this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
267 points (66.8% liked)

Memes

45869 readers
1079 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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 -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] r_se_random -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I have shared some articles on China's crackdown on dissent here. Will you will change your mind after reading them?

https://sh.itjust.works/comment/15587589

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Change my mind that the vast majority of Chinese are happy with their government? Why would your articles cause me to do that?

[–] r_se_random -4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Thanks for admitting that nothing could ever be enough to change your mind.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Lol, you were so eager to drop that, that you didn't even bother to read what I said

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"I won't bother to provide evidence because you don't believe me without evidence"

[–] r_se_random -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ohh wow, look who has appeared. Mr No reply to the original comment. Wonder what he will add to the conversation.

Like usual, it's nothing of value.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Others replied with the evidence you were asking of me, and you blew them off. Were you gonna suddenly read it if it had been me instead of them? I find it unlikely.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

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".

[–] r_se_random -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My friend, you're the one who's actively denying the opinions of the Chinese people I know, while pushing a Harvard study on my face. And then calling me racist/chauvinistic. I am not sure how that helps your case, but I guess just spouting random nonsense is your idea of a conversation.

To help you out, I have taken some time to find some of the articles from the time I was in SG, and cases I discussed. These are the articles.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-64592333

https://www.economist.com/china/what-peng-shuai-reveals-about-one-party-rule/21806441

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/14/dissidents-in-china-detained-and-harassed-as-beijing-prepares-for-party-congress

Most of the people I talked to related with these incidents, and acknowledged that while they may not the be the norm, they're certainly not anomalies. And a lot of people dont come out because the government reacts in such dracnonian ways.

The people I talked to were not representative of all of China, it would be ridiculous to consider that. However, ignoring multiple unrelated people sharing similar stories would be an asinine thing.

If your response is going to be a an aggregate study about economic development, and ask me why would people be unhappy with that, then you need some sort of help to understand that economic freedom is not the only freedom in the world.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He specifically doesn't want to hear anything that doesn't confirm his world view and in being loud about it it's getting him likes from his in-group which he thinks is all he needs and makes him superior.

You can see it in the way he responds to everyone with either the idea they fully agree with him or are deserving of indignation.

Wait till he finds out even his echo chamber doesn't pass the purity test and God forbid he ever fail it himself.

Also I swear the amount of small business owners I know in Singapore who agree they live there for a better life is wild if you know anything about the authoritarian lean of Singapore. Grass is always greener and all that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who gives a shit about purity tests? Y'all are literally all over the thread going "oh but is it perfect? Thought so, tankies".

Also I swear the amount of small business owners I know in Singapore who agree they live there for a better life is wild if you know anything about the authoritarian lean of Singapore.

Maybe because what business owners consider "less authoritarian" is being better able to exploit your workers? I don't know how many different ways one can explain this to you

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You do.

You go around saying anyone that disagrees with you, even on minor details, is a liberal and insisting that China is a fantastic Communist state. You are setting the bar on purity with no room for disagreement ~~without~~ with taking to insults and acting poorly.

The purity is that which you are insisting in others not even on the country. I have not even called you or anyone else in here a tankie once but you insist that I did so it okays you to "react" appropriately.

And how would a local business with a single employee be thinking they could better exploit themselves? Do you not see how you aren't even cooperating in the conversation? You barge in to shout a lot and see the discourse as productive even if it's just loud nonsense.

You don't even know that I have a 10 year work visa in China and have spent a generous amount of time over there, you have no knowledge of my detainment for giving out a VPN nor do you know about my detainment in Singapore for the same thing. There is nuance and more to the world than just one thing such as workers or economics on broad scale, but it's easier for you simplify for the sake of the fantasy you wish to have.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm arguing against people saying that china isn't perfect ant isn't communist because it has billionaires, by pointing out the class character of the state and the political apparatus that regularly clamps down on the capitalists (unlike any capitalist state).

I'm also arguing against libs saying big gubmint bad bc it's too communist. China is a socialist country, I never claimed it's a perfect utopia, you just don't have any angle of attack with facts so you have to put up a fictional one you can throw your "nuanced" platitudes at.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You don't engage with the facts you don't like and only hold up the sources that prove your points. I pulled out facts about citizens self mutilating and you responded with an ad hominem claiming I was using a word that belonged to you rather than engage with the facts.
You blame others for what you are doing.

I have and others in here have been just pointing out other ways that China is not perfect but you ignore those and hold up the Harvard study you have as if it was a silver bullet to finally slay all the mean things people say about the country you apparently love, that won't love you back.

I never claimed it's a perfect utopia,

I'm arguing against people saying that china isn't perfect

You are a hypocrite. We all are but you refuse to see it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Saying that China isn't perfect and isn't communist

What part of this was too hard to understand? I know it's not perfect, it doesn't have to be. That doesn't make it not socialist.

It's legitimacy doesn't come from being perfect, it comes from being overwhelmingly popular with its people, which you ignore while pulling your melodramatics.