4 ms·

While I agree it was a bit odd to read this coming from someone in China (given the state of their own internet), I'm as surprised as you are to have read this.

While I agree it was a bit odd to read this coming from someone in China (given the state of their own internet), I'm as surprised as you are to have read this. However, you have to read between the lines: > How do we make sense of the fact that the market and the state colluded in the abuse of private information via what represents the backbone of many modern day infrastructures? [...] How do we understand the one-sided cyber attack accusations the U.S. has poured upon China in the past few months? After I read those two questions, I realized, there was a difference. People in China know about the firewall. Sure, they have no choice, but the government isn't going behind their backs or allowing them unrestricted internet access and penalizing those who access "disallowed" content. And I do, for one, agree with that last question; I hardly could believe that the US was just taking cyberattacks from China for years without at least attempting to get some revenge (and indeed, I know the US has the resources to fight back). That being said, I admit I did laugh a bit to myself at this part: > this force is acting in an unconstitutional manner and entirely contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights And that's when I started reading in-between the lines, because half of it's the truth, and half of it's probably state-ordered propaganda. The only difference this time is that this propaganda has some truth to it.

glurgh 13y ago
I realized, there was a difference. People in China know about the firewall. That's the part they know about. Political dissenters in China are actively censored, suppressed, imprisoned, spied upon - systematic efforts to access overseas email accounts of dissidents and the personal computers of journalists outside of China have also been reported. So the government is most certainly 'going behind their backs' and doing a great deal more. But my point wasn't really to discuss the ways in which China isn't actually an open democratic society - everyone knows that. I usually hesitate to use the word 'propaganda' since it tends to be broadly over-applied to things like 'US Congressperson says a stupid thing' which are just 'someone saying a stupid thing' rather than propaganda. But this particular item is clearly a piece of hypocritically indignant state-sponsored propaganda. There's a great deal to talk about regarding the NSA surveillance programs - I just have a really hard time imagining how this sort of piece is a useful or interesting starting point for any such discussion.
wisty 13y ago
A simpler explanation: They are actually criticising the Chinese system as well, they just can't say so explicitly.
tootie 13y ago
The difference is that the NSA is taking away our freedom while the Great Firewall is ensuring a harmonious society.
olalonde 13y ago
> it's probably state-ordered propaganda I highly doubt that. It's only anecdote but most of my Chinese friends tend to support their government (except on some issues like Internet censorship) and tend to dislike the US government (I live in China). In fact, it would be more accurate to say that they believe the government of China is just as bad as the US government. You could say that the author is a victim of propaganda but I think he genuinely meant what he wrote.

glurgh 13y ago

I realized, there was a difference. People in China know about the firewall. That's the part they know about. Political dissenters in China are actively censored, suppressed, imprisoned, spied upon - systematic efforts to access overseas email accounts of dissidents and the personal computers of journalists outside of China have also been reported. So the government is most certainly 'going behind their backs' and doing a great deal more. But my point wasn't really to discuss the ways in which China isn't actually an open democratic society - everyone knows that. I usually hesitate to use the word 'propaganda' since it tends to be broadly over-applied to things like 'US Congressperson says a stupid thing' which are just 'someone saying a stupid thing' rather than propaganda. But this particular item is clearly a piece of hypocritically indignant state-sponsored propaganda. There's a great deal to talk about regarding the NSA surveillance programs - I just have a really hard time imagining how this sort of piece is a useful or interesting starting point for any such discussion.

wisty 13y ago

A simpler explanation: They are actually criticising the Chinese system as well, they just can't say so explicitly.

tootie 13y ago

The difference is that the NSA is taking away our freedom while the Great Firewall is ensuring a harmonious society.

olalonde 13y ago

> it's probably state-ordered propaganda I highly doubt that. It's only anecdote but most of my Chinese friends tend to support their government (except on some issues like Internet censorship) and tend to dislike the US government (I live in China). In fact, it would be more accurate to say that they believe the government of China is just as bad as the US government. You could say that the author is a victim of propaganda but I think he genuinely meant what he wrote.