this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
452 points (92.8% liked)
World News
32290 readers
535 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
lol try again
You are cherry picking.
The national government leaves the local government responsible for providing services, fucks them over, then convinces the people that it's the local governments fault because they control the media. Of course they approve of the national government, though not the local at all so...
Also, a large part of the approval that this article states is because most of the people of China "are only a generation removed from an era of chronic food shortages and significant social and economic instability." Its easy to improve people's lives if they're starting from a shitty position. We'll see how that changes now that they're playing in the big leagues.
When's capitalism planning to do that for everyone in the global south then? If you remove china from the statistics on poverty alleviation poverty has been almost stagnant for the last 50 years. China is responsible for almost all of the vaunted "improvement" in poverty. And they've done it without bombing dozens of countries per decade!
So you were really going to tell someone they're cherrypicking and quoting a survey that said only 11% of people were "very satisfied" and just hope no one looked through your wall of text, huh?
China just went through a period where in a single generation they eliminated more poverty than any other country in history (save the USSR). Why is it so hard for you to believe that children born subsistence farmers would have a positive view of their government when they're middle classed and middle aged?
Wall of text? Why link an article if you aren't going to read it? The wall of text was a quote from the article.
I literally included your reasoning in my comment. Why did you comment?
Why did you accuse me of not reading when my ability to humiliate you for being a GUTLESS FUCKING LIAR hinged on my ability to point out something in the middle of that text? Are you stupid?
Why are you accusing me of not reading and then making it clear that you aren't reading well enough to know who the fuck you're talking to? Are you stupid?
Out of all the people who replied to you and humiliated you for being an unread and incurious including myself, why are you ignoring literally everything everyone said and clinging to just three words of only my comment "wall of text"?
Take your L
What I see is a lot of
You said there weren't 1.3 billion people in China who supported the PRC. Harvard says you were wrong. We're not talking about the minutiae of Chinese governance here, we're talking about foreign policy.
PS: If you dig into the numbers (page 3 of the report, aka page 6 in the PDF), 70% of people are fairly or very satisfied with their township governments, so don't be taken in by the Harvard cope--it really is bullshit.
I advise you to not waste your time arguing with these people. It's a total waste of time. You can't win an argument with stubborn people. Don't be like me who wasted hours arguing with hexbear tankies. Just downvote them then go somewhere else on Lemmy.
I like how you admit that you were just trying to "win" an argument and closed to the idea of changing your mind at all from the outset.
Yes I am stubborn too
Yeah, though unlike you, we don't downvote you.
Not stubborn enough to take the time to learn what the fuck you're talking about so you can actually stand your ground in an argument
God forbid you not act stubborn at all and just realize you're being childish and ignorant
I fixed it for you