Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and conservative influencer Laura Loomer blasted the idea.

Donald Trump’s latest comments about allowing hundreds of thousands of Chinese international students into the United States have drawn criticism from some of the most outspoken members of the Republican Party.

Ahead of his meeting with South Korean President Lee Jae-myung at the White House on Monday, Trump told reporters that he plans to allow 600,000 Chinese students into the country — a figure more than double the number in the United States now.

It’s a sharp departure from an announcement Secretary of State Marco Rubio made in May, when he promised the United States would “aggressively revoke” visas for Chinese students and add more scrutiny to all future visa applications from China.

  • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
    1·
    20 hours ago

    That’s some grade A propaganda. The mid-90s Russia was a brutal Mafia state that preluded a number of ugly conflicts, most notably in Chechnya.

    How is that propaganda and why are you answering it with things orthogonal to what I said? You have a disability, perhaps, making you incapable of understanding texts taken in full?

    The only thing resembling “freedom” to talk was the rash of ethno-nationalism and reactionary social conservatism which would become the hallmarks of United Russia.

    Those were present in the public perception, thus those were present in politics. No, ER is not partial to any specific ideology. They are the ruling party and do whatever they want. That’s their only ideology.

    Russia was being converted into a Western client state, on par with Mexico or Indonesia. Yeltsin opened the doors to a US based looting of the former USSR.

    Yeltsin thought differently. When he realized that, he also realized he has no plan. Thus the weird moves after 1996 and ultimately passing power to Putin.

    Putin came into power on a wave of nationalist sentiment that closed the door and internalized the wealth of Russia again (to Putin’s cartel of guys).

    He didn’t close any doors. Just slowly accumulated power, as a side effect pressing out other interests.

    The idea that this was some kind of liberalization of Russian politics requires you to ignore everything but the superficial token liberalist parties that never had a popular base of support.

    What you wrote doesn’t have any connection to what I wrote.

    But since that’s wrong as well - no, roughly in 1989-1993 Russian politics existed for real. And in 1993-1999 there was growing understanding that things went the wrong way in 1993. And the 1996 election was competitive among the populace, even if CPRF the party clearly intended to lose politically.

    In any case what I wrote was about the society and culture, not about politics, you just can’t perceive anything outside of your partisan bullshit, can you?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      19 hours ago

      How is that propaganda

      Because it’s factually untrue and largely a product of American criticism of Societ Era politics.

      You have a disability, perhaps, making you incapable of understanding texts taken in full?

      Western propaganda in a nutshell. You’re so invested in your hatred of a foreign country that you attribute any rebuttal to mental illness.

      • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
        1·
        7 hours ago

        Because it’s factually untrue and largely a product of American criticism of Societ Era politics.

        I must have imagined everything I know of the 90s in Russia, including all read, heard and seen.

        Western propaganda in a nutshell. You’re so invested in your hatred of a foreign country that you attribute any rebuttal to mental illness.

        There was no rebuttal, I live in Russia and you are arguing like a typical American. You don’t know how hard it was to keep a more specific description in.