• axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    When westerners try to bring up social credit scores, this is what they’re fearmongering about. They’re afraid of wealthy parasites facing even an ounce of consequences.

  • Feinsteins_Ghost [he/him]@hexbear.net
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Two year reprieve meaning in two years they still stretch his neck or give him the Ol Yeller treatment or whatever?

    Thats a long time to think about whats coming, frankly. If theyre going to end his life just fucking do it already. My dislike of the death penalty is tempered a hair by the fact that this jackwagon is of the bourgeois class but two years just seems like a needless holiday. Either do it or dont.

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      In addition to what the other guys said, it’s a common practice for death row inmates in the US to sit in prison for years, and sometimes decades, before they get put down. The reasoning to my understanding is that you can’t exonerate a dead man. They give plenty of time for appeals and additional evidence as a due course of justice for a fair trail as preserved by the 6th ammendment.

      • JohnBrownNote [comrade/them, des/pair]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        They give plenty of time for appeals and additional evidence as a due course of justice for a fair trail as preserved by the 6th ammendment.

        michael-laugh

        that’s the lie we tell children but if you figure out the false conviction rate and do the math, the amerikkka executes innocent people and doesn’t give a shit.

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            The part you’re being criticised for is the part where you gargle the boot over the concept that people get a fair trial and “due course of justice” when at least 4% of people are falsely convicted and sentenced to death.

            You’re absolutely out of your mind if you think the system is fair when nearly a minimum of 1 in 20 people sentence to death by it shouldn’t be there.

            You are an extremely propagandised person living in the most propagandised nation on earth, you should do something about this. You have completely and totally internalised the national propaganda to the point of regurgitating it uncritically like you’re a fucking school text book. It is exactly what we mean when we say americans have a civil religion.

            amerikkka nato-cool

  • personalthought381@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Can’t Murica do the same thing for financial criminals like Bernie Madoff? Also how do I include the amerikkka emoji?

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      2008 was caused by bankers doing extremely illegal shit. How many people were imprisoned for it?

      They could do it. But they don’t want to. The difference here is that in the west the financial elite are the ruling class and the proletariat are under the boot. In China the proletariat are the ruling class and the bourgeoisie are under the boot.

      • personalthought381@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        In China the proletariat are the ruling class

        Slightly unrelated but your comment makes me wonder, are they though? The President of China hasn’t changed in ten years and while that in of itself doesn’t imply wrongdoing, China DOES have a one party election system. Can we really call that the rule of the working class, or even a free democracy for that matter?

        • zed_proclaimer [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          proletarian dictatorships tend to have long-ruling leaders who are symbols of proletarian power that the masses can concentrate around and trust, because they have proven their allegiance in the revolution. Every proletarian state has had long-serving heads of state.

          Democracy isn’t “when leader changes a bunch”. That just means a volatile system, or a system where the leader doesn’t matter anyway and is just a rotating door.

        • KarlBarqs [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          The President of China hasn’t changed in ten years

          Germany had the same president for 16 years. Canada had the same one for 9.

          Maximum term limits in the US is eight years

          What the fuck are you talking about? Free democracy is when your leader changes every two years?

          • personalthought381@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think you didn’t read the whole comment. My point was that a one party system can’t be called a free democracy. While eight other minor parties exist in China, they must

            accept the “leading role” of the CCP as a condition of their continued existence

            Free democracy is when anybody can make a political party and they have an equal change of winning or losing, ie no ‘special privileges’ like the CCP has.

            Look I know we like to simp for China here on hexbear, but we shouldn’t blatantly ignore it’s flaws. Anyway hope this answered atleast some of your questions. Peace ✌️

        • hopelessbyanxiety [he/him, she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          Im pretty sure the number of parties that can run for election and actually get elected, doesnt say much about democracy. Just look at the eu and their austerity policies, through the decades if you wish. Also i think the multiparty system was tried in Chile in the 70s, they didnt oppress opposition. They got couped. The multiparty system is a western thing, and the chinese dont need to pretend they’re white. I’d say a more accurate way of measuring democracy is to ask: is the government following the interest of the people? In that sense ok theyre not perfect, but give me a multiparty system thats better than china.

          • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            the Chinese party system is more complicated than there just being one party. There are multiple political parties but the chinese constitution specifies how powerful each of them are.

            the other parties exist as a source of political ideas

    • Posadas [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Not a fan of the death penalty, but this is one way to do it.

      You get two years to not fuck up, and if you manage that it gets reduces to a life sentence or some other fixed sentence

        • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I was thinking about this in regards to the death penalty in revolutionary societies, I feel like there’s a distinction to be made between ‘circumstantial’ crimes like theft or murder, where someone has to be in a particular place and time etc., they could be motivated by economic hardship, they could even just be innocent - versus ‘structural’ crimes where their guilt is a result of their position in an organization that cannot be deflected.