The "ChInA BaD" Starter Pack for lemmy liberals : memes

[–] Faalangst_26@feddit.nl -2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

This is a Dutch investigative piece (English subtitles available) made by the Dutch government funded TV program 'Nieuwsuur'. Before you start bashing on it for it being biased because the TV program is government funded, a lot of Dutch politicians at the time strongly wanted to increase our trade agreements with China, this item was actively hindering that.

https://youtu.be/ixdGGZ4Nof0

I get disliking a lot of the 'American exceptionalism' you see on some corners of the internet, but one must also be cautious of not accidentally creating your own 'Chinese exceptionalism'. There is actual concrete proof that this is happening in China. This is of course not the fault of the Chinese people, this is government policy, not the fault of the whole Chinese people. But if we become to cautious to speak up about issues like these, they will keep occurring in all parts of the world.

I don't think I'll be able to convince anyone in here, but due to me more and more frequently spotting posts about these on my Lemmy feed, I was itching to speak up about it.

[–] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago

Of course you won't be able to convince anyone here, you don't have any actual fucking evidence as usual

[–] huf@hexbear.net 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

how was it hindering more trade agreements?

[–] Faalangst_26@feddit.nl -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Politicians were being questioned by other media based on this report. They had to defend improving relations and creating stronger economic bonds with a country that did not have a great human rights record.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

this seems strange to me. dutch politicians have no problems doing business with countries with awful human rights records. the absolute worst countries by this metric.

i think there has to be another reason here.

[–] Faalangst_26@feddit.nl -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm not saying that this completely stopped them in their tracks. But it would obviously be in the governments best interests to not bring to light an item like this. It would be easier for them they don't have to worm their way out of difficult interviews

[–] huf@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

but again, it doesnt seem to bother either the politicians or the press when the netherlands trades with the worst offenders on the planet. and yet, in the case of china, it matters?

either the dutch are terribly inconsistent for no reason, or there's something else in play.

or is it just me and this seems like a perfecly good explanation of their actions to you?

[–] Faalangst_26@feddit.nl -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You are somehow completely missing the point. Why would there be something else at play? What possible reason could the Dutch government have to want a report like this to exist? The opposition often gives the coalition a lot of heat for things like this, actually affecting legislation. Again, 0 reasons to think that this TV program is biased in their reporting. They even have some more recent items you would actually like, about how Dutch innovation is starting to fall behind compared to China.

The point is this:

It is perfectly understandable to dislike 'the west' or anything you want to fit into that term, but don't use that as an excuse to defend other parties. No matter who they are.

I wish it was different, I wish China could focus their internal and external policies on items that actually benefited them.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

i'm not talking about the report, i'm talking about the dutch govt's actions. you say they're based on this report. i cant see how.

edit:
to try to explain what i'm getting at, i'm puzzled by this sentencve of yours:

Before you start bashing on it for it being biased because the TV program is government funded, a lot of Dutch politicians at the time strongly wanted to increase our trade agreements with China, this item was actively hindering that.

you're going to have to explain how this item was hindering that and why only this item and why much worse violations of human rights committed by the netherland's other trade partners do not hinder trade with those countries.

[–] Faalangst_26@feddit.nl -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I am not saying that, perhaps i worded it weirdly. I was merely trying to explain a reason why this report can't simply be put down as 'biased'. But since you are apparently not interested in the contents of said report I guess there is no convincing you. I just want to implore you to just like with any other country (or entity for that matter) to never blindly defend them.

Don't think I'm defending the Dutch government here, I strongly oppose the current government (what's left of it), but I do want to praise actual good journalism. It is something that is unfortunately becoming less and less common.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

so the dutch government is terrible and does not base its decisions on human rights records, but somehow the journalists funded by them are unbiased. magically.

right.

[–] Faalangst_26@feddit.nl -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Right, I know this is an unwinnable discussion, but whatever.

Perhaps a bit of a language barrier. English is (as you probably guessed) not my first language.

In the Netherlands government and the state are 2 different things. The state is the entire governmental organization as a whole.

By the government I mean the coalition, the ministers and the prime minister.

The NPO (which Nieuwsuur falls under) gets its funding from the state. They get allocated a fixed amount each year.

The government can not directly influence anything that is done with this money.

So yes, I strongly believe this reporting is unbiased. I base this opinion on the years of reporting they have done before this item, and the years after. They do t let themselves be influenced by the 'daily opinion', they criticize left and right equally.

The current government is currently not at all what I voted for, but I also know that there are plenty of parties in opposition that do seriously use these reports to hold the coalition (government) accountable. So yes, I do think that good reporting can help steer the government away from making deals with countries as such.

What part of the report makes you think it is biased against the Chinese? I don't dislike the Chinese people, just the factually proven mistreatment of the Uyghur people.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The government can not directly influence anything that is done with this money.

ok. yes, this discussion is fruitless.

[–] Faalangst_26@feddit.nl -2 points 6 days ago

I am also interested in your perspective. Why do you think this report was made? Why can't it be trusted, but other reports that say it is al fine there can be trusted?

Genuinely curious, if you have the time or enthousiasm to continue if course.

[–] Lowleekun@hexbear.net 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Man i have to say turning from an "enlightened centrist (calling himself leftist all the while" into a person disenfranchised with western propaganda opens a new treasure trove of memes. Nice. No regrets, totally worth the sleepless nights thinking of horrors committed by us. I even mean that unironically.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago

Congrats, comrade!

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

it's missing the words "authoritarian" and "dictator" lol

[–] folaht@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's also missing the "Uyghurs in concentration camp" picture.

https://lemmy.ml/post/37946260

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

part of me wishes i hadn't read through this because the way you're taught to read-between-the-lines in any literature in the west combined with the american narrative of chinese authoritarianism that all of us have been swallowing since birth makes some of the wording read like copy-pastes from some propaganda that you would expect to encounter from a dystopian novel like 1984.

these in particular are cringe worthy::

Nearly 60,000 participants attended the sessions, including ... susceptible individuals aged 16-45 ..

Director Abduwaiiti actively guided them to bear in mind the General Secretary’s instructions, focusing on the overarching goal of social stability and lasting peace. He emphasized taking the lead in four areas: loving the country and its people, enhancing religious knowledge, abiding by laws and regulations, and resisting extremism.

Subsequently, two inmates took the stage to share their personal stories of repentance, recounting their journey of remorse.

the entire basis of 60,000 people willing taking in a lecture from government officials also sounds suspicious AF to westerners. we popular regard anyone willingly doing so as subversively intellectual or socially bizarre in some way because it's assumed that any "normal person" would naturally rather pursue something more entertaining if they're not coerced to do so otherwise.

this is a bit of cultural double standard because all western cultures universally regard these sorts of lectures as fundamental and important; but at the same time we popularly only expect people with an agenda or "odd balls" to engage with it willingly.

it's pretty clear to me that there's a cultural disconnect between westerners and the chinese; with the latter exhibiting cultural norms so lofty that westerners regard it as unrealistic or unachievable and that makes the entire episode seem suspicious to us and now i think i can now understand how the "Uyghur genocide" propaganda took root.

[–] Twongo@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

libs can't comprehend a democratic system within a single pluralistic party.

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Which is weird if they live in the US, which has a single pluralistic party.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago

i wouldn't call their two far-right cells that pluralistic though

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party... and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.

— Gore Vidal

[–] PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Where’s Tankman? You know the reactionary who left China after the tiannanmen square thing

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

But fox news said he was captured and imprisoned by the ccp! He can't have escaped china.

[–] PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

He got turned into a stain on the pavement

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 6 days ago

Did he? He gets walked off by civilians in the tank man video, was there confirmation of that happening?

[+] Manmoth@lemmy.ml -12 points 1 week ago

"Small-brained American" YT channel went to the uygher part of China. It's definitely a police state. He was tailed the entire time. They are tearing down the older uygher ruins and building Disneyland equivalents for tourism. The whole history and culture is being commodified in the same way America is like "Mexicans wear sombreros LOL". The only difference is it's 2025. It's definitely presented as "We are Chinese and people that weren't Chinese lived here at some point but we're all Chinese now". No one answers any political questions either.

Memes

Rules: