|
Yep I was really hopeful for China before Xi. He really is poison.
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 17:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:40 |
|
|
Phigs posted:Yeah this doesn't feel like China embracing fascism, it feels like the continued ebb and flow of cultural controls it's been going through for decades. There was a view that China was opening up and changing its ways and this would seem like a big shift from that perspective, but to me this just feels like media coming back under conservative focus after getting a bit of a run under more liberal oversight. I suppose it doesn't feel like embracing fascism if you ignore the last decade of increasing international political belligerence, consolidation of political power & removal of term limits, cultivation of a personality cult, gigantic military buildup, several border disputes being escalated, attempted annexation of the entire regional sea, promotion of ethno-nationalism, domestic suppression/extermination of minorities, etc. Pushing traditional ideas of family/gender/culture is a small factor compared to many of the above but definitely on brand. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Sep 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 17:57
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:I suppose it doesn't feel like embracing fascism if you ignore the last decade of increasing international political belligerence, consolidation of political power & removal of term limits, cultivation of a personality cult, gigantic military buildup, several border disputes being escalated, attempted annexation of the entire regional sea, promotion of ethno-nationalism, domestic suppression/extermination of minorities, etc. Yeah that’s where I don’t understand the argument that it isn’t fascistic. Like, they are doing everything in the playbook.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
therobit posted:Yeah that’s where I don’t understand the argument that it isn’t fascistic. Like, they are doing everything in the playbook. I even forgot to mention the crackdown and expansion of control in Hong Kong (for basically no reason - they just had to wait) and leaning hard into revanchism ala the 100 years of humiliation narrative. It really is like they've just got a checklist and are working to check every box to make sure nobody is confused about what's going on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
therobit posted:Yeah that’s where I don’t understand the argument that it isn’t fascistic. Like, they are doing everything in the playbook. What is occurring that is in the fascist playbook but not in the communist authoritarian playbook? poo poo can be bad without using lazy emotive labels
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 19:00
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Just ban all micro-transactions. What would be lost. Is basically all cell phones game now. You would lose a entire industry. You can't do that ... fast, but you can push the industry in that direction so if find new bussines model. Or thats how I see things. I am not a high ranking politician in a country. How are u posted:Yep I was really hopeful for China before Xi. He really is poison. The problem with dictators, strongmen, kings and emperors is that even if the current one is good, what about the next one?, once a country is ruled by dictators, theres a ticking clock until the country is run by a idiot that is going to drive the whole country into the ground. Is not a good system to have all the power concentrated in one person hands. That and fights for power, I guess. Oh, and the dictator surrounding himself by yesmen and living in a ivory power, far from the reality of the country. A country is too big a thing to be driven by a single person. Tei fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Sep 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 20:14
|
|
|
Daduzi posted:What is occurring that is in the fascist playbook but not in the communist authoritarian playbook? It can be compared to both, I think, with similarities to historical horror shows on both ends of the horseshoe. Either way, things are changing rapidly and it's not an entirely unfair comparison. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Sep 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
Well, the explicitly fascist thing is elsewhere in Xi's policies where Han nationalism is being pushed and at least one other ethnicity is getting cleansed, but I guess that's not specifically part of the media policies for now. Maybe it'll get more prominent with further clarifications as to what doesn't count as "immoral" content.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
Tei posted:Is basically all cell phones game now. You would lose a entire industry. I see only positives.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
Phigs posted:Yeah this doesn't feel like China embracing fascism, it feels like the continued ebb and flow of cultural controls it's been going through for decades. There was a view that China was opening up and changing its ways and this would seem like a big shift from that perspective, but to me this just feels like media coming back under conservative focus after getting a bit of a run under more liberal oversight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoEoNk1mHTA&t=3024s Conservative, yes. There are also some (not great) patriotic war films that have been coming out and receiving heavy promotion. If you read the WikiLeaks cables, there's a source that was describing how Xi Jinping is a big fan of American war films ("Saving Private Ryan" is a favorite) and he didn't like some Chinese historical films because they were about "palace intrigue" stories where everything is relative and everyone is corrupt and so forth. But the American war films tended to have a clear division between good guys and bad guys, a strong sense of morality in the story, and he hoped Americans continue making such war films. And there are probably some downsides to that, too, but "Saving Private Ryan" is not a fascist movie, y'know? Another new one... kinda feels like a video game. There's a little slap at the U.S. at the end: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjMkTMq_41k SlothfulCobra posted:Well, the explicitly fascist thing is elsewhere in Xi's policies where Han nationalism is being pushed ronya posted:(I feel that there's a tendency of modern Very Online left-wing discourse to whitewash past leftisms into formulations that our left-wing politics a century later would approve of - cherrypicking irrelevant tendencies or intelligentsia experiments as predecessors of an teleological triumph of the New Left, and then the New New Left of today, in a line of unbroken intellectual descent. Which is really too bad, and we can see why in this thread - folks struggle to locate what is (in historic comparison) a relatively light-touch campaign on a new medium of mass-media cultural content - as Phigs says, merely one of an ebb and flow that has gone on for decades; not merely in post-revolutionary China but in every socialist discourse. Contemporary Western socialist discourse is inveterately neoliberalized and inherits its priorities on cultural engineering but that is hardly a universal.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL1fVdyIlCw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbW8U4VfgTM BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Sep 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 04:11
|
|
|
Tei posted:The problem with dictators, strongmen, kings and emperors is that even if the current one is good, what about the next one?, once a country is ruled by dictators, theres a ticking clock until the country is run by a idiot that is going to drive the whole country into the ground. Is not a good system to have all the power concentrated in one person hands. That and fights for power, I guess. Oh, and the dictator surrounding himself by yesmen and living in a ivory power, far from the reality of the country. A country is too big a thing to be driven by a single person. I'll put my hand up as being an idealistic kid in the 80s and 90s, looking to China and going, "Wow, look what a single strong leader can do!" Now I look at China today and go, "Oh dear god. Look at what a single strong leader can do." Oh my god, do you really think Xi Jinping would do that? Just put out a press release and lie? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 05:04
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:I think the CCP also just prefers modernism. The whole mode of expression feels very modernist. Honestly, PLA military propaganda feels like the Allies in World War II. I think this can seem really strange or "backwards" or conservative (although it might be that) though from the perspective of a very postmodern online left in Europe or North America. If you read old copies of the Daily Worker in the 1920s, they would begin an article about Bela Kun describing him as the "heroic champion of the proletariat." Honestly, the only people in America that seem to embody this spirit today are some Black Lives Matter activists chanting "we have a duty to fight for our freedom," because who else is talking about duty? I feel that conflates some distinctions of degree... the heroic style in Soviet reporting receded from fashion post-destalinization - IIRC one can compare late Soviet Chernobyl-era reporting for a more somber style even despite a similar "rally around the flag" national mood absent that (relatively extreme) degree of exhortation, some level of state-organized celebrations of military and civic accomplishments can arguably be put down to domestic tradition. A hypothetical liberal China would probably still put on some military parades. For example, here is India: https://twitter.com/prodefgau/status/1353211432146501632 (I love that coronavirus vaccine float) or Taiwan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5O9HyaHZucE or France:  FWIW, that said, I fully agree that there is a change in the aesthetic of the Western left as it transitioned from the vanguardist (old) left to the New Left. Modernism against post-modernism, as you say. Not necessarily around parades and mass symbology as such, but over the concept of political decisions to shape popular and civic culture in "rational" directions, which the old left enthusiastically partook in but the new left regarded with more than a little suspicion. The twists of history being what they are, for whatever reason said very online Western left discourse has circled all the way back to feeling obliged to debate the CCP line in particular: we feel obliged to seriously weigh whether its cultural campaigns have some respectable left-wing basis. We don't extend this to any number of other notionally left-wing, developing-world parties! But: it's whether that basis is consistent with our own postmodernized, and additionally neoliberalized, notions of the good (e.g., notice the debate upthread pitches in terms of whether corporate influence is mitigated - we tacitly assume that, absent corporate influence, states shouldn't/wouldn't actively engage in cultural production, or at least we would politely collectively pretend that all of it is spontaneous grassroots acclamations - obviously this is not the tenor of the domestic debate in the pages of Xinhua. Would any major Chinese firm be consciously or even proudly non-Party and non-national? Hardly so). This is not the political context of the CCP, it's our reflection of our own political anxieties. ronya fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Sep 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 07:07
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:It'd certainly be something if China's new media crackdowns led to the US restarting its pop culture grants for specifically the types of media that China wants to stamp out, like how during the Cold War and Soviets were trying to tamp down on abstract art in favor of realism, the US government sponsored some more abstract stuff. The key difference is that the PRC is a major source of profit for American media companies, having almost 2 Billion consumers. So what we're actually seeing is the opposite: Hollywood is twisting themselves into knots trying to placate Chinese censors so they don't get kicked out of the market. Notice how few major movies have the PRC as villains, and how American stars are doing weird poo poo like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z88zeQ25pjQ Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 15:24 on Sep 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 14:53
|
|
|
Woke up to this grim news. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1442365974284537857?s=20 China will reduce the number of abortions performed for “non-medical purposes”, the country’s cabinet announced in new guidelines issued on Monday. The state council said action would also be taken to avoid unwanted pregnancies and to encourage men to “share responsibility” in preventing them. Authorities aim to improve sex education and strengthen post-abortion and post-childbirth family planning services, the ruling body added. “The basic national policy of gender equality and the principle of giving priority to children need to be implemented in depth,” said Huang Xiaowei, deputy director of the State Council’s National Working Committee on Women and Children. Health authorities warned in 2018 that the use of abortion to end unwanted pregnancies was harmful to women’s bodies and risked causing infertility. China has already enacted strict measures aimed at preventing sex-selective abortions, which have been criticised for contributing to gender inequality. After years of trying to limit population growth, Beijing is pledging policies aimed at encouraging larger families. It said in June it would now allow all couples to have three children instead of two, while policies designed to reduce the financial burden of raising children are also being introduced. It wasn’t immediately clear whether Monday’s measures were designed to address China’s declining birth rate, which thinktanks and policy researchers have identified as one of its major social policy challenges in the coming decades. Although China remains the world’s most populous nation, the latest census showed population growth from 2011 to 2020 was the slowest since the 1950s. The population is expected to start to decline within a few years. National Health Commission data showed that between 2014 and 2018, there had been an average of 9.7 million abortions per year, rising about 51% from the 2009-2013 average despite a relaxation of family-planning policies in 2015 to allow each family to have two children. The data didn’t specify how many abortions were for medical reasons. The drift towards more limits on abortion has been under way for several years. Jiangxi province issued guidelines in 2018 stipulating that women more than 14 weeks pregnant must have signed approval from three medical professionals before having a termination.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
What is a "non-medical purpose" abortion? Sex-selection?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 15:46
|
|
|
"I hosed but can't raise a baby" abortions, aka a basic human right
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:"I hosed but can't raise a baby" abortions, aka a basic human right Oh poo poo, that sounds bad. Do you have a link that clarifies?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
I'll split the baby and suggest maybe its a little bit of column A and a little bit of column B.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 16:03
|
|
|
As we've seen in the United States, there's absolutely a slippery slope when it comes to limiting abortion access. Especially when your country is run in part by a bunch of reactionary conservative old men, as is true in both the US and in China.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 16:09
|
|
|
Devils advocate. With what we've seen in the US and other countries in which the media has been a key player in spreading fake news or echo chambering conspiracy theories (vaccines etc) resulting in real harm to the society, is there in legitimate need for more control on the media?
GlassEye-Boy fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Sep 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
non-story there I think - english-language summary: http://english.www.gov.cn/policies/latestreleases/202109/27/content_WS61516ea9c6d0df57f98e0f0f.html - it's the announcement of the new ten year plan on women's policies and children's policies the full programme is here: http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2021-09/27/content_5639412.htm quote:6．提高妇女生殖健康水平。普及生殖道感染、性传播疾病等疾病防控知识。在学校教育不同阶段以多种形式开展科学、实用的健康教育，促进学生掌握生殖健康知识，提高自我保护能力。增强男女两性性道德、性健康、性安全意识，倡导共担避孕责任。将生殖健康服务融入妇女健康管理全过程，保障妇女享有避孕节育知情自主选择权。落实基本避孕服务项目，加强产后和流产后避孕节育服务，提高服务可及性，预防非意愿妊娠。推进婚前医学检查、孕前优生健康检查、增补叶酸等婚前孕前保健服务更加公平可及。减少非医学需要的人工流产。加强对女性健康安全用品产品的质量保障。规范不孕不育症诊疗服务。规范人类辅助生殖技术应用。 gtranslate quote:6. Improve women's reproductive health. Popularize knowledge on the prevention and control of diseases such as reproductive tract infections and sexually transmitted diseases. Carry out scientific and practical health education in various forms at different stages of school education to promote students to master the knowledge of reproductive health and improve their self-protection ability. Enhance the awareness of sexual ethics, sexual health, and safety of both men and women, and advocate shared responsibility for contraception. Integrate reproductive health services into the whole process of women’s health management to ensure that women enjoy the informed and independent right to choose contraception and birth control. Implement basic contraceptive service projects, strengthen postpartum and post-abortion contraception and birth control services, improve service accessibility, and prevent unwanted pregnancy. The promotion of pre-marital medical examinations, pre-pregnancy health check-ups, and supplementation of folic acid, such as pre-marital pre-pregnancy health care services, will be more fair and accessible. Reduce non-medical abortion. Strengthen the quality assurance of women's health and safety products. Standardize infertility diagnosis and treatment services. Standardize the application of human assisted reproductive technology. but every ten year plan has likewise pledged to reduce the rate of induced abortions; that's not new. You can go back to the 2011 plan and the 2001 plans and see exactly the same thing there are new elements relating to ideological blather - e.g. now every item 1 on each list is related to Xi Jinping Thought on the New Era of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and the technocratic quantitative targets are demoted to item five or six (this is concretely what commentators are referring to when they say that Xi is newly ideological). I'm not kidding here, item 1 on Women's Education is now political education, item 1 on Family Development is socialist core values, item 1 on Environmental Pollution is also socialist core values, etc. But from a quick scan through I don't see any specifically abortion related hot buttons (probably someone more familiar with contemporary debates in Chinese feminism could pick out some of the subtleties - but I certainly couldn't) ronya fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Sep 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
I'm struggling to see the policy goal in the video game, streaming, cartoon, and cell phone app restrictions that have all been rapidly implemented under Xi. Generally, the answer would be "to get a foot in the door to give the government the authority to control media," but the government already has the authority to control the various restricted media. Xi also had many years to address cartoons, streaming services, cell phone apps, and video games. But, he never made any changes on this level. And now he's implementing changes to all of them at once. It is kind of darkly hilarious that the Chinese Communist Party and American Evangelicals now share the belief that abortions cause breast cancer, infertility, brain damage, and strokes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
GlassEye-Boy posted:Devils advocate. With what we've seen in the US and other countries in which the media has been a key player in spreading fake news or echo chambering conspiracy theories (vaccines etc) resulting in real harm to the society, is there in legitimate need for more control on the media? I'd say only in the sense of limiting how much of the media one person/company can own. And probably introducing a well funded non-profit alternative. Beyond that, there's next to no scenario where regulation on information content ends well. What's needed is more education funding and more focus on media literacy. Garbage being out there is less of a problem if people can recognise it's garbage. Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I'm struggling to see the policy goal in the video game, streaming, cartoon, and cell phone app restrictions that have all been rapidly implemented under Xi. "Some old fart in Beijing has a pet peeve and it's seen as unimportant enough to let him have at it" is always a possible explanation. Daduzi fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Sep 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 17:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I'm struggling to see the policy goal in the video game, streaming, cartoon, and cell phone app restrictions that have all been rapidly implemented under Xi. They're treating the symptoms of rampant capitalism without addressing the underlying issues of social alienation. It's the same story: they don't want the youth to spend all their time on phone games or expressing themselves personally, but they're terrible at building an environment that promotes the alternatives.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 17:17
|
|
|
Yup. Rather than "address the social, economic, and climate factors that are keeping young people from starting families and having multiple children" it's just "clamp down on abortion". Not like this type of problem solving is unique to China, it's bad everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 17:30
|
|
|
GlassEye-Boy posted:Devils advocate. With what we've seen in the US and other countries in which the media has been a key player in spreading fake news or echo chambering conspiracy theories (vaccines etc) resulting in real harm to the society, is there in legitimate need for more control on the media? My truth: Things start to going bad when you introduce algorithm that control what people see. Facebook was not has toxic when it was your friends walls, before it started selecting posts to present controversial (aka post that generate a more visceral reaction, aka more clicks, aka more profit) over any random comment from your friends. I am some humble nobody from a third rate country, but I think nuking these type of algorithms from orbit would be enough. Of course the dificult part is how to write the law to do so. On usa the radicalization of the right is a wide and deep enough fenomenom that the problem is visible to everyone. Social networks where bad before, but now the network itself has introduce itself in the talk between persons to select the trash stuff and has done so in a way that is invisible to the participants. Us human beings are easy prey to disinformation and bias information. Like, if people with red hats crimes are reported more than people with other type of hats, we could end sincerelly thinking that red hats people are more prone to crime. Is how our brain works, perhaps how any brain work. So something need to be done, but it don't need to be to close networks, but to ban the use of algorithm to select content for the user.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 17:45
|
|
|
ronya posted:non-story there I think - english-language summary: [url]http://english.https://www.gov.cn/policies/latestreleases/202109/27/content_WS61516ea9c6d0df57f98e0f0f.html[/url] - it's the announcement of the new ten year plan on women's policies and children's policies Seems like they're expanding access to contraceptives and women's health care services, not limiting access to abortion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 17:52
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:What is a "non-medical purpose" abortion? Sex-selection?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:01
|
|
|
for comparison, the 2011 programme: http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2011-08/08/content_1920457.htm
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:07
|
|
|
GlassEye-Boy posted:Devils advocate. With what we've seen in the US and other countries in which the media has been a key player in spreading fake news or echo chambering conspiracy theories (vaccines etc) resulting in real harm to the society, is there in legitimate need for more control on the media? There may be a need to clamp down on news stories that are wildly false, but that's worlds away from clamping down on fiction to attempt to broadly eliminate various philosophies, opinions, mindsets, and personalities. Who gets to decide which news stories count as untrue is a whole thing of its own as well. China already has a longstanding practice of trying to erase facts it doesn't want people to know about, like the time that they murdered a couple thousand people for demanding democracy. There's even some things that they oscillate on whether they're allowed to be talked about between various sources and censors.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:15
|
|
|
Cefte posted:My first reaction was this could have been a 'medical versus surgical' misread, but looking at Ronya's text, that wasn't the case. That said, 'improve contraception access and efficacy to reduce abortion rates' is an entirely banal plank in reproductive healthcare policy shared across most of the developed world, e.g. here. It's an interesting case study as to how the media treats non-white government policies. Those two headlines couldn't be more different despite how similar the actual stories seem to be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I'm struggling to see the policy goal in the video game, streaming, cartoon, and cell phone app restrictions that have all been rapidly implemented under Xi. Morrow posted:They're treating the symptoms of rampant capitalism without addressing the underlying issues of social alienation. It's the same story: they don't want the youth to spend all their time on phone games or expressing themselves personally, but they're terrible at building an environment that promotes the alternatives. I think these takes do not give sufficient credit for the prc's stated plan for the path to socialism all the way back to Deng. Now, I do think that there is a decent argument to be made that those carrying out deng's reforms were making a genuine attempt to fully liberalize the prc's economy and only with the arrival of Xi have the more communist-minded party officials taken back control. But fundamentally, the prc's stated plan has been to allow capitalism to exist within its country only as long as the CPC maintains the final authority on its actions. If we presume that Xi is rolling back liberalizations of the market, then these sort of targeted restrictions make sense to curtail the power of capitalists within the prc without causing them to flee the country with their capital. Slowly boiling the frog, if you would. (though i would add that obviously there is a degree of cultural chauvinism mixed in with the restrictions on types of content specifically) ronya posted:I feel that conflates some distinctions of degree... the heroic style in Soviet reporting receded from fashion post-destalinization - IIRC one can compare late Soviet Chernobyl-era reporting for a more somber style even despite a similar "rally around the flag" national mood regarding this point in particular, the global left has experienced profound defeats of electoral progress towards socialism in recent years, and i think many have begun to regard the prc as the one remaining challenger to the absolute hegemony of capitalism. as a result of this, many leftists are going to self-censor criticism of the prc's actions, even the ones clearly born out of chauvinism, out of a desire to see them succeed in this endeavor or just straight up due to heavy pro-prc bias How are u posted:Yup. Rather than "address the social, economic, and climate factors that are keeping young people from starting families and having multiple children" it's just "clamp down on abortion". my dude, can you not read the posts in this thread? the restrictions on abortion headline was straight-up fake news A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Sep 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 21:00
|
|
|
How are u posted:Yup. Rather than "address the social, economic, and climate factors that are keeping young people from starting families and having multiple children" it's just "clamp down on abortion". Seems like China at least in it's statement that everyone is posting about is trying to do the exact opposite of what your claiming and reducing abortions by addressing social and material factors that cause people to have abortions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:It's an interesting case study as to how the media treats non-white government policies. Those two headlines couldn't be more different despite how similar the actual stories seem to be. It's basically a given that any western/English reporting, for real ANY REPORTING, about Asia has a 90% to be either complete bullshit, framed incredibly deceptively, or taking a niche/limited phenomenon and presenting it as widespread. Like every goddamn time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 23:12
|
|
|
LimburgLimbo posted:It's basically a given that any western/English reporting, for real ANY REPORTING, about Asia has a 90% to be either complete bullshit, framed incredibly deceptively, or taking a niche/limited phenomenon and presenting it as widespread. So, like all other for-profit reporting about any given topic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
LimburgLimbo posted:It's basically a given that any western/English reporting, for real ANY REPORTING, about Asia has a 90% to be either complete bullshit, framed incredibly deceptively, or taking a niche/limited phenomenon and presenting it as widespread. That's a bit much. There are good western, English language reporting sources on China/Asia, though they tend to be more niche outlets like SupChina, and some individual correspondents are good (though fewer and fewer in China thanks to the current environment for foreign correspondents).
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/kevtellier/status/1441774309652025346 a long but very interesting thread on the ideology motivating the CPC in particular, it views Xi as spending a great deal of effort reversing Hu's policies of rapid liberalization of the economy, but also pointing out that Xi is unlike Mao because he follows Deng's principle that political reform cannot precede economic reform. i think the thread is pretty illuminating and and lays out a very good analysis of the actual ideology and beliefs guiding the CPC's actions A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Sep 28, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:21
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I'm struggling to see the policy goal in the video game, streaming, cartoon, and cell phone app restrictions that have all been rapidly implemented under Xi. Dictatorships almost always grow in paranoia and reactionary cultural preservation against "degeneracy" as control is consolidated into condition of having a true dictator or close-knit autocratic power group. It seems that the people who end up standing on top at the end of the process of total consolidation of power into a single office — and thus end up with the true power to personally command the initiatives and intent of the government as a single individual — strongly self-select for these kinds of desires or tendencies. Then they just get weirder with age.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 07:08
|
|
|
Daduzi posted:That's a bit much. There are good western, English language reporting sources on China/Asia, though they tend to be more niche outlets like SupChina, and some individual correspondents are good (though fewer and fewer in China thanks to the current environment for foreign correspondents). I would be cool to know more about my planet, where China is an important part of it, in population size and territory and economic importante. Checked that SupChina site, but.... all the news seems to have a positive spin, that make me think is an official propaganda site. That leave me a bit dissapointed. Maybe I am wrong, I only checked it for a few minutes...
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 07:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:40 |
|
|
Tei posted:I would be cool to know more about my planet, where China is an important part of it, in population size and territory and economic importante. ....it's a new York based paper founded by the daughter of a former us diplomat to china. I just think you're not used to news that is spun with a negative view of China
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 08:24
|
|