I agree with you! I grew up just next door in Sturbridge and recently moved back (partially because I literally can't afford rent anywhere in the country anymore, but also because MA is a good place to be) and I always thought Southbridge got way more shit than it deserves. Yeah, it can appear a bit shabby and sketchy in parts, but the people are good, genuine, and unpretentious. Mill Street Brews was cool while it was around and there's still a lot of great food for way less than you'd pay elsewhere. I think Southbridge would be fertile ground for someone with vision and lot of money to resuscitate the local economy. Independent businesses could survive there whereas it seems like they're getting squeezed out in other parts of the state and the town has a lot of the walkability and "vibes" younger people are looking for.

I like it here.

Commodifying women's bodies isn't the same as feminist freedom of choice. The only reason a topless dispensary is even being considered a viable business option is because women's bodies are so heavily sexualized and objectified.

> They could set limits for the cost of education and raise standards but they don't. Why?

Because then there'd be fewer functionally illiterate useful idiots like OP that willingly work against working class interests and foolishly advocate for self-destructive conservative policies that protect entrenched power and the status quo.

Are you his lawyer or pr team or something? What's embarrassing is you trying to deflect on behalf of this ghoul. None of what you said detracts from the fact that an environmental disaster occurred under his leadership, partially because of shoddy labor practices and cuts to regulations by the railroad lobby. The fact that we rely on companies like this is even more cause for concern.

Would you like to try dating a chronically poor (like qualifies for Medicaid poor), slightly chubby, straight edge, vegetarian tr*nny with mild anxiety and depression? You'll most likely lose massive social capital (even among self-proclaimed "progressives"), but you'll gain somebody who is more likely to share your more male-dominated hobbies and who will think it's pretty cool that you earn a consistent income at all, regardless of career.

The wikipedia article for "womxn" actually has a great breakdown of the term. I'm personally of the opinion that it is at best unnecessary because implying that "woman" is sexist because it contains "man" is outrageous and if you were really concerned about "inclusivity", then "woman" should apply to trans women too (because they are also women full-stop and refusing to acknowledge that is misgendering) and you'd use another term altogether to refer to non-binary people because they generally want to be viewed as separate from the gender binary.

Many such cases.

I'd describe myself as "anti-American" more than "pro-Chinese authoritarian". Have you ever heard of critical support?

> you also believe the Tiennamen Square massacre was Western propaganda

I don't, but I do know how to spell "Tiananmen". Keep stereotyping everybody who thinks differently than you if it makes you feel better though. I'm sure the country that literally has military bases all over the world and regularly sticks its grubby fingers where they don't belong is the real good guy and just wants to "spread democracy".

> The US government might be using this all as political ploy, but how does this make Chinese people’s demand for freedom and end of authoritarian rule any less valid??

It doesn't make it any less valid, but you should be exceedingly cautious about soliciting American "support". What often results from US involvement in power struggles abroad is a government that is friendlier to US business interests, but retains all the negative aspects of the former regime. I hope your friends are safe and that their calls for change and justice are answered.

Don't twist my words, I specifically said "this anti-CPC rhetoric". You might be able to "hate the government, not the people", but there have been plenty of instances where violent actors are unable to distinguish the two.

I view most news media with skepticism, especially when it's from English language outlets about countries the US considers enemies. They have a well-documented history of lying. And that's not a just a poll, it's a long-term survey (that you clearly didn't bother to actually read) conducted by the Ash Center at Harvard University. Is Harvard "authoritarian" now too?

If you're worried about bias, it even says "compared to the relatively high satisfaction rates with Beijing, respondents held considerably less favorable views toward local government. At the township level, the lowest level of government surveyed, only 11.3 percent of respondents reported that they were “very satisfied.” The research gets pretty granular and makes note of differences in responses from urban/rural, rich/poor, and what challenges the CPC might face maintaining support in the future.

I included a link to that study because, as the authors importantly emphasize, "although state censorship and propaganda are widespread in China, these findings highlight that citizen perceptions of governmental performance respond most to real, measurable changes in individuals’ material well-being." The CPC took China from a war-torn, rural backwater to a highly advanced world superpower in a matter of decades. Global poverty would have increased in that same time frame were it not for China. But you don't really care about that, you're more concerned about imposing your ineffectual political beliefs on people you don't know halfway around the world because you're an idealistic "democracy" fetishist.

Mhm, lets instead chauvinistically tell the Chinese people that we know what's best for them, because our own country and government is such a stellar example of a functional liberal democracy and shining bastion of democratic principles.

I'm aware of the terrible news. From what I can gather, the protests are largely about the continued covid lockdowns. Excuse me if I express skepticism when most of the English language news sources rely on "unverified videos on social media", full of conveniently translated quotes that just so happen to parrot American foreign policy interests. The articles I've read can't seem to decide if Urumqi was on lockdown for 3 or 5 months and the only evidence I've found that "local officials blamed the victims’ “weak survival capabilities” was a single statement by Li Wensheng, head of the Urumqi City Fire Rescue department, that said "some residents’ ability to rescue themselves was too weak and they failed to escape in time".

I don't need to be lectured about empathy when you're using people's deaths as a political cudgel. If it were American conservatives doing this, you'd be making fun of them. Repeatedly we've seen the US tell half-truths and outright lies to shift the narrative against countries it considers adversaries and stoke hostility to push for regime change. It never works out in the people's favor. We don't need more war and conflict. All this anti-CPC rhetoric does is make things less safe for Asian Americans.

And you get to pay ridiculous rents for the privilege of feeling that way! 😊

There are studies out there showing that the Chinese people are generally satisfied with their governance, so I'd like to know where you got the idea that they're "irate". Do you enjoy feeling aggrieved on behalf of other people or something? Also, it's officially the "Communist Party of China (CPC)", not CCP.

> pot-marked

pockmarked