Then there's the part where they are so deep in paranoia and racism they think you are a foreign spy if you say anything sympathetic about the country. (I actually had this happen to me once online.)
Only once? I have been accused of being a Russian agent, a DPRK agent, a Chinese agent, and once a CIA agent for some reason.
Interestingly I hear the DPRK one the most. Maybe because I live in Asia, not sure. You can sometimes get away with saying something positive about China, but absolutely no positivity is ever allowed about the DPRK. I think I said I had a pretty good pizza there (I did) and people lost their shit.
I must be pulling quite the paycheque for all the world governments I work for.
I hear that shit like 8 times a week. I'm most frequently getting called Russian tho; which I mean. If any of y'all know Black Russians who are comfortable and love their country; put me in contact, the spite has been rising for years and I'd very much like to leave Amerika.
I've had people in real life tell me I was brainwashed by Chinese media after I travelled there for a couple months and had good things to say. I don't even speak Chinese.
In the United States, for over a hundred years, the ruling interests tirelessly propagated anticommunism among the populace, until it became more like a religious orthodoxy than a political analysis. During the Cold War, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.
-- Michael Parenti, Blackshirts And Reds
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the admins of this instance if you have any questions or concerns.
Huh, this one was ignored by the lemmy libs. I wonder why? Too wordy maybe? I was expecting at least a drive by comment or two. Or to wake up to a massive dogpile.