• r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I wonder if it has anything to do with PRC’s punishment towards citizens who have been critical of their government. Who knows man.

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      Again, unfalsifiable nonsense, both A and the opposite of A are proof that China bad, no need for evidence.

      What’s more, why do they have to be critical? What are they missing from their lives? Their government actually works lmao. More than 700 million pulled out of poverty, corrupt officials at all levels get jailed or executed, most young people own their house, everyone has a job and very cheap food and cultural activities, as well as the best public transit in the world and well maintained infrastructure, not to mention billionaires keep their fucking mouths shut unless it is to pay lip service to the people’s government.

      You know who punishes their citizens, verifiably often and viciously? Say it with me: the USA. The Ferguson protesters were murdered one by one in the following months with no investigation, the occupy wall street organizers were detained by Homeland security, the black panther party was infiltrated and their leaders murdered by police whether openly or covertly, the Gaza protests had students beaten, arrested and tried en masse and the US passes new surveillance and protest crackdown laws every other day it seems.

      And, on the opposite side, what good does “being allowed to be critical” do, in and of itself? About 30% of Americans approve of the government at any given time, corrupt officials are openly insider trading, passing laws for bribes that they don’t even have to hide, and big business is allowed to KILL YOU FOR PROFIT.

      You liberals are delusional, you buy that you live in the best country ever and shit is almost impossible to change for the better and assume the rest of us must have it so much worse, facts be damned.

      • Krauerking@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        18 hours ago

        There are people upset enough with Chinese imperialism and rule that they light themselves on fire in the neighboring country as a way to try and get attention and assistance.
        That doesn’t come from nowhere even if it’s not a majority.

        Multiple things can be true such as different governments can be each doing their own form of abuse. It doesn’t excuse one to admit to the other and there can be positives to all relationships.

        Be upset with what you have and what’s around you but don’t use that to imagine a fantasy of greener grass on the other side of the fence. Do it to will a better existence around you.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Chinese imperialism

          lmao, libs co opting revolutionary language without understanding a single fucking thing about it will never not be funny to me

          • Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Yeah not a liberal and what would you call predatory loans to Africa and export systems of raw goods, or the annexation of Tibet, or the threatened annexation of Taiwan, or the skirmishes in the late 80s for the “South China Sea” which mainly cover reefs that have now been over fished, or even Russian, Tajikistan and Vietnamese land as recently as 2009?

            A word you think belonging to you doesn’t make it wrong to be used just because you don’t like it. It’s not even revolutionary just a Latin root word of ruling used for Napoleon using military to gain other counties support, and has been used in lots of ways by lots of people since.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              15 hours ago

              A red lib or a blue lib is still a lib. Even Bloomberg doesn’t buy the debt trap idiocy lmao. Washington mouthpiece The Atlantic doesn’t either. You want predatory loans? Look at the IMF. China regularly does no-strings-attached loans and regularly forgives hundreds of millions in loans that were interest free in the first place. China has NEVER seized an asset from a debtor. Poor way to do predatory loans, they should ask the US for advice if that’s the endgame.

              Most debt in Africa is held by western banks and the IMF, who demand you strip your economy for parts like the mafia (who probably got the idea from them). In Sri Lanka, the most quoted example, more than 90 percent of debt is owed to Western countries.

              • Krauerking@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                14 hours ago

                Still not a liberal.

                And alright. I understand that other countries are more directly responsible for the economic woes of the world as that is the whole point of them and China is the manufacturer so their issues will be more worker treatment related than economic policy.

                You move on to whatever to protect your point of view. You are on a conquest to be self righteous rather than right.

                My point is don’t seek for other, seek for better. It’s not a golden paradise, just another reality that isn’t perfect, because it’s top busy being a reality.

                  • Krauerking@lemy.lol
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    12 hours ago

                    Not that either.

                    Why is that I must belong to either of those ideologies? Is it so you can have pre conceived notions a our who I must be in the other side?
                    As I if can’t disagree on the minutia and still be in general in agreement?

                    It never ends and it’s never so simple.

      • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        I base my opinion on multiple people I personally know who moved from China to SG, because they were unhappy with the kind of control government maintained over any public criticism. I won’t pretend that I remember all the instances they’ve mentioned, but I know better than to reject the claims of the countries citizen when they have some concerns. I won’t pretend that I know better than the people living in the damned country.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          19 hours ago

          We all know Chinese people, dude, there’s 1.4 billion of them lmao. That doesn’t make you an authority on their opinion and the sample size is negligible to say the least. 95 percent of them, according to Harvard, are happy with the government.

          • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            19 hours ago

            I never claimed to be an authority, and there’s a reason I mentioned it was my opinion.

            And again, it’s not like there could be selection biases in a Harvard study. That absolutely never happens.

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              13 hours ago

              And again, it’s not like there could be selection biases in a Harvard study. That absolutely never happens.

              Jesus dude, just admit that nothing could ever be enough to change your mind.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              19 hours ago

              The only biases that Harvard could pull would be AGAINST the interests of the CPC, that’s the point. You wouldn’t accept a Chinese poll because of racism/chauvinism so I provide overwhelming proof even on your terms and the answer is “em, uh, nu uh”.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      23 hours ago

      The people of the PRC approve of Beijing to a far greater degree than western countries, with an over 90% approval rate. If we ask Harvard themselves about the results of their study, they say “We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. Second, the attitudes of Chinese citizens appear to respond (both positively and negatively) to real changes in their material well-being, which suggests that support could be undermined by the twin challenges of declining economic growth and a deteriorating natural environment.” This directly goes against claims of “social credit” preventing this, moreover the “Orwellian Social Credit System” hinted at doesn’t even exist, at least not in the manner most think it does. Even more overtly, they state "Although state censorship and propaganda are widespread, our survey reveals that citizen perceptions of governmental performance respond most to real, measurable changes in individuals’ material well-being."