OK, I won't just claim something I may not have enough education in, so I'll See what ppl have to say.
Thesis: are socially liberal forms of government (for example the right to self exoression) not mutually exclusive to forms of government (like communism) where private property and individualism are not necessarily respected and forms of collectives are the focus?
That's the trick: in Liberalism, "personal expression" just means "your money can do whatever it wants". Liberal freedom is capitalist freedom: the freedom for the rich to run roughshod over the poor
Personal property is respected under communism. Your possessions are yours. Countries like China, the DPRK, Vietnam, and Cuba have some of the highest home ownership rates in the world, for example. It’s productive private property - the means of production - that are limited. That means things like factories, farmland, etc. But even with productive private property, what we have learned over the last century is that socialism is a transition from the old to the new. And practically speaking, trying to completely eliminate any sort of small business emerging isn’t particularly helpful in the early stages of that transition.
Regarding self-expression, I don’t see why that would be limited under communism. Go to China now and see that people express themselves in just as many ways as other places, for example. I guess if you are talking about collective versus individualist values… we already have some fully capitalist societies that are more collectivist than others (say, Japan versus the USA). It appears to me in those instances, collectivism is not mutually exclusive with self-expression, no?
I don't think Japan is know for incentivising self expression or treating the individualism as a virtue?
Self-expression, I would argue, heightens in socialism and communism, as your existence is less tied to your ability to generate profits for others and your needs are more taken care of. The individualism socialists fight against is the anti-social type, the kind that seeks to profit off of others and compete with them, rather than work together to achieve the best outcome for everyone. This does not go counter to self-expression.
All rights we have under liberalism are limited, for example you can't use your right to self expression to threaten the government. I'm not sure I'd take being able to complain about being evicted, rather than the right to a shelter, but even then you're allowed to complain to socialist governments as well, you're just not allowed to call to overthrow them (just like in most liberal democracies)
In China freedom of religion doesn't exist so how is that not fucking oppressive?!?!?! HOW IS NOT BEING ABLE TO READ A BIBLE NOT REPRESIVE? or be a witch, or a fucking satanist idc I'm just saying that the level of control is through the roof with communism and I REFUSE to give up a FUCKING OUNCE of my freedom to anyone. PERIOD.
You sound like you came up in the church and have heard a lot of weird bullshit about China
You can read bibles in China. Freedom of religion does exist in the PRC. China has more freedom for its working classes than exists in, say, the US Empire.
i saw so many churches last time i was there
i honestly don't think i've ever heard anyone argue this before. where do you people even get this stuff?