• 0 Posts
  • 82 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 15th, 2022

help-circle


  • This thread is about a dude in Ireland. It has nothing to do with China.

    “why are we talking about the communist party of china under an article about how the bourgeoisie continues to accumulate wealth to the detriment of the proletariat?”

    The thing is that the comment rings true about the other AES countries also. OP (of the thread, not the post) has identified a problem, and the commies are suggesting a solution to the problem, with statistics that prove it to be viable. You’re dismissing the solution as off-topic, but it’s very relevant. The thread is directly relevant to the article, and the reply is directly relevant to the thread.

    Say what you want about the west, but China isn’t what the world should be either.

    But it is. In lieu of something better, we should all be like China.





  • A Russian soldier who kills a child should be tried for war crimes. On June 1st, the UN said 525 children had been killed. The majority of those would have been killed by Ukrainian military, but it’s okay if you think Russia bares the responsibility for those as well, since Russia did invade the country. Though it would be misleading to not mention that the children killed by Ukraine in the civil war 2014-2022 is also around 525.

    Russia invaded Feb 28, that’s 600 ish days ago, so on average one child dies as a result of this war every day. In the last 17 days, Israel has killed ‘nearly’ 2500 children. That’s ‘nearly’ 150 every single day. We’re outraged by both, but Israel’s slaughter needs to stop 150 times more urgently. Further, there is no argument, no security necessity, no motivation that can be attributed to Israel more convincing than pure hatred and a desire to steal land in order to explain why they are doing this. That means that the condemnation doesn’t deserve nuance. It needs to stop. Israel is the villain.





  • This is the dumbest shit. Do you really think bots can make semantically aware arguments but not parse your instruction? Or do you think the CCP police (It's the CPC by the way, the communist party of China. Communism first, China second, China first is how you get guillotined by angry Maoists) is standing behind me with a gun? How do you reckon that is economical? Anyway I'm not gonna say fuck Xi Jingping, he's a comrade and a great leader, long fucking live Xi Jingping. Absolute treasure. I'll happily say fuck Putin though, hope he chokes together with all the other capitalists and killers.


  • What are you even arguing here? The link corroborates that both RFA and CDT are part of the NED. Is your gripe that they use a different acronym? Propaganda from a geopolitical rival is obviously not a reliable source of information. Though it's true, the website doesn't make it very clear that the NED is part of the USA government or CIA, I didn't think that information was necessary to provide because it's common knowledge. But I can quote Wikipedia again in case you didn't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy

    The NED was created as a bipartisan, private, non-profit corporation, and in turn acts as a grant-making foundation.[2] It is funded primarily by an annual allocation from the U.S. Congress.[4][6][5]

    I generally prefer first hand sources so here's a cia.gov source corroborating their control of RFA. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000846953.pdf But if you prefer, here is an article by an American journalist explaining the relation. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1991/09/22/innocence-abroad-the-new-world-of-spyless-coups/92bb989a-de6e-4bb8-99b9-462c76b59a16/ For example

    Preparing the ground for last month's triumph of overt action was a network of overt operatives who during the last 10 years have quietly been changing the rules of international politics. They have been doing in public what the CIA used to do in private

    So then it comes down to you believing Mediafactchecker's vetting to be more reliable than an organisation's stated goal. So who's mediafactchecker? The website looks very amateurish. What resources do they have for verifying these news stories? Because the link you provided says they haven't reported any fake news in 5 years as far as the site is aware. But that's insane. They have stories like this. https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/squidgame-11232021180155.html
    Squid Game is extremely popular on Korean Soulseek and it's in no way covert.
    Or like this https://www.rfa.org/english/news/uyghur/philanthropist-11212018131511.html
    He's alive enough to take interviews. https://youtu.be/scScu7rcwnI
    RFAs reporting is so painfully fictitious that Mediafactchecker simply can't have done their due diligence. The examples they give are not original reporting, so in those cases it's completely fair to give them a pass. Most likely, Mediafactchecker simply reviewed only the cases they link and nothing else. In my opinion, this means Mediafactchecker is itself unreliable since it creates profiles for sites without looking through a large number of articles.

    Chinese citizens are not allowed to use a VPN, unless government has approved it in some way.

    Then quote some legislation or evidence.

    Onto the article you linked with the racist cartoon. This is an ad for VPN providers. It says China bans VPNs except for their partners, and then links to affiliate purchase links from big popular partner products, popular enough that China definitely would know about them. The article is explicitly aimed at selling products to tourists, not Chinese people. The article also lists blocked sites without actually checking if they're blocked. Not relevant to the core argument, because China does block the majority of western big tech and propaganda, but it shows that it's not a very high effort blog post.

    http://www.chinafirewalltest.com/?siteurl=x.com
    http://www.chinafirewalltest.com/?siteurl=wsj.org

    In summery, this is not a source, because there's no evidence of original reporting or an effort at fact finding.




  • Your article even says it's legal. The problem with this as a source is that their sources are two different CIA fronts. China Digital Times and Radio Free Asia. As it always is whenever it's one of these news stories. RFA just makes up things wholesale but CDT posts bad faith readings of social media posts. For example the user in question was getting mocked and called a liar by everyone in the comments but the CDT article neglected to mention that. For the time being, it's just some rando trying to stirr outrage to get out of a fine. Yes the police report correctly documented that he used a VPN, but that's not why he's being fined.

    Here is a list of CIA fronts provided by the CIA. https://www.ned.org/regions/



  • VPNs are not illegal in China, Russia, UAE, or the DPRK. That's 4 out of 5 where you didn't research it properly. In China, VPN use is legal, setting up your own VPN for domestic use is legal, but renting nodes to foreign companies is illegal unless you can document what the nodes are being used for which VPN providers can't. In Russia, VPN use is legal, but VPN providers must comply with censorship laws and deny access to their blacklist. In the UAE, VPN use is legal, but using a VPN while committing a crime is illegal (So you get a stricter sentence than if you had just committed the crime). In the DPRK, VPN use is legal, but kinda pointless since they have a nation-wide intranet. If you want to access the internet, you use the PUST-run VPN. If you're a tourist, you can use it to connect to your home or work VPN.