am
in no way surprised that there was massive government influence in the >Worldcon because that is how China is and that is what was expected going >into the game. But interference into the Hugos was not expected and not >acceptable.
Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
The odd pattern of voting is definitely concerning, but may have
reasonably innocent explanations. For instance, if somebody
influential in Chinese fandom a year ago said
"Let's make this the most popular WorldCon in history to show
our Chinese spirit. Please nominate your favorite books. Some of the
most popular books of the past year were ... (8-9 suggestions) ...
<other categories>"
we could get the anomalous behavior pointed out by Jones of 8-9 novels >>standing out above all others. Chinese students do remarkable things
in support of their passions (and would read all 8-9 books) but are
perhaps too easily influenced by authority. Unfortunate, but not >>intentional ballot stuffing and I don't see how to stop it.
This is always to be expected, and it is why the final awards did not surprise anyone. There will always be bloc voting and people campaigning because in the end it is a popularity contest after all.
But disqualifications without explanation... that is really really bad news. --scott
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
Oh! And since each WorldCon is its own soveriegn entity, there is
no higher organization that believes it has the power to intervene
when a WorldCon goes rogue and eithr subverts or screws up the
process. There's no legal mechanism (or at least nobody at the WSFS >>believes there is) to overrun a clearly broken, possibly completely >>fraudulent Hugo process.
The Hugos are supposed to remain independent of the Worldcon itself. I am
in no way surprised that there was massive government influence in the >Worldcon because that is how China is and that is what was expected going >into the game. But interference into the Hugos was not expected and not >acceptable.
Over on bluesky, people report that Chinese fans are fuming about how the >Chengdu admins bungled the Hugos. The admin fuckups are seen as making
all of Chinese fandom look bad.
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
Over on bluesky, people report that Chinese fans are fuming about how the
Chengdu admins bungled the Hugos. The admin fuckups are seen as making
all of Chinese fandom look bad.
Yes, but this is not surprising. There has been an interesting gap between the Chinese management and the Chinese fans throughout this whole process.
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism. Surely
they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a
communist country.
On 26/01/2024 12:38, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:It's simple statism, whether the state is Communist, Fascist,
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism. Surely
they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a
communist country.
Capitalist, an Empire, or whatever.
The peons are afraid of annoying the tools of the >President/Emperor/Chairman/Dictator/...
In article <jgnb8k-t11.ln1@paranoia.mcleod-schmidt.id.au>,
Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
On 26/01/2024 12:38, Lynn McGuire wrote:There is a theory that it's actually a giant cockup. They comprehensively fucked up running the algorithm for EPH and not only put people in
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
It's simple statism, whether the state is Communist, Fascist,
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>>> content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and >>>> is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism. Surely >>> they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a
communist country.
Capitalist, an Empire, or whatever.
The peons are afraid of annoying the tools of the
President/Emperor/Chairman/Dictator/...
twice (which we know happened) but left people off as well. And then
didn't want to admit error so they just said anyone who was left off
was not eligible.
There is a theory that it's actually a giant cockup. They comprehensively >fucked up running the algorithm for EPH and not only put people in
twice (which we know happened) but left people off as well. And then
didn't want to admit error so they just said anyone who was left off
was not eligible.
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a >communist country.
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
There is a theory that it's actually a giant cockup. They comprehensively >>fucked up running the algorithm for EPH and not only put people in
twice (which we know happened) but left people off as well. And then
didn't want to admit error so they just said anyone who was left off
was not eligible.
This is a very reasonable explanation but also one that reflects even
more poorly on the committee than that of government interference.
In the post-Puppies world many are looking very carefully at the voting >process and it is that much more important that it be completely open and >available for inspection.
--scott
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism. Surely
they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a
communist country.
In article <l1entrFsfcpU1@mid.individual.net>,
Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
snip re The Pandamoanium
Thanks for the added link (which includes links to other discussion).
It looks like there are two distinct problems which are perhaps being >>linked together too much in the discussions.
Which reminds me: there may be no One True Explanation because maybe
more than one thing went wrong.
To quote Kevin Standlee's ("current Chair of the legal entity that owns
the service marks of the World Science Fiction Society") summary (https://kevin-standlee.dreamwidth.org/2296661.html) of the relevant
rules governing the World Science Fiction Society (https://www.wsfs.org/rules-of-the-world-science-fiction-society/):
There is no entity that is superior to the individual Worldcon committee.
On 2024-01-26, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com> wrote:
To quote Kevin Standlee's ("current Chair of the legal entity that owns
the service marks of the World Science Fiction Society") summary
(https://kevin-standlee.dreamwidth.org/2296661.html) of the relevant
rules governing the World Science Fiction Society
(https://www.wsfs.org/rules-of-the-world-science-fiction-society/):
<snip>
There is no entity that is superior to the individual Worldcon committee.
Almost, but not quite accurate.
There's the WSFS' "Worldcon Intellectual Property Ltd", the commercial
entity which holds the service marks of the WSFS.
They've announced that they've censured McCarty, Standlee, Ben Yalow and
the head of the Chengdu Worldcon; McCarty and Standlee, in addition,
have now resigned from their official positions in the WIP.
McCarty seems to have gone entirely from the body, Standlee only appears
to have left the Chair.
https://file770.com/worldcon-intellectual-property-announces-censure-of-mccarty-chen-shi-and-yalow-mccarty-resigns-eastlake-is-new-chair/
In article <updqdb$el6$1@dgold.eu>, dgold <news@dgold.eu> wrote:
On 2024-01-26, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com> wrote:
To quote Kevin Standlee's ("current Chair of the legal entity that owns
the service marks of the World Science Fiction Society") summary
(https://kevin-standlee.dreamwidth.org/2296661.html) of the relevant
rules governing the World Science Fiction Society
(https://www.wsfs.org/rules-of-the-world-science-fiction-society/):
<snip>
There is no entity that is superior to the individual Worldcon committee. >>There's the WSFS' "Worldcon Intellectual Property Ltd", the commercial >>entity which holds the service marks of the WSFS.
True. However, this won't affect the 2023 Hugo results.
Charles Stross wrote his own version of this.
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2024/01/worldcon-in-the-news.html
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a >communist country.
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:in what world is modern china a communist country?
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a
communist country.
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:in what world is modern china a communist country?
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a >>communist country.
On 2/4/2024 5:04 PM, Mad Hamish wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:in what world is modern china a communist country?
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>>> content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and >>>> is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a
communist country.
This one where "communist" is another way of saying "authoritarian".
On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 17:26:19 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
in what world is modern china a communist country?
This one where "communist" is another way of saying "authoritarian".
And "Fascist" or "Nazi" are other ways of saying "authoritarian".
On Mon, 05 Feb 2024 12:04:10 +1100, Mad Hamish ><newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuireChinese
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
= >https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship= >-babel
=20
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their =
andcontent. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred =
in what world is modern china a communist country?is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.=20 >>>Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a=20 >>>communist country.
The real world.
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed
is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed
is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
IIRC, it was J.P. Hogan who wrote that Russia was communist only for six months
in 1917, thereafter just another dictatorship.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 17:26:19 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
in what world is modern china a communist country?
This one where "communist" is another way of saying "authoritarian".
And "Fascist" or "Nazi" are other ways of saying "authoritarian".
It's very confusing. I used to have a job where I would get interviewed
by security people on an annual basis. They would ask if I had been in contact with anyone who held views contrary to American interests and
I would tell them my grandmother was a fascist and had a picture of the
Duce hanging on her wall (next to a picture of Jesus and one of John F. Kennedy). And EVERY time I would have to explain to them what fascism actually was because none of them had any idea.
On Mon, 05 Feb 2024 12:04:10 +1100, Mad Hamish ><newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:in what world is modern china a communist country?
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>>> content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and >>>> is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a >>>communist country.
The real world.
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed
is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed
is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
"Every day, Chinese communism becomes less communist and more Chinese."
-- my asian studies teacher in 1980 or so.
IIRC, it was J.P. Hogan who wrote that Russia was communist only for six months
in 1917, thereafter just another dictatorship.
I'd give it longer than that. At least until 1921 when they got the NEP.
By the time the NEP was over in '28 or so, Stalin's collectivization was
the order of the day and one could argue that that was sort of a form of communism even if it could not be argued to be effective or beneficial to long-term socialism.
In article <1832silbotti0mubjb3np8i9d4m2vpkq54@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2024 12:04:10 +1100, Mad Hamish >><newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:in what world is modern china a communist country?
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>>>> content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and >>>>> is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism. >>>>Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a >>>>communist country.
The real world.
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed
is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
It's communist in the same sense 20th Century Fox is a small canine
predator.
On 06/02/2024 16:43, Paul S Person wrote:
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 20:02:48 -0000 (UTC), jdnicoll@panix.com (James
Nicoll) wrote:
In article <1832silbotti0mubjb3np8i9d4m2vpkq54@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2024 12:04:10 +1100, Mad Hamish
<newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuirehttps://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
in what world is modern china a communist country?
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite >>>>>>> intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their
Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually
occurred and
is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon
in a
communist country.
The real world.
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed >>>> is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
It's communist in the same sense 20th Century Fox is a small canine
predator.
So, it hasn't changed then.
And, no, it is communist in the sense that it has only one political
party, the Communist Party.
Which is the only sense that matters, politically.
So Hitler was a communist?
On 06/02/2024 16:43, Paul S Person wrote:
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 20:02:48 -0000 (UTC), jdnicoll@panix.com (James
Nicoll) wrote:
In article <1832silbotti0mubjb3np8i9d4m2vpkq54@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2024 12:04:10 +1100, Mad Hamish
<newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuirehttps://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/24/2024 8:06 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
in what world is modern china a communist country?
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite >>>>>>> intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>>>>>> content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and >>>>>>> is being reported correctly?
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a >>>>>> communist country.
The real world.
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed >>>> is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
It's communist in the same sense 20th Century Fox is a small canine
predator.
So, it hasn't changed then.
And, no, it is communist in the sense that it has only one political
party, the Communist Party.
Which is the only sense that matters, politically.
So Hitler was a communist?
On Mon, 05 Feb 2024 12:04:10 +1100, Mad Hamish ><newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:38:19 -0600, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't know why people are upset, it is just standard communism.in what world is modern china a communist country?
Surely they knew that would happen when they located the WorldCon in a >>>communist country.
The real world.
Mainland China is communist because the /only/ political party allowed
is the Communist Party.
Or has that changed?
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 17:26:19 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
in what world is modern china a communist country?
This one where "communist" is another way of saying "authoritarian".
And "Fascist" or "Nazi" are other ways of saying "authoritarian".
It's very confusing. I used to have a job where I would get interviewed
by security people on an annual basis. They would ask if I had been in >contact with anyone who held views contrary to American interests and
I would tell them my grandmother was a fascist and had a picture of the
Duce hanging on her wall (next to a picture of Jesus and one of John F. >Kennedy). And EVERY time I would have to explain to them what fascism >actually was because none of them had any idea.
--scott
Since the whole /point/ of Communism is that the State, all by itself, >without any assistance at all, will eventually wither away, it follows
that there can /never/ be a Communist State in the philosophical
sense, any more than there can ever be an Anarchist State in the >philosophical sense.
On 5 Feb 2024 17:45:44 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 17:26:19 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
in what world is modern china a communist country?
This one where "communist" is another way of saying "authoritarian".
And "Fascist" or "Nazi" are other ways of saying "authoritarian".
It's very confusing. I used to have a job where I would get interviewed
by security people on an annual basis. They would ask if I had been in >>contact with anyone who held views contrary to American interests and
I would tell them my grandmother was a fascist and had a picture of the >>Duce hanging on her wall (next to a picture of Jesus and one of John F. >>Kennedy). And EVERY time I would have to explain to them what fascism >>actually was because none of them had any idea.
--scott
I suspect the powers that be in the Canadian parliament have a much
better idea now than before last September when (in the presence of
Zelenskii no less!) a "Ukrainian veteran" was saluted by the Speaker
of the House of Commons - the guy turned out to be a veteran of a
Ukrainian Nazi SS division who had come to Canada after the war and
was now in his late 80s.
(Needless to say the Canadian parliament had a new speaker in fairly
short order since saluting Nazi veterans is not something that's
acceptable even in 2023)
On Wed, 07 Feb 2024 08:13:31 -0800, Paul S Person ><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Since the whole /point/ of Communism is that the State, all by itself, >>without any assistance at all, will eventually wither away, it follows
that there can /never/ be a Communist State in the philosophical
sense, any more than there can ever be an Anarchist State in the >>philosophical sense.
Whereas Hitler even if he had achieved his wildest fantasies of
conquest would never have allowed the state to "wither away" - but
then the same could be said of Stalin.
Thus I have no use at all for the type of people who argue Communism
has never been given a fair test since neither Russia or China are /
were Comunist.
By that "logic" we could argue that Naziism should get another try
since Hitler diverged so much from the vision espoused in Mein Kampf.
Yeah sure.....
The People's Republic of China is ruled by the Communist Party of China.
Also, it is a totalitarian dictatorship; for example, churches aren't
allowed to exist except as state-run organizations.
Whether or not their Marxism or Maoism is as pure as it once was is really >not a concern to anyone but the Party itself.
John Savard
This has nothing to do with it being communist; it is completely orthogonal >to the economic system of the country. You can have a totalitarian capitalist >country like Saudi Arabia or a communist representative democracy like Milan >was for a while.
Whether or not their Marxism or Maoism is as pure as it once was is really >>not a concern to anyone but the Party itself.
Well, it might also be a concern to the residents of the country who are >subject to that government.
(Needless to say the Canadian parliament had a new speaker in fairly
short order since saluting Nazi veterans is not something that's
acceptable even in 2023)
Not in Canada, perhaps.
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 08:29:33 -0800, Paul S Person ><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
(Needless to say the Canadian parliament had a new speaker in fairly >>>short order since saluting Nazi veterans is not something that's >>>acceptable even in 2023)
Not in Canada, perhaps.
What are you suggesting? That giving a friendly intro to a Waffen SS
veteran would be acceptable in 2024 by a Speaker of either the US
Senate or House of Representatives? That would certainly be a surprise
to me - I would expect a Speaker who actually did that would be
swiftly removed from office just as the Canadian speaker was.
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 08:29:33 -0800, Paul S Person ><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
(Needless to say the Canadian parliament had a new speaker in fairly >>>short order since saluting Nazi veterans is not something that's >>>acceptable even in 2023)
Not in Canada, perhaps.
What are you suggesting? That giving a friendly intro to a Waffen SS
veteran would be acceptable in 2024 by a Speaker of either the US
Senate or House of Representatives? That would certainly be a surprise
to me - I would expect a Speaker who actually did that would be
swiftly removed from office just as the Canadian speaker was.
On Saturday, February 10, 2024 at 1:15:46?PM UTC-7, Kevrob wrote:
Note that we in the US aren't having our own crisis of legitimacy.
What with January 6th and all that, one could say the U.S. is having
a crisis of some sort, but is it really a crisis of _legitimacy_?
At first glance, Trump's lie about the "stolen election" could make it
appear that legitimacy is the issue. But one would have to be a sucker
to believe that lie.
Perhaps the real crisis is demographic change in the United States.
And instead of obviously discriminatory measures to ensure black
voters stand in long line-ups at the polls, at least one state is
considering a measure to truly fix the problem, Arizona, with a
measure introduced by John Fillmore. If the state legislature, not the >voters, picks the electors, then as long as the process of picking the
state legislature is suitably gerrymandered, black Americans can be >thoroughly disenfranchised.
*Then*, after the Republicans get their way, you will see a *serious*--
crisis of legitimacy.
On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 10:41:09?PM UTC-5, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Wed, 07 Feb 2024 08:13:31 -0800, Paul S Person
<pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Since the whole /point/ of Communism is that the State, all by itself,
without any assistance at all, will eventually wither away, it follows
that there can /never/ be a Communist State in the philosophical
sense, any more than there can ever be an Anarchist State in the
philosophical sense.
There's a reason it was called the Union of Soviet _Socialist_ Republics.
Acc to Marx, the proletarian revolution was supposed to happen in an >advanced, industrial state, that had progressed into a capitalist economic >system. Candidates for that were Germany, Britain and even the USA, once
it had rid itself of chattel slavery. The world revolution was to spread from
the advanced economies, which would progress further into socialist societies,
as the more primitive societies became capitalist, then socialist.
Russia hadn't shed itself of the hallmark of feudalism, serfdom, until 1861.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_reform_of_1861
It's middle class (bourgeoise) was tiny compared to that of the various >industrializing states of Europe and the Americas. Lenin's hope was
that a revolution in Russia would spark the predicted uprising in Germany. >Instead, there was anti-communist reaction that prevented such revolts
from succeeding.
Whereas Hitler even if he had achieved his wildest fantasies of
conquest would never have allowed the state to "wither away" - but
then the same could be said of Stalin.
Stalin came up with "socialism in one country" to justify the USSR
existing without world revolution, which was supposed to happen,
any day now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_one_country
Thus I have no use at all for the type of people who argue Communism
has never been given a fair test since neither Russia or China are /
were Comunist.
By that "logic" we could argue that Naziism should get another try
since Hitler diverged so much from the vision espoused in Mein Kampf.
Yeah sure.....
Hitler being the "Nazi pope," he could change his goals at any time.
My "favorite" of these diktats was designating the Japanese as
"honorary aryans."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_Aryan
Nazi race theory was batshit crazy, but that really pushed things.
On Saturday, February 10, 2024 at 1:49:52?PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
Yes. This does not necessarily they are communist, any more than the
The People's Republic of China is ruled by the Communist Party of China.
Republican Guards necessarily believe in a republic or the US Democratic
Party necessarily believes in democracy. But it's certainly an indicator
in that direction.
Also, it is a totalitarian dictatorship; for example, churches aren'tThis has nothing to do with it being communist; it is completely orthogonal >> to the economic system of the country. You can have a totalitarian capitalist
allowed to exist except as state-run organizations.
country like Saudi Arabia or a communist representative democracy like Milan
was for a while.
Whether or not their Marxism or Maoism is as pure as it once was is really >> >not a concern to anyone but the Party itself.Well, it might also be a concern to the residents of the country who are
subject to that government.
Here's the thing about Maoism: if the current regime got rid of Marxism-Leninism-
Stalinism-Mao-Zedong-Thought as the basis of its political system, what would >replace it? The Maoist tradition provides political legitimacy. Sure, one could describe
The People's Republic as a technocratic-authoritarian oligarchy with a totalitarian
history that bubbles under the surface, but, absent Maoism, what gives it any legitimacy?
The Mandate of Heaven?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political)
Note that we in the US aren't having our own crisis of legitimacy.
On 10/02/2024 17:16, Quadibloc wrote:
On Monday, February 5, 2024 at 3:14:25?PM UTC-7, Moriarty wrote:
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 1:06:26?PM UTC+11, Chris Buckley wrote: >>>> https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>>> content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
When I first heard about this, I was scratching my head to work out why
RF Kuang's "Babel" was so offensive that it was made ineligible. I hadn't >>> realised the author had written an earlier alternative history series where >>> a major character is loosely modelled on Mao. Of course the CCP took offense.
The point is, I suppose, that if RF Kuang could sue Worldcon for a pile of >> money for being excluded unfairly from consideration... and win in U.S. courts...
then organizations like Worldcon would take notice, and never, ever consider >> holding their events in countries like the PRC again. Or even places like, say,
Dubai, where there would also be _some_ danger of _some_ political censorship,
although of a different kind.
They would have to prove that a Hugo award
or nomination comes with "a pile of money".
It doesn't. ><https://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-faq/#Is%20there%20a%20monetary%20award?> >"No."
On Monday, February 5, 2024 at 3:14:25?PM UTC-7, Moriarty wrote:
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 1:06:26?PM UTC+11, Chris Buckley wrote:
https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese
content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and
is being reported correctly?
When I first heard about this, I was scratching my head to work out why
RF Kuang's "Babel" was so offensive that it was made ineligible. I hadn't
realised the author had written an earlier alternative history series where >> a major character is loosely modelled on Mao. Of course the CCP took offense.
The point is, I suppose, that if RF Kuang could sue Worldcon for a pile of >money for being excluded unfairly from consideration... and win in U.S. courts...
then organizations like Worldcon would take notice, and never, ever consider >holding their events in countries like the PRC again. Or even places like, say,
Dubai, where there would also be _some_ danger of _some_ political censorship, >although of a different kind.
Anything that involves handing out awards to books or movies or other things >that may have political content... would strictly be confined to safe countries
thoroughly aligned with the United States.
Next step is to figure out how to achieve the same result with respect to the >Olympics, for the sake of the safety of all athletes.--
John Savard
On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 00:26:45 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 08:29:33 -0800, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
(Needless to say the Canadian parliament had a new speaker in fairly
short order since saluting Nazi veterans is not something that's
acceptable even in 2023)
Not in Canada, perhaps.
What are you suggesting? That giving a friendly intro to a Waffen SS
veteran would be acceptable in 2024 by a Speaker of either the US
Senate or House of Representatives? That would certainly be a surprise
to me - I would expect a Speaker who actually did that would be
swiftly removed from office just as the Canadian speaker was.
I'm suggesting that, in the present situation, /all bets are off/.
Anything might happen.
Exciting times indeed!
And the last Speaker was removed for ... what, trying to do his job?
On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 11:48:46 +0000, Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/02/2024 17:16, Quadibloc wrote:took offense.
On Monday, February 5, 2024 at 3:14:25?PM UTC-7, Moriarty wrote:
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 1:06:26?PM UTC+11, Chris Buckley wrote: >>>>> >https://www.polygon.com/24049021/hugo-awards-controversy-china-censorship-babel
I haven't seen any discussion of this previously! It sounds quite
intolerable - books being declared ineligible because of their Chinese >>>>> content. Is there confirmation that all of this actually occurred and >>>>> is being reported correctly?
When I first heard about this, I was scratching my head to work out why >>>> RF Kuang's "Babel" was so offensive that it was made ineligible. I hadn't >>>> realised the author had written an earlier alternative history series where
a major character is loosely modelled on Mao. Of course the CCP
U.S. courts...
The point is, I suppose, that if RF Kuang could sue Worldcon for a pile of >>> money for being excluded unfairly from consideration... and win in
like, say,then organizations like Worldcon would take notice, and never, ever consider
holding their events in countries like the PRC again. Or even places
Dubai, where there would also be _some_ danger of _some_ political >censorship,
although of a different kind.
They would have to prove that a Hugo award
or nomination comes with "a pile of money".
It doesn't. >><https://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-faq/#Is%20there%20a%20monetary%20award?> >>"No."
But does it help them /sell more books/? Money from lost book sales
would surely count as "damages".
On 2/11/2024 6:41 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
I do wonder whether Communism would have
run better if all the other countries of
the world hadn't been vigorously at war
against it from day zero. Huge effort
and a vast amount of money was invested
by us to nobble it. And still is.
The problem I've seen with Socialist regimes is that
even if they start out with the purist of intentions,
they are inevitably taken over by people more interested
in the retention and expansion of their own power, and
enriching themselves.
On 2/10/2024 3:15 PM, Kevrob wrote:
On Saturday, February 10, 2024 at 1:49:52?PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
Republican Guards necessarily believe in a republic or the US Democratic >>> Party necessarily believes in democracy. But it's certainly an indicator >>> in that direction.
The People's Republic of China is ruled by the Communist Party of China. >>> Yes. This does not necessarily they are communist, any more than the
Also, it is a totalitarian dictatorship; for example, churches aren'tThis has nothing to do with it being communist; it is completely orthogonal >>> to the economic system of the country. You can have a totalitarian capitalist
allowed to exist except as state-run organizations.
country like Saudi Arabia or a communist representative democracy like Milan
was for a while.
Whether or not their Marxism or Maoism is as pure as it once was is really >>>> not a concern to anyone but the Party itself.Well, it might also be a concern to the residents of the country who are >>> subject to that government.
Here's the thing about Maoism: if the current regime got rid of Marxism-Leninism-
Stalinism-Mao-Zedong-Thought as the basis of its political system, what would
replace it? The Maoist tradition provides political legitimacy. Sure, one could describe
The People's Republic as a technocratic-authoritarian oligarchy with a totalitarian
history that bubbles under the surface, but, absent Maoism, what gives it any legitimacy?
The Mandate of Heaven?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political)
Note that we in the US aren't having our own crisis of legitimacy.
I think I could rewrite that paragraph with 'Confucianism' replacing
Maoism, and it would be a pretty close description of Ming or Qing
dynasty China.
Sometimes, the labels change, but the system remains the same.
Yes, but this pretty much is the case for any organization, and eventually
it has to be cleaned out. Ever been on a con committee before? Or seen
an HOA from the inside? It's not just socialism, it is humanity.
Here's the thing about Maoism: if the current regime got rid of Marxism-Len= >inism-
Stalinism-Mao-Zedong-Thought as the basis of its political system, what wou= >ld=20
replace it? The Maoist tradition provides political legitimacy. Sure, one=
could describe=20
The People's Republic as a technocratic-authoritarian oligarchy with a tota= >litarian=20
history that bubbles under the surface, but, absent Maoism, what gives it = >any legitimacy?=20
Note that we in the US aren't having our own crisis of legitimacy.=20
Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> wrote:
Here's the thing about Maoism: if the current regime got rid of Marxism-Len= >> inism-
Stalinism-Mao-Zedong-Thought as the basis of its political system, what wou= >> ld=20
replace it? The Maoist tradition provides political legitimacy. Sure, one= >> could describe=20
The People's Republic as a technocratic-authoritarian oligarchy with a tota= >> litarian=20
history that bubbles under the surface, but, absent Maoism, what gives it = >> any legitimacy?=20
For a while after his death, the Cult of Mao died off somewhat in China
and although the government did consider themselves created and inspired
by Mao, they weren't hanging big Mao banners up everywhere.
But, in more recent years, the Mao banners have been coming back, precisely for the reason you state. Thankfully the Maoist notion of "permanent state of revolution" has not come back although I am sure the current management has it waiting in the wings if it is necessary for them to retain power.
Note that we in the US aren't having our own crisis of legitimacy.=20
Maoism also has the same kind of problem that Reaganism has, in that the young Mao was a genius general (one who even defined the birth of a state) but who stayed in power far too long and who was a raving and drooling
fool later in life (witness the Cultural Revolution). When someone speaks
of Mao, which one are they talking about? Or are they talking about Mao
the abstract symbol of China?
--scott
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 546 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 02:08:50 |
Calls: | 10,387 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 14,061 |
Messages: | 6,416,750 |