Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 347 posts

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#121

Post by FooBarWidget »

anter wrote: post #99
guscost wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll add these to my sources, thanks.

Mind that some of those mentioned receive money from the CCP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOIrsmjRFxU

Well here's what Cyrus Janssen has to say about accusations of him being paid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb-6fgN3MZA

TLDR: he didn't only not get paid, he refused payment. Plus the payment offer was not "we pay you to say this" but "we want to license your content for republication" and "we pay you a fee for the trouble of appearing on our show to give your independent opinions".

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#123

Post by FooBarWidget »

tomatofarmer wrote: post #110
FooBarWidget wrote: post #23

The media's reporting on Peng Shuai's case is... let's say, incomplete. For a better picture, one should read her original Weibo post. Here is a translation: https://www.reddit.com/r/tennis/comments/qmn69a/full_transla... I've checked this translation and I agree with most of it.

Why was it censored within 30 minutes? Surely a benign post would not lead to such extreme government efforts.

Because censorship doesn't work the way you think it works. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29344676

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#124

Post by hogFeast »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #90
zarzavat wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the situations are similar. Peng is not a dissident, she's a tennis player. And Assange has not been erased, his trial has been covered even in the mainstream media. The real difference, as the old story goes, is in the quality of the propaganda. The west has managed to convince its people that Assange is a bad person, a rapist even. Whereas China has not managed to convince many of its people that Peng…

People think Chinese propaganda is clever and insidious but in truth Chinese propaganda is extremely clumsy to the point of being essentially harmless in the west. This is the typical level of Chinese propaganda: https://twitter.com/manyapan/status/1454346638596743173

The West's propaganda is just as clumsy, civil servants everywhere are far removed from real people (the stuff the US used in Iraq/Afghanistan is comic, I believe they are used leaflets drops in Syria too...you could also include public health campaigns and "nudges" in this, lots of comic nonsense).

The difference is that the West has the media which puts its own propaganda, people on the internet putting their own propaganda, etc. There is a market. In China, that market is limited.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#125

Post by tomatofarmer »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #123
tomatofarmer wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why was it censored within 30 minutes? Surely a benign post would not lead to such extreme government efforts.

Because censorship doesn't work the way you think it works. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29344676

It works exactly how I think it works.

As long as no one takes notice, I am free to say whatever I want.

You should reflect on how much effort you spend defending such a regime all over this website, twitter, and elsewhere.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#126

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

__s wrote: post #32
rectang wrote: post #6

> With the Winter Olympics opening in Beijing in February, the IOC and corporate sponsors have multi-billion-dollar reasons to help China make the Peng Shuai story go away. Therein lies a bleak lesson. The WTA has been brave in challenging China, given that it has organised lucrative tournaments there. But as a women’s sports association, it depends on retaining the confidence of women players. Sometimes there are in…

Didn't know context of joke here, so looked it up: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/11/jamie-dimon-quickly-... The quotation seems to be garbled in that link, https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/jamie-dimon-jokes-jpmorgan... has one that makes more sense > The Communist Party is celebrating its 100th year. So is JPMorgan. And I’ll make you a bet we last longer. Tho second link isn't a citation for: > I can’t say th…

"Didn't know context of joke here"

Why are people referring to it as a joke? He may have said it in a jocular tone-of-voice, but I don't think it was a joke at all: it's a reasoned statement to make and furthermore it's a statement I agree with: given US blue-chip companies' propensity to entrench themselves and the CCP's reversion back to authoritarianism (which history has made abundantly clear: rarely ends-well for authoritarians) means that absent anything unexpected happening, the CCP may very-well no-longer exist within a generation or two from now - or at least the CCP won't exist as-we-know-it.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#128

Post by coupdejarnac »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #65
guscost wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, do you have any recommendations for uh, China analysis YouTubers?

Cyrus Janssen, Daniel Dumbrill, Geopolitics In Conflict, Carl Zha, Brian Berletic.

This has to be satire. Anyone looking to be informed about China would be better served by reading the Axios Sinocism newsletter.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#129

Post by FooBarWidget »

zozbot234 wrote: post #113
FooBarWidget wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's commendable that he tried adding more notes but on the whole I don't find it more useful to English speakers than the version I linked. The version you linked also has some things I disagree with: I disagree with note 4, claiming that that paragraph is her evidence for non-consensual relationship. My reading of that paragraph (about 10 years ago, the previous time she had an affair) is that that was consensual,…

She clearly says that she was in tears and panicking when he pressured her for sex the second time. There's very little ambiguity there: this is a serious allegation of lack of true consent, not just emotional venting.

I respect your interpretation. I am just saying that there are indeed people out there who don't agree. Of course you are free to disagree with them. Being pro-democratic, we respect each others' differences in opinion.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#130

Post by chongli »

hintymad wrote: post #103
chongli wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is remarkable but it shouldn’t be surprising. As the article says, the WTA is a women’s sports association and arguably the most successful one in the world. If the WTA caved to pressure from China then they would rightly be vilified in the west for betraying women. There is no way they could ever do that and get away with it!

It's also great that WTA does not depend on Chinese market, so they won't sustain too much of loss by antagonizing Chinese authority. On the other hand, look at NBA. The righteous American conscience, the one and the only King James, kisses up to China to no end.

I would be really interested to see how things would go if it was a WNBA player making the sexual assault complaint against a party grandee. The NBA owns the WNBA and we might reasonably expect them to cave to the pressure as they have before. However I think they’d face a rebellion from their players as well as the public. It could get really ugly.
Post reply on HN