|
Rabelais D posted:I'm an expat so I cant talk with too much authority about local opinions. Some of the elderly were no doubt influenced by the media who made it their duty to give everyone a daily update of how many people were suffering side effects (or dying) after vaccination. The headlines would frequently read "Another dies after getting jabbed" or "Man's face paralyzed after vaccine mishap". Elderly people with pre-existing conditions (i.e. most of them) were told to seek medical advice before vaccination and early on a lot of that advice seems to have been "maybe don't get it". one of my friends in hong kong is so strongly anti-sinovac that when i got sinopharm in mainland china, he called me stupid and said "sinopharm is the same as sinovac, which doesn't work at all. you're an idiot for getting it" doesn't seem like a healthy attitude to me!
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2022 07:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
If China wanted to make an example of Hong Kong as the Goofus to the mainland's Gallant then I dunno how better they could have done than just sitting back and letting them do things the way they have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2022 08:34
|
|
|
Rabelais D posted:The authorities don't even seem to have grasped the severity of measures required to control the virus - which is their stated aim. Then it's over already, and it's a full breakout by next week, sounds like. The next part of this misadventure is finding out how many of the elderly have been effectively doomed by misinformation and vaccine FUD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2022 09:34
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Can you speak to vaccination beliefs in HK? How are the vaccines generally perceived? Was the PRC vaccine nationalism effort a factor? It's bad but different from the US and Europe, from what I've seen of all the above. I think I've written about it in this thread before. Part of the population is skeptical of anything from the central government, and so was skeptical of Sinovac and the mainland-manufactured BioNTech (even though I believe only some was manufactured there). Another part is skeptical of non-Chinese vaccines, including a lot of weird old race theory about how Chinese immune systems are different. Vaccine nationalism and regular old sensationalist tabloid reporting also seem to play a role. I also think the Covid Zero policies have sometimes created unintended disincentives to get vaccinated — "Why get a vaccine if we will never have Covid here?" Ghost Leviathan posted:If China wanted to make an example of Hong Kong as the Goofus to the mainland's Gallant then I dunno how better they could have done than just sitting back and letting them do things the way they have. HK hasn't done that badly, and there has been a lot of cooperation between the central government and HKSAR from the start. As recently as late November a delegation from the National Health Commission did a tour of HK and declared that HK has been consistently following the strategy set by the central government, that there were a few improvements to be made in data sharing, and that plans to reopen the border could proceed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2022 09:56
|
|
|
yeah, to add to what smeef said, while it's tempting to imagine that the mainland gave hong kong just enough rope to hang themselves with, i think it would still be in the cpc's interests to not have a huge outbreak on the border of the country.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2022 10:13
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:yeah, to add to what smeef said, while it's tempting to imagine that the mainland gave hong kong just enough rope to hang themselves with, i think it would still be in the cpc's interests to not have a huge outbreak on the border of the country. I would go further and say it's not just seen as 'on the border.' Regardless of anyone's normative positions on independence, etc., HK is part of China (it is HKSAR after all) and plays a unique and valuable gateway role, especially for the Chinese economic and political elite, both in HK and mainland. While I'm sure there are some psychotic hardliners who want to teach HKers a lesson or whatever, it is far more in the CCP and central government's interests to continuing pursing constructive cooperation between HK and the mainland. Providing medical expertise and resources is an easy way to do that and will do more to win support than will power plays. I think that the outcome in HK with this outbreak will also influence the mainland's Covid strategy. If HK suppresses the outbreak with more modest measures, that may give mainland authorities more confidence in doing the same. Or if cases run rampant but health outcomes are tolerable, the healthcare system is resilient, and the population remains supportive of the government, then it will alleviate concerns about the destabilizing effects of Covid. Conversely, if it's chaos, then expect a much longer path to mainland relaxing policies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 04:06
|
|
|
the title made me boggle the analysis is more reasoned and less hot-takey: https://twitter.com/i_montaigneEN/status/1492076810716205057 quote:There are more margins for government action and support to the economy I quoted an interesting paper previously on the politics of the 1995 centralization reform. To reiterate the broad strokes of how China centralized fiscal control: in 1994, increasing the center's nominal share whilst allowing the localities the autonomy to tacitly run up massive hidden liabilities; in 2014, not successfully forcing budget balance yet but mainly forcing localities to to formally bring their liabilities to market, and now in 2021 finally letting market pressure - rather than government pressure as such - bring those risks to heel. Theoretically, anyway. The trickle of news seems to a reversion to too-big-to-fail provincial-level backstops. The wisdom of preserving a large 'fiscal buffer' in order to respond to crises is perhaps overly informed by 2008 (good fundamentals are, after all, what made Asia circa 1996 so confident that they could not possibly be subject to a financial crisis a la 1980s Latin America. Well, they weren't, but they were subject to a different kind of crisis anyway: one which good fundamentals and fiscal space did not protect them from).
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 06:07
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:yeah, to add to what smeef said, while it's tempting to imagine that the mainland gave hong kong just enough rope to hang themselves with, i think it would still be in the cpc's interests to not have a huge outbreak on the border of the country. Yeah there is zero way it is in anyone not insane's interests to have a massive covid outbreak running rampant in hong kong. Zero covid very quickly doesn't work if you have a huge source of cases just burning away within your borders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 06:39
|
|
|
Smeef posted:I would go further and say it's not just seen as 'on the border.' Regardless of anyone's normative positions on independence, etc., HK is part of China (it is HKSAR after all) and plays a unique and valuable gateway role, especially for the Chinese economic and political elite, both in HK and mainland. While I'm sure there are some psychotic hardliners who want to teach HKers a lesson or whatever, it is far more in the CCP and central government's interests to continuing pursing constructive cooperation between HK and the mainland. Providing medical expertise and resources is an easy way to do that and will do more to win support than will power plays. ronya posted:the title made me boggle the analysis is more reasoned and less hot-takey: Credit where credit is due, both of these are very good informative and or thought provoking posts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 07:00
|
|
|
HK is at 80%+ for 1st shot at the moment which is honestly higher than I would have guessed it would be a year ago. https://www.covidvaccine.gov.hk/en/ https://www.covidvaccine.gov.hk/en/dashboard
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 08:30
|
|
|
Shrimp or Shrimps posted:HK is at 80%+ for 1st shot at the moment which is honestly higher than I would have guessed it would be a year ago. For sure better than a year ago, but here's what worries me (using data from the links you posted):
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 09:22
|
|
|
I'm inclined to believe that it's mostly about sinovac being the first available rollout, which would highly preference the elderly as first recipients but I would be fascinated to find out if vaccine factionalism played a hand, because that's definitely existed as a feature of the global pandemic. I guess compare the sinovac rates vs. other similarly preferenced early vaccine groups.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 10:09
|
|
|
Serious question, is Sinovac effective?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 10:23
|
|
|
yeah
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 11:08
|
|
|
Maybe a tad less effective than Astrazeneca but not in the sense that would meaningfully impact your ability to reach herd immunity if you get good enough uptake.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 11:14
|
|
|
iirc the Sinovac/Sinopharm inactivated vaccines got a lot of bad publicity when they were found to not have great protection from infection at a similar time the mRNA vaccines offered pretty good sterilizing immunity. So the Chinese gov't did a mea culpa. Then it turned out the sterilizing immunity from two shots of mRNA waned pretty quickly and welp, Sinopharm/Sinovac aren't garbage after all, they still provided protection against severe disease. I have absolutely no idea how good Sinovac/Sinopharm vaccines are against Delta and Omicron. I'm guessing pretty poor at preventing infection and decent to quite good at preventing serious illness. tbh Western news media seems to have largely forgotten about the Chinese vaccines, I'd certainly be interested to hear updates on them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 11:20
|
|
|
Sinovac had about 51% efficacy at preventing symptomatic covid before the variants came along. Astrazeneca's figure was 60 something percent. Now we have Omicron, and three doses of Sinovac cannot give enough antibodies to read a "protective threshold" (see below article link) against the disease, although they do prevent serious infection in a lot of cases which is the most important thing. In fact the amount of antibodies you get from Sinovac seems to be quite pitifully low. HK scientists told people who had two shots of Sinovac to get a Pfizer booster because that actually put them over the protective threshold. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-23/three-sinovac-doses-fail-to-protect-against-omicron-study-shows Sinovac is still a good vaccine. It just isn't as good as a lot of the others that are widely available.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 12:03
|
|
|
Caveat to the "widely available" part; the last time I checked sinovac/pharm were entire magnitudes more obtainable for people in the global South compared to mRNA stuff due to some combo of developed nations hoarding Pfizer/moderna and the prc aggressively exporting sino
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 17:43
|
|
|
https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/sinovac-vaccine-efficacy-drops-28-three-five-months-%97-report 30% efficacy after 6 months for sinovac. There were numerous reports about this. I feel bad for anyone fed this vaccine as it’s clearly the runt of the vaccine litter when it comes to efficacy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 20:11
|
|
|
I bet in 10 years Taiwan is invaded and annexed by China. Taiwan is not a NATO ally and the US isn't gonna start WW3 to save them, just like Ukraine. E: on revision I'll say that Taiwan isn't the same kind of situation as Ukraine. There are no boots on the ground in Ukraine and Taiwan and the US have a different historical relationship. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Feb 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2022 20:51
|
|
|
quarantinethepast posted:I bet in 10 years Taiwan is invaded and annexed by China. Taiwan is not a NATO ally and the US isn't gonna start WW3 to save them, just like Ukraine. why invade taiwan when the prc can flex its soft power to bring Taiwan's political factions under its influence?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2022 04:19
|
|
|
Apropos vaccination rates and the elderly in HK, SCMP just published this story. I tried not to copy the entire thing, but there are a lot of interesting points here. I feel like the government has given tons of priority to the elderly, but clearly some elderly don't feel that way. The dependence on a smartphone app seems like an obvious barrier. https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...pgtype=homepage quote:Coronavirus Hong Kong: alone, afraid and distrustful of government, many elderly residents shun vaccines, despite the price paid
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2022 04:41
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:why invade taiwan when the prc can flex its soft power to bring Taiwan's political factions under its influence? Considering the past 8 years, they have been doing a real lovely job of that. I have seen in the past 10 years of living in Taiwan that support for China/popular support for reunification gets less every year. During the Ma/Hu era, things were going pretty well economically and a large part of it was due to greater economic connections to China itself. And many people were moving to China because it was seen that you could get a higher paying job over there. Ever since the first HK protests, popular support of China, especially with the young, has been in the toilet. The DPP appears to be consolidating themselves in power. The KMT itself is losing support in the North, with more people supporting parties that are similar in policy but don't have the "stink" of the white terror era on them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_People%27s_Party (no matter what that wiki article says, Ko's party is taking more support from the pan-blue than pan-green imo.) In the past year China has been flexing its soft power to piss off most Taiwanese people, for example, agricultural bans: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56353963 - pineapples quote:“Taiwanese pineapples are stronger than fighter jets. Geopolitical pressures cannot squeeze their deliciousness,” declared Taiwan’s Vice President Lai Ching-te, in a tweet. Japan and other SE Asian nations picked up the slack, along with greater domestic consumption. Same thing with custard apples last fall: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17_ezoNN44I GoutPatrol fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Feb 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2022 06:27
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:Considering the past 8 years, they have been doing a real lovely job of that. to be clear, i dont mean engendering popular support, i mean making opposition to the PRC's goals geopolitically and economically untenable
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2022 22:34
|
|
|
I mean the whole 'reunification' thing in Taiwan terms, is that still the idea that somehow the entirety of China will fall under the authority of the government in exile on a small island? Which had always struck me as laughably delusional even as a child.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 05:00
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:I mean the whole 'reunification' thing in Taiwan terms, is that still the idea that somehow the entirety of China will fall under the authority of the government in exile on a small island? Which had always struck me as laughably delusional even as a child. No; the broadly 1990s-flavoured hope for KMT-flavoured unificationists is in some form of political transition in the mainland that would create a political entity acceptable for negotiations for merger (of the two political entities, equal in status, that constitute One China*). * as opposed to one legitimate political entity and an illegitimate communist rebellion pre-1991 Given the relative sizes of their economies and the propensity of apparently invulnerable communist regimes to dissolve suddenly in the early 1990s, this arguably wasn't an unrealistic hope. Since the Taiwanese transition to democracy itself, the KMT is prepared to countenance periods where it doesn't rule Taiwan itself, never mind the mainland. "Well you probably wouldn't rule the resulting merged entity either" is no longer felt to be an existential threat. And that's how all imagined communities work, don't they? ronya fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Feb 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 05:23
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:I mean the whole 'reunification' thing in Taiwan terms, is that still the idea that somehow the entirety of China will fall under the authority of the government in exile on a small island? Which had always struck me as laughably delusional even as a child. That's just part of Taiwan's political 'myth', and I don't mean that in a pejorative way — all countries have them. I don't take what the political elite (of any country) say at face value, nor do I expect people (elite or non-elite) to behave rationally in their politics. I personally think the likelihood of PRC invading Taiwan is quite low, but still too high for comfort. I think it would take a series of bad outcomes to end up there and would not be part of some long-term PRC plan. A major economic downturn in PRC, a legitimacy crisis for the Party, saber-rattling and brinksmanship the likes of which we haven't yet seen in order to rally support, and then multiple accidents that escalate the situation. The status quo is just too beneficial both to PRC and Taiwan. Not just in the 'economic ties' sense, but in a deeper political sense, too. Hell, the status quo is just too beneficial to the whole region/world. If unification happens, I would bet on it happening over a much longer period and heavily dependent on PRC advancing to a state where it offers a much more compelling alternative vision of life to the Taiwanese people, who are far wealthier while also having less inequality, are more socially progressive, and are accustomed to open public opposition and inclusion in politics. The Russia-Ukraine situation actually makes me more confident that it won't happen. Xi is not Putin, and despite some gestures to the contrary, does not seem to really like or admire him at all. Evidently no one even met him at the airport when he arrived to the Olympics, which would explain why Putin also fell asleep in the opening ceremony (i.e., some sort of petty shot back). I think Xi likes to be seen on the international stage as a respectable statesman, as playing by the rules, as a steady, predictable hand — not as some smirking bully and troll. PRC is not Russia, either, and despite immense power concentrated in Xi's hands, I expect (admittedly not knowing much about Russia) that he (or whoever is leader) would face much more opposition from internal factions and systems. And East Asia is not Europe. Again, I know little about Ukraine, but what I do know suggests it wouldn't be one's top prospective bedfellow in ordinary times, at least not mine. Korea and Japan (maybe even some others in the region) would be much less likely to appease and far more capable of making it costly for an aggressor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 06:04
|
|
|
ronya posted:on that topic, a panel I found interesting, on China's Gen Z: https://www.readingthechinadream.com/xu-jilin-houlang-and-houlang-culture.html The Chaoyang blog recently covered the topic of 后浪 (gen z), 正能量 (can-do spirit), etc.: https://chaoyang.substack.com/p/chive-pocket-camp In particular, an observation on pop culture I've seen remarked also elsewhere: quote:To use contemporary art as a slightly abstracted example, most major Chinese artists are pushing 50. While there are a handful of artists in their early 40s that have just about reached the same status, below that there’s a gap—an artist in their mid-30s might still be considered “up and coming” even though their predecessors were participating in major international shows at the same age. The “secret sauce” that made established stars—participation in quasi-dissident activities in the 90s and a more open attitude towards China in the West leading to cosigns from foreign tastemakers with a knock-effect at home; enough time having passed for these dalliances to not be a liability now; and strong relationships with major art academies in China—seems hard to replicate in this day and age. Countries only get to build their big "thirty glorious years" consensus institutions once. After that, sweeping change is hard. ronya fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Feb 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 07:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/henrysgao/status/1493793855623155712 Direct link: http://cpc.people.com.cn/n1/2022/0215/c64094-32352701.html not unfamiliar to the tort-happy West, perhaps, but "守法、遇事找法、解决问题靠法" seems to be the emphasis: to inculcate a culture where one abides by the the law, finds the relevant law when there are incidents, and relies on legislation to establish answers to lawfulness questions (that being presumably the neoliberal part of the neoliberal-neoauthoritarian compact making itself felt - it predates the nationalist-exceptionalist gloss that - IMO anyway - doesn't seem to actually mean anything in particular) ronya fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Feb 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 07:05
|
|
|
Rule of law, without an independent judiciary, I don't know how that works. At all times rule of law is a sliding scale but that is one of the things that you need to get to the other side. And I don't see any moves towards that in this vision of a socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics. And is 推动我国法域外适用的法律体系建设 (Promote the construction of a legal system applicable outside the jurisdiction of our country) uh.. what it sounds like? Ignoring erroneous Western ideas like the peace of Westphalia? Or is that a bad translation, and it's about something normal like extradition treaties or working with established international law?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 07:42
|
|
|
"Rule of law" 法治 has an implication in English-language jurisprudence theory of being opposed to "rule by law", which is not present in Chinese. That said - it's not purely a translation artefact; see e.g. rule of law jurisprudence in Singapore, which is a studiously English-language Westminster system, and nonetheless has an enduring academic debate on what "rule of law" covers. Here, have the Singapore Minister of Law give an exegesis on the concept in English: quote:https://law1.nus.edu.sg/sjls/articles/SJLS-Dec-12-357.pdf You'll notice some stock similarities - Western conceits, Western hypocrisy, "rule of law" must be adapted to supposedly exceptional local and temporal conditions, priority is delivering good material results, the highest realisation of "the rule of law" means reification of statutory process on the ground. Somewhere Wang Huning's ear itches. re: 推动我国法域外适用的法律体系建设, no, that's more like advocating for Chinese participation in the formation of international frameworks/agreements
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 08:33
|
|
|
ronya posted:re: 推动我国法域外适用的法律体系建设, no, that's more like advocating for Chinese participation in the formation of international frameworks/agreements Thanks for that, I like to go to Chinese sources directly because there's so much that never gets published in English, but trying to make sense of a policy paper with my vocabulary lol, a struggle. "I don't think this is an accurate translation but I have no idea what's wrong with it." There's a lot of mention of building rule of law, which makes me wonder what the term is for the current unnamed or untranslatable status that rule of law must be built from? Something between rule of man (人治) and rule of law (法治). But I'm getting the idea I'm down a pointless path as the terms seem to be dependent on context, or vague enough to encompass anything. And while rule by law and rule of law is still a worthwhile distinction, it just doesn't translate in a useful way. Still feel like reading this document is like reading about someone building a beautiful addition on a house without mentioning the house. And the house was built on a vacant lot just a few decades ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 22:21
|
|
|
The return of Legalism?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
Horatius Bonar posted:Thanks for that, I like to go to Chinese sources directly because there's so much that never gets published in English, but trying to make sense of a policy paper with my vocabulary lol, a struggle. "I don't think this is an accurate translation but I have no idea what's wrong with it." Apropos: https://brill.com/view/journals/cjgg/5/2/article-p153_4.xml?language=en Xu, Lu (2019) The Changing Perspectives of Chinese Law:Socialist Rule of Law, Emerging Case Law and the Belt and Road Initiative. Chinese Journal of Global Governance, 5 (2). pp. 153-175. ISSN 2352-5193 Fun and games with homophones: quote:In the absence of a widely understandable expression in Chinese, some have tried to translate “rule by law” as equivalent to “以法治国 yǐ fa zhi guo” (govern the nation by law). There are a number of reasons why this would be rather unhelpful in explaining the concept to the Chinese audience. The phrase was first used by Legalist politicians and philosophers such as Guan Zhong (725–645 BC) and Han Fei (279–233 BC), but hardly found its way into the common parlance for the next two thousand years. This largely forgotten historic phrase may struggle to fit into a role of explaining contemporary thinking with all the Legalistic baggage attached to it. At the same time, “yǐ fa zhi guo” is a close homophone to “依法治国 yī fa zhi guo” (govern the country according to law), which is the core value enshrined in the Constitution, discussed below. The possible confusion inherent in such subtle differences would hardly help to clarify the already complex subject matter. Furthermore, the phrase, being unused in the past, has never carried any approbative or pejorative sense to it, unlike the “rule by law” label in English with its dedicated use in criticism. So any criticism that “China is doing yǐ fa zhi guo!” would still leave the Chinese audience bewildered as before. All that said - as before, my sense is that reasoning too hard from supposedly uniquely Chinese cultural aspects belies the observation of commonalities embraced in a great deal of 20th century socialist thinking on state-building CommieGIR posted:The return of Legalism? This analogy seems fashionable but I'm averse to it; it's like invoking Plato in an essay on some contemporary subject. It relies more on the politics of contemporary scholars of Plato/Legalism - the 'baggage', as Xu suggests - and at that point, why not pick a contemporary scholar of something more salient instead. It's not like one is starved for schools of Marxist or liberal thought. ronya fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Feb 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2022 04:19
|
|
|
A thoughtful essay by a leftie pro-China blogger (that I substantively disagree with):quote:https://lateralthinkingtechnology.wordpress.com/2021/12/08/seeing-red-on-chinese-nostalgia-and-two-visions-of-history/ the obvious counterpoint (to me, anyway) is the drift even amidst the Chinese revolutionary mythos itself - e.g. the Maoist sloganeer displacing the May Fourth intellectual as the prototypical big-character-poster-waver, or for that matter the same Maoist sloganeer displacing later party governance in claiming the place of the archetypical communist in cultural memory - that governance with all the good stuff intended for Ostalgie with Chinese characteristics. interesting, nonetheless
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
That blogpost is extremely interesting. I have to admit that passage you quoted, the counterfactual, was one of the less persuasive parts of it. To presuppose the sudden disappearance of the CPC requires us to consider how exactly that would occur to draw any meaningful conclusions. That said, the author makes excellent points about the degree to which red culture and red nostalgia has become an utterly normalized part of the cultural fabric of the people in China. I think he's bang on about his criticisms of the idea that the party's rule represents an aberration or a blight on the continuity of the 5,000 years of history of China, that it is a downright farce at this point. Red China has become an inexorable part of the people's cultural memory, and it would take a profoundly traumatizing event to simply excise those 70 years of memories. A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Feb 19, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 00:55
|
|
|
Eh, the post strikes me as one giant strawman. I don't think I've ever noticed anyone even unconsciously suggest the beliefs that he's arguing against.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 02:36
|
|
|
I'd never encountered the idea that the post-revolution Chinese government is some sort of, like, stain on Chinese history. That strikes me as a little hyperbolic. It's not even like the CCP is a departure from pre-revolution China. It's a capitalist society run by a blend of oligarchy and autocracy. That seems pretty much the same as things were before Mao came along.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 03:01
|
|
|
Smeef posted:Eh, the post strikes me as one giant strawman. I don't think I've ever noticed anyone even unconsciously suggest the beliefs that he's arguing against. I think you do see a version of it from anti-CCP Chinese nationalists like the people behind Shen Yun. You also see a less angry version of it as an orientalist cliché from non-Chinese sci-fi writers and the like (I'm thinking of Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age in particular). In the latter version, even the "neon signs and sexy girls in qipao and Nationalist soldiers and triad gangsters with dragon tattoos" are seen as somehow "fake"; it's the "kung fu and Confucian officials in flowing robes and badass Three Kingdoms soldiers and moon gates and mountain temples" that are imagined to be the "real" China that would return if the CCP went away. Silver2195 fucked around with this message at 03:15 on Feb 19, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
Returning to an imagined golden age through extermination of the subversive degenerates and their legacy is pretty standard fascism. Ironically it's kinda the opposite of the treatment of Russia; a post-Communist Russia that isn't the USSR isn't something that the world's ruling class can internalise as 'real'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 11:20
|
|