Believe it or not, just because a government isn’t aligned with the United States doesn’t make it the hero in every situation. Oppressing and spying on your citizens destroys any claim of people’s liberation–full stop. Why is that so hard to grasp?
Gonna need some sources on that, and please at least do better than fkn vice or BBC articles.
If you read those threads below, you’ll see that citizens in China have very little debt, the so-called social credit score is more akin to financial regulations / consequences for wealthier citizens skirting laws. They stopped enacting or enforcing regulations on the rich in the west about 70 years ago, but unfortunately for them in China, the rich keep ending up in prison.
What about China spying on its own people?
Just because the social credit system is less comprehensive than it appears in foreign media reports does not mean that it is incapable of causing harm, of course. Moreover, the Chinese government maintains a sophisticated and pervasive surveillance apparatus, which it regularly uses to curtail the civil rights of its citizens. It’s not so difficult to imagine how the misguided belief that the social credit system centrally integrates other state-operated surveillance technologies may have originated, given the troubling creation of DNA databases in Xinjiang and police procurement of facial recognition technology across the country.
Another way that the social credit system strengthens blacklists is by fostering closer communication not just within government but between government and industry—in particular, with China’s biggest technology firms. Previously, people who could not purchase airline tickets through official channels if they were blacklisted might have still managed to use websites like CTrip.com or the in-app travel booking feature of the mobile wallet service Alipay to circumvent these restrictions. That is no longer possible under agreements that these companies and several dozen others have signed with China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the powerful government body that has spearheaded the social credit system’s development.
Welp.
And please, tell me why the Great Firewall of online control that prevents people from seeing anything related to the Tiananmen Square massacre and other dirty secrets is such a good, anti-surveillance thing to do.
Why are you skipping paragraphs?
But the social credit system as it currently exists is not aimed at Orwellian social control. Rather, the cluster of policy initiatives designated by the term are intended to promote greater trust—namely, trust between companies and their customers, and between citizens and the government. This trust-building can serve both economic and political ends. While many of the problems that the government uses to justify the need for a social credit system have economic considerations at their core—improving food safety, punishing debtors, cracking down on counterfeit goods sold online—others fit a broader theme of promoting institutional trust, such as by penalizing those who produce misleading or forged academic research.
Also, the first source is someone who lives in China. And so much of what is said in the western media about tianenmen is a total lie.
I’m not skipping paragraphs, just pointing out information which confirms what I’ve already said–that China is a surveillance state. Why do you want to ignore that? And are you seriously denying the Tiananmen Square massacre? Jesus Christ.
I’m aware all this will be brand new to you, because you’ve only ever heard the western telling of Tiananmen.
What about the Tiananmen square massacre?
- Tiananmen Square “Massacre”, A Propaganda Hoax.
- It wasn’t a massacre of peaceful students, but a skirmish between PLA soldiers and armed detachments from the pro-capitalist / free market reform movement. The protest movement, as evidenced by their own accounts, called for market liberalisation, and free market reforms, rallying around a replica of the statue of liberty. After the movement had been building in the square for seven weeks, unarmed soldiers were sent in to disperse the protesters, after which many soldiers were beaten to death, torched, and lynched. The New York Times death count went from 2600, to many thousands, to 8000, to tens of thousands. In reality only around ~200 (including soldiers) were killed or trampled, in smaller clashes outside the square. The on-scene New York Times reporter disavowed the article, especially about machine-gunning of protesters. A wikileaks cable from a US ambassador to the US state department, confirmed that no killings or machine-gunnings took place in the square.
- A British Lie.
- Deng XiaoPing was ill at the time, and the CIA had an inside man inside the party, Zhao Ziyang, dubbed China’s Gorbachev, who promised to open the door to market liberalisation if the protest movement had succeeded, like those of Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Georgia, and the USSR.
- The protest movement followed the line of “color revolutions”, in which the US tried to destabilize and create counter-revolutions in eastern Europe and Latin America after the fall of the USSR. The strategy was to stir division within and without, by inundating the media with news of massacres of “peaceful”, pro-capitalist / market reformers.
- The defeat of a counter revolution in China.
Then surely the Chinese government would be perfectly fine disseminating these facts to its citizens and the world at large instead of blanket-banning any searches for it? The left is in a pathetic state if there are people who legitimately think other governments are automatically good just because they oppose the U.S. The fact that people who claim to oppose oppression defend this shit makes me sick.
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/china-1989-tiananmen-square-protests-demonstration-massacre
