this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
31 points (63.2% liked)

Memes

45726 readers
993 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 3 months ago (8 children)

The difference is the number of athletes caught doping recently.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 29 points 3 months ago (6 children)
[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Does it seem a little sketchy to anyone else that so many people were tested in China? Do they really have that many athletes or are they trying to skew the numbers?

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 10 points 3 months ago

If China tested fewer athletes than the US, you'd call them lax. But they test more than anywhere else and that's sketchy because it makes this particular metric look better.

parenti-hands

During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 months ago

They just test Chinese athletes disproportionately.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)