140
submitted 1 year ago by APassenger@lemmy.one to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

A thread yesterday had a variety of people asking if the unemployment is lower because the youth are well cared for.

Please click through and read for additional context. Families are helping. Parents age and are not a long-term plan except for the most unusually wealthy.

Please remember: China is nominally communist. Functionally, they are capitalists with an usual side of excess infrastructure spending. A strong central government doesn't make a country communist.

Their land use rules... that makes them communist-ish. But that's a small part of a far larger picture.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Pili@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago

What's the point of downvoting a reply that's exactly on topic and fully sourced? Is it the redditors again?

[-] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Because people don't like to read the opposite of what the West propaganda shows, it creates a cognitive dissonance with reality and their beliefs, and before questioning their beliefs, they choose to question reality.

I assumed it was downvoted by people who see China as being largely a state capitalist economy with a nominally socialist/communist government, whom I would guess are primarily lefties. Contrary to seeing it as western propaganda, they'd see it as Chinese propaganda as it pretends that the country is something it really isn't.

This is only a possible view, of course.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They sourced gini information three times, and then cited what dollars-to-donuts is a propaganda work from someone that agrees with them. It's on topic, but it's also a lot of words to prop up a weak point.

You could say people should respond instead of downvote, but they also say to pick who you argue with carefully, because most arguments are a waste of time.

[-] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fully sourced means my statements were sourced, not that it was dripping in sources.

Also, the book I cited is not propaganda. Please don't resort to calling everything that posits an alternate view propaganda.

From the Springer page on the book,

Roland Boer is a professor in the School of Marxism Studies at Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China.

So he has a degree in and is a professor in the exact subject he's talking about, from a respected University:

Dalian University of Technology (DUT) [...] is a public research university located in Dalian, Liaoning, China, with an additional campus in Panjin, Liaoning. [...] Formerly called the Dalian Institute of Technology, DUT is renowned as one of the Big Four Institutes of Technology in China. [...] As of 2022, DUT was listed as one of the top 400 global universities in several major international universities' rankings

Moreover, it's not some random publisher or some guy's PDF on the internet. It's published by Springer which, if you have done any academic reading in almost any field, you will know that Springer content is high-quality and trustworthy. In fact, at a lot of the university libraries I've been in, some subjects (maths, especially) are probably three-quarters Springer publications,

Springer Science+Business Media, commonly known as Springer, is a German multinational publishing company of books, e-books and peer-reviewed journals in science, humanities, technical and medical (STM) publishing.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 1 year ago

Yep, a professor of Marxism in a state-run Chinese university, definitely sounds very neutral. /s

Springer is an academic publisher, but that doesn't mean they agree with the viewpoints of every niche humanities publication in their catalogue. It's sort of like how Penguin offers both Das Kapital and Mein Kampf (with a disclaimer that I'm not calling anyone a Nazi).

Please don’t resort to calling everything that posits an alternate view propaganda.

Even when propaganda is true it's propaganda. Leftists are usually pretty good about acknowledging that, even.

[-] steltek@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago

I'm gonna say it's because it's a wall of text with mostly subjective or aspirational statements to rebut a cheap two sentence quippy post.

It would have been sufficient to simply state that China' inequality problem is improving. If you have the free time for the wall-of-text route, demonstrating how concrete communist policies are directly leading to these improvements would have been much better than the "CCP works really hard to help people" fluff language.

this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
140 points (89.8% liked)

World News

32285 readers
737 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS