▲ -20 ▼ Remember ChInA EvIL (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 year ago by bubblybubbles@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml 18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] MyBrainHurts@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 year ago (11 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source hideshow 11 child comments replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (11 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children) And in this one by the European union they rank themselves lower or equal to western countries. As well as ranking low on things like freedom of speech and separation of power. Perceived democracy survey by the EU 2025 One survey, be it from the EU or Harvard doesn't really prove anything. If you want to convince people then you should find a meta analysis. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago freedom of the private press I apologise but my media literacy is so bad I can't find where press is even mentioned in the document. The closest I could find is freedom of speech but those are two different things. As you admit, they focus on concepts like "separation of powers," or "freedom of the private press," or "political pluralism," as well as "peaceful transition of power." This fundamentally is meant to disqualify socialist concepts of democracy, focused on cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people, and limiting of the powers of the wealthy over society. How do those "fundamentally disqualify" democracies that focus on "cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people and limiting the powers of the wealthy over society"? I would have thought that separation of powers makes it easier to limit the power of the wealthy. Does that concept impede cohesion, cooperation, social unity or rule by the common people in any way? How can the common people have any chance to rule if you don't have courts that make sure the law is upheld by the powerful? In my very limited worldview political pluralism plays a pivotal role in establishing a functioning socialist democracy. Yes, having many differing opinions on any given topic slows the decision making process down. However, how can you expect the marginalized to be represented in any way if you don't have a party representing them? But I guess if you educate your people properly then even in a population of 1.4 billion people everyone's political opinions can be represented by a single party. As for peaceful transition of power, how is that bad exactly? Since we're cherry picking questions here, how do "government transparency", " freedom of speech" or "rule of law" prohibit the rule of the common people? I would think that they only help strengthen the common people? How are they at odds with any of the other socialist concepts you mentioned? Please excuse my stupid questions, as you mentioned, my media literacy is terrible so I don't even understand these really basic concepts. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zjti8eit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago But that's none of those things are democracy. Democracy is rule by the majority. Whether you get individual rights, social protection, or something else is all dependent on who makes up that majority. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vatlark@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago Super interesting survey, thanks for sharing. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) [+] kwezelaar@mastodon.nl -3 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago I should think western propaganda is more effective and yet look at how unhappy eperyone is. You cant just propagandize people into a feeling of happiness. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Omnipitaph@reddthat.com -3 points 1 year ago I'mma be honest, if I was living in a country where it was common knowledge that slandering the government in anyway got you disappeared, I'd rate them highly on any study put in front of me :/ I know I'm going to have comments telling me I don't know what I'm talking about, and that's ok. I've enough friends in China, and from China, who have talked about this kind of thing to understand that this graph could represent the feelings of the people, but likely doesn't. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (4 children) I still don't like the social credit thing, but I at the same time I wouldnt mind moving to Sweden from the US if I had the chance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (3 children) Sweden also has the credit score thing permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) Oh wow I wasn't aware, I have only been to Sweden and Finland for a day each on a Cruise trip my friends dragged me on permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) To clarify - Sweden has a lesser variant of the U.S credit score system, but it differs in some important ways. For example, you don't have to get a credit card to 'build credit' - you are assumed to be in good standing unless you have unusual ratios of debt and so on. Sweden does not have a social credit score system. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 year ago yeah, but swedens credit score is still worse than chinas social score system permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (11 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children) And in this one by the European union they rank themselves lower or equal to western countries. As well as ranking low on things like freedom of speech and separation of power. Perceived democracy survey by the EU 2025 One survey, be it from the EU or Harvard doesn't really prove anything. If you want to convince people then you should find a meta analysis. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago freedom of the private press I apologise but my media literacy is so bad I can't find where press is even mentioned in the document. The closest I could find is freedom of speech but those are two different things. As you admit, they focus on concepts like "separation of powers," or "freedom of the private press," or "political pluralism," as well as "peaceful transition of power." This fundamentally is meant to disqualify socialist concepts of democracy, focused on cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people, and limiting of the powers of the wealthy over society. How do those "fundamentally disqualify" democracies that focus on "cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people and limiting the powers of the wealthy over society"? I would have thought that separation of powers makes it easier to limit the power of the wealthy. Does that concept impede cohesion, cooperation, social unity or rule by the common people in any way? How can the common people have any chance to rule if you don't have courts that make sure the law is upheld by the powerful? In my very limited worldview political pluralism plays a pivotal role in establishing a functioning socialist democracy. Yes, having many differing opinions on any given topic slows the decision making process down. However, how can you expect the marginalized to be represented in any way if you don't have a party representing them? But I guess if you educate your people properly then even in a population of 1.4 billion people everyone's political opinions can be represented by a single party. As for peaceful transition of power, how is that bad exactly? Since we're cherry picking questions here, how do "government transparency", " freedom of speech" or "rule of law" prohibit the rule of the common people? I would think that they only help strengthen the common people? How are they at odds with any of the other socialist concepts you mentioned? Please excuse my stupid questions, as you mentioned, my media literacy is terrible so I don't even understand these really basic concepts. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zjti8eit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago But that's none of those things are democracy. Democracy is rule by the majority. Whether you get individual rights, social protection, or something else is all dependent on who makes up that majority. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vatlark@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago Super interesting survey, thanks for sharing. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) [+] kwezelaar@mastodon.nl -3 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago I should think western propaganda is more effective and yet look at how unhappy eperyone is. You cant just propagandize people into a feeling of happiness. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Omnipitaph@reddthat.com -3 points 1 year ago I'mma be honest, if I was living in a country where it was common knowledge that slandering the government in anyway got you disappeared, I'd rate them highly on any study put in front of me :/ I know I'm going to have comments telling me I don't know what I'm talking about, and that's ok. I've enough friends in China, and from China, who have talked about this kind of thing to understand that this graph could represent the feelings of the people, but likely doesn't. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (4 children) I still don't like the social credit thing, but I at the same time I wouldnt mind moving to Sweden from the US if I had the chance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (3 children) Sweden also has the credit score thing permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) Oh wow I wasn't aware, I have only been to Sweden and Finland for a day each on a Cruise trip my friends dragged me on permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) To clarify - Sweden has a lesser variant of the U.S credit score system, but it differs in some important ways. For example, you don't have to get a credit card to 'build credit' - you are assumed to be in good standing unless you have unusual ratios of debt and so on. Sweden does not have a social credit score system. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 year ago yeah, but swedens credit score is still worse than chinas social score system permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children) And in this one by the European union they rank themselves lower or equal to western countries. As well as ranking low on things like freedom of speech and separation of power. Perceived democracy survey by the EU 2025 One survey, be it from the EU or Harvard doesn't really prove anything. If you want to convince people then you should find a meta analysis. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago freedom of the private press I apologise but my media literacy is so bad I can't find where press is even mentioned in the document. The closest I could find is freedom of speech but those are two different things. As you admit, they focus on concepts like "separation of powers," or "freedom of the private press," or "political pluralism," as well as "peaceful transition of power." This fundamentally is meant to disqualify socialist concepts of democracy, focused on cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people, and limiting of the powers of the wealthy over society. How do those "fundamentally disqualify" democracies that focus on "cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people and limiting the powers of the wealthy over society"? I would have thought that separation of powers makes it easier to limit the power of the wealthy. Does that concept impede cohesion, cooperation, social unity or rule by the common people in any way? How can the common people have any chance to rule if you don't have courts that make sure the law is upheld by the powerful? In my very limited worldview political pluralism plays a pivotal role in establishing a functioning socialist democracy. Yes, having many differing opinions on any given topic slows the decision making process down. However, how can you expect the marginalized to be represented in any way if you don't have a party representing them? But I guess if you educate your people properly then even in a population of 1.4 billion people everyone's political opinions can be represented by a single party. As for peaceful transition of power, how is that bad exactly? Since we're cherry picking questions here, how do "government transparency", " freedom of speech" or "rule of law" prohibit the rule of the common people? I would think that they only help strengthen the common people? How are they at odds with any of the other socialist concepts you mentioned? Please excuse my stupid questions, as you mentioned, my media literacy is terrible so I don't even understand these really basic concepts. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zjti8eit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago But that's none of those things are democracy. Democracy is rule by the majority. Whether you get individual rights, social protection, or something else is all dependent on who makes up that majority. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vatlark@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago Super interesting survey, thanks for sharing. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago freedom of the private press I apologise but my media literacy is so bad I can't find where press is even mentioned in the document. The closest I could find is freedom of speech but those are two different things. As you admit, they focus on concepts like "separation of powers," or "freedom of the private press," or "political pluralism," as well as "peaceful transition of power." This fundamentally is meant to disqualify socialist concepts of democracy, focused on cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people, and limiting of the powers of the wealthy over society. How do those "fundamentally disqualify" democracies that focus on "cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people and limiting the powers of the wealthy over society"? I would have thought that separation of powers makes it easier to limit the power of the wealthy. Does that concept impede cohesion, cooperation, social unity or rule by the common people in any way? How can the common people have any chance to rule if you don't have courts that make sure the law is upheld by the powerful? In my very limited worldview political pluralism plays a pivotal role in establishing a functioning socialist democracy. Yes, having many differing opinions on any given topic slows the decision making process down. However, how can you expect the marginalized to be represented in any way if you don't have a party representing them? But I guess if you educate your people properly then even in a population of 1.4 billion people everyone's political opinions can be represented by a single party. As for peaceful transition of power, how is that bad exactly? Since we're cherry picking questions here, how do "government transparency", " freedom of speech" or "rule of law" prohibit the rule of the common people? I would think that they only help strengthen the common people? How are they at odds with any of the other socialist concepts you mentioned? Please excuse my stupid questions, as you mentioned, my media literacy is terrible so I don't even understand these really basic concepts. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zjti8eit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago But that's none of those things are democracy. Democracy is rule by the majority. Whether you get individual rights, social protection, or something else is all dependent on who makes up that majority. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Havald@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago freedom of the private press I apologise but my media literacy is so bad I can't find where press is even mentioned in the document. The closest I could find is freedom of speech but those are two different things. As you admit, they focus on concepts like "separation of powers," or "freedom of the private press," or "political pluralism," as well as "peaceful transition of power." This fundamentally is meant to disqualify socialist concepts of democracy, focused on cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people, and limiting of the powers of the wealthy over society. How do those "fundamentally disqualify" democracies that focus on "cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people and limiting the powers of the wealthy over society"? I would have thought that separation of powers makes it easier to limit the power of the wealthy. Does that concept impede cohesion, cooperation, social unity or rule by the common people in any way? How can the common people have any chance to rule if you don't have courts that make sure the law is upheld by the powerful? In my very limited worldview political pluralism plays a pivotal role in establishing a functioning socialist democracy. Yes, having many differing opinions on any given topic slows the decision making process down. However, how can you expect the marginalized to be represented in any way if you don't have a party representing them? But I guess if you educate your people properly then even in a population of 1.4 billion people everyone's political opinions can be represented by a single party. As for peaceful transition of power, how is that bad exactly? Since we're cherry picking questions here, how do "government transparency", " freedom of speech" or "rule of law" prohibit the rule of the common people? I would think that they only help strengthen the common people? How are they at odds with any of the other socialist concepts you mentioned? Please excuse my stupid questions, as you mentioned, my media literacy is terrible so I don't even understand these really basic concepts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zjti8eit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago But that's none of those things are democracy. Democracy is rule by the majority. Whether you get individual rights, social protection, or something else is all dependent on who makes up that majority. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] vatlark@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago Super interesting survey, thanks for sharing. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] kwezelaar@mastodon.nl -3 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago I should think western propaganda is more effective and yet look at how unhappy eperyone is. You cant just propagandize people into a feeling of happiness. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago I should think western propaganda is more effective and yet look at how unhappy eperyone is. You cant just propagandize people into a feeling of happiness. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Omnipitaph@reddthat.com -3 points 1 year ago I'mma be honest, if I was living in a country where it was common knowledge that slandering the government in anyway got you disappeared, I'd rate them highly on any study put in front of me :/ I know I'm going to have comments telling me I don't know what I'm talking about, and that's ok. I've enough friends in China, and from China, who have talked about this kind of thing to understand that this graph could represent the feelings of the people, but likely doesn't. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (4 children) I still don't like the social credit thing, but I at the same time I wouldnt mind moving to Sweden from the US if I had the chance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (3 children) Sweden also has the credit score thing permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) Oh wow I wasn't aware, I have only been to Sweden and Finland for a day each on a Cruise trip my friends dragged me on permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) To clarify - Sweden has a lesser variant of the U.S credit score system, but it differs in some important ways. For example, you don't have to get a credit card to 'build credit' - you are assumed to be in good standing unless you have unusual ratios of debt and so on. Sweden does not have a social credit score system. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 year ago yeah, but swedens credit score is still worse than chinas social score system permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (3 children) Sweden also has the credit score thing permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) Oh wow I wasn't aware, I have only been to Sweden and Finland for a day each on a Cruise trip my friends dragged me on permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) To clarify - Sweden has a lesser variant of the U.S credit score system, but it differs in some important ways. For example, you don't have to get a credit card to 'build credit' - you are assumed to be in good standing unless you have unusual ratios of debt and so on. Sweden does not have a social credit score system. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 year ago yeah, but swedens credit score is still worse than chinas social score system permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) Oh wow I wasn't aware, I have only been to Sweden and Finland for a day each on a Cruise trip my friends dragged me on permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) To clarify - Sweden has a lesser variant of the U.S credit score system, but it differs in some important ways. For example, you don't have to get a credit card to 'build credit' - you are assumed to be in good standing unless you have unusual ratios of debt and so on. Sweden does not have a social credit score system. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 year ago yeah, but swedens credit score is still worse than chinas social score system permalink fedilink source parent
[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) To clarify - Sweden has a lesser variant of the U.S credit score system, but it differs in some important ways. For example, you don't have to get a credit card to 'build credit' - you are assumed to be in good standing unless you have unusual ratios of debt and so on. Sweden does not have a social credit score system. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 year ago yeah, but swedens credit score is still worse than chinas social score system permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mathemachristian@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 year ago yeah, but swedens credit score is still worse than chinas social score system permalink fedilink source parent