• zephyreks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah yes, because American democracy is going so well.

      Who’s interests are the Republicans representing? Who’s interests have the Democrats protected after being in power for 3 years?

      Democracy is meaningless if it doesn’t actually act to benefit the people. After all, the goal of government is to improve the lives of the people over which it governs. All of these experiments into different methods of governance should be evaluated based on how much the quality of lives of the population have improved and how happy the population is with their government.

              • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s not about brains, it’s about the flow of conversation. Everytime someone calls out China on anything there’s always a bunch of people that immediately say “Ah yes because the US–” No one is talking about the US. No one is saying it’s any better. It being a shithole too doesn’t magically make China not one. If that is the only thing you have to say then you don’t actually have an argument, just the vibe that it’s le based epic AES wholesome chungus country and if they do anything wrong it must be propaganda or not actually done by them.

                  • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    followed by USA/capitalism works best and is only system that works (does not)

                    Neither me not the person you were responding to said this. They criticised China on something - you made up the “hence the US is good/only thing that works” line. You just assumed if anyone thinks anything slightly remotely bad about China it’s because they’re an evil idiot liberul!!!. It really is just a reflex for you people no?

        • zephyreks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can find a bad example for any form of government. By any reasonable metric of success, the US government is performing poorly compared to non-democratic countries… Even in terms of freedom of speech, given the prevalence of government and intelligence-funded “independent think tanks” that influence policy in Washington.

          At least most people in Russia and China can distinguish between the truth and the party line.

          • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This not an argument. You can’t respond to “X is doing something wrong” with “OH AS IF Y IS ANY BETTER” when literally no one was talking about Y. You’re just trying to derail the conversation. If you’re going to defend China stick to your guts and defend China, don’t attack completely unrelated countries implying I must think they’re any better, they’re not.

            At least most people in Russia and China can distinguish between the truth and the party line.

            I am sure that most people in the country with the largest censorship firewall in existence know the truth any better. And before you say B-B-B-BUT AMERICA— Yeah they censor shit too. I hate both of them.

            • zephyreks@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The post I was replying to said:

              That’s meaningless if they aren’t democratic

              I get what you mean, but the other guy brought up democracy as if it was the be-all end-all solution. Countries that disprove OP’s point about democracy being the solution are fair game.

              Chinese people know they’re being censored, though. That’s the key difference. They know that the perspectives being presented are, by and large, coherent with national policy and most urban people either know how to flip the firewall or know someone who can - it’s really not that hard. Sure, there is this nationalist block that doesn’t want to do so, but when have right-wing people actually looked at content that doesn’t agree with them, anyway?

              Ask any random American what they think, and they’ll go on and on about freedom of speech and blah blah blah… As if the large media organizations in the US don’t all cite reports from “independent think tanks” that are conspicuously all funded by the same billionaires and manned by “ex”-US intelligence. See: the Atlantic Council. The US has been the world leader in manufacturing consent in a way that China and Russia can’t really match. It’s been impressive to see tbh.

              • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I get what you mean, but the other guy brought up democracy as if it was the be-all end-all solution.

                Yes. No democracy, no support from me. “But the US isn’t democratic!” Which is why I don’t support it either. Not sure if the other guy is the same.

                Countries that disprove OP’s point about democracy being the solution

                No country disproves that democracy is needed. “Benevolent dictators” (all dictators think they’re benevolent) die. If you think a dictatorship is doing well just give it a few years.

                most urban people either know how to flip the firewall or know someone who can - it’s really not that hard.

                “Yes they censor everything, but it’s easy to circumvent!” is not an excuse. How accurate is this really though? Do you have any sources to prove this is the case? Genuinely interested.

                As if the large media organizations in the US don’t all cite reports from “independent think tanks” that are conspicuously all funded by the same billionaires and manned by “ex”-US intelligence.

                Chinese news cite chinese think tanks, both entities funded by the chinese government. How is it any different? Doesn’t China have more billionaires than the US too?

                • zephyreks@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  China doesn’t pretend that their media is unbiased, though. There’s no aura of unbiased media in China. Meanwhile, Facebook’s head of global threat intelligence, is literally a US intelligence plant (and most of the authors on his Meta adversarial threat reports are ex- or current US intelligence). Meta is just the most memorable example, which is why I’m picking on them. Given the algorithmic nature of news delivery nowadays, how much influence would you guess US intelligence has on what news people see?

                  Xiao Qiang at UC Berkeley did a study before the VPN crackdown and estimated that there are about 10 million DAUs (daily active users) of firewall-flipping VPNs in the country. DAU/MAU is usually between 20%-50%, so that gives 20-50 million people with VPN access monthly (2-5% of internet users). Last October, China clamped down on some VPNs, but then the user counts for those VPNs that were still working skyrocketed.

                  Anyway, these numbers are actually really quite high:

                  Bing has 100 million DAUs worldwide. Reddit has about 55 million DAUs worldwide. LinkedIn has about 22 million DAUs in the US. Twitter has about 54 million MAUs in the US. Threads has about 8 million DAUs worldwide (though probably less now, lol). 1-5% penetration of total users in terms of usage is indicative of very high awareness. Other options include using a HK SIM (widely available) and a VPS (harder to setup). I have no idea what kind of market penetration these methods have.

                  • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    China doesn’t pretend that their media is unbiased, though. There’s no aura of unbiased media in China.

                    What they “pretend” to be doesn’t matter, what matters is the thoughts they want to put on the people who read it, why they want to, and how many of them do read it. Any and all state media or state collaborative media tries to paint the state it comes from in a good light. This is not somehow more benevolent or less manipulative when it’s done by China, even if “it’s easy to circumvent” or “people know it’s biased”.

                    Meanwhile, Facebook’s head of global threat intelligence, is literally a US intelligence plant

                    According to its CEO and founder Ren, Huawei’s corporate culture is the same as the culture of the CCP, “and to serve the people wholeheartedly means to be customer-centric and responsible to society.” Ren frequently states that Huawei’s management philosophy and strategy are commercial applications of Maoism.

                    Ren states that in the event of a conflict between Huawei’s business interests and the CCP’s interests, he would “choose the CCP whose interest is to serve the people and all human beings”. Qiao and Marquis observe that company founder Ren is a dedicated communist who seeks to ingrain communist values at Huawei.

                    I wonder if WeChat and TikTok are any different, too.

                    Bing has 100 million DAUs worldwide. Reddit has about 55 million DAUs worldwide. LinkedIn has about 22 million DAUs in the US. Twitter has about 54 million MAUs in the US. Threads has about 8 million DAUs worldwide (though probably less now, lol). 1-5% penetration of total users in terms of usage is indicative of very high awareness.

                    Last October, China clamped down on some VPNs

                    So basically, it’s easy to do, but illegal, but it’s rarely persecuted? That’s a really weird policy.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They literally have above 90 percent approval according to international studies from people as conservative as fucking Harvard University.

      You’re wrong about their institutions but regardless of what you think of their institutions they have a popular mandate, which is how democracies define themselves as legitimate.