7 ms·

The Chinese are innovating totalitarianism faster than any other country. Take this, for example: > ... When undergraduate students at Peking University, which

by apo 7y ago

The Chinese are innovating totalitarianism faster than any other country. Take this, for example: > ... When undergraduate students at Peking University, which was at the center of the incident, were shown copies of the iconic photograph [of Tank Man] 16 years afterwards, they were "genuinely mystified." One of the students said that the image was "artwork." It is noted in the documentary Frontline: The Tank Man that he whispered to the student next to him "89," which led the interviewer to surmise that the student may have concealed his knowledge of the event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man The fact that Leica, a foreign company, is now apologizing about the ad (and has deleted it from their YouTube account) shows just how effective the Chinese government has become at their trade. From the article: > “Leica Camera AG must, therefore, distance itself from the content shown in the video and regrets any misunderstandings or false conclusions that may have been drawn,” Emily Anderson, a spokesperson for Leica, told SCMP.

spookyuser 7y ago
> ... When undergraduate students at Peking University, which was at the center of the incident, were shown copies of the iconic photograph [of Tank Man] 16 years afterwards, they were "genuinely mystified." One of the students said that the image was "artwork." It is noted in the documentary Frontline: The Tank Man that he whispered to the student next to him "89," which led the interviewer to surmise that the student may have concealed his knowledge of the event. Reminds me of this: https://vimeo.com/44078865 https://vimeo.com/44078865
- sverige 7y ago
  Money quote: "Which unit are you from?"
0815test 7y ago
> "genuinely mystified." ... "artwork." It's all about plausible deniability. Funnily enough, that's exactly why censorship doesn't actually work - these things are precisely what people would say if they knew about the picture and its significance, but wanted to make an outer impression that they don't. I think it's quite possible that the Chinese nationalists "protesting" Leica's shameful, anti-Chinese campaign are playing a very similar game, even while clearly hinting that they do respect the government's authority. These things are not what they seem to be, there's a lot of subtlety involved.
- daodedickinson 7y ago
  Ketman https://www.scribd.com/document/353888952/The-Captive-Mind-Czeslaw-Milosz-pdf https://www.scribd.com/document/353888952/The-Captive-Mind-C...
- PavlovsCat 7y ago
  Oh, it works. The objective is to dissolve the bonds between people is dissolved that would allow them to collectively organize and resist. If everybody pretends they don't know, even if everybody else knows they do know, for all practical purposes, the objective of censorship is accomplished. https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-Censorship-China-Allows-Government-Criticism-Silences-Collective-Expression https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-Censorship-China-...
  - 0815test 7y ago
    "Collectively organize and resist"? That's really not what Chinese politics looks like, either today or in the foreseeable future. It's not just that the vast majority of Chinese are quite apathetic about politics (though they definitely are) - most of them nowadays think the government is actually doing a pretty good job, all things considered. And they're even less inclined to think that rocking the boat in any way would be a good idea. Now, these overtly-expressed positions might change, and even quite suddenly (that's just about the only difference censorship makes - you're not going to see any gradual shifts or impending warning signs), but only if there's some sort of crisis that prompts such a change; they're not going to change on their own.
    - PavlovsCat 7y ago
      You're basically just stating that the objective has already been achieved (not exactly a surprise with decades of murdering dissidents), and I never claimed otherwise.
    - nercht12 7y ago
      > It's not just that the vast majority of Chinese are quite apathetic about politics (though they definitely are) What? You have a source on this? Last I checked, people were jumping out of buildings to commit suicide so the gov put nets around the bottom. Things may have gotten better, but they are far from the ideal anyone wants to live in. I think the "apathy" you're referring to is actually "resignation" to the fact that they feel they can't do anything about the problem. Their country is dying off, and all they can do is watch. Miserably sad. :..(
duxup 7y ago
They've even got totalitarian apps: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/07/world/asia/china-xi-jinping-study-the-great-nation-app.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/07/world/asia/china-xi-jinpi... >Schools are shaming students with low app scores. Government offices are holding study sessions and forcing workers who fall behind to write reports criticizing themselves. Private companies, hoping to curry favor with party officials, are ranking employees based on their use of the app and awarding top performers the title of “star learner.” >Many employers now require workers to submit daily screenshots documenting how many points they have earned. How long until we see weaker nations require the same of their own people? Participating in the firewall, etc?
- EGreg 7y ago
  Soon, if you don't play a certain amount of time and don't swear loyalty to the party regularly enough, you won't be able to buy food. https://www.cnet.com/news/china-turns-to-tech-to-monitor-shame-and-rate-citizens/ https://www.cnet.com/news/china-turns-to-tech-to-monitor-sha...
  - microsage 7y ago
    This is completely unfounded speculation not found in that article or in any other writing on the topic(s) (of social credit scores and the study the great nation app). Or possibly it's an attempt at some dark humor through hyperbole. Either way, I see a lot of these sort of extreme claims on HN whenever China comes up, and I think we'd all do better to discuss what's actually happening rather than our wildest fears. This type of speculation really muddies the waters and makes it hard to have a thoughtful discussion about anything China-related on here, and China is a big, complicated, important topic right now that deserves careful consideration. It also risks undermining legitimate criticisms of Chinese policy, or at least making them less believable, which I assume is the exact opposite of the intent of the poster here.
    - EGreg 7y ago
      Consider that already, purchases for mobility and communication are restricted based on social credit scores: Cellphones https://www.sfgate.com/business/amp/China-requires-ID-to-buy-cell-phone-numbers-3175130.php https://www.sfgate.com/business/amp/China-requires-ID-to-buy... Trains https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g297411-i3650-k10245003-Is_it_true_that_Chinese_people_need_ID_to_buy_bus_tickets-Guangdong.html https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g297411-i3650-k1024500... There are official confirmations http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2019/02/22/china-social-credit-travel-ban http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2019/02/22/china-social-credi... They also officially admit they can: Throttle your internet speed Ban your kids from some schools Banning you from certain jobs Taking your pets away http://www.businessinsider.com/china-social-credit-system-punishments-and-rewards-explained-2018-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/china-social-credit-system-pu... I think that predicting possible restricting ability to buy food is not “unfounded speculation” but rather pointing out something that can literally be one step away. If you help someone with a low social credit score who has been restricted, your score also lowers. The AI can track where you’ve been and who you helped. Uyghur markets are gone. Their freedom of movement has been restricted as they are in the re-education centers for years. Are you really taking issue with the suggestion that food can be next, how much hyperbole is it given the scale of what happened in 2018 and 2019 thus far alone?
dx87 7y ago
That reminds me of an interview with a Chinese esports team I saw at a tournament a few months ago. The interviewer was doing a light-hearted game where they showed twitch emotes to the Chinese team and asked what they thought the emotes meant. One of the emotes was a frog (the creator of the game goes by IceFrog), and the Chinese translator said that the players weren't allowed to say anything about the emote. We later found out that they were afraid to say anything because the nickname of the former president of China was "Toad King", and the players were worried that they'd get in trouble if they said anything about the frog emote.
- HAL9000Ti 7y ago
  Fasinating, I never heard about that one before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toad_worship_(Chinese_internet_subculture) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toad_worship_(Chinese_internet... searching "膜蛤" on baidu.com yields zero results.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- gxwmg 7y ago
  Well, there's a frog in the west that can also get you in trouble...
  - wahnfrieden 7y ago
    As a symbol of racist misogynist hate of marginalized groups, not a statement against a totalitarian leader. What exactly are you comparing?
    - gxwmg 7y ago
      "racist misogynist hate of marginalized groups", that's got to be the winner of some bingo lol
    - butYouSuck 7y ago
throw2016 7y ago
China is a totalitarian country. Its not a democracy so there is no point criticizing them for the lack of democracy but its democracies that must be held accountable, yet we do not see that right from Snowden, Assange and Manning to a culture of surveillance, torture, war crimes, secret courts and processes and border agents demanding to go through your personal papers. You can't claim to be a democracy and do these things by definition yet not only are 'democracies' doing these things openly but we have people who seem less outraged by what's happening in their own 'democratic' backyards and more outraged by what a totalitarian country is doing. This lacks credibility and seems more like a way to score political points than out of any genuine concern for democracy or human rights.
- mc32 7y ago
  We could have and still can apply economic pressure, but let’s face it, if the EU and US even tried, multinationals would complain it puts companies in peril or economic disadvantage. Before allowing them into MFN status or WTO, we had much better leverage, but that was wasted.
- yorwba 7y ago
  China does claim to be a democracy in its constitution, though: Under the leadership of the Communist Party of China [...] the Chinese people of all nationalities will continue [...] to turn China into a socialist country that is prosperous, powerful, democratic and culturally advanced. http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Constitution/2007-11/15/content_1372962.htm http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Constitution/2007-11/15/con... Of course the literal text of the constitution is completely ignored in practice, but criticizing that doesn't automatically lack credibility.
  - Zuider 7y ago
    The word 'democracy' has been used in two incompatible senses. In the West, we see democracy as a means of limiting the excesses of power. As Karl Popper noted, 'democracy' is not so much the answer to the question "who should rule?", as to the question "how do we prevent bad rulers ruling absolutely?". When 'democracy' is taken to imply the first answer, it is seen as the grounds of total legitimacy for the ruler. It is simply a substitute for the divine right of kings. In the second case, the ruler seen as having limited legitimacy, subject to the rule of law, of criticism, even ridicule, and of lawful challenge from other potential rulers. When totalitarian states called themselves 'Democratic People's Republics' they were not so much lying as using the term 'democracy' in the first sense above. They were signaling that their governments had a legitimate claim to absolute power on the grounds that they were the expression of Rousseau's 'general will'. Those who clashed with the state were not seen as rebels against the ruler, but as 'enemies of the people'.
PavlovsCat 7y ago
> Leica, a foreign company, is now apologizing about the ad (and has deleted it from their YouTube account) Joining Mercedes Benz in that particular hall of shame: https://money.cnn.com/2018/02/07/technology/mercedes-benz-tibet-china-apology/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/02/07/technology/mercedes-benz-ti...
- adventured 7y ago
  Along with the airlines regarding Taiwan. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/business/taiwan-american-airlines-china.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/business/taiwan-american-...
- snaky 7y ago
  MB sales on Western markets didn't drop because of that, so could we say that was a rational business decision by MB.
  - PavlovsCat 7y ago
    Shame refers to morality and as such to the personal responsibility of individuals. > There was a widespread conviction that it is impossible to withstand temptation of any kind, that none of us could be trusted or even be expected to betrustworthy when the chips are down, that to be tempted and to be forced are almost the same, whereas in the words of Mary McCarthy, who first spotted this fallacy: "If somebody points a gun at you and says,'Kill your friend or I will kill you,' he is tempting you, that is all." And while a temptation where one's life is at stake may be a legal excuse for a crime, it certainly is not a moral justification. [..] > It is fortunate and wise that no law exists for sins of omission and no human court is called up onto sit in judgment over them. But it is equally fortunate that there exists still one institution in society in which it is well-nigh impossible to evade issues of personal responsibility, where all justifications of a nonspecific, abstract nature - from the Zeitgeist down to the Oedipus complex - break down, where not systems or trends or original sin are judged, but men of flesh and blood like you and me, whose deeds are of course still human deeds but who appear before a tribunal because they have broken some law whose maintenance we regard as essential for the integrity of our common humanity. Legal and moral issues are by no means the same, but they have a certain affinity with each other because they both presuppose the power of judgment. [..] > What mattered in our early, nontheoretical education in morality was never the conduct of the true culprit of whom even then no one in his right mind could expect other than the worst. Thus we were outraged, but not morally disturbed, by the bestial behavior of the stormtroopers in the concentration camps and the torture cellars of the secret police, and it would have been strange indeed to grow morally indignant over the speeches of the Nazi big wigs inpower, whose opinions had been common knowledge for years. [..] The moral issue arose only with the phenomenon of "coordination," that is, not with fear-inspired hypocrisy, but with this very early eagerness not to miss the train of History, with this, as it were, honest overnight change of opinion that befell a great majority of public figures in all walks of life and all ramifications of culture, accompanied, as it was, by an incredible ease with which life long friendships were broken and discarded. In brief, what disturbed us was the behavior not of our enemies but of our friends, who had done nothing to bring this situation about. They were not responsible for the Nazis, they were only impressed by the Nazi success and unable to pit their own judgment against the verdict of History, as they read it. Without taking into account the almost universal breakdown, not of personal responsibility, but of personal judgment in the early stages of the Nazi regime, it is impossible to understand what actually happened. -- Hannah Arendt, "Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship"
frostburg 7y ago
Leica distancing itself from the ad isn't a good look. The company is not very relevant for actual "working" photographers today (I use one, but tellingly photography isn't a real job for me), but it once was and at the time they stood up to their own homegrown totalitarian regime by helping jews escape Germany disguised as transferring employees.
- jessedhillon 7y ago
  The ad itself is supposed to be a tribute to photo journalists, highlighting the risks they're prepared to take in pursuit of the truth. I can hardly capture in words how incongruent Leica's actions are with their message.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- GuiA 7y ago
  Like many “classic” camera companies (Polaroid, Voigtländer, etc), “Leica” today is a name controlled by various holding entities and private equity firms. While it might bear the same name, it has very little in common with the original company (the one that saved the lives of hundreds of Jewish employees).
  - frostburg 7y ago
    This is not actually true. I mean, it's not under the ownership of the Leitz family, but it's basically steered around by Kaufmann and is more or less in continuity with its past (to the point that they moved back to Wetzlar). Voigtlander is a brandname used by Cosina.
4ntonius8lock 7y ago
I'm curious as to what percentage of the US vs Chinese populations know about their own governments horrors? I mean, what percentage of US students would recognize the Tuskegee experiments continued until 1972? I've had many people straight up tell me that is a lie, or a 'conspiracy theory'. In fact, I think this post will get down voted, despite asking a perfectly valid question and having concrete factual examples. Not saying it isn't appalling that Leica is apologizing. Thought it makes sense from a business perspective. I'm just curious to know what is more effective: the soft censorship of the west created by unwritten social norms or the hard censorship of the east?
- icelancer 7y ago
  >> what percentage of US students would recognize the Tuskegee experiments continued until 1972 Literally everyone who has ever had to take a medical or scientific ethics course knows this, since the IRB process was born specifically from this horrific abuse of science. I'm guessing most high schools cover it in US History and/or World History, also, as mine did.
  - AbitofAsum 7y ago
    I went to a rather nice semi-private high school (graduated 15 years ago) and Tuskegee was not covered
    - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
      Thank you. It seems this is common knowledge in some circles. I know for a fact it isn't in others. My post was just a question as to the overall percentage. Not whether there were any Americans who knew about the experiments. Apparently asking questions and being inquisitive is bad now.
- danso 7y ago
  How has Tuskegee been “soft” censored by the U.S. government?
noonespecial 7y ago
they were "genuinely mystified." One of the students said that the image was "artwork." Thats just spooky close to the "It doesn't look like anything to me" from Westworld. How long until they really don't see the man and the tank at all?
SenHeng 7y ago
Adding some personal anecdata, Singapore has been having a large influx of Chinese students for the past couple of decades and I have spoken with a few who are adamant that Tiananmen is made up because they ‘don’t know anyone who has actually been through it’.
- throwaway55244 7y ago
  Are you speaking to them in Mandarin or English? I find when I speak in Mandarin, and in a nonjudgmental manner, they all know about it. Of course they all say the protest started due to labor reform issues and not because of democracy.
- everdev 7y ago
  I bet 10-15 years ago the Tianamen video would be undeniable proof. But now with deepfakes and other video editing, it wouldn't be that crazy for an average person in China to simply not believe the video was real if their government universally denies it.
tomc1985 7y ago
It's pathetic that companies are giving in to that pressure

by apo 7y ago

spookyuser 7y ago

> ... When undergraduate students at Peking University, which was at the center of the incident, were shown copies of the iconic photograph [of Tank Man] 16 years afterwards, they were "genuinely mystified." One of the students said that the image was "artwork." It is noted in the documentary Frontline: The Tank Man that he whispered to the student next to him "89," which led the interviewer to surmise that the student may have concealed his knowledge of the event. Reminds me of this: https://vimeo.com/44078865 https://vimeo.com/44078865

sverige 7y ago
Money quote: "Which unit are you from?"

0815test 7y ago

> "genuinely mystified." ... "artwork." It's all about plausible deniability. Funnily enough, that's exactly why censorship doesn't actually work - these things are precisely what people would say if they knew about the picture and its significance, but wanted to make an outer impression that they don't. I think it's quite possible that the Chinese nationalists "protesting" Leica's shameful, anti-Chinese campaign are playing a very similar game, even while clearly hinting that they do respect the government's authority. These things are not what they seem to be, there's a lot of subtlety involved.

daodedickinson 7y ago
Ketman https://www.scribd.com/document/353888952/The-Captive-Mind-Czeslaw-Milosz-pdf https://www.scribd.com/document/353888952/The-Captive-Mind-C...
PavlovsCat 7y ago
Oh, it works. The objective is to dissolve the bonds between people is dissolved that would allow them to collectively organize and resist. If everybody pretends they don't know, even if everybody else knows they do know, for all practical purposes, the objective of censorship is accomplished. https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-Censorship-China-Allows-Government-Criticism-Silences-Collective-Expression https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-Censorship-China-...
- 0815test 7y ago
  "Collectively organize and resist"? That's really not what Chinese politics looks like, either today or in the foreseeable future. It's not just that the vast majority of Chinese are quite apathetic about politics (though they definitely are) - most of them nowadays think the government is actually doing a pretty good job, all things considered. And they're even less inclined to think that rocking the boat in any way would be a good idea. Now, these overtly-expressed positions might change, and even quite suddenly (that's just about the only difference censorship makes - you're not going to see any gradual shifts or impending warning signs), but only if there's some sort of crisis that prompts such a change; they're not going to change on their own.
  - PavlovsCat 7y ago
    You're basically just stating that the objective has already been achieved (not exactly a surprise with decades of murdering dissidents), and I never claimed otherwise.
  - nercht12 7y ago
    > It's not just that the vast majority of Chinese are quite apathetic about politics (though they definitely are) What? You have a source on this? Last I checked, people were jumping out of buildings to commit suicide so the gov put nets around the bottom. Things may have gotten better, but they are far from the ideal anyone wants to live in. I think the "apathy" you're referring to is actually "resignation" to the fact that they feel they can't do anything about the problem. Their country is dying off, and all they can do is watch. Miserably sad. :..(

duxup 7y ago

They've even got totalitarian apps: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/07/world/asia/china-xi-jinping-study-the-great-nation-app.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/07/world/asia/china-xi-jinpi... >Schools are shaming students with low app scores. Government offices are holding study sessions and forcing workers who fall behind to write reports criticizing themselves. Private companies, hoping to curry favor with party officials, are ranking employees based on their use of the app and awarding top performers the title of “star learner.” >Many employers now require workers to submit daily screenshots documenting how many points they have earned. How long until we see weaker nations require the same of their own people? Participating in the firewall, etc?

EGreg 7y ago
Soon, if you don't play a certain amount of time and don't swear loyalty to the party regularly enough, you won't be able to buy food. https://www.cnet.com/news/china-turns-to-tech-to-monitor-shame-and-rate-citizens/ https://www.cnet.com/news/china-turns-to-tech-to-monitor-sha...
- microsage 7y ago
  This is completely unfounded speculation not found in that article or in any other writing on the topic(s) (of social credit scores and the study the great nation app). Or possibly it's an attempt at some dark humor through hyperbole. Either way, I see a lot of these sort of extreme claims on HN whenever China comes up, and I think we'd all do better to discuss what's actually happening rather than our wildest fears. This type of speculation really muddies the waters and makes it hard to have a thoughtful discussion about anything China-related on here, and China is a big, complicated, important topic right now that deserves careful consideration. It also risks undermining legitimate criticisms of Chinese policy, or at least making them less believable, which I assume is the exact opposite of the intent of the poster here.
  - EGreg 7y ago
    Consider that already, purchases for mobility and communication are restricted based on social credit scores: Cellphones https://www.sfgate.com/business/amp/China-requires-ID-to-buy-cell-phone-numbers-3175130.php https://www.sfgate.com/business/amp/China-requires-ID-to-buy... Trains https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g297411-i3650-k10245003-Is_it_true_that_Chinese_people_need_ID_to_buy_bus_tickets-Guangdong.html https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g297411-i3650-k1024500... There are official confirmations http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2019/02/22/china-social-credit-travel-ban http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2019/02/22/china-social-credi... They also officially admit they can: Throttle your internet speed Ban your kids from some schools Banning you from certain jobs Taking your pets away http://www.businessinsider.com/china-social-credit-system-punishments-and-rewards-explained-2018-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/china-social-credit-system-pu... I think that predicting possible restricting ability to buy food is not “unfounded speculation” but rather pointing out something that can literally be one step away. If you help someone with a low social credit score who has been restricted, your score also lowers. The AI can track where you’ve been and who you helped. Uyghur markets are gone. Their freedom of movement has been restricted as they are in the re-education centers for years. Are you really taking issue with the suggestion that food can be next, how much hyperbole is it given the scale of what happened in 2018 and 2019 thus far alone?

dx87 7y ago

That reminds me of an interview with a Chinese esports team I saw at a tournament a few months ago. The interviewer was doing a light-hearted game where they showed twitch emotes to the Chinese team and asked what they thought the emotes meant. One of the emotes was a frog (the creator of the game goes by IceFrog), and the Chinese translator said that the players weren't allowed to say anything about the emote. We later found out that they were afraid to say anything because the nickname of the former president of China was "Toad King", and the players were worried that they'd get in trouble if they said anything about the frog emote.

HAL9000Ti 7y ago
Fasinating, I never heard about that one before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toad_worship_(Chinese_internet_subculture) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toad_worship_(Chinese_internet... searching "膜蛤" on baidu.com yields zero results.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
gxwmg 7y ago
Well, there's a frog in the west that can also get you in trouble...
- wahnfrieden 7y ago
  As a symbol of racist misogynist hate of marginalized groups, not a statement against a totalitarian leader. What exactly are you comparing?
  - gxwmg 7y ago
    "racist misogynist hate of marginalized groups", that's got to be the winner of some bingo lol
  - butYouSuck 7y ago

throw2016 7y ago

China is a totalitarian country. Its not a democracy so there is no point criticizing them for the lack of democracy but its democracies that must be held accountable, yet we do not see that right from Snowden, Assange and Manning to a culture of surveillance, torture, war crimes, secret courts and processes and border agents demanding to go through your personal papers. You can't claim to be a democracy and do these things by definition yet not only are 'democracies' doing these things openly but we have people who seem less outraged by what's happening in their own 'democratic' backyards and more outraged by what a totalitarian country is doing. This lacks credibility and seems more like a way to score political points than out of any genuine concern for democracy or human rights.

mc32 7y ago
We could have and still can apply economic pressure, but let’s face it, if the EU and US even tried, multinationals would complain it puts companies in peril or economic disadvantage. Before allowing them into MFN status or WTO, we had much better leverage, but that was wasted.
yorwba 7y ago
China does claim to be a democracy in its constitution, though: Under the leadership of the Communist Party of China [...] the Chinese people of all nationalities will continue [...] to turn China into a socialist country that is prosperous, powerful, democratic and culturally advanced. http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Constitution/2007-11/15/content_1372962.htm http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Constitution/2007-11/15/con... Of course the literal text of the constitution is completely ignored in practice, but criticizing that doesn't automatically lack credibility.
- Zuider 7y ago
  The word 'democracy' has been used in two incompatible senses. In the West, we see democracy as a means of limiting the excesses of power. As Karl Popper noted, 'democracy' is not so much the answer to the question "who should rule?", as to the question "how do we prevent bad rulers ruling absolutely?". When 'democracy' is taken to imply the first answer, it is seen as the grounds of total legitimacy for the ruler. It is simply a substitute for the divine right of kings. In the second case, the ruler seen as having limited legitimacy, subject to the rule of law, of criticism, even ridicule, and of lawful challenge from other potential rulers. When totalitarian states called themselves 'Democratic People's Republics' they were not so much lying as using the term 'democracy' in the first sense above. They were signaling that their governments had a legitimate claim to absolute power on the grounds that they were the expression of Rousseau's 'general will'. Those who clashed with the state were not seen as rebels against the ruler, but as 'enemies of the people'.

PavlovsCat 7y ago

> Leica, a foreign company, is now apologizing about the ad (and has deleted it from their YouTube account) Joining Mercedes Benz in that particular hall of shame: https://money.cnn.com/2018/02/07/technology/mercedes-benz-tibet-china-apology/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/02/07/technology/mercedes-benz-ti...

adventured 7y ago
Along with the airlines regarding Taiwan. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/business/taiwan-american-airlines-china.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/business/taiwan-american-...
snaky 7y ago
MB sales on Western markets didn't drop because of that, so could we say that was a rational business decision by MB.
- PavlovsCat 7y ago
  Shame refers to morality and as such to the personal responsibility of individuals. > There was a widespread conviction that it is impossible to withstand temptation of any kind, that none of us could be trusted or even be expected to betrustworthy when the chips are down, that to be tempted and to be forced are almost the same, whereas in the words of Mary McCarthy, who first spotted this fallacy: "If somebody points a gun at you and says,'Kill your friend or I will kill you,' he is tempting you, that is all." And while a temptation where one's life is at stake may be a legal excuse for a crime, it certainly is not a moral justification. [..] > It is fortunate and wise that no law exists for sins of omission and no human court is called up onto sit in judgment over them. But it is equally fortunate that there exists still one institution in society in which it is well-nigh impossible to evade issues of personal responsibility, where all justifications of a nonspecific, abstract nature - from the Zeitgeist down to the Oedipus complex - break down, where not systems or trends or original sin are judged, but men of flesh and blood like you and me, whose deeds are of course still human deeds but who appear before a tribunal because they have broken some law whose maintenance we regard as essential for the integrity of our common humanity. Legal and moral issues are by no means the same, but they have a certain affinity with each other because they both presuppose the power of judgment. [..] > What mattered in our early, nontheoretical education in morality was never the conduct of the true culprit of whom even then no one in his right mind could expect other than the worst. Thus we were outraged, but not morally disturbed, by the bestial behavior of the stormtroopers in the concentration camps and the torture cellars of the secret police, and it would have been strange indeed to grow morally indignant over the speeches of the Nazi big wigs inpower, whose opinions had been common knowledge for years. [..] The moral issue arose only with the phenomenon of "coordination," that is, not with fear-inspired hypocrisy, but with this very early eagerness not to miss the train of History, with this, as it were, honest overnight change of opinion that befell a great majority of public figures in all walks of life and all ramifications of culture, accompanied, as it was, by an incredible ease with which life long friendships were broken and discarded. In brief, what disturbed us was the behavior not of our enemies but of our friends, who had done nothing to bring this situation about. They were not responsible for the Nazis, they were only impressed by the Nazi success and unable to pit their own judgment against the verdict of History, as they read it. Without taking into account the almost universal breakdown, not of personal responsibility, but of personal judgment in the early stages of the Nazi regime, it is impossible to understand what actually happened. -- Hannah Arendt, "Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship"

frostburg 7y ago

Leica distancing itself from the ad isn't a good look. The company is not very relevant for actual "working" photographers today (I use one, but tellingly photography isn't a real job for me), but it once was and at the time they stood up to their own homegrown totalitarian regime by helping jews escape Germany disguised as transferring employees.

jessedhillon 7y ago
The ad itself is supposed to be a tribute to photo journalists, highlighting the risks they're prepared to take in pursuit of the truth. I can hardly capture in words how incongruent Leica's actions are with their message.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
GuiA 7y ago
Like many “classic” camera companies (Polaroid, Voigtländer, etc), “Leica” today is a name controlled by various holding entities and private equity firms. While it might bear the same name, it has very little in common with the original company (the one that saved the lives of hundreds of Jewish employees).
- frostburg 7y ago
  This is not actually true. I mean, it's not under the ownership of the Leitz family, but it's basically steered around by Kaufmann and is more or less in continuity with its past (to the point that they moved back to Wetzlar). Voigtlander is a brandname used by Cosina.

4ntonius8lock 7y ago

I'm curious as to what percentage of the US vs Chinese populations know about their own governments horrors? I mean, what percentage of US students would recognize the Tuskegee experiments continued until 1972? I've had many people straight up tell me that is a lie, or a 'conspiracy theory'. In fact, I think this post will get down voted, despite asking a perfectly valid question and having concrete factual examples. Not saying it isn't appalling that Leica is apologizing. Thought it makes sense from a business perspective. I'm just curious to know what is more effective: the soft censorship of the west created by unwritten social norms or the hard censorship of the east?

icelancer 7y ago
>> what percentage of US students would recognize the Tuskegee experiments continued until 1972 Literally everyone who has ever had to take a medical or scientific ethics course knows this, since the IRB process was born specifically from this horrific abuse of science. I'm guessing most high schools cover it in US History and/or World History, also, as mine did.
- AbitofAsum 7y ago
  I went to a rather nice semi-private high school (graduated 15 years ago) and Tuskegee was not covered
  - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
    Thank you. It seems this is common knowledge in some circles. I know for a fact it isn't in others. My post was just a question as to the overall percentage. Not whether there were any Americans who knew about the experiments. Apparently asking questions and being inquisitive is bad now.
danso 7y ago
How has Tuskegee been “soft” censored by the U.S. government?

noonespecial 7y ago

they were "genuinely mystified." One of the students said that the image was "artwork." Thats just spooky close to the "It doesn't look like anything to me" from Westworld. How long until they really don't see the man and the tank at all?

SenHeng 7y ago

Adding some personal anecdata, Singapore has been having a large influx of Chinese students for the past couple of decades and I have spoken with a few who are adamant that Tiananmen is made up because they ‘don’t know anyone who has actually been through it’.

throwaway55244 7y ago
Are you speaking to them in Mandarin or English? I find when I speak in Mandarin, and in a nonjudgmental manner, they all know about it. Of course they all say the protest started due to labor reform issues and not because of democracy.
everdev 7y ago
I bet 10-15 years ago the Tianamen video would be undeniable proof. But now with deepfakes and other video editing, it wouldn't be that crazy for an average person in China to simply not believe the video was real if their government universally denies it.

tomc1985 7y ago

It's pathetic that companies are giving in to that pressure