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

181–190 of 347 posts

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#181

Post by frabbit »

darimo wrote: post #55
1cvmask wrote: post #20

An interesting different narrative. https://www.mintpressnews.com/olympolitik-fake-peng-shuai-sc...

Hahaha A cursory read through the Mint Press wiki page reveals it's an affiliate channel from Russia Today. Also nice section around the opacity of their funding and revenue model. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintPress_News

What's wrong with that? Read it with skepticism, just like you read the corporate outlets pushing propaganda on behalf of the USA with skepticism. Hopefully you'll find some clashing ideas/narratives. There is a lot of good content on Russia Today e.g. Chris Hedges' show.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#182

Post by sudosysgen »

twojacobtwo wrote: post #168
tomatofarmer wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> You should reflect on how much effort you spend defending such a regime all over this website (...) Wow, you're right about that. I thought you might have been saying it as an offhand comment, but I just looked through the 4 most recent pages of FooBarWidget's comments and only 2 comments of those listed were not directly defending or espousing CCP talking points. Potential shill? edit: Their earlier comments have…

That's perfectly normal. If you're going to be accused of being a shill you might as well silo your accounts into one for serious matter and one everyone is going to adhominem into extinction.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#183

Post by vore »

jjcc wrote: post #174
vore wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not personally a supporter of the CCP, but I do interact with people who are. For those who are immigrants from mainland China who support the CCP, there's an element of patriotism with regards to seeing their country becoming a burgeoning superpower and as a form of comeuppance for national shame that stretches all the way back to the unequal treaties during the era of the Qing dynasty. For people born and raise…

I think your interpretation is quite simplified. Yes there is some "element of patriotism" but it's enhanced by something else. Let me explain. homo sapiens are born to have defects that their brains can not differentiate model of their neural network and data (i.e. fact). The people from China have more data or ground facts compare to the Westerners who get all the information from media. There's a quite big discrep…

I agree that I've boiled it down a bit too much and so I should also add that beyond patriotism the CCP have actually had a positive impact on the material conditions of the rural people of China, as well as engaging in extensive modernization -- compare Shanghai's Pudong district between now and 20 years ago and it's night and day.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#184

Post by pphysch »

toxik wrote: post #115
pphysch wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CCP has some 100,000,000 active members and >90% domestic approval rate. You simply cannot decouple it from "China" in any meaningful social, political, or economic manner without resorting to boring Orientalist/"white savior" narratives.

And I hear over in NK, 100% of people approve of the Kim dynasty. Weird how great stats they get, gotta get in on their secret.

The CCP's "secret" is consistently materially improving the conditions of 1.4 billion people over decades.

You have to answer the question: why wouldn't the Chinese support their government?

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#185

Post by pphysch »

miohtama wrote: post #159
pphysch wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food for thought: when has any action of the Chinese government been cast in a good light by Western media? We start from the conclusion "China bad" and search for evidence to confirm it, while ignoring contrary evidence.

Climate change action, lifting people from poverty, so yes.

Any examples from, say, the NYT?

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#186

Post by clove »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #147
tomatofarmer wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not ignoring that such a thing might happen. The regime must be able to doublespeak. Allowing a small amount of safe criticism and changing policies allows those in power to deflect and convince people who aren't paying attention. Any criticism that is a legitimate threat is met with blanket censorship - as in the case of Peng Shuai - or deadly violence as in the case of Tiananmen.

You are free to disagree and I am free to disagree with you. But I am sure glad that 98% of Chinese people are happy and feel that the country is heading in the right direction, and I am glad that the world has a diverse set of governance systems.

>I am glad that the world has a diverse set of governance systems.

Except when it comes to Taiwan, right?

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#187

Post by burntbridge »

legutierr wrote: post #45
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.

How is the specific content of her Weibo post relevant at all here? The issue is that the woman was kidnapped by the Chinese government because simple because she spoke out publicly, and it seems to me that the media’s reporting has been very complete in that regard. What specifically has been lacking?

I heard about her disappearance from social media for a time. Can you link information about her kidnapping please.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#188

Post by sudosysgen »

Manuel_D wrote: post #148
FooBarWidget wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Part 1) Here's where the original translation becomes relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29344036 Specifically, there are doubts on whether it's a rape charge at all. See the translation discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29344244 One possible interpretation of the main point of the post is that it was venting about Zhao having left her and played with her feelings. Her social media ac…

> Fan Bingbing is a good case. Jack Ma is another case. In all these cases, the person in question is not in danger in the sense of being tortured in a prison. It's taking in for questioning with a gag order (and depending on the severity of the case, a house arrest) until it's over Being put under house arrest and prevented from having contact with the outside world by the government, without being charged with a cr…

You can be put into regular arrest without being charged for a crime for weeks in almost every country on earth and there is no obligation in most country to allow for more than one or two monitored calls that can be interrupted at any moment for any reason.

As far as I know Jack Ma never criticized Xi. He criticized (international) banking regulations that were ratified in 2009 in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and that he was not in compliance of. Legally in the United States that could very well put you in prison for fraud and you are not guaranteed the right to make a phone call or see family federally, though some states guarantee phone calls to some people on the day of arrest. Then the prosecutors can seal the indictment and you can be held for a year without anyone except your immediate family and attorney (if you can afford one) knowing. And then the prosecutors can drop chargers a few months later.

What happened to Jack Ma could have happened in the US because he was did something (fraud) that is a federal crime in the US. Thankfully it doesn't happen often. You also don't know that he wasn't charged. He recorded himself giving probable cause for a crime. It was really stupid of him.

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#189

Post by clove »

justicezyx wrote: post #18
bryan0 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many reasons your comment would be getting downvoted. I found this paragraph particularly awful: > Peng Shuai is not pretty in the current PS & facial surgery standard, but her energetic and strength as a pro athlete no doubt make her a desirable partner in any relationship. Gaoli had such a high taste is a revealing fact of their humanity.

Well, political fights based on sexual activity. If you dont like to see why Gaoli made this awful deed, then you have to understand the underlying human drive. I am stating a fact. Facts hurt, but that does not make my statement awful. It's just that readers dont like certain facts.

What was your original comment?

Re: What Peng Shuai reveals about one-party rule

#190

Post by sudosysgen »

beckman466 wrote: post #118

double standard: the US propertied class is openly involved in a bunch of wars and regime change operations in a number of countries (which essentially comes down to severe human rights violations). why aren't we boycotting all sporting events held by the US?

You're right, of course. It would be too uncomfortable to confront that reality so we filter it out, that way we can direct our moral outrage to an enemy without having to deal with the moral distress of confronting these issues (or failing to do so) in our own societies.
Post reply on HN