Memes

Watch any bloger that lives there

As ever, it just boils down to white supremacy with you people

you're literally ruled by pedophiles 🤡

the epstein files shows in plain back-and-white print that the system is captured by a ruling class of people who exist above the law to such a degree that they can flaunt their activities to the world in unencrypted messages; calling it merely imperfect is an dramatic understatement.

Your framing rests on a fundamental idealism that treats law as floating above material relations. Law in any society reflects the interests of its ruling class. When you praise Western systems for "striving for facts and just outcomes" you ignore that their legal architecture is designed to protect capital first. Lobbying is not an aberration in the system, it is the system. Campaign finance law has codified bribery as speech, ensuring that policy outcomes align with donor interests rather than public need. That is not an imperfect system striving for justice. That is a system functioning exactly as designed, instituted long before Trump. It is funny how you and so many others use Trump as a kind of scapegoat, a Jesus-like figure through which you can launder the horrific abuses of capitalism while pretending the rot began with one man. Much like many did with Hitler before him.

China's anti-corruption work since 2012 has investigated over two million officials, prosecuted more than 250,000, and recovered tens of billions in assets. The Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and National Supervisory Commission operate with institutional reach that targets both high-level "tigers" and grassroots "flies". When Alibaba's leadership was reined in for attempting to push klarna esque financialisation to the detriment of the public, it was not political opportunism. It was a material check on capital's power to shape markets and data infrastructure. When was the last time the US or EU disciplined a corporation for harming public interest with any level of real consequence? The answer is never, because their legal frameworks treat corporate power as a protected class. And just to preempt the tired deflection: "oh so you admit China's corrupt". Corruption will exist so long as class society exists. What makes China's system different is the action taken to constantly fight back against that contradiction rather than base the entire system on it like the capitalist states in the EU and the US.

You like the rest of the western world know nothing of the DPRK beyond stories from the defector industrial complex and ROK tabloids that have repeatedly fabricated executions, ridiculous laws about haircut mandates, and other absurdities. This is not analysis. It is propaganda consumption presented as knowledge. If your standard for judging a country is Western media output, you have already surrendered the premise of factual inquiry.

Russia's oligarchic corruption did not emerge from some inherent cultural flaw. It was manufactured. Western leaders advisors imposed shock therapy that privatized public wealth overnight, enabling a small group to loot state assets through schemes like Loans for Shares. The result was the creation of a kleptocratic class. To then point at that outcome and say "see, authoritarianism" is to blame the victim of economic warfare for the wounds inflicted by that war.

As for the US and EU "striving for just outcomes": Julian Assange was prosecuted for exposing war crimes, whatever you think of him as a person. Edward Snowden lives in exile for revealing mass surveillance. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo operated with legal impunity. Pro-Palestinian dissent is criminalized across Europe while state violence escalates. These are not bureaucratic errors. They are features of a legal order that protects imperial power. The separation of powers you praise does not prevent injustice when all branches serve the same material interests.

Authoritarian is a meaningless slur used by the stupid and uneducated to avoid class analysis. Every state exercises coercion. The question is which class benefits. China's legal system has demonstrably reduced corruption and constrained capital's excesses in ways Western systems have not. That is not perfection. It is a different material trajectory. If your ideal of justice cannot account for who holds power and how law serves that power, then your ideal is simply fantasy.

(The USA is an) imperfect system (striving for equality)

(China, Russia, North Korea, are) formal(ly) (unequal) (...) corrupt system(s).

Could you explain to me why among these, only the USA one meets your par?

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Russia
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Socialist_Constitution_of_the_Democratic_People%27s_Republic_of_Korea_(2016)
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States_of_America

You can use AI to summarise them. Or talk about individual articles. Really any sort of justification for why anyone could read these and think the USA one is the best one, never mind in a league of it's own, is extremely fascinating.

To describe the American justice system as "imperfect" is something of a massive understatement. Who is actually bound by the law? Any allowance of set monetary penalties shows that the laws exist to bind workers, not owners. If a $500 fine is enough to bankrupt a worker, but is pocket change for the owner, then can that really be called 'justice'?

And who is the law enforced against? People of color, and workers, predominantly. In some parts of the USA, a poor black man can wind up serving a life sentence for selling some marijuana, a crime most people would agree does not merit that punishment, while a rich white man can defraud millions of their life's savings and not serve a day in prison. That injustice is structural; it's not an accident.

And if a man commits no crime, that is no guarantee he will not be convicted of one, as we have seen time and time again. For-profit prisons have need of their enslaved workforce, and the system will provide them. As we're constantly saying on here, the purpose of a system is what it does, not what it claims to do.