this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)
US News
2048 readers
36 users here now
News from within the empire - From a leftist perspective
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
you do understand they vote and elect people in China right
Yes sure, but as I stated it's possible to successfully run a disinformation campaign to cover an occassional vote. It's also hard to run an opposition against an incumbent candidate when they will literally have you removed from congress on a whim.
Do you have any evidence of disinformation campaigns being directed by Xi towards political opponents internally within China or are you talking out of your ass
Where did I say that there were disinformation campaigns directed against Xi?
I've just said it's possible to rig elections every so often. Surely that isn't an objectionable idea to you?
Your motte & bailey malarkey ainβt gonna fly here.
Didnt know that had a name.
Which two arguments am I conflating here?
Well you called Xi a dictator, which is a pretty big claim.
If you can evidence that it would be great, from my understanding China is a democratic centralist country that has popular support from the billion+ people living there.
Biden said he was a dictator. I asked how he was not a dictator.
well how is he a dictator then?
Media tells him so
You yourself say that you cannot sustain any disinformation campaign indefinitely, even if they might be successful for the occassional vote. So, using your own logic these hypothetical disinformation campaigns you're doing hand wringing over don't actually matter in the grand scheme of things.
You are making a disingenuous argument that ignores the entire point I made.
Disinformation campaigns do matter if you're only having occasional votes - you can slip through a bad decision every once in a while. If you vote on everything, then it wouldn't matter, because you'll have a vote in review where the flawed vote would be corrected.
The only one making disingenuous arguments here is you bud. Your whole argument is based on a completely unfounded supposition that the current system does not end up fairly representing the will of the public. There is no evidence to suggest anything of the sort that I'm aware of.
Meanwhile, the whole idea of direct democracy that you're peddling here doesn't scale beyond small communities. Failing to understand why delegation of concerns is a necessary aspect of any complex organization exposes infantile understanding of the subject you're attempting to debate.
The sheer amount of voting that takes place in China would make you shit your pants.