catiopatio
Joined 4 years ago
Joined 4 years ago
This is misleading given the severe restrictions on human rights, freedom of speech, and rule of law in an authoritarian regime like China.
Your second false equivalence is in your equating of limited, private content moderation by a social network with systemic human rights abuses by government.
See also: Western Democracy.
Remind me again which government was responsible for the deadliest famine in human history?
The new Measures on the Administration of Internet Religious Information Services came into effect in March, prohibiting individuals or groups from teaching or otherwise propagating religion online without official approval. A widely used Catholic app, CathAssist, shut down in August because it was unable to obtain a license.
Authorities in Jilin province forcibly disappeared human rights lawyer Tang Jitian.
A court in Shandong province held secret trials of prominent legal scholar Xu Zhiyong and human rights lawyer Ding Jiaxi for “subversion.” Their verdicts were unknown at time of writing. The men were detained in 2020 and 2019 respectively after organizing a small gathering to discuss human rights and democracy issues.
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2023/country-chapters/china
Instead, your post employs a series of rhetorical tactics aimed at stifling constructive dialogue:
First, you assert a false equivalency between China and the USA/EU by trivializing the qualitative difference in freedom levels, thereby attempting to normalize authoritarianism.
Second, you use a slippery slope argument about social media moderation to suggest that all limitations on freedom are essentially the same — equating limited, private content moderation with systemic human rights abuses by government.
Third, you engage in an ad hominem attack by accusing me of being influenced by propaganda without providing substantive counter-arguments.
Were I to adopt your approach, I could easily make similar sweeping ad hominem accusations based on your behavior here.
This ventures firmly into the realm of conspiracy theory.
Do you feel you are presenting objective facts, as opposed to participating in disinformation or propaganda?
1. False Equivalence: Suggesting that economic progress and freedom of speech are interchangeable or mutually exclusive is intentionally misleading.
2. Relativism: By stating there's "no objective way" to compare, you are deflecting any form of critical evaluation.
3. Unfalsifiability: Your assertion that any evaluation is "inherently biased" is an unfalsifiable claim meant to immunize your argument from critique.
On top of which, they did such a terrible job of lifting people out of poverty, they unnecessarily killed tens of millions in the deadliest famine in human history:
Feel free to read the yearly reports from the HRW:
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2023/country-chapters/china
Random selection from the report:
> In May, a court in Hainan province sentenced former journalist Luo Changping to seven months in prison for a Weibo post that questioned China’s justification for its involvement in the Korean War.
Details on his case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luo_Changping#Arrest
> Sanya Ji'an Police Bureau summoned Luo for investigation into his "illegal remarks" suspected of "insulting heroes and martyrs".
Censorship in China: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_China
Four Cardinal Principles (enshrined in the constitution): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Cardinal_Principles
Open Constitution Initiative (shut down by the government): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Constitution_Initiative
The issues are plain, endemic, and well-documented. It is not propaganda.
You comment on this issue a surprising amount, and clearly feel strongly about the US’ views on China. I’d be curious as to exactly how you feel China is being judged unfairly.