Chinese propaganda is rampant on the fediverse
-
Okay.. From the last couple days.
Removed Comment He's also either blackmailed or employed by china (multiple visits including his honeymoon, where he spent the night not with his wife but in the room with a number of school kids that he also brought with him... On his honeymoon) by
NihilsineNefas
@slrpnk.net
reason: Misinformationmod
Removed Comment There are lots of countries, including all the western countries where fewer people answered affirmatively to that question, where people are far more free to express their opinions than in China, though. The most obvious reason being that the majority of the world's countries do not have a Great Firewall. This is what shows that there is a bias in the Chinese answers -- or possibly a bias the other way in the western ones, but either way it means the results are not meaningfully comparable. edit: > What's happening is that working class speech is relatively free, while capitalist and corporate speech is not. That's why the vast majority say they have freedom of speech, while we know the state censors private, capitalist speech. "I don't want to work the 996 work week" is the epitome of working class speech, whereas supporting it is corporate speech. China chose to censor it. by
turdas
@suppo.fi
reason: misinformation -
You conveniently missed these:
Time mod Action
mod
Banned
realitista
@lemm.ee
from the community Technology
reason: Rule 1
expires: 7 months agomod
Removed Comment More like someone who lives in a country that survived communism and the oppression that it brings and who would never go back. Why don't you guys move to China or North Korea (or inexplicably Russia which you also brigade for). Try living in the utopias you brigade for? by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 1mod
Removed Comment You should pop on over to North Korea and tell us how great it is there. by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 1mod
Removed Comment .ml is leaking again. by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 2mod
Removed Post Elon Musk is named after a character in a book written by a Nazi, Werner Von Braun
reason: Video linkmod
Locked Post Elon Musk is named after a character in a book written by a Nazi, Werner Von Braunmod
Removed Comment That's a false equivalence. Every country is imperialist if you go back far enough. My concern is about today's political and security situation, not that of 200+ years ago. by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 1All I see here is hurt feelings for rules enforcement
-
Yes we have a misunderstanding, but not the definition of law.
But yes this is very much how .ml feels. Twisting words to achieve some sort of propaganda win. Excellent job there.
Again not twisting any words. This is why most think ml does censorship. They come in, say terrible things and when comment removed or banned call foul.
This is what a 10+ comment deep thread and you still can't admit why anyone would think it was poor wording
In that specific case I was banned for words I didn't say. Same technique you are trying here, to ask me if legal attacks should be allowed and then changing the definition of legal. And there are plenty of mods for just saying something which the CCCP doesn't like:
Okay… From the last couple days.
Removed Comment He’s also either blackmailed or employed by china (multiple visits including his honeymoon, where he spent the night not with his wife but in the room with a number of school kids that he also brought with him… On his honeymoon) by NihilsineNefas @slrpnk.net reason: Misinformation
mod Removed Comment There are lots of countries, including all the western countries where fewer people answered affirmatively to that question, where people are far more free to express their opinions than in China, though. The most obvious reason being that the majority of the world’s countries do not have a Great Firewall. This is what shows that there is a bias in the Chinese answers – or possibly a bias the other way in the western ones, but either way it means the results are not meaningfully comparable. edit: > What’s happening is that working class speech is relatively free, while capitalist and corporate speech is not. That’s why the vast majority say they have freedom of speech, while we know the state censors private, capitalist speech. “I don’t want to work the 996 work week” is the epitome of working class speech, whereas supporting it is corporate speech. China chose to censor it. by turdas @suppo.fi reason: misinformation
1 score
Show in context
realitista
You
to
Fediverse@lemmy.world
·
Chinese propaganda is rampant on the fediverse
·
17m agoYou conveniently missed these:
Time mod Action
mod Banned realitista @lemm.ee from the community Technology reason: Rule 1 expires: 7 months ago
mod Removed Comment More like someone who lives in a country that survived communism and the oppression that it brings and who would never go back. Why don’t you guys move to China or North Korea (or inexplicably Russia which you also brigade for). Try living in the utopias you brigade for? by realitista @lemm.ee reason: Rule 1
mod Removed Comment You should pop on over to North Korea and tell us how great it is there. by realitista @lemm.ee reason: Rule 1
-
Well sure you can criticize Trump there. But try criticizing the CCCP, China, or Russia.
I engage regularly there in precisely those discussions.
-
equating them is dishonest
Criticizing one of them on it's individual merits while avoiding comparisons is very obviously not the same thing as equating both of them.
and very deflective.
LOOOOOLOLOL you can't be serious.
then why is it doing to the us "whataboutism"?
it is very deflective to go both sides bad when neither exists in a vacuum. especially considering the context of the fucking world being held hostage by the us.
i find it hard to believe westerners hate china that hard on it's own merits, because it doesn't warrant that at all.
but i do find it curious they always want to remove all context or straight up lie to criticize china, because that's the only way westerners can.
-
In that specific case I was banned for words I didn't say. Same technique you are trying here, to ask me if legal attacks should be allowed and then changing the definition of legal. And there are plenty of mods for just saying something which the CCCP doesn't like:
Okay… From the last couple days.
Removed Comment He’s also either blackmailed or employed by china (multiple visits including his honeymoon, where he spent the night not with his wife but in the room with a number of school kids that he also brought with him… On his honeymoon) by NihilsineNefas @slrpnk.net reason: Misinformation
mod Removed Comment There are lots of countries, including all the western countries where fewer people answered affirmatively to that question, where people are far more free to express their opinions than in China, though. The most obvious reason being that the majority of the world’s countries do not have a Great Firewall. This is what shows that there is a bias in the Chinese answers – or possibly a bias the other way in the western ones, but either way it means the results are not meaningfully comparable. edit: > What’s happening is that working class speech is relatively free, while capitalist and corporate speech is not. That’s why the vast majority say they have freedom of speech, while we know the state censors private, capitalist speech. “I don’t want to work the 996 work week” is the epitome of working class speech, whereas supporting it is corporate speech. China chose to censor it. by turdas @suppo.fi reason: misinformation
1 score
Show in context
realitista
You
to
Fediverse@lemmy.world
·
Chinese propaganda is rampant on the fediverse
·
17m agoYou conveniently missed these:
Time mod Action
mod Banned realitista @lemm.ee from the community Technology reason: Rule 1 expires: 7 months ago
mod Removed Comment More like someone who lives in a country that survived communism and the oppression that it brings and who would never go back. Why don’t you guys move to China or North Korea (or inexplicably Russia which you also brigade for). Try living in the utopias you brigade for? by realitista @lemm.ee reason: Rule 1
mod Removed Comment You should pop on over to North Korea and tell us how great it is there. by realitista @lemm.ee reason: Rule 1
https://lemmy.world/comment/21823351
In that specific case I was banned for words I didn't say
Expect we can see from the mod log the removed comment was for advocating collective punishment.
Same technique you are trying here, to ask me if legal attacks should be allowed and then changing the definition of legal.
Again not changing definition pointing out legal doesn't mean people won't get killed.
For the rest is your point you do lots of comments that get removed?
-
then why is it doing to the us "whataboutism"?
it is very deflective to go both sides bad when neither exists in a vacuum. especially considering the context of the fucking world being held hostage by the us.
i find it hard to believe westerners hate china that hard on it's own merits, because it doesn't warrant that at all.
but i do find it curious they always want to remove all context or straight up lie to criticize china, because that's the only way westerners can.
then why is doing it to the us "whataboutism"?
I don't know how to be any more clear this. Using whataboutism is using whataboutism. If I talk about China and you say "but what about US!", that's a whataboutism, because we're not talking about the US. And vise versa. It's a clear attempt to excuse and deflect blame away from the topic at hand and onto someone else.
it is very deflective to go both sides bad
I'm glad you finally understand.
-
I really couldn't care less. If they want to mod someone for criticizing authoritarian regimes, there's no point in being there. You can't say I didn't try.
-
I really couldn't care less. If they want to mod someone for criticizing authoritarian regimes, there's no point in being there. You can't say I didn't try.
All I see here is a temper tantrum
-
Maeve:
-
then why is doing it to the us "whataboutism"?
I don't know how to be any more clear this. Using whataboutism is using whataboutism. If I talk about China and you say "but what about US!", that's a whataboutism, because we're not talking about the US. And vise versa. It's a clear attempt to excuse and deflect blame away from the topic at hand and onto someone else.
it is very deflective to go both sides bad
I'm glad you finally understand.
and you still don't seem to get that condemning "rampant ccp propaganda!" when we praise it's accomplishments is not honest, and that neither country is in a vacuum.
today's us colonial and fascist strategy is directly related to how they want to hurt china, and that also shows in the anti-chinese western narrative. and you don't really have the moral high ground to criticize them in light of this.
neatly wrapped in a single word to deflect us responsibility for the shitty state of the world.
i repeated that point a couple of times in different ways, so i'm just gonna wish you a nice day, and may your mind eventually be freed from that.
-
and you still don't seem to get that condemning "rampant ccp propaganda!" when we praise it's accomplishments is not honest, and that neither country is in a vacuum.
today's us colonial and fascist strategy is directly related to how they want to hurt china, and that also shows in the anti-chinese western narrative. and you don't really have the moral high ground to criticize them in light of this.
neatly wrapped in a single word to deflect us responsibility for the shitty state of the world.
i repeated that point a couple of times in different ways, so i'm just gonna wish you a nice day, and may your mind eventually be freed from that.
You can repeat the same nonsense all you want, it's still nonsense. I hope one day your "mind is freed" from comparing everything to the worst possible example as an excuse for bad behavior.
-
People did have a massive swing in opinion. I'm aware that dissolution was not an option, but your claim that people didn't change their opinion in light of the immense political turmoil between that vote and the second vote requires more evidence than "people don't change their minds that quickly." Rather, to the contrary, large shifts in opinion do happen more swiftly than gradually.
Further, the fact that the large majority regret the fall of the soviet union is relevant in showing that it clearly wasn't as simple as saying everyone hated living in the soviet union, but realized how good they had it afterwards. Polling is often inconsistent not because of bad polling, but political instability caused by the immense fuckery of capitalism and imperialism in these countries, and forces like NATO.
Protests were already widespread in the Union. Several member states had already declared nominal independence from Moscow. Gorbachev was doing damage control and trying his best to keep the Union from fracturing further. Elections in member republics saw huge rises in popularity for noncommunist parties.
The referendum was an attempt to gain the political momentum required for reform, in an ultimate effort to keep the Union together. It was essentially a kind of propaganda attempt to display large support for the reformed Union, made possible because dissolution was not on the ballot.
There was widespread civil discontent before the referendum. Elections saw noncommunists rise to power and several member states declared independence. Then I am somehow to believe that the population first swung all the way back to "actually the Soviet Union is great and we don't want to leave it" and back to "we should leave the Soviet Union" in a matter of mere months? That is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence, which you don't have. The truth is far simpler: at every point once the civil unrest started, the population voted in favour of less Soviet Union and for more independence, and not the other way around.
My point regarding the phrasing of post-Soviet polling is that the wording drastically changes the outcome. Sure, people aren't happy about how the 90s turned out and they feel they're not part of a superpower anymore. They're not happy with being screwed over by western nations. They say those things were better under the Soviet Union. But ask them if they would go back to such a Union, and suddenly support evaporates. And in several former member states even the first few questions don't find much Soviet sympathies (eg the Baltics). They want to live in a stronger nation, akin to the Soviet Union, but they do not want to go back to what once was. It isn't a simple case of "boy we sure had it good", that does a huge disservice to the diverse and complicated opinions of the Union.
-
You can repeat the same nonsense all you want, it's still nonsense. I hope one day your "mind is freed" from comparing everything to the worst possible example as an excuse for bad behavior.
you guys are the ones coming up with chinese propaganda allegations then immediately deflecting when we point out you think like that because you are immersed in anticommunist propaganda yourselves.
i'm not gonna play the game of exchanging insults with you as i have nothing against you personally, i'm just hoping you free yourself from it eventually.
-
Protests were already widespread in the Union. Several member states had already declared nominal independence from Moscow. Gorbachev was doing damage control and trying his best to keep the Union from fracturing further. Elections in member republics saw huge rises in popularity for noncommunist parties.
The referendum was an attempt to gain the political momentum required for reform, in an ultimate effort to keep the Union together. It was essentially a kind of propaganda attempt to display large support for the reformed Union, made possible because dissolution was not on the ballot.
There was widespread civil discontent before the referendum. Elections saw noncommunists rise to power and several member states declared independence. Then I am somehow to believe that the population first swung all the way back to "actually the Soviet Union is great and we don't want to leave it" and back to "we should leave the Soviet Union" in a matter of mere months? That is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence, which you don't have. The truth is far simpler: at every point once the civil unrest started, the population voted in favour of less Soviet Union and for more independence, and not the other way around.
My point regarding the phrasing of post-Soviet polling is that the wording drastically changes the outcome. Sure, people aren't happy about how the 90s turned out and they feel they're not part of a superpower anymore. They're not happy with being screwed over by western nations. They say those things were better under the Soviet Union. But ask them if they would go back to such a Union, and suddenly support evaporates. And in several former member states even the first few questions don't find much Soviet sympathies (eg the Baltics). They want to live in a stronger nation, akin to the Soviet Union, but they do not want to go back to what once was. It isn't a simple case of "boy we sure had it good", that does a huge disservice to the diverse and complicated opinions of the Union.
Gorbachev had also implemented Perestroika, and his policy of Glasnost had weakened the soviet system. The seeds for radical change for the worse and instability were already there. My point isn't that there was 0 discontent and it flipped to 100% discontent, but that people, despite the various nationalist movements in some of the member-states, overall did support the socialist project up to the end. After the vote, there was the hardliner coup, dramatic sharpening of contradictions, and the internal, anti-democratic dissolution by Yeltsin claiming legitimacy from the rising nationalist movements.
You have no evidence supporting your claims other than the idea that there was some discontent, which I never denied, and that people ultimately lost faith in the stabilty of the soviet union right at the end itself. Further, support for returning to socialism doesn't simply "evaporate," and again, it depends highly on the political fuckery in the region, the purging of communists by westerners, and the sheer devastation these countries went through. Trying to chalk it all up to simple pride in a stronger nation instead of the actual material benefits is an extraordinary claim.
Russia and Belarus, for example, are seeing rising waves of socialist sympathy among the populace. The CPRF is rising rapidly, and people fundamentally feel that capitalism should not last any longer. This represents the large majority of the post-soviet population.
-
you guys are the ones coming up with chinese propaganda allegations then immediately deflecting when we point out you think like that because you are immersed in anticommunist propaganda yourselves.
i'm not gonna play the game of exchanging insults with you as i have nothing against you personally, i'm just hoping you free yourself from it eventually.
You didn't "point out" anything, you deflected to another country while ignoring the discussion at hand (AKA whataboutism) which is what tankies do every single time. It's almost like you have nothing else...
-
One group- memes or something is wholly controlled by Chinese state actors.
As one of the moderators of !memes@lemmy.ml i encourage OP to look at the sort of posts i make and tell me - do you really think i'm a "Chinese state actor"?
Do you think all these posts i make in, eg, !hoch@lemmy.ml and !goodnews@lemmy.ml and !badnews@lemmy.ml and !eleven@lemmy.ml... these are all part of a carefully-crafted cover, and I'm actually being paid by China to delete totally-not-racist posts depicting their president as a yellow cartoon bear?
And for this service, to maintain my cover, they also pay me to create memes like this and this and this and this and this and this (and defending that one against less informed nerds) and this and this and this (a small sample of my OC here)?
And do you think China paid for this understandable explanation of asymmetric cryptography using high-school level math, because someone asked, deep in a thread about a service which I'd also already debunked the snake-oil privacy claims of?
Really?
-
You conveniently missed these:
Time mod Action
mod
Banned
realitista
@lemm.ee
from the community Technology
reason: Rule 1
expires: 7 months agomod
Removed Comment More like someone who lives in a country that survived communism and the oppression that it brings and who would never go back. Why don't you guys move to China or North Korea (or inexplicably Russia which you also brigade for). Try living in the utopias you brigade for? by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 1mod
Removed Comment You should pop on over to North Korea and tell us how great it is there. by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 1mod
Removed Comment .ml is leaking again. by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 2mod
Removed Post Elon Musk is named after a character in a book written by a Nazi, Werner Von Braun
reason: Video linkmod
Locked Post Elon Musk is named after a character in a book written by a Nazi, Werner Von Braunmod
Removed Comment That's a false equivalence. Every country is imperialist if you go back far enough. My concern is about today's political and security situation, not that of 200+ years ago. by
realitista
@lemm.ee
reason: Rule 1accusing people on .ml of brigading a .ml comm
you clearly didn't want to be there and were making it everyone else's problem so I don't see what's wrong with banning you
video link
I can't confirm, but the message makes me think it's because the community doesn't allow video links as posts
Elon Musk is a nazi, I don't think anyone disagrees, but it was because the post directly linked to a video rather than an article that it was likely removed.
My concern is about today’s political and security situation, not that of 200+ years ago
You were minimizing past genocides of indigenous people simply because those have already been completed. You deserved the ban, and it was temporary.
-
You didn't "point out" anything, you deflected to another country while ignoring the discussion at hand (AKA whataboutism) which is what tankies do every single time. It's almost like you have nothing else...
we have all been pointing this out in this entire thread.
if you want to know what more we have, you can ask any of the many communists in the fediverse about it instead of referring to them with an anticommunist pejorative.
-
Gorbachev had also implemented Perestroika, and his policy of Glasnost had weakened the soviet system. The seeds for radical change for the worse and instability were already there. My point isn't that there was 0 discontent and it flipped to 100% discontent, but that people, despite the various nationalist movements in some of the member-states, overall did support the socialist project up to the end. After the vote, there was the hardliner coup, dramatic sharpening of contradictions, and the internal, anti-democratic dissolution by Yeltsin claiming legitimacy from the rising nationalist movements.
You have no evidence supporting your claims other than the idea that there was some discontent, which I never denied, and that people ultimately lost faith in the stabilty of the soviet union right at the end itself. Further, support for returning to socialism doesn't simply "evaporate," and again, it depends highly on the political fuckery in the region, the purging of communists by westerners, and the sheer devastation these countries went through. Trying to chalk it all up to simple pride in a stronger nation instead of the actual material benefits is an extraordinary claim.
Russia and Belarus, for example, are seeing rising waves of socialist sympathy among the populace. The CPRF is rising rapidly, and people fundamentally feel that capitalism should not last any longer. This represents the large majority of the post-soviet population.
CPRF support rising rapidly? You must live in a fantasy world. Their electoral results have rarely been worse, their 2024 presidential election candidate receiving a mere 4% of the vote (a record low for the party).
![Cowbee [he/they]](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/c18ce632-5fb5-4888-8226-3dc55a07acc4.jpeg "Cowbee [he/they]"){kind=avatar}
