https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources
You can notice a bias towards the state media from pro-capitalist regimes from the above.
Idk, I’ve learned a tremendous amount about things outside my culture… because of wikipedia. Don’t let perfection be the enemy of good?
Idk, why should this issue be seen as good?
And what is your culture? Is Wikipedia good for it?
It’s not? Being informed is always positive, and it’s always unfortunate that bias exists. I’d rather learn and try to understand my own bias, as opposed to being ignorant and having bias anyway
Do you have a tool that is just as accessible as wiki, but perfectly objective? Or are you throwing the baby out with the bath-water? Knowledge is good for any culture, and bias is a motherfucker to us all. Your critique isn’t unwarranted, but it does flirt with anti-intellectualism
Being informed of the bias is also positive
No one mentioned anything about throwing the bathwater, but only hinted at the bias.
Are you trying to villainise and portray it as anti-intellectualism?
Are you thinking that the source you use is unbiased and trying to derial convos that hint at how it is not unbiased?Noting the bias is a good thing and trying to shut down the convoys on that is a bigger mf to all of us.
Your concerns isn’t unwarranted, but it does flirt with strawmanning and derailing the convo.
Sounds like we both flirt with some bias, doesn’t it?
That’s probably because most mass killings under capitalist regimes are just generally called “mass killings”. They are your regular, run of the mill mass killings that aren’t really newsworthy and that we are accustomed to.
Yeah dude just regular mass killings that happen every day
My previous comment was very cynical, but when you think about it communism is the historical anomaly. Sure you can point to the Mass killings wikipedia page, but you can also do that with other topics and they also are separated into “XY under communism” and “XY” articles. XY could be stuff like “Economy”, “Urban development”, “Housing” or “Worker’s rights”. It’s just a convention wikipedia seems to adhere to.
In what way is communism a historical anomaly in a manner that capitalism does not fit into? Both are part of the same historical development process.
Also it’s doing unionbusting
Yes. The meme is bullshit. The wikipedia community has always covered every kind of atrocity and has truly tried to maintain a neutral pow. But the union busting really is Really shitty behavior from the wikimedia organization.
and has truly tried to maintain a neutral pow.
My god, how are you people so fucking brainless?
seriously. before we even get to state-sponsored media, i’d say a good half of the people i look up on wikipedia don’t have a “controversy” section when they absolutely should. they have been biased towards protecting the images of people and countries for quite a long time.
Because you hoard the brain in a box! (sorry, couldn’t help myself)
maintain a neutral pow
Neutral POV as per themselves? Or is it some external agency? Agency made up of all sides?
And do you see this as neutral?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources
You can notice the bias towards the state media from pro-capitalist regimes
? If it was pro-capitalist China would be green, the divide is USA and their colonies vs perceived potential threats to it’s domination.
China is a socialist country.
China is led by a Communist party that aims to progress in the path of Socialism.
Compared to the West, not pro-Capitalist enough for Wikipedia then?
China is led by a Communist party that aims to progress in the path of Socialism
By their own words and practice, and any measurable metric, they are not.
https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202412/06/content_WS6752b0e2c6d0868f4e8edbb0.html
Chinese government press release: 60% of GDP is from fully private companies. About 20% is from mixed ownership companies.
80% of workers work for private enterprises.
(USA states are 80% GDP from private companies, 20% from SOE, could not find a metric that distinguishes partially state owned enterprise in USA; and that about 80% of population also work for private enterprises)
Worker rights are stagnated far behind EU, for safety of workplace (e.g. China official statistics are twice the Eu per capita https://english.news.cn/20260115/89ba80c83c4a4cf6a0162fa4f43e6b68/c.html) , renumeration, paid holidays, paid sick leave.
The only positive was slightly lower retirement age, but that is gone now: http://english.scio.gov.cn/m/chinavoices/2025-01/02/content_117641102.html
Heck, even ProleWiki says that Socialism in China is a dream for the future, and that they are aiming for the poetic 100th birthday of PRC. I will believe that when I see it, because for now it’s just a capitalist country.
It is vastly better if you compare China to USA, but let’s not lie to ourselves.
Socialism is not “no private sector,” it’s a transitional society between capitalism and communism marked by worker control of the state, and public ownership as the principal aspect of the economy. All apply to China. Regarding prolewiki saying that China isn’t socialist, that is outright incorrect. You also lied about the CPC saying that socialism is not the backbone of their economy and their goal for further development, you linked a source stating that the private sector presently plays a large but subordinate part of the economy, which is in line with their analysis that they are in the primary stage of socialism:
Then you compare ratios of private to public, which doesn’t actually say anything about which sector holds power. The important factor is controlling the commanding heights and critical sectors, and employing marketization in underdeveloped sectors to facilitate growth. Capital is treated in China like a farmer treats wheat, rather than like an uncontrollable force of nature like it is in the US, because China is socialist.
- The backbone of the economy is state ownership and socialist planning. 24 / 25 of the top revenue companies are state-owned and planned. 70% of the top 500 companies are State-owned. 1, 2 The largest bank, construction, electricity, and energy companies in the world, are CPC controlled entities, subject to the 5 year plans laid out by the central committee.
- Workplace democracy in action in the CPC.
- Is modern day china communist? Is it staying true to communist values?
- Didn’t China go Capitalist with Deng Xiaoping? Didn’t it liberalize its economy? Is China’s drastic decrease in poverty a result of the increase in free market capitalist policies?
- Is the CPC committed to communism?
- The Long Game and Its Contradictions. Audiobook
- The myth of Chinese state capitalism. Did Deng really betray Chinese socialism?
- Tsinghua University- Is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics real socialism, or is it state Capitalism?
- Isn’t China revisionist for having a capitalist sector of the economy, and working with capitalists? Why isn’t it fully planned like the USSR was?
- Castro on why both China and Vietnam are socialist countries.
- Roderic Day - China has billionaires.
- What is socialism with Chinese characteristics (SWCC)?
- How is SWCC not revisionist? How is it any different from Gorbachev’s market reforms?, 2
- Domenico Losurdo - is China state capitalist?, 2
- Did Lenin say anything about Market Socialism, or productivism?
- Vijay Prashad - Is China capitalist?
- Why do Chinese billionaires keep ending up in prison? Why are many billionaires and CEOs going missing? China sentences Ex-Chairman of a major bank, guilty of embezzling ~$100M USD, to death in 2019.
- China cracks down on billionaires - Ben Norton interviews Ian Goodrum
- Do capitalists control the communist party? No, pic
- How the State runs business in China.
- 50% of the economy is in the socialist public sector and directly follows the plan (40% if you ignore the agricultural sector). 20 to 30% is inside the state capitalist sector, which is the sector partially or totally owned by domestic capitalists but run by the CPC or by local workers councils. The rest is made up of the small bourgeois ownership like in the NEP.
- China pushing forward Marxist training in colleges, attracts 1M students.
- China tells the US that it has no plans to weaken the role of its State-Owned-Enterprises, one of the US’s main demands in the trade war. “Beijing plans to make the state economy stronger, bigger, and better.”
- Unlike the US, China refuses to bail out over-leveraged property developers, and lets them go bankrupt.
- A China misinformation Megathread.
https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/socialism-with-chinese-characteristics
Why are you gish galloping at Xinhua news?
The backbone of the economy is
Literally Chinese government official press release does not agree with that, linked above.
I fucking believe Chinese official government press release over random reddit posts when it comes to sourcing knowledge about China.
Vastly better than USAmerica
Is that the reason for Wikipedia’s bias against their media?
Europe tags along with USAmerican regime’s capitalist-imperialist actions and so their media is given an exemption?
Heck, even ProleWiki says that Socialism in China is a dream for the future, and that they are aiming for the poetic 100th birthday of PRC. I will believe that when I see it, because for now it’s just a capitalist country.
Even if they are currently capitalist, they do not see it as the end stage, like the pro-capitalist regimes do?
So, let’s not lie to ourselves, to deny the obvious preference that the Wikipedia page shows for the media from the pro-capitalist regimes.
To be clear, ThirdConsul is lying. China is socialist, and both the CPC and prolewiki agree about that. ThirdConsul is pretending socialism means the absence entirely of private property.
This is the moderating repository of knowledge in the western media ecosystem all but admitting that they do not actually consider China a capitalist state.
Allowing only western sources is not “truly trying to maintaining a neutral pov” as all sources have a bias
Does Wikipedia really only allow Western sources? I don’t know if that’s true
wikipedia considers government propaganda sources like the BBC and Voice of America (dont laugh) to be reliable, as long as they’re western government propaganda sources.
But I don’t think it’s true Wiki only allows Western sources
Wikipedia heavily favors western news sources as “less biased” than non-western equivalents. Look at the text of the post you’re commenting in.
Don’t give the Wikipedia community too much credit. The union-busting goes hand-in-hand with the western liberal frame that every article is presented with.
The wikipedia community has always covered every kind of atrocity and has truly tried to maintain a neutral pow.
lol
You know you can make a page yourself right?
Go ahead and compile a list with sources referenced and write it up according to the style guide.
People have done this repeatedly and been nuked every time. It’s extremely fucking telling that all the Wikipedia true believers have clearly never actually looked into the process themselves
I don’t think OP is concerned about the existence of one particular article, but rather the various systemic biases in what Wikipedia chooses to include or exclude.
“You know you can do this thing yourself right?”
Person does thing
“No you are using biased language and have to use exclusively sources which are known to repeat CIA imperialist propaganda like the Hamas rape hoax on demand.”
Yeah articles that show capitalist and imperialists in a bad light don’t exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrocities_in_the_Congo_Free_State
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwangju_Uprising
The sources referenced there should be a great start for writing the suggested article. Have at it.
which ones explicitly state that they were caused by capitalism like the point OP was making?
The suggestion was that OP could simply make an article and reference works that make a strong case for that claim.
It doesn’t appear to be difficult especially in relation to colonialism.
Now if Wikipedia rejected a well researched, fairly written and referenced article, this would be a different discussion.
Now if Wikipedia rejected a well researched, fairly written and referenced article, this would be a different discussion.
No it wouldn’t, it would be exactly the same because you would ignore that Wikipedia deleted it. And we know this because that is exactly what happened
the claim is that wikipedia is biased against communism and dedicates a 1/4 of its existence to clearly displaying it:
none of yours do
True. Would be good to try that and see how it is handled
Asking for the help of others who may see this: Could you help in listing major mass killings by capitalist states?
Will mention ones that I can remember now:
USAmerican regime - Kent State Uni massacre, MOVE bombing, BLM protestors murdered for protesting against the racist regime
British colonial regime in India - Jalianwallah Bagh massacre, Wagon massacre, Massacre of tribes in hilly states
If famines are included, then the Bengal famine, Madras famine, Travancore famine etc.Mass killings in areas like Ireland n all by the British capitalist regime too
South Korean regime - Jeju island, Bodo league massacres and similar mass killings
Mass killings by Nazi Germany
Fascist and colonial states atrocities are widely documented in Wikipedia, countries that we consider capitalist probably too. I recently stumbled across Belgian atrocities in Congo reading Wikipedia by accident. It motivated me to read more about it in the future, maybe “Heart of darkness” (while not exactly historical, it still seems like a good critique. By the way is it a good novel?).
True.
But there does not seem to be an equivalent page for ‘Mass killings in capitalist regimes’
Even if it is documented, does it not show that how it is organised currently has an imbalance, likely from Anti-communist propaganda, things like red scare etc?
So, cannoted be unbiased, right? My focus was on that. There is no unbiased source, but only ones which acknowledge biases and maybe try to ensure that the biases do not affect the quality of the source too much.
there’s a mass anti-communist killings page, but that doesnt seem to explain how capitalism is anti-communism…
deleted by creator
But there does not seem to be an equivalent page for ‘Mass killings in capitalist regimes’
You can create that page. Don’t forget to cite your sources and link to them or it will be deleted.
It’s so fucking stupid that you don’t think anyone has tried this. And so fucking arrogant that you don’t even bother you check before mouthing off.
it will be deleted regardless because a lot of wikipedia editors are cia agents
No! You can’t expect them to behave! They need to use blogs and disrecredited historians for citations!!! FACTS ARE CIA!!!
No! You can’t deny the holy scripture! The tankies are at fault when we lose, for not believing hard enough!!! CIA ARE FACTS!!!
“My sources are ‘facts’ because they say so! Your sources are ‘discredited’ because mine say so!”
A perfectly circular chain of reasoning
Might I recommend King Leopold’s Ghost if you want a straight up history book of the Belgian Congo. No shade against Heart of Darkness, I think that’s a worthwhile read; but reading KLG first will give you more context to appreciate HoD. Or maybe read it after, idk, up to you
That is just killings against communists. That is not equal to killings under capitalist states.
Injustices such as the Ludlow would not fall under the former as the victims were not communists. They were workers seeking better wages and conditions under a capitalist system.
There is no “anti-capitalist mass killings” page either.
You might want to give some sources for that heading.
Indonesia: Am I a joke to you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965–66
Where’s the word Capitalism in that title?
Removed by mod
Is there a reason for deliberately breaking the rules by being ableist? Could you not have phrased your discontent with the meme in a way that doesn’t break the rules?
Removed by mod
Do you actually have a point, then? Why defend ableism? There are billions of ways to insult people that don’t rely on bigotry.
Removed by mod
All of the conversation is surrounding your bigotry.
Ableism from a lib instance. Classic.
Removed by mod
It’s always the same instances that post the most vile lib and fascist comments.
Also Imagine thinking someone is beyond critique because they are from the same instance
Post hog
👌👍
