5 ms·
It's interesting how the authorities of the US and China have a different view of how to control its populace through information. China is all about the contr
by cyber_kinetist 4y ago
It's interesting how the authorities of the US and China have a different view of how to control its populace through information.
China is all about the controlling the logistics of the flow of information, where the authorities need to crack down dissent that can impede the structural stability of the CCP. (Not all social criticism is censored, but the ones that directly criticize the party are.) Therefore they have done many things to shut down access to foreign sites, and created one of the biggest bureaucracies in the history of the world to search through the deluge of information on the domestic net to pick out which users and posts are deemed censorable. And it kinda works, but also kinda doesn't (If you have seen the memes and lexicon circulating in the Chinese nets, you'll understand what I mean instantly.)
Whereas the US authorities plays a much more smarter game: is all about tactics. Instead of controlling the flow of information in a top-down way, it lets them free, and then actively participates in it. While China focuses on removing the opponent's pieces on the chessboard, US focuses on adding their own: through its numerous media conglomerates and NGOs (which if you ultimately trace back its funding, all leads to one of the alphabet-named agencies or neoliberal thinktanks like the Ford Foundation or the RAND Institute). When you search a dissident figure in the Chinese net, all traces will be erased and you will find nothing. When you search a dissident figure on Google, you will be spammed with all the numerous media sites that try to mislead you in some way. (And yes, this also kinda works, but also kinda doesn't. But I see this as a more sophisticated strategy than what China is doing.)
- dchftcs 4y agoNo, China does both. US just doesn't have the legal ability to pursue one of the two strategies you mentioned.
- qwezxcrty 4y agoWhile of course the speech freedom is pretty scarce in China, there are many things that the USG do without the legal ability. Also, the massive attempt to deplatform Trump supporters also significant weakened my belief in the US's speech freedom. I don't care if this was done by the USG or private companies, but it worked, very effectively, Parler was gone in the same way as Twitter get GFWed in China. I was shocked how Chinese this was. As a Chinese and for personal experiences, I hate Trump and the red-necks to the deepest, but I would support their right for emitting their sound.
- swagasaurus-rex 4y agoTrump used twitter to incite violence and insurrection, which is not protected by the first amendment. It would be better to determine this through the courts rather than twitter, but twitter has every right to ban trolls, spammers, and politicians calling for violent action
- qwezxcrty 4y agoThe same would be also applicable, if stretched a little bit, to protests and people organizing them in China. "Weibo has every right to ban trolls, spammers, and politicians calling for violent action" (Weibo is the Chinese Twitter equivalent) We should not have double standard just because the USG is a something you like and CPC is not.
- swagasaurus-rex 4y agoTrump can start his own platform. He did. People are free to join it. It's a joke to think getting 'deplatformed' in China means you can keep trying. Test the CCP and you and your family might get a visit.
- qwezxcrty 4y agoThen what happened to Parler? Certainly we all know in China there is little speech freedom, I don't need to compare to it. (And I did test it and my family well survived till now) What I was saying is what happened to Trump's supporters seriously damaged my belief in US's ideology.
- swagasaurus-rex 4y agoWhat happened to it? Looks like you can still sign up and participate.
- qwezxcrty 4y ago