Heithinn Grasida posted:

Other people have already talked about it, but Biden can’t not say that without opening himself up to attacks about being too friendly with China. A negative opinion of China is one of the only things both parties agree on in the US, so any mainstream politician will have to say things like this if directly asked by a journalist. I don’t know if Biden would have wanted to say that on his own, but once the journalist asked him directly, he pretty much had to, particularly given his vulnerability in recent polling.

Stringent posted:

It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice.

socialsecurity posted:

So China has less information control then the US?

Neurolimal posted:

It's a matter of soft influence vs. hard influence, and who controls global cultural trends. If you can exert enough soft influence and hold a monopoly on acceptable discourse, then you don't need to exert hard influence, and in fact your soft influence may be far better at defusing unrest & unacceptable thought than hard influence would; you don't need to ban dissent on Israel if even the most """""neutral"""" news organizations will fire you for attending a pro-Palestine rally in college. You don't need to ban unflattering depictions of the US military if Pentagon approval is all but necessary to depict them in any cost-effective way. You don't need to censor anti-police stories if you have an overwhelming multimillion dollar industry that adores Good Cop stories.

And there is no opposing cultural powerhouse contesting any of that.

We have also seen the result when this soft influence buckles under unrest and pressure; hard influence emerges. Assassinations, brutality, censorship. Fred Hampton folk die. Communist parties are banned. Racial protests are put down. Al Jazeera's get blocked. For all its bravado, free thought and expression has its boundaries, and will be severely punished for crossing them.

The USSR didn't have this cultural dominance, and so exerted hard influence upon its states (and we saw that crumbling before the power of the global culture by the end). China, which has defined much of its evolution by the USSR's failures, has only further fortified its hard influence, while also financially incentivizing foreign studios to provide censored editions of globally funded & influenced art.

All this is to say, I'm not particularly surprised when China censors art, it's a tool for cultural control they possess, and states will always look for methods to control its citizens' acceptable views. Perhaps one day China will have amassed enough global cultural power that these hard measures become obsolete, and they adopt a more western approach. I imagine they'd approach it with caution, keeping in mind how the soviet bloc was devoured.

E:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwDrHqNZ9lo

Stringent posted:

It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice.

Neurolimal posted:

They have more blunt information control, but by not conditioning a tolerance nor release into the public, they've made that information more dangerous & valuable. Hard power to stifle dissent is significantly less effective than soft power. I've argued something along these lines before:

Ogmius815 posted:

Holy lol. Do DPRK next.

je1 healthcare posted:

Yes, and it was wrong last time too. Artists don't need Pentagon approval to depict the military in a non-flattering or critical way because being able to borrow the latest jet fighters isn't remotely necessary to tell such a story (and they've sometimes supported such stories anyway).

quote:

China still censors despite also having all the same soft power influences within their own borders, such as a massive entertainment industry propping up Good Cop stories.

Neurolimal posted:

Studios making large films which catch the most American eyes are not going to spend millions of dollars on developing props or CGI planes of still-shot quality if they can instead pay one writer to address the military's grievances with a script. You can argue "well, cheap studios can do it anyways!" But they are not going to get the lion share of the American public's focus. Top Gun 2 & The Avengers will.

MarcusSA posted:

I feel like you are intentionally glossing over the point that it can actually can be done where in China it’s not possible at all.

Nenonen posted:

Ah yes. It doesn't matter if muslims are being sent to re-education camps as long as the trains taking them there run on time.

BUUNNI posted:

If I had a say in it I’d rather be sent to a reeducation camp than experience my entire family and thousands of others get destroyed by American bombs

Neurolimal posted:

Studios making large films which catch the most American eyes are not going to spend millions of dollars on developing props or CGI planes of still-shot quality if they can instead pay one writer to address the military's grievances with a script. You can argue "well, cheap studios can do it anyways!" But they are not going to get the lion share of the American public's focus. Top Gun 2 & The Avengers will.

Neurolimal posted:

I did not take the stance that China is inherently virtuous on the subject. My point was that the dissemination of information happens because the state is confident that it will not rock the boat outside acceptable channels. Massive untold atrocities on behalf of the state in America, United Kingdom, Israel, Australia, Canada, etcetera are far more likely to result in the disposal of disposable politicians than actual massive state reform. Put another way; imagine if, during any of the US-backed color revolutions, instead of dismantling Communism the reactionary groups instead voted for Tito But He Likes Apartheid South Africa. Or, say, after Bush killed 1 million Iraqis we retaliated by voting in Reagan But A Black American.

Within this context, the application of hard power is an admission that the state does not have the cultural productions and legislative voodoo to diffuse civil unrest. I would not be surprised if this is being debated or will be debated in the near future in China; whether or not heavy-handed censorship protects a China with a significant cultural reach, or implies weakness when they censor films & delete social media posts in a world where citizens are easily capable of using VPN's and learning that China doesn't want them to see certain things.

GoutPatrol posted:

Yes the more that comes out, Ko just looks dumber and dumber.

quote:

However, on Friday, an examination of the six polls revealed discrepancies in the margin of error and survey methodologies. The KMT claimed that Hou received five points, while Ko received one point. The TPP, however, insisted it was a tie, per CNA. As a result, the two parties will engage in further consultations to resolve the disagreement.

quote:

The sense of guilt around the persecution of the Jewish people has been, at times, transferred to offset the Arab world. Financially, culturally, and in terms of media influence, the Jewish community has had a significant presence in the United States. The annual $3bn aid package to Israel has, for decades, been touted as one of the most valuable investments the United States has ever made. This partnership is often described as one of shared destiny.

quote:

“Curators typically attribute such cancellations to unspecified reasons, assuming understanding without explicit communication,” he said. “This time, in the so-called free world since 2015, the abrupt cancellation is perplexing due to its unclear rationale, reminiscent of ‘reasons you know.’ Notably, several galleries globally, around three or four, faced recent exhibition cancellations, all shrouded in ambiguous circumstances. This trend underscores the gravity and scope of the situation across diverse geographical origins.”

Spending his early childhood in a labor camp alongside his father, the late Chinese poet Ai Qing, the artist grew up to become a major critic of China’s ruling Communist Party. He paid for his dissent with prison time, ongoing persecution, and a life in exile. In 2011, a few weeks before he was arrested in a Beijing airport and detained for 81 days without charges, China’s Ullens Center for Contemporary Art canceled an exhibition by the artist under pressure from government officials.

“I grew up in a Communist Party era where my father, a writer, endured a ban for over 20 years, facing far graver consequences,” Ai told Hyperallergic. “Our existence has consistently been viewed as oppositional to the regime, the nation, and even the people. This kind of canceling under the Cultural Revolution not only negates political and cultural influence but also erases one’s life; under this circumstance, hundreds of thousands of people lost their lives.”

In 2016, Ai filmed in Gaza for his documentary about the global refugee crisis, Human Flow (2017). He is also said to have shown sympathy for the Palestinian cause.

“While the suddenness is jarring, it doesn’t astonish me; what does surprise me is the application of violent means in today’s ostensibly democratic and free society to suppress cultural expression,” the artist said. “If culture is a form of soft power, this represents a method of soft violence aimed at stifling voices. It’s not directed solely at me but at the broader culture of a society lacking a spiritual immune system.”

He continued: “When a society cannot withstand diverse voices, it teeters on the brink of collapse. I am committed to voicing my perspective. The works to be exhibited at Lisson Gallery are inherently political, entwined with contemporary global cultural politics. The irony lies in staging such an exhibition precisely when art is most crucial for expressing alternative perspectives. Yet, self-censorship robs artists of this vital opportunity, a poignant contradiction in a time demanding diverse voices.”

When asked if he’s reconsidering his future with Lisson Gallery, the artist replied: “I don’t have any plans. It’s very hard to have any plans. Everything is quite uncertain … It very much depends on their decision.”

mawarannahr posted:

The discussion on art and speech has been interesting given recent developments. Artists must tread carefully around political topics around the world, as Ai Weiwei has found out. His London exhibit was cancelled following a tweet he made about Israel.

Alchenar posted:

Even that article doesn't seriously attempt to equivocate between 'be careful or people might not want to associate with you' and 'be careful or you will spend 80 days in prison without charge and then exiled'.

quote:

“While the suddenness is jarring, it doesn’t astonish me; what does surprise me is the application of violent means in today’s ostensibly democratic and free society to suppress cultural expression,” the artist said. “If culture is a form of soft power, this represents a method of soft violence aimed at stifling voices. It’s not directed solely at me but at the broader culture of a society lacking a spiritual immune system.”

Alchenar posted:

First they came for the people who suggested that Jewish minorities in countries exert substantial control over their foreign policy and I said 'yeah that seems appropriate'.

i fly airplanes posted:

What does this have to do with China?

mawarannahr posted:

It is relevant as a comment on the statements of a Chinese dissident artist. The statements do have antisemitic content, and freedom of expression has its limits. His comparison of using violent means and soft power means to suppress expression, as someone who has experienced them, is germane to the discussion at hand and to the topic of China being discussed here in an international context.

Benagain posted:

In every single us election I have been told to ignore atrocities committed by my own government because the other party would be worse. The democratically elected president is sending billions of dollars to help another democratically elected government commit a genocide right now, and also is continuing to be lovely about every issue I care about. If you're from the US and vote for pretty much anybody in power after this you're directly complicit in something unambiguously worse than the worst case scenarios about xinjiang

Nenonen posted:

China is probably indirectly complicit in plenty enough poo poo outside China too.

Bald Stalin posted:

What are China's top 3 atrocities outside China? Just want to level set vs. the US's war crimes.

Nenonen posted:

It seems like you didn't read what you replied to, Mr. Stalin?

Nenonen posted:

China is probably indirectly complicit in plenty enough poo poo outside China too.

But mainly the point is that Xi is a dictator and trying to deny it is weird and trying to portray dictatorships as the superior system is even weirder. Can you imagine what USA would be like under one party strongman?

Bald Stalin posted:

You quoted someone saying that the US expects citizens to support their government despite it commiting atrocities. I must have misunderstood. What did you mean? Edit: and please leave the thinly veiled posting about posters out of your replies.

tractor fanatic posted:

Whether Xi is a dictator or just the stronger-than-Hu leader of a Leninist Party-State would require more knowledge of the inner workings of the CCP than anyone here is privy to. It's also pointless hair splitting when the issue is that the most base level of diplomacy is that you avoid name-calling. Xi could just as truthfully call Biden doddering and senile but that would be exactly as pointless and stupid.

je1 healthcare posted:

I think the point was Biden answering a direct question from a reporter about whether Xi is a dictator, of which denying it would have burned domestic support among both parties. There may be a middling non-answer that could have avoiding offending anyone, but I'm not savvy enough to come up with one. Apparently neither is Biden

je1 healthcare posted:

I think the point was Biden answering a direct question from a reporter about whether Xi is a dictator, of which denying it would have burned domestic support among both parties. There may be a middling non-answer that could have avoiding offending anyone, but I'm not savvy enough to come up with one. Apparently neither is Biden

tractor fanatic posted: