Comment by embedding-shape
Comment by embedding-shape 5 days ago
Which used to be seen as "Ew, China has their own version? Crazy censorship" but after some time it seems like the US is aiming for the very same thing. Classy.
Comment by embedding-shape 5 days ago
Which used to be seen as "Ew, China has their own version? Crazy censorship" but after some time it seems like the US is aiming for the very same thing. Classy.
> I am an open minded, well traveled man. I disagree with the powerful.
This kind of narrative is actually one of the more popular forms of propaganda.
"We are the side of the revolutionaries. The status quo is wrong but only about the things we want to change and not the things we want to stay the same. Powerful people are our opponents."
All politics is about opposing powerful people, because if they weren't powerful then it would be easy to defeat them. But there are different groups of powerful people, with different interests, and then it rather matters which ones you align yourself with on a given issue. And if it's always the same ones then you're doing partisanship rather than reasoning.
A KGB spy and a CIA agent meet up in a bar for a friendly drink.
"I have to admit, I'm always so impressed by Soviet propaganda. You really know how to get people worked up," the CIA agent says.
"Thank you," the KGB says. "We do our best but truly, it's nothing compared to American propaganda. Your people believe everything your state media tells them."
The CIA agent drops his drink in shock and disgust. "Thank you friend, but you must be confused... There's no propaganda in America."
Case-in-point of why we shouldn't have approached China like we did over the last few decades. It normalized totalitarianism in some segments of Western society.
America: does the usual American thing Americanly
Commentators: What are we, some kind of Asians?
That's... not what I'm saying?
The US has traditionally had at least some counterweight to the state, in the form of a free press, free speech, opposition parties, checks and balances in branches of government, and an armed populace. The effectiveness of these measures has varied over time but there has never been a point when any single institution had control over the United States to the point that the CPC has control over mainland China.
People are concerned that the US is taking an authoritarian bent under Trump, and many of the tactics being used would lead to a state far more similar to the PRC than the historical US.
There still isn't. If a single institution had the level of control over the US that the CCP has over mainland China, you wouldn't be allowed to talk about it on HN, as Paul Graham would have his webserver license revoked for allowing it. Webserver licenses are a thing in China.
Although... Actually... There are many conspiracy theories that fit this description.
I lived in China as an American a while back and had a similar take. Their ability to grow successfully and manage their populace definitely presented a new model to a lot of countries.
> presented a new model to a lot of countries.
that is a common mistake. it is called the "If China can do it, I can do it too" symptom, which has been discussed like a million times on Chinese social media. interestingly, the biggest obstacle for other countries to repeat it is the fact that there is a country called China.
What does their treatment of the Uyghurs present to other countries?
Why blame China? This dire situation is not on foreign nations seeking to destroy US democracy, it's entirely on domestic robber barons capturing the State for their own gains. China has very little soft power among the general population, while Musk, Ellison and the other propagandists run the show.
Our domestic robber barons are building the capacity to monitor and control Americans in ways similar to those used by China to monitor and control their population.
China isn't to blame, but they are a frightening example of where things are headed and they're giving the robber barons screwing us a blueprint to follow.
> Case-in-point of why we shouldn't have approached China like we did over the last few decades. It normalized totalitarianism in some segments of Western society.
An interesting thought I read a couple days ago: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/24/opinion/trump-carney-chin...:
> Finally, and most controversially, I suspect the same “if not America, then China” logic applies to political ordering as well. The United States under Trumpian conditions has allowed populism to come to power, bringing chaos and authoritarian behavior in its train. Recoil from that by all means — but recognize that it happened through democratic mechanisms, under freewheeling political conditions.
> Meanwhile, the modes through which Europe and Canada have sought to suppress populism involve harsh restrictions on speech, elite collusion and other expression of managerial illiberalism. And what is China’s dictatorship if not managerial illiberalism in full flower? When European elites talk about China as a potentially more stable partner than the whipsawing United States, when they talk admiringly about its environmental goals and technocratic capacity, they aren’t defending a liberal alternative to Trumpian populism. They are letting the magnet of Chinese power draw them away from their own democratic traditions.
China is not publicly espousing conquering Canada and Greenland (Europe). Who would you choose, the people threatening to invade you, or the other guys?!?!
China claims parts of India, occupied some parts already in Ladakh, has conquered and subjugates Tibet, subjugates Xinjiang and has disputes with almost all other neighbors.
As a person whose country is being threatened by China, I support the US.
If China were as developed as the US, a lot of China’s threats would have been reality.
China is threatening invade other places, which are of more value to them.
Besides fear of populism, I think it reveals a genuine contempt for the United States on the part of Canada and Europe, one that past US presidents and policy makers have long overlooked and downplayed. Note that besides all of the territory China claims (as other responses have noted), including the entirety of the Taiwanese archipelago and islands within the territorial waters of the Philippines and Vietnam, China is the single largest purchaser of Russian energy, and it supplies Russia with drone parts and other restricted components, and also provides Russia with intelligence to better plan and execute strikes on Ukraine.
> Besides fear of populism, I think it reveals a genuine contempt for the United States on the part of Canada and Europe, one that past US presidents and policy makers have long overlooked and downplayed.
I think that's definitely a thing. What's the term? The narcissism of small differences? That contempt is there, and I've long felt it, and (unusually) I think it's also mirrored by some Americans.
There are a lot of internal contradictions and tensions that Trump is bringing to the surface.
> The narcissism of small differences?
Certain political parties (typically leftwing) in these countries will often leverage, if not outright foment, anti-Americanism for political gain. And then you have the external propaganda campaigns, most notably undertaken by the Soviet Union and later, the Russian Federation. The USSR also funded violent separatist movements, like the IRA and ETA, and propped up "pacifist" protest movements that curiously only ever protested the US and other NATO countries' militaries, disregarding the Eastern Block's military buildup.
Today, Code Pink and other organizations run by power couple Neville Roy Singham (ThoughtWorks) and Jodie Evans do this on behalf of the CCP. Name-dropping them now is contentious, because FOXNews and other rightwing outlets have alleged a link to anti-ICE protests. But there was a lengthy NYT piece covering them and their pro-CCP activism back in 2023: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/05/world/europe/neville-roy-...
> I think it's also mirrored by some Americans.
It's surely reciprocated, but usually only by Americans who been exposed to enough anti-Americanism from these countries to wise up. The default attitude of Americans towards our allies is overwhelmingly positive: https://news.gallup.com/poll/472421/canada-britain-favored-r...
If a large outside power is intent on screwing with your populace I think the only way to really stop it is with diplomacy or a crackdown on free speech.
Authoritarianism has been starting to become normalized because China and Russia are increasingly able to mess with our society in the same way our leaders always messed with theirs.
True, true, so true. Actually when a large outside power is screwing with your populace you gotta crackdown on the whole constitution. Yep, that's the only solution i think, sign of the times, I guess!
Unfortunately so. Niceties like civil rights and free elections were great before the rise of mortal enemies like Russia and China. Now we have to curtail those for a time to protect our democracy.
Don’t worry, everything will return to normal one day. Pinky swear.
> Which used to be seen as "Ew, China has their own version? Crazy censorship"
It used to be marketed as that by "China evil" people. Western politicians have always seen this as an arms race. They claim infinite brutal censorship and suppression in China in order to claim that not having it here is a strategic disadvantage. Meanwhile, China's "social credit" is just like a US credit score, which in most countries is an illegal thing to do.
This is completely bipartisan, both US parties take turns shitting on their two greatest enemies: the Bill of Rights and (almost completely defeated at this point) antitrust law. Those are painted as China's advantages: that they don't have to respect anyone's rights and that their government directly runs companies. 1) Neither of those things are true, and 2) they just ignore that China manufactures things and invests in infrastructure (which US politicians as individuals have no idea how to do because they are lawyers and marketers), and pretend that everything can be reduced to gamified finance and propaganda tricks.
It's the "missile gap" again. The US pretended and marketed that Russia had an enormous amount of nuclear weapons in order to fool us into allowing US politicians to dedicate the economy to producing an enormous amount of nuclear weapons.
The result, the child of the Oracle guy owns half the media, and uses it for explicitly political purposes that align with the administration (whichever it may be.)
> This is completely bipartisan, both US parties take turns shitting on their two greatest enemies: the Bill of Rights
Ignoring the magnitude to draw a false equivalence is a great way to discredit your position. Neither party is perfect but only one of them is denying the full personhood of over half the population, having armed men threaten the public with lethal violence over constitutionally-protected activities, or saying that the executive should be able to direct private industries for profit. Debates about things like how much the government should ask private companies to enforce their terms of service are valid but it’s like arguing over a hangnail while you’re having a heart attack.
Police in all states systemically violate it. MAGA ramped it up to 11 though.
"The result, the child of the Oracle guy owns half the media"
I guess in 90ies version of polymarket nobody would have had that result on their bingo sheet. But, well, they probably also didn't have "something like polymarket could exist in the free world" on those bingo cards, either...
Most of the country is genuinely committed to the bill of rights. The Trump administration is determined to ignore every single amendment, but even a lot of the Republican party I don't really think wants this. People are genuinely worried about Chinese media control. But Trump obviously wants to control the media and censor things. I hope the right turns around. Assuming that everyone in politics is working in bad faith is how we become an authoritarian country like China. It is hard when the leadership is obviously working in bad faith and the entire Republican party deliberately chooses bad faith and lies over any reasonable alternatives.
> Most of the country is genuinely committed to the bill of rights.
I'd like to see evidence of that. A third of the country voted to burn the bill of rights, and another third voted they don't care but they'd be ok with it happening.
It’s more sinister than simple censorship.
The point is brainwashing.