Free speech without being heard, is just like whistling in the wind which is worthless. Professor Jeffrey Sacks who is one of the most well know and respected international economists is a good example. He has been forcefully giving speeches around the world to promote international cooperation to focus on many challenges we are facing today, such as climate change, shortage of natural resources, poverties in many under developed countries, ... But most of his speeches have been suppressed by many main stream media because they are not compatible with the geopolitical agenda of many those countries.
Good overview but one very important piece missing: China did in fact initially open itself up to Western social media companies like Facebook but then you had the string of deadly Uyghur terrorist attacks, which coincided with the violence of the Islamic State in Syria. These Uyghur terrorists used Facebook to communicate with each other and when Chinese authorities asked Facebook to hand over the relevant evidence, Facebook flatly refused (afraid of receiving political blowback in the US) and was consequently banned by China for refusing to abide by Chinese law. Couple that with the overt US support for Uyghur and other separatisms and you can kind of get China's apprehensions toward letting Western news/social media muddy the waters in Chinese political discourse.
That's understandable... though Facebook's refusal to 'share', and even the occasional Western censorship of covid 'cures', hate speech, etc., still seems a far cry from China's 'Great Firewall', with its omnipresent video surveillance, and an infamous Social Credit System enabled by massive cross-linked databases on every citizen. And that's aside from the growing perception that it's mostly for the collective 'security' of the dominant Han Chinese, but other 'Chinese' cultures like Tibetans, Mongols, Uyghurs, etc., not so much.
@electrostatic, simply put when free speech is hijacked, abused, or used to cause harm and create social unrest, violence, political instability, riots, upheavals, and lawlessness, then it should be restricted accordingly. Nothing is free. There is a cost to everything. Absolute freedom is chaos, not peace or free speech.
A a person living in HK looking back at the 2019 protest, I now realise how dumb the protestors were. I mean, The US is absolutely horrible, they claim to spread democracy and yet they only spread war and chaos(look at syria or afghanistan) while back at home, the majority of the population can't even afford to live even after working two jobs in a day, and the rich control everything. Why would anyone in their right mind want to be like them?! Clearly, this is the result of western media. The mainland government recognised this early on and thus made the call to ban western media. Also after I was recommended your channel by a Chinese friend online, I can say now that I am HOOKED on your content. Your videos are amazing, keep it up :)
@@johncorr7154in this case, it’s pointing out American hypocrisy. It’s not a Whataboutism, meant to move away of the original conversation, it’s pointing out how free speech doesn’t have the effects the US claims.
I am an American who has lived and worked in China for 20 years and am now partially retired and living frequently in Yunnan Province. I agree with most of what you present in your online videos and thank you for promoting peace between our two nations. If there is any way I can help you with this mission, please let me know. Robert Detrano
The only path to peace is to free the workers of the world from their chain by ending capitalism. Our ideals have been spreading and finding popular support across the world thank you for being part of our movement.
I noticed the United States always encourage other nations to divide, or so called announcing sovereignty or individuality, never encouraged any nation, region or people to unify.
I am a Canadian, and don’t always agree with America’s take on China (or my own country’s), but it’s so hard to find people earnestly trying to explain their perspective not wanting to simply convert their listener/viewer. I have watched several of your videos now and am subscribing because you continue to prove you are coming from a place of seeing rights and wrongs on both sides and trying to find your own honest way through, and the research you put in and things you see as someone with a different background to me is so so helpful. Moments like this I am thankful for the internet and the access I have to hear from you across time zones and culture. Well done and thank you for all the work you’re putting in with these videos!
Congrats, you fell for her state-sponsored propaganda. Seriously, you can watch her justify why it's OK for her to spread CCP talking points to the west, but China is justified in keeping its people from reading the truth about their government because it's all some CIA plot? This is such nonsense. She's obviously not a backyard vlogger, these clips are too professional, and how the hell does she have access to TH-cam anyway when it's blocked in China?
Perhaps just perhaps that every government is evil there is no good out there. So as people of the human race maybe we should just give the people some slack and not attack anyone?
Thank you for your video. I am American and since there has been tension between our governments I have been trying to better understand the Chinese perspective. Your videos have been a helpful resource. I agree with some of what you said and disagree with some of what you said, but I respect your opinions and appreciate all of the work you put into your videos. It's always helpful to try to understand each other better. In spite of philosophical differences and difficult history between our countries, I feel hopeful that with time we can rebuild trust and come to have a better relationship as nations in the future. We are all members of the same human race and that is the most important thing in the end. Thank you and good luck with your channel!
So about 0:42 seconds in and already we're misrepresenting the point regarding free speech by confusing actions taken by private entities with actions taken by government authority. Cancel culture, social media bans, virtue signaling, and political correctness are not only examples of actions taken by private actors but, contrary to the author's belief, they are examples of speech in and of themselves. Further your point on this front is based on the mistaken assumption that content policies of social media companies are controlled by the government which seems to be a blind spot from your perspective since it would seem incredible, to a Chinese viewer, for the government to have no control in that realm. Restraining people from reacting to the speech of another, through responses or actions, would itself be a restraint on speech. The arrest of journalists isn't a free speech issue...it's a freedom of the press issue. Whether or not CRT is taught in schools isn't a free speech issue...that falls under the regulatory authority of the states to govern curriculum in public schools. Private schools, if so inclined, are free to teach CRT as are entities outside of the public school setting. Such a flawed premise, at the outside, undermines the analysis built upon it. It is perhaps fair to say that, while you argue that Westerners don't understand China's viewpoint on this issue, that you equally don't understand how this freedom functions in the West, particularly America. Lastly, the fact that you came so close to understanding the real reason for censorship and how the principle of unity, imposed on society, is used to benefit the ruling class "...in the past this was a prerequisite for any emperor to hold his mandate of heaven..." which effectively allows authorities to maintain the status quo. You would be incredibly naive (so much so it makes me question your motives) to assume that such an effort to maintain the status quo is driven by a desire to "protect its people from losing their FAIR [you can't be serious] opinions of the government".
Siming is absolutely right to point out that China has historically valued harmony, stability and moderation over pluralism, extremism, and diversity of thought. However, I think she downplayed a little bit the extent modern Chinese citizens are allowed to debate public policy. Chinese scholars and public figures are able to voice a multitude of opinions on international affairs, military strategy, economic policy, public health policy, and so on. However, there is a well-defined limit to the debate, and that limit stops at the legitimacy of the Chinese state. For example, there is a fundamental difference in my view between a citizen protesting the zero-Covid policy, and a Hong Kong separatist waving the American and UK flags and calling for revolution. The former wants to make the country better for everyone, and the latter wants the country destabilised. As an aside, most Hong Kongers from what I see are trustworthy, sensible and patriotic people. Secondly, we should acknowledge that China's 1.5 billion people represent a huge influx of potential internet users for the world wide web. By sheer numbers, Chinese netizens could potentially have a huge impact in terms of shaking up the Western echo chamber and reshaping the international discourse on China, if the firewall is removed permitting easy internet access. I wonder if a more prudent strategy for China is actually to remove the firewall, and let loose the Chinese netizens who will have a great collective influence in terms of telling China's story, rather than be disproportionately influenced by the Western discourse (as Beijing may currently fear). Even in Russia, despite relatively loose internet censorship compared to China, most people still stand by their country's actions. This is in spite of the smaller size of the Russian population relative to China, and the even more negative coverage of Russia by the Western media at present for understandable reasons.
The Waco Massacre tells you all you need to know about how the US deals with seditious elements. Heck, just look up the Whiskey Rebellion and check how George Washington dealt with a revolt and rebels which is especially ironic because America was founded on not wanting to pay fucking taxes, and the first rebellion they violently put down was about rebels that didn't want to pay taxes.
thanks again for the great comment :) 1. you are absolutely right about the amount of freedom chinese netizens enjoy these days and the limit lies in exactly what you said. i'll add that it's a good tool for the government to do temperature check on society. i found 2. an interesting prospect to consider. currently around 400 million chinese people are learning/or speak english, compared to the 1.1 billion people who speak english as a second language - there is a big potential there, though the numbers gap would exacerbate the fear/need for security that informs the necessity of firewall. hope to hear more from you in future videos!😊
yes, [your] initial example is absolutely correct. "free speech" only exists as far as the govt respects [its] citizenry [and] their rights. in america, this should not be in question and yet, here we are. these laws and orders and actions should have been ruled as an infringement and stopped, but those who wanted control, found courts that would agree and all of our rights are being attacked from all sides under a concerted effort of lawfare.
Possibly. But she mentioned Twitter's removal of Donald Trump's account, and that is not really a "free speech" issue, as Twitter is a private entity, not a part of the government.
@@PracticaProphetica the govt is responsible to not only accept free speech but to protect it, even on privately owned but public accommodations. this is why courts rule, for example, that if a mall allows girl scouts to sell cookies, they must also allow others to solicit. further, it has been clearly exposed that govt HAS directed social media to abridge speech thus they are to be considered agents of govt.
@@jaewok5G I don't think your example of the Girl Guides is a free speech issue...more likely a discrimination issue. There is no doubt that there are attempts at government influence over social media. But this case failed in the supreme court, because in order to implicate government, you must prove that they actually compelled the organizations to comply. Businesses can and do make laws regarding under what conditions they offer their service. "No shoes, no shirt, no service" is an example. These are not "free speech" issues. I have a website and if people leave long argumentative comments, where it seems they are primarily trying to use my website as a means to promulgate their ideas, instead of developing their own website, I may choose to remove their comments, although I'll try just to shorten it and publish an explanation of why it was not appropriate. They can make their own website, so I'm not restricting their ability to speak freely. They just can't do it on my property. Nor does "free speech" mean the freedom to slander, threaten, or perjure others. In its basic intent, it is to allow people to pursue, publish, and speak the truth (or what they think the truth is). Although, you might find, as Gab did, that you have to do it on your own, without relying on any social media platforms.
So, free speech in the us comes with some asterisks. However, it only applies to actions by government. The U.S. government is barred from restricting free speech unless under certain very specific conditions. This, such that whenever actions like that happen it turns into massive controversies, and often become legal cases and rallying points for political discourse. You cannot compare that to an authoritarian government which throws any detractors into prison, or sends them for reeducation. To suggest that these things are the same is intellectually dishonest and frankly horrifying. Governments hold a monopoly on legal use of force, and should be held to the highest standard and restrictions.
Julian Assange/Edward Snowden/Twitter files/Covid?!!!! The US has a growing industry coined the censorship industrial complex. They do censor, they just use private companies to do it for them
Spot on! The fallacy of this entire video is conflating private entities and government. It is clear she's pushing pro-CCP propaganda with some highly deceptive logical fallacy(like falsely equating censorship by private companies with those by governments) and professionally produced videos. Must be on CCP's payroll!
Free speech does exist but it doesn’t mean speech without consequence. All it means is that you cannot be criminally charged for expressing an opinion. It is a constraint on the GOVERNMENT’S ability to punish you. It has NOTHING to do with private companies or individuals ostracizing you.
What she meant is that in the more and more liberal western societies state control lessens in favor of the development of private organizations, thus placing financial and private companies at the forefront of development and public opinion. Privatization has in fact been growing in Europe even in sectors that used to be solely state regulated, like health care. Therefore the interests of private companies and those of the states go hand in hand. China's state, however, regulates its industrial and institutional development at all times. Regarding freedom of speech, it's very different in already established societies like the western ones to allow criticisms than in China, a country in a delicate development, being built anew in less than a century while being internationally presented as a threat in many ways.
It's very natural to have such thought for people from a multi-party western democracy. When opinions are "freely" expressed (note: nothing is free. Public opinions are heavily influenced by capital), the louder voice gets elected and is ultimately responsible for its own choice. In China, there is only one party, and the party is always responsible for all people (or the interests of the majority). It is not that all opinions are banned but that critiques without constructive and responsible solutions are restricted as they are in some sense distractions to reaching a workable solution. See Arab Spring and Russia under Yeltsin. Neither society is perfect. Western democracy respects the choice of individuals but ultimately lack long-term accountabilities (capital is always short sighted). China, as a one-party society, focuses on long-term goals but the cost is that grievances from some individuals or private interests are not at the top of the list.
What she meant is “free speech” is not as free as you would like to think. There are many hidden influence and control before the speech even arrived to you and end up, well, just “speech”, no free speech. A guy got thrown in jail for 8 years for a meme on Hillary. Dictatorship? How about that. Free speech is an ideal my friend. Accept the political reality.
Also, same to the idea of “voting “ equals democracy. Truth is voting is only one of the representation of democracy, and experiences told me that elections can be bought over, manipulated and rigged before even you go to the voting station
You can't, but try saying something about a certain cabal of powerful ethnogroups controlling US society and see where you end up - homeless unless you applogize and grovel. And being homeless is arguably worse than locked up with 3 square meals a day.
Absolutely spot on! Free speech is indeed a complex and often misunderstood concept, not just in China but globally. You nailed it when you highlighted the political reality that free speech doesn't exist when it becomes inconvenient for those in power. It's fascinating how the perception of free speech is often used as a tool for political influence, rather than as an absolute right. I really appreciate how you broke down the cultural differences and the historical context behind China's approach to censorship. It's not about paranoia; it's about protecting stability and unity in a rapidly changing world. The Arab Spring example was particularly eye-opening, showing how social media can be both a force for good and a potential threat to national security, depending on the perspective. One thing I would add is the role of Western media in shaping global perceptions. As you mentioned, the imbalance in global news media influences how countries like China are portrayed. This cultural war is very real, and it's crucial to understand the motivations behind it. Keep up the great work! Your insights are incredibly valuable, and I hope you continue to share more videos like this. The depth and clarity you bring to these discussions are truly refreshing!
Seeing the overwhelmingly sympathetic comments here, many coming from Westerners, I feel the need to address some of the issues raised in your videos from the perspective of a Chinese citizen. In your videos, you have been consistently doing such a great job explaining why the CCP is doing what it's doing. But the question is, why are you sympathizing with the logic of the regime and its desire for 'stability' (read 'the desire to stay in power'), and not with the interest of the ordinary people the regime rules? I think your use of the concept of 'Chinese culture' is a masterful sleight of hand here. By arguing that Chinese culture prefers unification, harmony, etc., you are essentially saying that the 'Chinese people' have given tacit consent to the CCP's quest for stability, exchanging the messiness of democracy for economic prosperity. I agree that this exchange is basically the entire basis of the CCP's claim of legitimacy for the past four decades. But there are several problems here. First, no culture is unchanging. Political culture in particular can change rapidly, and is prone to be shaped by propaganda. It is hard to say to what extent many ordinary Chinese people's political apathy today is the result of our 'culture' and not the product of terror, starting with the bloody crackdown on the nation-wide pro-democracy protests of 1989. Chinese people are not born to love stability and order, we learn to be so. Second, it is hilariously oversimplyfing that you just showed some pictures of Chinese writing, traditional clothing, and suggest that somehow these mean that we inherited the same understanding of law and justice as in old imperial China. Even if we did, does that justify a legal system based not on rights, but on maintaining order? Does it justify the CCP to rule by the same political principle that the emperors did two hundred years ago? Btw, all of those 'traditions' you pointed to changed drastically during China's transformation into a modern society. There are also minority cultures who see this ideology of uniform order as imperial. To a largely Western audience, who are very used to the idea of respecting other people's culture and do not consider themselves to know Chinese culture better than you do, your essentializing use of 'cultural continuity' serves as a convenient tool to fill in the gap in your logic, and glide over the state violence that is needed to keep that culture of stability alive. I also agree that if the CCP somehow collapses tomorrow, there will be a power vacum and chaos in China. But this is no reason to just accept the status quo. In fact, it is the CCP that should be responsible for this would-be chaos. It has killed all possibilities of civil alliance among its citizens, destroyed the foundation of serious political debate, so that it becomes the only viable ruler of China. But the Chinese people do not deserve this. We deserve better.
Thank you very much for saying this. I'm so glad I found your comment. A lot of the things she said made sense and were hard to refute, but I felt there was 'something wrong' in her explanations that I couldn't formulate into full paragraphs due to lack of ability and time. You basically spoke my mind.
I think you start with a false equivalency. The critical difference is that in the US we unquestionably allow people to critique the challenges to free speech. We allow the debate about the issue. It i is beyond the pale that someone could be arrested for an image critical of the US. This is not so in the Middle Kingdom. There are of course challenges to free speech in the US. That's part of being in a democracy. But the challenges are different in kind, not merely degree, to those in China. You lost me at that. Endemic to the freedom of speech is a tacit recognition that sometimes other views are correct in the marketplace of ideas. It seems to me this is the basis of a tension that cannot be reconciled.
Excellent response. I want to add that she doesn't seem to understand the history and the benefit of democracy. West becomes so powerful is because it has a very different norms and cultures to China, including democracy. Chinese economic rise is all about imitating, if not stealing US technology. And some skeptical people always mention India as a failure of democracy. But India has a caste system which is not democratic at all. India also has a geographical disadvantage. Four seasons countries tend to be more advanced than tropical or equatorial countries. Now Chinese stock market has been collapsing since 2021, while India's stock market has been rising. Let's see how the future will unfold.
No, they are not different in kind, merely in degree. People will go to the greatest lengths the law will permit to censor, deplatform, or otherwise hide or marginalize political opinions that challenge liberal democracy and the rules-based international order, both of which are essential to the interests of the Anglo-American establishment that has ruled over the west since WWII. They will go far, far beyond merely offering honest and good-faith counterarguments and engaging in the marketplace of ideas, they will use lies and defamation, social ostracization, economic and financial pressure, and even abuse the monopoly power of certain corporations to maintain control of the narrative and enforce the worldview that best aligns with the interests of the establishment. If they could go further in enforcing their control of the narrative, they would, as evidenced by Europe and their outright criminalizing of narratives that they have judged to pose a threat to liberal democratic norms or the rules-based international order.
I can freely make fun of my government. I can also be un-woke about ALOT of things. Free speech exists in the States. But, the technology we have today, free speech has social consequences if it pisses enough people off. The government doesn't actually control it unless it involves threats of death or harm (which you can get arrested for; this also includes shouting "fire" in a theatre under false pretenses or making threats involving explosives, whether true or not) or if it would constitute a violation of national security related laws (but those specifically refer to classified information being disseminated to unauthorized parties). China completely controls all speech in their territory and it completely controls the narrative any media in the country that is legally accessible to the people is allowed to tell in any of its content. America does not and its also why very little to no media in most contexts is state controlled. What you talk about involving cancel culture and other such things only result in censorship by corporations who fear losing money from their customer base who get pissed off at people who say things which anger them. Not all nasty posts and offensive video content gets "cancelled", though. In the states, censorship of free speech is crowd-sourced through the sensibilities of the majority of the people who care enough to comment on the controversy in question. *It's a TOTALLY different animal.* And frankly, having an open internet and allowing people to make up their own minds on what's good governance for their country is a good thing. America hears everything that comes out of China without censorship by the government to protect America's narrative. The majority of Americans are actually personally threatened by China's narrative and, without government involvement (although corporate media is often involved. It's not the same thing), have an aversion to Chinese rhetoric. Human nature promotes capitalism, but it also TENDS toward dictatorship, although it is amicable to the idea of democracy. Democracy is fairer governance long term to ensure the most people's needs are met. Micromanaging an economy, even one that nominally look capitalist (i.e. state-capitalism, like in China) is not sustainable long term and will fail eventually. It always does and always has. Culture differences might prolong it, but it can't prevent the collapse indefinitely. Freedom is the best policy.
No, I have to correct you. The US/Western European countries do NOT have absolute free speech. As you say, speech (through online social platforms) has social consequences if it pisses enough people off (i.e. when it crosses certain line of the socially permitted political correctness set in your society, slightly different topics of course in different Western countries), and some speech are considered an arrestable offense in the West (relating to the Holocaust, for example). And you have also listed examples of the other scenarios when your ''free speech'' could result in arrests and violations of (terrorism related) laws. So, applying equally all above conditions, China has ''free speech'' too - At home, in private settings, Chinese people can pretty much say whatever they want, but in social gatherings large or small, online or offline, speech has consequences too, it works exactly the same way as in the West. In the Chinese version of political correctness (much less PC on certain cultural issues than in the West, which is great), insulting/smearing the government/politicians/leaders, insulting/smearing the Chinese military, questioning/smearing the sufferings/crimes inflicted by Western/Japanese imperialism are just some of the examples that are considered crossing the PC line. But it is not up to the US/West to judge whether these are acceptable, it is simply called cultural difference. And about the Chinese media, yes it is true, all Chinese media is regulated, and yes its information and narrative controlled by authorities, so that, NO LIES and misinformation would be put out intentionally, and that's the DIFFERENCE between the Chinese media and the US/Western media. Your media, routinely puts out lies (without any base), especially about your so called adversary countries. It also runs your government permitted narrative (a lot of the time involving fearmongering so to generate support towards the party in charge and push for certain agendas, like increasing the defence budget, and so on), and yes, without you even being aware of it, because most of time and for most of you, you simply do not know any better (for example, about China). Your media also twists facts, misinterprets, sensationalises stories, because this is the nature of your media, they are mostly a business, they do what it takes to make money, whereas Chinese media is there mostly to deliver information, they are required to be professional and accurate for the things they put out. To conclude, no, you DON'T have absolute free speech in the US/West, neither does any country. You do have MORE freedom of speech than China, only slightly more.
@@Faye_Liu Your understanding of the “west” is lacking. Obviously we don’t have absolute free speech and your attempts to create a straw man out of this argument is a blatant attempt at a logical fallacy that most educated westerners will see through. Your comment is also full of generalizations that simply don’t apply in general, only in specific countries or news organizations. In the west we also have publicly funded news agencies that do not have the same corrupting influences as the various competing private networks. And the limits of free speech in the US and Germany regarding the Holocaust are quite different for obvious historical reasons. The legal limits in Germany on this issue would run a foul of the First Amendment in the US. And on the other hand Germany is more open in other areas.
@@michaelmanley5614 Your ''public funded news agencies''? Are they happen to be media outlets such as the BBC? The BBC is largely ''public funded'', or heavily subsidised by the British government (through licence fees (a form of tax) collected by a government body on the government's behalf, which I paid some 15 years of them), but it is very much a state media, you would be lying to claim otherwise, I have evidence (tons of it, mostly relates to China), personal experiences to prove it is anything BUT an independent and impartial organization. BBC is probably worse in ways than other US/Wester media about delivering misinformation and lies, precisely because it is state funded. There is no need to write so many fancy words to try to discredit me, I live in the West and have been for over 20 years, I watched Western media exclusively for many years, I know how it works, I also know how the Chinese media works (lived in China for over 20 years too). And in your comment, you provided no example of my ''generalization'', and named no name from ''specific countries or news organization'', your ''arguments'' are pretty weak to me. In any case, you agree with me that the US/West does not have absolute free speech that your countr(ies) love to lecture China on, that is my main point. And as I already stated, the US/West has more free speech, which you confirmed it by repeating it. So what exactly is your contribution to the discussion?
It's legal for the police in the UK to murder trade unionists or commit any other crime to preserve government power (Covert Human Intelligence Sources bill). The police routinely spy on and subvert political groups. You think you have full freedom of speech that's because your speech falls within what's deemed acceptable.
Makes sense to me 🤔 Maybe Germany wouldn't have the serious issues with their AFD political party if there were no Twitter/X, Facebook, Telegram, or other "freedom of reach" platforms. I wouldn't even mind banning TH-cam, either. To be crystal clear. I'm not against freedom of speech, nor against freedom for journalism, but I am against unregulated freedom of reach.
Um the great fire wall project was begun in 1998, far before the Arab Spring in 2011. It was primarily a response to internal political developments that threatened CCP dominance. Regardless of later statements, it begun as a mechanism to enhance internal control, and not combat outside intrusion
It is true that the "Great Firewall of China" was initially created as a cyber protection tool for China's internal stability, but it is not what it used to be, and it is now more for the protection of countries outside of China.
Yet if a Chinese citizen seeks to learn about Tiananmen Square, the Great Leap Forward or the Cultural Revolution in any kind of detail, they would have no choice to access western sources.
As someone who was fed with Western media all my life, I understand fully how powerful and influential it is. It can make an intelligent person who can analyse situation logically to totally lose their logical reasoning when talking about China.
It doesn't matter what media you watch. You should not rely on such sources to provide you with a basic education in history. politics, or ethics. Nor should you trust the authority of human opinion in general. (Jeremiah 17:9) 'The heart is deceitful beyond all else, and is desperatelt sick; who can understand it?' Yes, perversity and malignant self-centredness are typical of the human race, and so-called 'Westerners' are no exception. But if you think that the PRC government and CCP are the golden exception, a veritable fountain of Truth and Virtue, you are fooling yourself. It is important to realize that abandoning one delusion does not require embracing a contrary delusion. Must one jump from the frying pan into the fire?
Refreshing perspective. As has been said elsewhere: No one sees themselves as the villain in their own story. As an American, it's important to understand that the motives and actions of Western governments and cultures are often... um, sketchy.
Don't stutter. Say it loud and clear: (Romans 3:23) 'For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.' In view of your grand discovery, what is the best option? 1. To become a fashionably self-hating Westerner and glorify the CCP, with its rich history of megacide and callous disregard for what wee consider elementary human rights. 2. To repent of our pride, trusting Jesus to be our righteousness, and to make ourselves useful in others' service. Let me tell you, those two options are mutually incompatible.
@@pnw_wanderer9786 Well... The last military conflict China was involved in was a short border war with Vietnam in 1979, with a quite complicated historical background. Since then, they have adopted a policy of NON-INTERFERENCE in the domestic policies of the countries they interact with. In other words, they do trade with whoever, as long as there is mutual respect and non-interference. The United States on the other hand, has been involved in wars and conflicts non-stop in the past 40 years. Destroying Libya, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, invading Panama, funding ethnic cleansing in Israel and Yemen etc... The death toll from all these conflicts started by the United States is in the MILLIONS. So yes, the actions of China compared to the United States ARE different, and LESS HARMFUL by any meaningful measure, and to deny that is to engage in straight up gaslighting. I don't care about motives of countries. I look at what they do, and weigh their actions against each other. And the fact of the matter is that in the last decades the US has been a force for conflicts, hunger, and war, whereas China has been a force for poverty alleviation, trade, and development. You can call it propaganda all you like. But these are the facts. I'm sure you have a great reason and justification for all these wars, and how the US is still somehow the 'lesser evil'. But for a normal person who despises violence there is simply no question. Out of the two options, China or the US, China has done infinitely less harm. Cope and seethe.
Since you had your education abroad, do be mindful that we are still chinese and somehow deep within our psych, incalculated with a Confucian diet culturally. Whether born a 1st or 2nd gen in a country outside China, there is only one motherland. At the end of the day, if there is a pogrom on chinese in some other countries, only China will be able to save the victims. A good example was the chinese ambassador of Malaysia who stood in front of Chinatown and stopped a would be rioting by ultra-nationalists who were at that time supported and egged on by some politicians in the then existing government. At the same time, China is learning from past mistakes and adjusting accordingly. FYI, it's good to remember that, as with any past errant dynasties, the people will eventually rise up and depose the errant dynasty if it didnt do a good job administering the country.
Free Speech doesn't exist in the same vein that True Communism Hasn't Been Tried. Or even True Free Market doesn't exist even if there's a single government intervention. However if you put it on a scale, say 0-10, I think the free speech in the west leans towards 10 compared to China which leans towards 0. If it's isn't free speech unless you're a 10 then it doesn't exist anywhere, most likely. It's an ideal after all, ideals don't exist but some countries are closer to the ideal than others.
I can see you improve your craft as I watch and compare your older videos with newer ones. Pretty good editing style to make the audience feel like they're involved in the conversation. The thought process and quality of research also seems to improve across time. Kudos on the continuous improvements.
After traveling in China over 15 yrs. I can see now why China is so leery of an unfettered internet. One thing I noticed first was the absence of pornography. The next thing I noticed was the government's concern over its youth spending too many hours game playing. In the West we just let a lot of this go on unfettered. The breakdown in our society is self evident. Remember, China tried to stop Western influence and trading in the 1840s only to be attacked viciously with their five main ports bombed into submission. Opium was the major trade item held by the West in return for China's silks, ceramics, gold and silver ect,. The resulting overflowing addiction problem brought China down to it's knees. My government here in the US shafted us on infrastructure promised to us in the 60's. Instead it ratcheted up military spending which now has 750 bases in 80 countries. China has maybe one base outside China and chose to spend its money on a state of the art transportation system which is much appreciated by the Chinese People. They did this infrastructure improvement during my years of travel there. It was like something out of Star Wars. We are propagandized against China here and it works!
I grew up in a Frankish family, and I have a Taiwanese Chinese friend. I knew here for more than ten years. One day, - I've forgotten what caused it, - she started with an almost endless list of accusations, things that irritated her, things that I had done wrong etc.. It was terrible. Then, when she was ready, I said: "Thank you for being so honest to me.". Of cause I wanted to know what had irritated her, what she thought she could accuse me of, and what she thought I had done wrong, but she had never said it. We have always been good for each other. Now; what is the advantage of not always speaking frankly, and then comming up with everything at once?
Unfortunately, some personalities keep things that bother them to themselves, until a certain action or word spoken causes them to explode emotionally, in one great outburst. It is probably best to speak frankly and honestly about what is bothersome at that moment, rather than holding it in until it builds up like hot air in a balloon that is ready to pop.
Some people's bad behavior has roots in emotional or psychological disturbance. It might be tempting to attribute it to culture or ethnicity, but I hope you won't (or didn't) in this case. Do your best to forgive this person, if you haven't already. When the sting of memory goes away you probably won't feel a need to talk about it. In the Lord's Prayer (translated) it says, ".....and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"; alternatively, "and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us". Just curious about your 'Frankish' identity. i thought that the Franks were a Germanic tribe of the Dark Ages. If people still identify as 'Frankish' today, in what region do they mostly live?
I agree the nowhere has free speech Like nowhere on this earth is there free speech but in my opinion that’s why we should thrive to strive to get there everybody should speak their mind without the threat of getting searched getting beat down or whatever by cops free speech should be a thing everywhere and yeah it is nowhere
Love your channel and your insightful analysis. By the way, you don't have to be too apologetic about China. Your country is doing well and increasing more countries in the world is recognizing China's achievements. Still, it is good to explain China's thoughts and policies for other to have a greater understanding of China. Keep it up.
Agreed on the great channel. Definitely disagree on the "too apologetic" part. She strikes a great balance explaining the Chinese position to a western audience, and any whiff of this being Chinese propaganda would be a huge detriment to her work. The way she is wording things right now is pretty close to a masterpiece
Yes she shouldn't be too apologetic. Where will China be if America get what it wants from them? Poverty and exploitation forever. We already see how they did to others, don't let them ruin your country.
Who are you to judge whether a country is 'doing well'? You are not God. Do you know anything about the crimes committed by the CCP since its accession to power in 1949, how tens of millions died in famines and purges under Mao's rule? Did you know that tanks rolled over students' bodies in Tiananmen Square in 1989? Do you know that China was in denial when the first covid cases showed up, and did not alert the international community quickly? Did you know that ethnic Uyghurs (of Turkic stock) have been persecuted, sent to prisons to be brainwashed, subjected to intense surveillance in their own homes, their women sexually assaulted, men deported to perform labor in faraway places? Do you think that having lots of money and military hardware demonstrate a people's virtue? Jesus said that not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions.'
Its called the ‘social contract’, but the fact is, the oligarchs run the world and let us believe we have a say. We are deluded if we think we have any say in how our country is administered. We ‘vote’ for candidates chosen by the oligarchs. Look at the top two right now! Old and feeble men! Americans crack me up with their ‘freedom’ talk😅
Just want to add that Harmony (和) in Chinese means "harmony with diversity". China has always been a nation embracing pluralism and solidarity at the same time, so do not fall into the standard Western dichotomy of pluralism/singlism.
Yet my lgtbq friends in China are scared because the room for them within Chinese diversity is growing smaller and smaller every year. One friend just had her seminar on feminism in Kunming shut down with the police telling her nothing about feminism or lgbtq is allowed in China anymore. People were denied entry to a concert in Beijing recently for wearing rainbows…
I study Feminism in Chinese university and my gay friends in Chengdu and Beijing are not coy when it comes to public display of affection. Yes to pluralism, no to Neoliberal cultural war driven by capital.@@OldOnes666
China has the right to block whatever internet they feel is harmful to their county. I'm retired now, but when I was working almost all of the people I supervised were from China and I don't see any of them rushing back to live in China, why do you think that is? These workers only make $20 an hour and this is in San Francisco, where it's $2000 or more to rent a studio apartment.
So refreshing to listen to a thoughtful and intelligent channel like yours. I'm glad I stumbled on your channel just 2 days ago! Keep up with your wonderful work. You've just recruited a new and keen subscriber!
Good job! You provide a nuanced explanation of both the Western and Chinese perspectives. If more people were as evenhanded as you are, the world would be a better place. I can understand the logic behind China's censorship system if the goal is to maintain social order and control. Given the tight control that the CCP imposes on information and criticism of the senior leadership, it's not surprising that it has a 90% approval rating! In the long run, however, I think this strategy is self-defeating. Suppressing information is not a recipe for good governance. If citizens do not know what is going on and are unable to voice criticisms, their government will be less accountable and responsive to their needs. Also, while I agree that Western governments -- like all governments on earth -- sometimes engage in cynical manipulation of information, this does not mean that free speech is just empty rhetoric. In fact, much of the information you relied upon in your video (for example, the video clip of Edward Snowdon revealing how the NSA collects information and the media story about Western governments' involvement in the Colour Revolutions) are good examples of free speech in action. If the US government was able to suppress such criticism, I'm sure it would have a 90% approval rating too. But would it be better governed? I think not.
Actually, many Chinese travels out of China to western countries for educations and work. And many choose to return back to China. Young Chinese have ways to access the news and information like everyone else, the firewall acts more like a restriction on the less educated (believes to be more easily persuaded or influenced), and older generations.
The 90% approval rating for the CCP is not from their media, it is from the change in people's lives. There are many independent videos showing how good the Chinese people's lives are. Lifting 800 millions people out of poverty. Best infrastructure in the world. Growing religious society. Cleaner environment. Better healthcare, longer life and safer. While the west is on the decline, with social disorder, unhealthy lives, mental illness, homelessness, inflation, increasing gun crime and deteriorating infrastructure. I have been to both the US and China. China may not be the wealthiest or the most powerful but it has a better society and culture and people are happier.
Actually Chinese people have more criticism of their government that the west. The local Chinese government visits and talks to the common people to find out the problem and solve the problem.. In the west, before a local election, I see some flyers at some door steps, but not on every block and the local candidate only visits and talk to the resident who donors a lot of money. The western gov, has too much capitalism in play in their politic.
The intensity of surveillance is enough to build mathematical models that simulates almost every group in a society while they keep their mouth shut. China is more technocracy (with a bit of Foucault, gov knows you more than you know yourself) than any traditional authoritarian regimes. Depends on how you define "better governed", a nation can still thrive as a whole while its citizens remain expendable fuel. Maintaining its technological and geopolitical superiority, while keep most citizens' living standards just above where they start to get rebellious, is possible. Discussing whether it's evil doesn't negate the possibility.
@@TheJayJayYoung Then why it's always the alt-right garbage and conspiracy theories that got dumped into Chinese public discourse, while barely anything from the progressive side can get through? Calling it a WALL is hiding the fact that it has always been a FILTER. and to the "return back to china" issue, those who can afford foreign education are already (at least) upper middle class from elite family background, yet they are no one if they stayed in a foreign country.
You have lots of good points in your videos. But here you simply try to rationalize something bad as normal. I grow up in communism and now live in democracy, so I know both sides. Censorship is bad, it doesn´t matter if it is done by woke activists, nazi Germany, French monarchy, Islamic sharia, or spanish inquisition. You pointed woke bullies, or cancel culture. Yes, it is here, but thanks to freedom of speech we can criticize it. Whole progress in world was achieved through critical thinking - and it was based on speech and argumentation. Otherwise we will still believe that Earth is center of the universe. Freedom of speech is always in threat, in Europe are now many grups that want only their truth, same as woke activist, cancel culture nazis, simply young people who believes that their truth is THE TRUTH and therefore they have some rights to enforce people into their belief. And if there are tools to censorship, you never knew who will come to power and which crazyness he will impose. And fear of this is useless. Yes, we can fight with some liberal extremism, or crazy beliefs, or choose some life paths for us, or our children, but there are no big changes. In many countries (including UK, or USA) you can check that media show politicians lie, or shown that they don´t know basic knowledge about world, or their jobs, or even show connections to shady business. And what it gets? Nothing. Still are same politicians in power and people only can grumble publicly instead of in secret. But it change nothing. People criticize wars, but they are still happening, criticize economic restrictions and they are still happening and diminish middle class in Europe, not to mention hardship of middle and low class in US. So yes, there are similarities. But censorship is always bad.
I will keep it simple for you: China in the world press freedom index comes at the 179 th 0:31 position out of 180 countries justn front of N Korea ,overall freedom position 166 I would lie on my nationality if I was Chinese ,so embarrassing!
Besides, I'm very proud to say I'm Chinese from China. Which means a country full of diligent smart people, who dare to challenge any country, say no, who cares to anyone. That's super cool!
I read somewhere that as many as 140 million Chinese people travel outside their country on holiday and approximately 450 000-00 study abroad every year . The USA is the favourite destination for studying . Many Chinese people therefore have a good idea what the world look like outside China . Chinese people of your generation will decide what your country will look like in the future . I live in a poor but “ democratic “ country . I am certain that almost all of those very poor people in my country will trade in an a blink of an eye “ democracy “ for a country with an effective government and a plan to free them from their poverty . We can all learn from what has been accomplished in China . China must be one of the few countries in the world where it’s people are largely positive about the future .
You have a nice shtick when it comes to being an apologist for the Chinese ruling regime. But it's cute and I actually watch your videos all the way to the end. I learn things. Every now and then, though, you slip. 0:33 There is no violation of 1st Amendment rights when someone is banned from a forum owned by a private enterprise. Freedom of speech, as guaranteed under the US Constitution, means that the government can't put you in jail for expressing your views, no matter how vile.
@@SimingLanwhich government division are you working for? Which program? Are they hiring more young, good looking TH-camr to explain their standard cliche to the world again?
It’s china prohibit western website to make western government prohibit Chinese website, now you said these two are the same thing? Have you ever learned the basic logic before you make these cliche video?
Practicing as a doctor here in Australia, we were heavily censored by the Medical Board as to what we can say or not say about Covid during the pandemic. There was a government approved 'scientific understanding' of the situation and all doctors had to toe this line. Talking off script risks your being deregistered by the Board as many Dr's had experienced. Then there is also the Gaza conflict censorship where ironically your compatriot Ai Weiwei previously celebrated by the West for his Anti China stance was cancelled when he publicly supported the Palestinians.
You give allowance to the west. Chinese give allowance to China. Censorship is censorship. A good life is not really how much you can bad mouth others, just to push your ideology through. I have the luck to be taught in saint louis schools in late 60’s. The priest for catechism said respect your grandmother when she asked you to accompany her to make offerings to the temple, in her heart there is a god.
This is also what I believe is correct as well. The west has such a strong influence. It really affects some of us in developing countries as well, if something happens in the US it will at least be talked about by many of the younger generations. At times problems that may shape the country for the next few years might get overshadowed by ideals that have been of little problem or just isn’t at all the public opinion. To me it makes sense why China took this step
Are you willing to define what 'the West' is? People speak in such broad generalities these days. It bothers me but I can't seem to avoid using rthe same terms. Latin America exists entirely within the Western hemisphere. Is it Western? I think so, but not everyone agrees. How about Israel? Yes, no, or maybe? My country (NOT the USA) lies on the North American continent but hosts immigrants from every other. I am of European descent, married to a non-European. We live in a neighborhood where people of European descent are a small minority. My clients at work are mostly Chinese. My friends at church are of European, African, and Indian descent. 'The West' experienced a powerful bomerang effect as a result of European colonialism. It has also been sought by refugees from many parts, and opportunists as well. The resulting racial and ethnic diversity has significantly changed the character of Western countries significantly over the past generation or two, making PLURALISM a defining features which separates them from China among many others. 'White' domination in the West is fading, and I thank God for that. China has certainly replaced the USA as the world's predominant expansionist imperial power. This has become quite concerning for us, owing to Chinese influence-peddling and election interference. The demographic weight of the Christian Church has shifted away from the West, toward the Global South. Incidentally, more Christian missionaries come out of South Korea (per capita) than any other country. South Korea jumped from the status od 'developing nation' to First World status in about two generations. I believe that the widespread embrace of Christianity had a powerful if indirect impact on economic development.
@@marcusonesimus3400 America is located in North America, and to China it is located in the East, but it is still a Western country. The West here refers to the ideological West, not the geographical or blood West. As for Western ideology, this one is difficult to describe in a commentary, because it is very complex and specialized, and it is a discipline. If you are interested in this, you can find the information yourself.
@@marcusonesimus3400 I don’t know which media you heard that China is an imperialist country, and China interferes in other countries’ elections. I want to say that this is not true. China has a history of 5,000 years, and it was one of the world’s great powers three centuries ago. China can colonize at that time if it wants to, instead of waiting until now, China has no interest in interfering with other countries. People take it for granted that a big country has influence, like a mountain that people can see when they look up, and that mountain will not actively affect anyone. How the West is defined depends largely on philosophy and geography. Chinese philosophy is very different from Western philosophy, which leads to differences in people's moral concepts, logic of action, and ways of expression. China has a territorial area of 9.6 million square kilometers, a marine area of 3 million square kilometers, and a land area of 12.6 million square kilometers. It is the only country in the world with an all-terrain landscape. Any natural geographical environment in the world can be found in China (excluding the north and south poles). "Geographic determinism" believes that human living habits, cultural characteristics and political systems are determined by the geographical conditions of the location. There are 56 ethnic groups in China, and each ethnic group lives in different geographical conditions. So Chinese culture is very complicated. China is very diverse in terms of immigration and diversity. The culture of each province in China is different. If you are interested, you can watch this documentary about Chinese history. th-cam.com/video/CTRvs6bW6CQ/w-d-xo.html
I can freely express my disdain for my leaders and they only have power through the consent of the governed. You can make false equivalencies and attempt to muddy the waters all you’d like. It’s nonsense.
George Orwell: “Journalism is printing what someone else does not want published". Good old George was on to something. Censorship is everywhere, and the means of controlling the narrative are oddly similar around the globe. I started my career as a teenager at a big newspaper in western Europe and was quickly taught the lesson by (rather cynical) news room veterans that new was made - not brought. Back in the day many juicy stories never saw the light of day for a myriad of reasons, with the most important one being a code of quiet self censorship - a tacit understanding that some topics are untouchable. Today, with the neo-liberal world order falling apart everybody in a position of power wants to tell the people what to believe - even if it is only partly true or pure nonsense.
Totally agree. With the development of AI, creating News will be more efficient, and humans may be surrounded by Fake news, for instance, Forced labor in Xinjiang
china tend to tell mostly true though some maybe abit stretched, they play the long game and therefore cant risk losing credentials when stories get debunked
As a Chinese born, raised and living in the mainland. I strongly disagree with your opinion that China is under siege by the Western world just because of its different culture and choice under this culture. Also heavily influenced by Confucianism, why Japan and Korea have completely different relationship with other countries, especially Westerners? The PRC and many others inside China always tell me it is because we, the Chinese, are so different. But I am telling you that I am not, and neither are many of my friends. We want to choose our own leader for our city, even for my neighborhood committee, but we can't; we are educated adults, why can't we choose what I want to read and why can't I distinguish right from wrong? Is our education system too bad to teach people to think critically instead of knowing how to assemble an iPhone? Realizing that I have written a lot, I want to emphasize that we, the Chinese, are part of the human race, so we desperately want to choose as normal people, live as normal people, just like Taiwanese do. As Chinese, we will certainly vote differently from Western people, but we don't want to be ruled by an emperor. Ironically, we are discussing different views on a Western platform, which is not allowed on the Chinese mainland platform. Besides, I have been to Xinjiang for 5 times for I love there, education camp is the have to choose with an unavoidable cost? I think no, and I think PRC should take most of the criticism. But, but, we Chinese should not avoid to see the reality, should not stop to seek the truth. Who is right is the least important, the most important is that we have conscience and courage to seek the truth.
You have a shallow understanding of geopolitics, racism and colonialism. Why do you think the west label China as Yellow Peril and Red Scare? Do you know this goes back over 200 yrs since the 1800's. The Chinese Exclusion Act (they make it a law!!) was passed since 1850's. They wanted to suppress China. The west created 2 Opium Wars to conquer China n enslave China. It is not about freedom. It is about western imperialism, superiority, racism and colonialism. Haven't you learn anything about a Century of Humiliations fir China. Every major western powers curved up China into a pie for economic exploitations, slave cheap labor and domination. The Chinese should always bow to western ideology and way of life. It had been embodied into the DNA of the western countries.That's why they cannot the rise of China. Freedom does not exist for China, only fir the west. They use "Freedom n Democracy" as an illusion to trap China, like the Opium War. China learned fr history and will never repeat the mistake. Western Freedom is toxic to China designed to cause social unrest, destabilize the China, riots, violence and weaken China. Very easily destabilize bcos of China's very large population, 1.4 billion people.
This is very insightful. I can say hand on heart that western governments played a very key role in a negative disinformation campaign against the previous government in Zambia. The negativity and bias particularly on social media platforms brought a tension never before in a general election. Primarily because the government of Edgar Lungu was pro China.
How is that Chinese debt forgiveness going on in Zambia? a land-locked country bigger than Texas, rich in copper and loaded with Chinese debt - and so poor that most of its population lives on less than $2 dollars a day. I hear a lot of Chinese are doing very well in Zambia..... a lot more that $2 a day.
Sure, Siming has many valid points. However, I would like bring to her audience the following points to ponder: - Firstly, look at what the free speech has done in the US. It gives freedom of propagating fake news, propagandas and hate speeches. There is no law to control that, i.e., censorship. Any suggestion to introduce such control will face a dead end before even reaching the Congress. Secondly, western democracy has its problem with political boycott. In all western democracies, it is very difficult to get any project start, regardless how good it is for national interest. When you have opposition party, they almost always face opposition for the sake of political point scoring. The hypocrisy of democracy vs. dictatorship has been going on in the western sphere without attracting any notice. US, with its hegemony agenda has been acting as a dictator to every nation in the world, especially to its own allies. For example, the way they are controlling EU and NATO vis-a-vis Ukraine War. They enforce their "Rule based International Order" globally, and for them it is either "You are with US or against US", as simple as that. (By the way, the Rule based International Order is not international law). On the contrary, China is a pragmatic country. It does not want to waste time and energy to go through such nonsense. It has already known what the most likely end results will be. It is better to focus on the betterment of the economy of the country and individuals. When people's tummies are full and the living standard has improved, people will be happy, and the issue of free speech might not even be there. People want free speech to complain, because there is no restriction on positive free speech. The Chinese style democracy works better that the western kind. With one party system people are united and there is no political point scoring. Therefore, everything can get done quickly and efficiently. That has been proven by the breathtaking progress made by China itself. In the west, under Westminster system, people will sigh with relief when both chambers of the parliament are dominated by the same party. That's an acknowledgment of the desirability of one-party system. Chinese is often portrayed by the west as a "communist authoritarian" country, while I don't see it that way. It is a hybrid of socialism and capitalism. It is not authoritarian, with the president being democratically elected by the caucus, and it has 3000+ members of Congress which are elected the same away as the Congressmen and women in the US. I have to restrict the length of my view here, but my main point is, both systems have its positive and negative aspects. We just have to weigh between the two systems, and I think China has chosen the best they can to achieve their immediate objectives, i.e.. to lift Chinese people up from hundred years of humiliation and poverty.
Thank god the TH-cam algorithm took me to your channel! You have so many interesting perspectives and reflections, many which I agree with 😊 You got a new subscriber from Scandinavia. Keep up the good work, and you channel will become big! 👏🏻
Correction : China does allow all the foreign internet companies to operate in China, but they need to put their servers for Chinese information in China. All of the American internet companies opted to exit from China. China's request is the same as what the US government asked from TikTok, by the way. As for Huawei, there is simply no proof that its system has a back door to the Chinese government, it has more to do with no back door to the US governemnt 😂
How about the Chinese laws that demand full cooperation of companies if the state asks for it? You don't need a "backdoor" if you can literally just walk in the front door legally. Don't interpret this as USA good, China bad. I'm not American. I'm just pointing out that claiming "no proof of backdoors" is a strange argument in this case.
@SimingLan: Have you talked to @CyrusJanssen? Both of you should interview each other. Thank you very much to both, and many others, for making the world a better place.
As a journalist who left Hong Kong because of the said situation, I find your words fair and objective that I don’t usually find from many people talking from your country. Thanks.
Siming, you have a rare gift in your craft: 1. You have a nice way of leading the audience into your discussions, viewpoints and positions. 2. You delivery is natural, easy, authentic and captivating. The pace is perfect. 3. Your command of the language is fabulous considering that’s your second language. BTW, your British accent is adorable. 4. Last but not least, your arguments are authentic, personal, insightful and persuasive. Your perceptions and understanding of western cultures and societies are excellent, personal and again authentic. Western societies are like shinny objects with irresistible allure. It is easy to reject the Chinese culture when you’re dazzled by these shinny objects. Obviously, you have done a lot of soul searching on these matters. Clearly, you have arrived at a better and deeper understanding and appreciation of the Chinese culture, society and governance. Congratulations! It was a pleasure viewing your broadcast. You’d make a fantastic “ambassador” for China to the young people in the west. Keep up the good work! And you seem to have . You would make a fantastic “ambassador” for China, particularly for
ya but her facts are off. she acts like every company has too go threw the government to do anything. thats the China system. they dont have that in the US any app developer can make any app on line or web site with out getting the government involved at all. and she doesnt seam educated enough to understand the US system
I am always happy to see your excellent videos. Whether I agree or disagree with your opinion I enjoy them because you present them clearly with support and are not out here pushing a propaganda narrative like many folks.
Even as someone who is not conservative and often sees social media favouring, promoting and tolerating far right speech while banning and throttling the accounts of left and liberal voices, I do not believe free speech is about private entities and their platforms. The right to free expression protects you from the government, not from being thrown out from a private property you were yelling in.
You mentioned a few issues with Hong Kong, but you didn't really touch on the, sometimes mind-blowing aspects of it. For example, even the BBC has reported that none of the "Hong Kong Booksellers", who supposedly 'disappeared' from Hong Kong and somehow ended up arrested on the Chinese mainland, actually claimed that they were arrested in Hong Kong. According to the BBC, that claim doesn't actually come from the booksellers themselves, but instead comes from one of the bookseller employees. The evidence suggests that 4 of the booksellers were peddling their fictional books (which they promote as "factual") on the Chinese mainland when they got arrested. The single other bookseller was arrested in Thailand and deported to the Chinese mainland. That story never did make any sense. The other point about Hong Kong which is worth looking into is how western powers created a mandatory course for all Hong Kong students, from Elementary school through to University, titled "Liberal Studies" immediately after the handover in 1997. This course is full of anti-China ideology and rhetoric, and made extensive use of the BBC's coverage of China in the classroom (the BBC's coverage of China is now, justifiably, considered a sick joke in China and is constantly made fun of as a result). Basically, while China took the agreed-upon approach to have a hands-off approach to Hong Kong following the handover, the U.K. and U.S. immediately got to work brainwashing the Hong Kong student population against the Chinese mainland. Also, before the handover, courses in Chinese history were mandatory in Hong Kong classrooms, but they became electives following the handover. It was all pretty incideous.
She talks about the Chinese culture help the country to unify and traditions get passed over. But that's not true, it is just that most of the Chinese people don't know how to communicate in an equal manner. The American tradition has passed for hundreds of years but the way American treat others are more equal than the traditional Chinese.
Haha, you just blew it for me young lady. In my country, Australia, and the UK, most European countries etc, governments tolerate massive levels of criticism. They don't regulate that at all. That's completely different to the situation in China. That difference is undeniable. You make a silk purse out of a sows ear with your eloquent argument, but in the end, there is a massive difference between freedom of speech here and in China, and the implications for citizens are massive.
There is a difference between using public opinion to punish people who go against some political standard that one private or political group or another doesn't like, and using the power of the state to jail those who criticize the state. Autocratic systems use this power to prevent the spread of alternate opinions not out of a desire for stability, but for control of the political and cultural narrative. All countries have these narratives. In the West, this narrative plays a constructive role in mainly communicating public opinions to their representatives; it is bottom up. In China, the direction of the narrative for the most part flows in the opposite direction; from the top to the bottom. In China, the Internet is a propaganda tool wielded against thought that the CCP deems subversive, and biases the narrative in a way that supports the regime. In both systems the flow goes both ways, but the limits of dissent in China are clearly demarcated and crossing red lines will end with those expressing these opinion ending up in jail. This produces self-censorship. As it is dangerous to express contrary ideas, the safest course of action is to shy away from anything too controversial or substantial. When I lived in Taiwan during the one party rule of the KMT, ordinary people could not express their political opinions publicly for fear of being jailed. The result was a culture that was obsessed with food. That was always the main topic of conversation in any kind of social setting. Political discussion was taboo in public. That doesn't mean that people didn't have opinions; just that they couldn't express them. In the case of Taiwan, this dissent eventually became too intense to be ignored and, over time, contrary thought was allowed to be expressed. This ended up with a peaceful transition of power to a multiparty system. In the case of the Arab Springs, it was the violent suppression by the states that caused chaos in the wake of these revolutions and left them politically and culturally divided. In the West we found democracy to be the most stable form of government as it gives all people a way to express discontent without having to blow up everything with a revolution. This may not be the case for China. China for centuries had periods of benevolent autocracy in which stakeholders from all sectors of society knew what their rights and responsibilities were. There were no constitutions or independent judiciary. But the tenants of Confucianism were deeply ingrained in the Chinese psyche, and ideals of justice and humanity were well understood. In modern day China, Confucianism has been replaced by a foreign ideology. In Confucianism, harmony between Fathers and their Children, local officials and the people they ruled, provincial officials and the central monarchy was governed by a shared responsibility and loyalty to each other. Fathers should be listened to, but the welfare of his children is his sacred responsibility, and so up the hierarchy. Without this bi-directional responsibility, society fails and falls into chaos. The current system is no longer bi-directional; the Chinese are asked to pay unswerving loyalty to the CCP without reciprocal actions by the latter. As you admit in your video, China is not a welfare state. Often times justice is subverted to meet the immediate needs of the central authority. People are deprived of their homes in urban villages without proper compensation. Pensions that they were promised were cut. Health care for most people is expensive and poorly provided. Stability that comes from suppressing the ability of people to make their needs known to their rulers, is fleeting. I am not advocating democracy for China; that is a system that has worked well in Europe and America, and may not work in China. But, regardless of political system, perverting the reciprocity between ruler and ruled is destructive to social stability and ultimately leads to exactly what the authorities hope to avoid.
Very well said sir. Historically, Chinese people who sacrificed their lives defending corrupt, useless regimes usually got praised as being loyal to the country. It has caused a major problem even today, that many people consider party, government and nation as one thing, being loyal to ccp(like those emperors in the past) is equal to patriotism. It’s hard for many people to understand that one can love a country and hate the government at the same time. But I think today’s people are changing, such “unconditional support” to the government will eventually change, no matter how hard the government tries to control people’s thinking, it’s undeniable that more and more people got westernised ideologies. I feel rather than “love” the CCP, it’s more like there’s kind of mutual agreement between people and the party. This agreement is based on a thriving economy and peaceful international relations, as the economy growth stalls, it’s going to be a lot harder for CCP to gain trust in the coming years.
Well articulated, researched and produced view from China's perspective. I'm sure that Chinese social media have plenty of western accounts explaining the views of the West.
China doesn't have a perspective. China has people. People have perspectives. are you pretending that there's a Mono Mind in China? that sounds a little ... racist, no?
Your view on China’s censorship laws are exactly how I see it too. China understood even from the very start that losing media control to the west will be detrimental to her political stability, and more amazingly to have the foresight of the west’s willingness to abuse it. Besides, the west is equally culpable of censorship although in a more subtle manner.
Well, people who have already experienced freedom rarely give it up by themselves later. In the case of China, this is not the case because it has never been free according to Western standards. But Japan, too, was a much less free country before WW2. If China was a bit more like today's Japan , there would be no questions about Taiwan and the relations between the West and China would be much less tense.
Unfortunately, this video makes some very wrong assumptions, leading to a very confused narrative. 1. Socially-driven trends governing the acceptance of certain ideas IS NOT the same as government censorship. Ex: Twitter being pressured by public opinion (and advertisers) to block Trump IS NOT the same as a government-mandated silencing of Hong-Kong protesters. There's a big difference between bottom-up and top down movements. Having to impose ideas top-down, through surveillance and police action is a mark of an authoritarian regime that lacks legitimacy. 2. Even if you consider the "western media" biased (can we really call CNN a puppet organization?), you cannot possibly "balance" this by actively suppressing the publication of facts. The Tienanmen Square Massacre, the extermination of the democracy movement in Hong-Kong and the cover-up of the COVID breakout did, actually, happen. Again, having the need to distort the truth is a mark of and authoritarian regime that lacks legitimacy.
I would also add to another factor: it’s an effective way to control for western technological monopoly. So it has a lot of economic interests as well. Chinese government is heavily promoting using Chinese apps which has been effective in keeping western monopoly away. But also at the same time compromising more free speech of course
Free speech does not have to come from the west. Free speech could be free in that country. Like USA media does not accept free speech from China but always bashing China one sided in their media, or accept free speech from RT America, Russian media but banned RT instead. What free speech from the west you are talking about?
Once again very well done and I REALLY enjoy your approach to explaining China. Much better than the mindless parroting of the hyper nationalists. I can feel you own thoughts have gone into this and I applaud that. Where the argument of "this is a cultural difference" comes in I believe is where it breaks down. This is something I term as a cultural excuse. Culture is simply a way of doing things with a a group or society. It can be affected by many factors, one of which would be government. What you refer to as a Chinese way of doing things is dictated to you by the current and past governments. Anyone with any degree of sense can view the people in Shenzhen versus Hong Kong and spot the massive cultural differences between them. The biggest difference in governance. Culture is used as an excuse far too many times in history. People historically (and to this day) used culture to excuse slavery, women rights and you name it what else. Just saying something is cultural doesn't make it wrong or right either. But lets make no mistake that the reason why Chinese buy into this system is because they are constantly indoctrinated through rigorous campaigns and censorship to believe it is "correct" and best for them. Whether that is correct or not is another argument but let not stray from this fact. All governments have a high degree of influence on people and culture but China is on a completely different level. They erase their own culture at the flick of a switch when it suits them. I have watched it happen countless times sometimes for better or worse.
It tells us that Chinese propaganda not matter how illogical it is, it still very effective. Removing people's right to speak out against ideas is a crime against humanity and you can easily see the scar it leaves on Chinese when you walk through the streets of any city in China. @@GrantRussell705
Grassroots movements??!! We have a very different understanding of this term. The groups that you mentioned, in my opinion, are not grassroots movements. They are movements funded by very rich donors.
You referenced popular attitudes and the actions of software corporations like it was federal mandate - Persons (humans and companies) in the USA have the ability to attempt to police speech to a point, but the government mustn’t - Apples and Oranges…
The real question should be 'is free speech a good thing'? Should you be able to 'speak truth to power' without fear of reprisal? To question authority? To call out those actions and ideas you disagree with? Saying 'one group of people does it and so it's fine if I do it', is something a 5 year old would say. Either you support checks and balances or you don't.
Would you be willing to go on a talk show with one of the people who was gassed at the protests in HK? I'm sure they'd love to interview you about why that was necessary.
Free speech without being heard, is just like whistling in the wind which is worthless. Professor Jeffrey Sacks who is one of the most well know and respected international economists is a good example. He has been forcefully giving speeches around the world to promote international cooperation to focus on many challenges we are facing today, such as climate change, shortage of natural resources, poverties in many under developed countries, ... But most of his speeches have been suppressed by many main stream media because they are not compatible with the geopolitical agenda of many those countries.
Good overview but one very important piece missing: China did in fact initially open itself up to Western social media companies like Facebook but then you had the string of deadly Uyghur terrorist attacks, which coincided with the violence of the Islamic State in Syria. These Uyghur terrorists used Facebook to communicate with each other and when Chinese authorities asked Facebook to hand over the relevant evidence, Facebook flatly refused (afraid of receiving political blowback in the US) and was consequently banned by China for refusing to abide by Chinese law. Couple that with the overt US support for Uyghur and other separatisms and you can kind of get China's apprehensions toward letting Western news/social media muddy the waters in Chinese political discourse.
Excellent point. Not many people are as aware of this as you.
What you said is absolutely true.
That's understandable... though Facebook's refusal to 'share', and even the occasional Western censorship of covid 'cures', hate speech, etc., still seems a far cry from China's 'Great Firewall', with its omnipresent video surveillance, and an infamous Social Credit System enabled by massive cross-linked databases on every citizen.
And that's aside from the growing perception that it's mostly for the collective 'security' of the dominant Han Chinese, but other 'Chinese' cultures like Tibetans, Mongols, Uyghurs, etc., not so much.
@electrostatic, simply put when free speech is hijacked, abused, or used to cause harm and create social unrest, violence, political instability, riots, upheavals, and lawlessness, then it should be restricted accordingly. Nothing is free. There is a cost to everything. Absolute freedom is chaos, not peace or free speech.
A a person living in HK looking back at the 2019 protest, I now realise how dumb the protestors were. I mean, The US is absolutely horrible, they claim to spread democracy and yet they only spread war and chaos(look at syria or afghanistan) while back at home, the majority of the population can't even afford to live even after working two jobs in a day, and the rich control everything.
Why would anyone in their right mind want to be like them?! Clearly, this is the result of western media. The mainland government recognised this early on and thus made the call to ban western media.
Also after I was recommended your channel by a Chinese friend online, I can say now that I am HOOKED on your content. Your videos are amazing, keep it up :)
Good Whataboutism there.
@@johncorr7154in this case, it’s pointing out American hypocrisy. It’s not a Whataboutism, meant to move away of the original conversation, it’s pointing out how free speech doesn’t have the effects the US claims.
Well done for a very balance analysis. Keep it up. You are great.
I am an American who has lived and worked in China for 20 years and am now partially retired and living frequently in Yunnan Province. I agree with most of what you present in your online videos and thank you for promoting peace between our two nations. If there is any way I can help you with this mission, please let me know. Robert Detrano
salute
Best if u can donate. Everyone needs $.
The only path to peace is to free the workers of the world from their chain by ending capitalism. Our ideals have been spreading and finding popular support across the world thank you for being part of our movement.
this Mission wtf r u talking about this mission? this mission of stupid
if you are real, do you not see this comes from the propaganda ministry in China?
I noticed the United States always encourage other nations to divide, or so called announcing sovereignty or individuality, never encouraged any nation, region or people to unify.
I am a Canadian, and don’t always agree with America’s take on China (or my own country’s), but it’s so hard to find people earnestly trying to explain their perspective not wanting to simply convert their listener/viewer. I have watched several of your videos now and am subscribing because you continue to prove you are coming from a place of seeing rights and wrongs on both sides and trying to find your own honest way through, and the research you put in and things you see as someone with a different background to me is so so helpful. Moments like this I am thankful for the internet and the access I have to hear from you across time zones and culture. Well done and thank you for all the work you’re putting in with these videos!
Ccp might capture her if she digs too deep though
Congrats, you fell for her state-sponsored propaganda. Seriously, you can watch her justify why it's OK for her to spread CCP talking points to the west, but China is justified in keeping its people from reading the truth about their government because it's all some CIA plot? This is such nonsense. She's obviously not a backyard vlogger, these clips are too professional, and how the hell does she have access to TH-cam anyway when it's blocked in China?
@@pjb111 Ask your friends to make more guesses here.
I agree with you and do feel the same like you.
Perhaps just perhaps that every government is evil there is no good out there. So as people of the human race maybe we should just give the people some slack and not attack anyone?
Thank you for your video. I am American and since there has been tension between our governments I have been trying to better understand the Chinese perspective. Your videos have been a helpful resource. I agree with some of what you said and disagree with some of what you said, but I respect your opinions and appreciate all of the work you put into your videos. It's always helpful to try to understand each other better. In spite of philosophical differences and difficult history between our countries, I feel hopeful that with time we can rebuild trust and come to have a better relationship as nations in the future. We are all members of the same human race and that is the most important thing in the end. Thank you and good luck with your channel!
never to be friend with liers, America is a bigest lier.
但不幸的是，美国不会在其全球霸权受到挑战时袖手旁观。虽然我们保持了和平的经济建设和社会发展。我们不可能通过妥协我们的正常权利来与美国妥协，这无疑导致目前世界局势正在滑向第三次世界大战。
You fell for it😂🇹🇼🇹🇼🇹🇼🔛🔝
重建信任的前提，是让美国的军舰和军机远离中国，如果有人拿着一把枪经常在你家门口走来走去，如果这个人说想跟你建立信任，你的感觉是什么？另外对中国发动贸易战和金融战，在香港煽动颠覆政府的街头运动，这些都是美国对中国做的坏事，随便就能说出一堆，还有美国一边承认一个中国，一边又卖武器给台湾，沙利文公开演讲说过去几十年对中国进行的颠覆活动都失败了，奥巴马采访中说如果每个中国人都过上和美国人一样的生活水平，那就是一个灾难，世界不能承受这么多人享受丰富的资源。请问中国对美国做了什么坏事吗？让军舰去美国边境威胁美国的安全了吗？什么时候美国人停止对中国做这些坏事，什么时候才能谈信任和和平，但是我目前感觉看不到什么希望。
Well said
Keep up the good work! Thank you so much!
So about 0:42 seconds in and already we're misrepresenting the point regarding free speech by confusing actions taken by private entities with actions taken by government authority. Cancel culture, social media bans, virtue signaling, and political correctness are not only examples of actions taken by private actors but, contrary to the author's belief, they are examples of speech in and of themselves. Further your point on this front is based on the mistaken assumption that content policies of social media companies are controlled by the government which seems to be a blind spot from your perspective since it would seem incredible, to a Chinese viewer, for the government to have no control in that realm. Restraining people from reacting to the speech of another, through responses or actions, would itself be a restraint on speech. The arrest of journalists isn't a free speech issue...it's a freedom of the press issue. Whether or not CRT is taught in schools isn't a free speech issue...that falls under the regulatory authority of the states to govern curriculum in public schools. Private schools, if so inclined, are free to teach CRT as are entities outside of the public school setting. Such a flawed premise, at the outside, undermines the analysis built upon it.
It is perhaps fair to say that, while you argue that Westerners don't understand China's viewpoint on this issue, that you equally don't understand how this freedom functions in the West, particularly America.
Lastly, the fact that you came so close to understanding the real reason for censorship and how the principle of unity, imposed on society, is used to benefit the ruling class "...in the past this was a prerequisite for any emperor to hold his mandate of heaven..." which effectively allows authorities to maintain the status quo. You would be incredibly naive (so much so it makes me question your motives) to assume that such an effort to maintain the status quo is driven by a desire to "protect its people from losing their FAIR [you can't be serious] opinions of the government".
Siming is absolutely right to point out that China has historically valued harmony, stability and moderation over pluralism, extremism, and diversity of thought. However, I think she downplayed a little bit the extent modern Chinese citizens are allowed to debate public policy. Chinese scholars and public figures are able to voice a multitude of opinions on international affairs, military strategy, economic policy, public health policy, and so on. However, there is a well-defined limit to the debate, and that limit stops at the legitimacy of the Chinese state. For example, there is a fundamental difference in my view between a citizen protesting the zero-Covid policy, and a Hong Kong separatist waving the American and UK flags and calling for revolution. The former wants to make the country better for everyone, and the latter wants the country destabilised. As an aside, most Hong Kongers from what I see are trustworthy, sensible and patriotic people.
Secondly, we should acknowledge that China's 1.5 billion people represent a huge influx of potential internet users for the world wide web. By sheer numbers, Chinese netizens could potentially have a huge impact in terms of shaking up the Western echo chamber and reshaping the international discourse on China, if the firewall is removed permitting easy internet access. I wonder if a more prudent strategy for China is actually to remove the firewall, and let loose the Chinese netizens who will have a great collective influence in terms of telling China's story, rather than be disproportionately influenced by the Western discourse (as Beijing may currently fear). Even in Russia, despite relatively loose internet censorship compared to China, most people still stand by their country's actions. This is in spite of the smaller size of the Russian population relative to China, and the even more negative coverage of Russia by the Western media at present for understandable reasons.
The majority of citizens from non-Five Eyes can understand English but not Mandarin. This is a big challenge for China to overcome.
The Waco Massacre tells you all you need to know about how the US deals with seditious elements. Heck, just look up the Whiskey Rebellion and check how George Washington dealt with a revolt and rebels which is especially ironic because America was founded on not wanting to pay fucking taxes, and the first rebellion they violently put down was about rebels that didn't want to pay taxes.
thanks again for the great comment :)
1. you are absolutely right about the amount of freedom chinese netizens enjoy these days and the limit lies in exactly what you said. i'll add that it's a good tool for the government to do temperature check on society.
i found 2. an interesting prospect to consider. currently around 400 million chinese people are learning/or speak english, compared to the 1.1 billion people who speak english as a second language - there is a big potential there, though the numbers gap would exacerbate the fear/need for security that informs the necessity of firewall.
hope to hear more from you in future videos!😊
Hey look who I found in the comment section. It's good to see you here, my friend.
@@NeMayful Hello friend! We both stumbled across a great channel in here
yes, [your] initial example is absolutely correct. "free speech" only exists as far as the govt respects [its] citizenry [and] their rights. in america, this should not be in question and yet, here we are. these laws and orders and actions should have been ruled as an infringement and stopped, but those who wanted control, found courts that would agree and all of our rights are being attacked from all sides under a concerted effort of lawfare.
Possibly. But she mentioned Twitter's removal of Donald Trump's account, and that is not really a "free speech" issue, as Twitter is a private entity, not a part of the government.
@@PracticaProphetica the govt is responsible to not only accept free speech but to protect it, even on privately owned but public accommodations. this is why courts rule, for example, that if a mall allows girl scouts to sell cookies, they must also allow others to solicit.
further, it has been clearly exposed that govt HAS directed social media to abridge speech thus they are to be considered agents of govt.
@@jaewok5G I don't think your example of the Girl Guides is a free speech issue...more likely a discrimination issue.
There is no doubt that there are attempts at government influence over social media. But this case failed in the supreme court, because in order to implicate government, you must prove that they actually compelled the organizations to comply.
Businesses can and do make laws regarding under what conditions they offer their service. "No shoes, no shirt, no service" is an example. These are not "free speech" issues.
I have a website and if people leave long argumentative comments, where it seems they are primarily trying to use my website as a means to promulgate their ideas, instead of developing their own website, I may choose to remove their comments, although I'll try just to shorten it and publish an explanation of why it was not appropriate. They can make their own website, so I'm not restricting their ability to speak freely. They just can't do it on my property.
Nor does "free speech" mean the freedom to slander, threaten, or perjure others. In its basic intent, it is to allow people to pursue, publish, and speak the truth (or what they think the truth is). Although, you might find, as Gab did, that you have to do it on your own, without relying on any social media platforms.
So, free speech in the us comes with some asterisks. However, it only applies to actions by government. The U.S. government is barred from restricting free speech unless under certain very specific conditions. This, such that whenever actions like that happen it turns into massive controversies, and often become legal cases and rallying points for political discourse. You cannot compare that to an authoritarian government which throws any detractors into prison, or sends them for reeducation. To suggest that these things are the same is intellectually dishonest and frankly horrifying. Governments hold a monopoly on legal use of force, and should be held to the highest standard and restrictions.
Right on. Finally someone who sees though the veneer.
Julian Assange/Edward Snowden/Twitter files/Covid?!!!! The US has a growing industry coined the censorship industrial complex. They do censor, they just use private companies to do it for them
Spot on! The fallacy of this entire video is conflating private entities and government. It is clear she's pushing pro-CCP propaganda with some highly deceptive logical fallacy(like falsely equating censorship by private companies with those by governments) and professionally produced videos. Must be on CCP's payroll!
@@bt6904 The stealing and posting of confidential military documents has NEVER been a protected free-speech issue in ANY nation!
@@ranradd This is what made me suspicious that this channel is actually a propaganda channel.
Free speech does exist but it doesn’t mean speech without consequence. All it means is that you cannot be criminally charged for expressing an opinion. It is a constraint on the GOVERNMENT’S ability to punish you. It has NOTHING to do with private companies or individuals ostracizing you.
What she meant is that in the more and more liberal western societies state control lessens in favor of the development of private organizations, thus placing financial and private companies at the forefront of development and public opinion. Privatization has in fact been growing in Europe even in sectors that used to be solely state regulated, like health care.
Therefore the interests of private companies and those of the states go hand in hand. China's state, however, regulates its industrial and institutional development at all times.
Regarding freedom of speech, it's very different in already established societies like the western ones to allow criticisms than in China, a country in a delicate development, being built anew in less than a century while being internationally presented as a threat in many ways.
It's very natural to have such thought for people from a multi-party western democracy. When opinions are "freely" expressed (note: nothing is free. Public opinions are heavily influenced by capital), the louder voice gets elected and is ultimately responsible for its own choice. In China, there is only one party, and the party is always responsible for all people (or the interests of the majority). It is not that all opinions are banned but that critiques without constructive and responsible solutions are restricted as they are in some sense distractions to reaching a workable solution. See Arab Spring and Russia under Yeltsin.
Neither society is perfect. Western democracy respects the choice of individuals but ultimately lack long-term accountabilities (capital is always short sighted). China, as a one-party society, focuses on long-term goals but the cost is that grievances from some individuals or private interests are not at the top of the list.
What she meant is “free speech” is not as free as you would like to think. There are many hidden influence and control before the speech even arrived to you and end up, well, just “speech”, no free speech. A guy got thrown in jail for 8 years for a meme on Hillary. Dictatorship? How about that. Free speech is an ideal my friend. Accept the political reality.
Also, same to the idea of “voting “ equals democracy. Truth is voting is only one of the representation of democracy, and experiences told me that elections can be bought over, manipulated and rigged before even you go to the voting station
You can't, but try saying something about a certain cabal of powerful ethnogroups controlling US society and see where you end up - homeless unless you applogize and grovel. And being homeless is arguably worse than locked up with 3 square meals a day.
Absolutely spot on! Free speech is indeed a complex and often misunderstood concept, not just in China but globally. You nailed it when you highlighted the political reality that free speech doesn't exist when it becomes inconvenient for those in power. It's fascinating how the perception of free speech is often used as a tool for political influence, rather than as an absolute right.
I really appreciate how you broke down the cultural differences and the historical context behind China's approach to censorship. It's not about paranoia; it's about protecting stability and unity in a rapidly changing world. The Arab Spring example was particularly eye-opening, showing how social media can be both a force for good and a potential threat to national security, depending on the perspective.
One thing I would add is the role of Western media in shaping global perceptions. As you mentioned, the imbalance in global news media influences how countries like China are portrayed. This cultural war is very real, and it's crucial to understand the motivations behind it.
Keep up the great work! Your insights are incredibly valuable, and I hope you continue to share more videos like this. The depth and clarity you bring to these discussions are truly refreshing!
Seeing the overwhelmingly sympathetic comments here, many coming from Westerners, I feel the need to address some of the issues raised in your videos from the perspective of a Chinese citizen. In your videos, you have been consistently doing such a great job explaining why the CCP is doing what it's doing. But the question is, why are you sympathizing with the logic of the regime and its desire for 'stability' (read 'the desire to stay in power'), and not with the interest of the ordinary people the regime rules?
I think your use of the concept of 'Chinese culture' is a masterful sleight of hand here. By arguing that Chinese culture prefers unification, harmony, etc., you are essentially saying that the 'Chinese people' have given tacit consent to the CCP's quest for stability, exchanging the messiness of democracy for economic prosperity. I agree that this exchange is basically the entire basis of the CCP's claim of legitimacy for the past four decades. But there are several problems here.
First, no culture is unchanging. Political culture in particular can change rapidly, and is prone to be shaped by propaganda. It is hard to say to what extent many ordinary Chinese people's political apathy today is the result of our 'culture' and not the product of terror, starting with the bloody crackdown on the nation-wide pro-democracy protests of 1989. Chinese people are not born to love stability and order, we learn to be so.
Second, it is hilariously oversimplyfing that you just showed some pictures of Chinese writing, traditional clothing, and suggest that somehow these mean that we inherited the same understanding of law and justice as in old imperial China. Even if we did, does that justify a legal system based not on rights, but on maintaining order? Does it justify the CCP to rule by the same political principle that the emperors did two hundred years ago? Btw, all of those 'traditions' you pointed to changed drastically during China's transformation into a modern society. There are also minority cultures who see this ideology of uniform order as imperial. To a largely Western audience, who are very used to the idea of respecting other people's culture and do not consider themselves to know Chinese culture better than you do, your essentializing use of 'cultural continuity' serves as a convenient tool to fill in the gap in your logic, and glide over the state violence that is needed to keep that culture of stability alive.
I also agree that if the CCP somehow collapses tomorrow, there will be a power vacum and chaos in China. But this is no reason to just accept the status quo. In fact, it is the CCP that should be responsible for this would-be chaos. It has killed all possibilities of civil alliance among its citizens, destroyed the foundation of serious political debate, so that it becomes the only viable ruler of China. But the Chinese people do not deserve this. We deserve better.
Thank you very much for saying this. I'm so glad I found your comment. A lot of the things she said made sense and were hard to refute, but I felt there was 'something wrong' in her explanations that I couldn't formulate into full paragraphs due to lack of ability and time. You basically spoke my mind.
Please read Chinese history， When China is divided，what happened to chinese people.and how CPP beat other parties and enemies to get there.
Great work! Deep and thorough analysis!
Thank you, Technomania, that's so kind of you:)
I think you start with a false equivalency. The critical difference is that in the US we unquestionably allow people to critique the challenges to free speech. We allow the debate about the issue. It i is beyond the pale that someone could be arrested for an image critical of the US. This is not so in the Middle Kingdom. There are of course challenges to free speech in the US. That's part of being in a democracy. But the challenges are different in kind, not merely degree, to those in China. You lost me at that.
Endemic to the freedom of speech is a tacit recognition that sometimes other views are correct in the marketplace of ideas. It seems to me this is the basis of a tension that cannot be reconciled.
Excellent response. I want to add that she doesn't seem to understand the history and the benefit of democracy. West becomes so powerful is because it has a very different norms and cultures to China, including democracy. Chinese economic rise is all about imitating, if not stealing US technology. And some skeptical people always mention India as a failure of democracy. But India has a caste system which is not democratic at all. India also has a geographical disadvantage. Four seasons countries tend to be more advanced than tropical or equatorial countries. Now Chinese stock market has been collapsing since 2021, while India's stock market has been rising. Let's see how the future will unfold.
No, they are not different in kind, merely in degree. People will go to the greatest lengths the law will permit to censor, deplatform, or otherwise hide or marginalize political opinions that challenge liberal democracy and the rules-based international order, both of which are essential to the interests of the Anglo-American establishment that has ruled over the west since WWII. They will go far, far beyond merely offering honest and good-faith counterarguments and engaging in the marketplace of ideas, they will use lies and defamation, social ostracization, economic and financial pressure, and even abuse the monopoly power of certain corporations to maintain control of the narrative and enforce the worldview that best aligns with the interests of the establishment. If they could go further in enforcing their control of the narrative, they would, as evidenced by Europe and their outright criminalizing of narratives that they have judged to pose a threat to liberal democratic norms or the rules-based international order.
I can freely make fun of my government. I can also be un-woke about ALOT of things. Free speech exists in the States. But, the technology we have today, free speech has social consequences if it pisses enough people off. The government doesn't actually control it unless it involves threats of death or harm (which you can get arrested for; this also includes shouting "fire" in a theatre under false pretenses or making threats involving explosives, whether true or not) or if it would constitute a violation of national security related laws (but those specifically refer to classified information being disseminated to unauthorized parties). China completely controls all speech in their territory and it completely controls the narrative any media in the country that is legally accessible to the people is allowed to tell in any of its content. America does not and its also why very little to no media in most contexts is state controlled. What you talk about involving cancel culture and other such things only result in censorship by corporations who fear losing money from their customer base who get pissed off at people who say things which anger them. Not all nasty posts and offensive video content gets "cancelled", though. In the states, censorship of free speech is crowd-sourced through the sensibilities of the majority of the people who care enough to comment on the controversy in question.
*It's a TOTALLY different animal.*
And frankly, having an open internet and allowing people to make up their own minds on what's good governance for their country is a good thing. America hears everything that comes out of China without censorship by the government to protect America's narrative. The majority of Americans are actually personally threatened by China's narrative and, without government involvement (although corporate media is often involved. It's not the same thing), have an aversion to Chinese rhetoric. Human nature promotes capitalism, but it also TENDS toward dictatorship, although it is amicable to the idea of democracy. Democracy is fairer governance long term to ensure the most people's needs are met. Micromanaging an economy, even one that nominally look capitalist (i.e. state-capitalism, like in China) is not sustainable long term and will fail eventually. It always does and always has. Culture differences might prolong it, but it can't prevent the collapse indefinitely. Freedom is the best policy.
No, I have to correct you. The US/Western European countries do NOT have absolute free speech. As you say, speech (through online social platforms) has social consequences if it pisses enough people off (i.e. when it crosses certain line of the socially permitted political correctness set in your society, slightly different topics of course in different Western countries), and some speech are considered an arrestable offense in the West (relating to the Holocaust, for example). And you have also listed examples of the other scenarios when your ''free speech'' could result in arrests and violations of (terrorism related) laws.
So, applying equally all above conditions, China has ''free speech'' too - At home, in private settings, Chinese people can pretty much say whatever they want, but in social gatherings large or small, online or offline, speech has consequences too, it works exactly the same way as in the West. In the Chinese version of political correctness (much less PC on certain cultural issues than in the West, which is great), insulting/smearing the government/politicians/leaders, insulting/smearing the Chinese military, questioning/smearing the sufferings/crimes inflicted by Western/Japanese imperialism are just some of the examples that are considered crossing the PC line. But it is not up to the US/West to judge whether these are acceptable, it is simply called cultural difference.
And about the Chinese media, yes it is true, all Chinese media is regulated, and yes its information and narrative controlled by authorities, so that, NO LIES and misinformation would be put out intentionally, and that's the DIFFERENCE between the Chinese media and the US/Western media. Your media, routinely puts out lies (without any base), especially about your so called adversary countries. It also runs your government permitted narrative (a lot of the time involving fearmongering so to generate support towards the party in charge and push for certain agendas, like increasing the defence budget, and so on), and yes, without you even being aware of it, because most of time and for most of you, you simply do not know any better (for example, about China). Your media also twists facts, misinterprets, sensationalises stories, because this is the nature of your media, they are mostly a business, they do what it takes to make money, whereas Chinese media is there mostly to deliver information, they are required to be professional and accurate for the things they put out.
To conclude, no, you DON'T have absolute free speech in the US/West, neither does any country. You do have MORE freedom of speech than China, only slightly more.
@@Faye_Liu Your understanding of the “west” is lacking. Obviously we don’t have absolute free speech and your attempts to create a straw man out of this argument is a blatant attempt at a logical fallacy that most educated westerners will see through. Your comment is also full of generalizations that simply don’t apply in general, only in specific countries or news organizations. In the west we also have publicly funded news agencies that do not have the same corrupting influences as the various competing private networks. And the limits of free speech in the US and Germany regarding the Holocaust are quite different for obvious historical reasons. The legal limits in Germany on this issue would run a foul of the First Amendment in the US. And on the other hand Germany is more open in other areas.
@@michaelmanley5614 Your ''public funded news agencies''? Are they happen to be media outlets such as the BBC? The BBC is largely ''public funded'', or heavily subsidised by the British government (through licence fees (a form of tax) collected by a government body on the government's behalf, which I paid some 15 years of them), but it is very much a state media, you would be lying to claim otherwise, I have evidence (tons of it, mostly relates to China), personal experiences to prove it is anything BUT an independent and impartial organization. BBC is probably worse in ways than other US/Wester media about delivering misinformation and lies, precisely because it is state funded.
There is no need to write so many fancy words to try to discredit me, I live in the West and have been for over 20 years, I watched Western media exclusively for many years, I know how it works, I also know how the Chinese media works (lived in China for over 20 years too). And in your comment, you provided no example of my ''generalization'', and named no name from ''specific countries or news organization'', your ''arguments'' are pretty weak to me.
In any case, you agree with me that the US/West does not have absolute free speech that your countr(ies) love to lecture China on, that is my main point. And as I already stated, the US/West has more free speech, which you confirmed it by repeating it. So what exactly is your contribution to the discussion?
It's legal for the police in the UK to murder trade unionists or commit any other crime to preserve government power (Covert Human Intelligence Sources bill). The police routinely spy on and subvert political groups. You think you have full freedom of speech that's because your speech falls within what's deemed acceptable.
@@Faye_Liu I can shout to the world the Joe Biden is a stupid idiot, can you call Xi Jinping, Pooh Bear? Now let's talk about the Uyghurs.
Makes sense to me 🤔
Maybe Germany wouldn't have the serious issues with their AFD political party if there were no Twitter/X, Facebook, Telegram, or other "freedom of reach" platforms.
I wouldn't even mind banning TH-cam, either.
To be crystal clear. I'm not against freedom of speech, nor against freedom for journalism, but I am against unregulated freedom of reach.
Um the great fire wall project was begun in 1998, far before the Arab Spring in 2011. It was primarily a response to internal political developments that threatened CCP dominance. Regardless of later statements, it begun as a mechanism to enhance internal control, and not combat outside intrusion
毛泽东：共产党有两把武器，一个是枪杆子，一个是笔杆子，舆论高地你不占领敌人就会占领。
they were quite late, foreign funded terrorism starts to bloom in 1992, 1996, 1997,1998 etc
It is true that the "Great Firewall of China" was initially created as a cyber protection tool for China's internal stability, but it is not what it used to be, and it is now more for the protection of countries outside of China.
Yet if a Chinese citizen seeks to learn about Tiananmen Square, the Great Leap Forward or the Cultural Revolution in any kind of detail, they would have no choice to access western sources.
Fake news.
As someone who was fed with Western media all my life, I understand fully how powerful and influential it is. It can make an intelligent person who can analyse situation logically to totally lose their logical reasoning when talking about China.
It doesn't matter what media you watch. You should not rely on such sources to provide you with a basic education in history. politics, or ethics. Nor should you trust the authority of human opinion in general.
(Jeremiah 17:9) 'The heart is deceitful beyond all else, and is desperatelt sick; who can understand it?'
Yes, perversity and malignant self-centredness are typical of the human race, and so-called 'Westerners' are no exception.
But if you think that the PRC government and CCP are the golden exception, a veritable fountain of Truth and Virtue, you are fooling yourself.
It is important to realize that abandoning one delusion does not require embracing a contrary delusion. Must one jump from the frying pan into the fire?
Wow the way you put this together is amazing. Everything you say is what I want to say but can’t. Thank you for doing this.
Refreshing perspective. As has been said elsewhere: No one sees themselves as the villain in their own story. As an American, it's important to understand that the motives and actions of Western governments and cultures are often... um, sketchy.
As opposed to the motives and actions of non western nations are any different? This is a great propaganda channel.
Don't stutter. Say it loud and clear:
(Romans 3:23) 'For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.'
In view of your grand discovery, what is the best option?
1. To become a fashionably self-hating Westerner and glorify the CCP, with its rich history of megacide and callous disregard for what wee consider elementary human rights.
2. To repent of our pride, trusting Jesus to be our righteousness, and to make ourselves useful in others' service.
Let me tell you, those two options are mutually incompatible.
@@pnw_wanderer9786 Well... The last military conflict China was involved in was a short border war with Vietnam in 1979, with a quite complicated historical background. Since then, they have adopted a policy of NON-INTERFERENCE in the domestic policies of the countries they interact with. In other words, they do trade with whoever, as long as there is mutual respect and non-interference.
The United States on the other hand, has been involved in wars and conflicts non-stop in the past 40 years. Destroying Libya, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, invading Panama, funding ethnic cleansing in Israel and Yemen etc... The death toll from all these conflicts started by the United States is in the MILLIONS.
So yes, the actions of China compared to the United States ARE different, and LESS HARMFUL by any meaningful measure, and to deny that is to engage in straight up gaslighting. I don't care about motives of countries. I look at what they do, and weigh their actions against each other. And the fact of the matter is that in the last decades the US has been a force for conflicts, hunger, and war, whereas China has been a force for poverty alleviation, trade, and development.
You can call it propaganda all you like. But these are the facts. I'm sure you have a great reason and justification for all these wars, and how the US is still somehow the 'lesser evil'. But for a normal person who despises violence there is simply no question. Out of the two options, China or the US, China has done infinitely less harm.
Cope and seethe.
Thanks!
Thank you David, that's extremely kind of you. I appreciate you, have a nice day! x :)
@@SimingLan well argued points and keep up the good work :)
Since you had your education abroad, do be mindful that we are still chinese and somehow deep within our psych, incalculated with a Confucian diet culturally. Whether born a 1st or 2nd gen in a country outside China, there is only one motherland. At the end of the day, if there is a pogrom on chinese in some other countries, only China will be able to save the victims. A good example was the chinese ambassador of Malaysia who stood in front of Chinatown and stopped a would be rioting by ultra-nationalists who were at that time supported and egged on by some politicians in the then existing government. At the same time, China is learning from past mistakes and adjusting accordingly. FYI, it's good to remember that, as with any past errant dynasties, the people will eventually rise up and depose the errant dynasty if it didnt do a good job administering the country.
Free Speech doesn't exist in the same vein that True Communism Hasn't Been Tried. Or even True Free Market doesn't exist even if there's a single government intervention. However if you put it on a scale, say 0-10, I think the free speech in the west leans towards 10 compared to China which leans towards 0. If it's isn't free speech unless you're a 10 then it doesn't exist anywhere, most likely. It's an ideal after all, ideals don't exist but some countries are closer to the ideal than others.
I can see you improve your craft as I watch and compare your older videos with newer ones. Pretty good editing style to make the audience feel like they're involved in the conversation. The thought process and quality of research also seems to improve across time. Kudos on the continuous improvements.
After traveling in China over 15 yrs. I can see now why China is so leery of an unfettered internet. One thing I noticed first was the absence of pornography. The next thing I noticed was the government's concern over its youth spending too many hours game playing. In the West we just let a lot of this go on unfettered. The breakdown in our society is self evident. Remember, China tried to stop Western influence and trading in the 1840s only to be attacked viciously with their five main ports bombed into submission. Opium was the major trade item held by the West in return for China's silks, ceramics, gold and silver ect,. The resulting overflowing addiction problem brought China down to it's knees. My government here in the US shafted us on infrastructure promised to us in the 60's. Instead it ratcheted up military spending which now has 750 bases in 80 countries. China has maybe one base outside China and chose to spend its money on a state of the art transportation system which is much appreciated by the Chinese People. They did this infrastructure improvement during my years of travel there. It was like something out of Star Wars. We are propagandized against China here and it works!
I grew up in a Frankish family, and I have a Taiwanese Chinese friend. I knew here for more than ten years. One day, - I've forgotten what caused it, - she started with an almost endless list of accusations, things that irritated her, things that I had done wrong etc.. It was terrible. Then, when she was ready, I said: "Thank you for being so honest to me.". Of cause I wanted to know what had irritated her, what she thought she could accuse me of, and what she thought I had done wrong, but she had never said it. We have always been good for each other. Now; what is the advantage of not always speaking frankly, and then comming up with everything at once?
Unfortunately, some personalities keep things that bother them to themselves, until a certain action or word spoken causes them to explode emotionally, in one great outburst. It is probably best to speak frankly and honestly about what is bothersome at that moment, rather than holding it in until it builds up like hot air in a balloon that is ready to pop.
Some people's bad behavior has roots in emotional or psychological disturbance. It might be tempting to attribute it to culture or ethnicity, but I hope you won't (or didn't) in this case.
Do your best to forgive this person, if you haven't already. When the sting of memory goes away you probably won't feel a need to talk about it. In the Lord's Prayer (translated) it says, ".....and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors";
alternatively, "and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us".
Just curious about your 'Frankish' identity. i thought that the Franks were a Germanic tribe of the Dark Ages. If people still identify as 'Frankish' today, in what region do they mostly live?
@@MrRichard1280 "Damned if you do. Damned if you do not. People are crazier than anybody."
Why did she marry you!?😢.
been bingeing your channel lately, superb work with incredible depth and insightful observation! Don't ever stop doing it.
Never has this complicated subject been explained so clearly and concisely. Thank you.
I agree the nowhere has free speech Like nowhere on this earth is there free speech but in my opinion that’s why we should thrive to strive to get there everybody should speak their mind without the threat of getting searched getting beat down or whatever by cops free speech should be a thing everywhere and yeah it is nowhere
Love your channel and your insightful analysis. By the way, you don't have to be too apologetic about China. Your country is doing well and increasing more countries in the world is recognizing China's achievements. Still, it is good to explain China's thoughts and policies for other to have a greater understanding of China. Keep it up.
Agreed. This is a good channel and the CCP narrative is well put here.
Agreed on the great channel. Definitely disagree on the "too apologetic" part. She strikes a great balance explaining the Chinese position to a western audience, and any whiff of this being Chinese propaganda would be a huge detriment to her work. The way she is wording things right now is pretty close to a masterpiece
Yes she shouldn't be too apologetic. Where will China be if America get what it wants from them? Poverty and exploitation forever. We already see how they did to others, don't let them ruin your country.
Who are you to judge whether a country is 'doing well'? You are not God. Do you know anything about the crimes committed by the CCP since its accession to power in 1949, how tens of millions died in famines and purges under Mao's rule?
Did you know that tanks rolled over students' bodies in Tiananmen Square in 1989?
Do you know that China was in denial when the first covid cases showed up, and did not alert the international community quickly?
Did you know that ethnic Uyghurs (of Turkic stock) have been persecuted, sent to prisons to be brainwashed, subjected to intense surveillance in their own homes, their women sexually assaulted, men deported to perform labor in faraway places?
Do you think that having lots of money and military hardware demonstrate a people's virtue?
Jesus said that not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions.'
Its called the ‘social contract’, but the fact is, the oligarchs run the world and let us believe we have a say. We are deluded if we think we have any say in how our country is administered. We ‘vote’ for candidates chosen by the oligarchs. Look at the top two right now! Old and feeble men! Americans crack me up with their ‘freedom’ talk😅
Plz keep it up, and i will stand with you forever...a Chinese who live in Australia
Just want to add that Harmony (和) in Chinese means "harmony with diversity". China has always been a nation embracing pluralism and solidarity at the same time, so do not fall into the standard Western dichotomy of pluralism/singlism.
Yet my lgtbq friends in China are scared because the room for them within Chinese diversity is growing smaller and smaller every year. One friend just had her seminar on feminism in Kunming shut down with the police telling her nothing about feminism or lgbtq is allowed in China anymore. People were denied entry to a concert in Beijing recently for wearing rainbows…
I study Feminism in Chinese university and my gay friends in Chengdu and Beijing are not coy when it comes to public display of affection. Yes to pluralism, no to Neoliberal cultural war driven by capital.@@OldOnes666
I just discovered your channel and find your well-documented and well-thought-out style appealing. Keep up the good work!
China has the right to block whatever internet they feel is harmful to their county.
I'm retired now, but when I was working almost all of the people I supervised were from China and I don't see any of them rushing back to live in China, why do you think that is?
These workers only make $20 an hour and this is in San Francisco, where it's $2000 or more to rent a studio apartment.
So refreshing to listen to a thoughtful and intelligent channel like yours. I'm glad I stumbled on your channel just 2 days ago!
Keep up with your wonderful work. You've just recruited a new and keen subscriber!
I think in this video you try to argue for the actions of the ccp instead of finding the true reality
Good job! You provide a nuanced explanation of both the Western and Chinese perspectives. If more people were as evenhanded as you are, the world would be a better place.
I can understand the logic behind China's censorship system if the goal is to maintain social order and control. Given the tight control that the CCP imposes on information and criticism of the senior leadership, it's not surprising that it has a 90% approval rating! In the long run, however, I think this strategy is self-defeating. Suppressing information is not a recipe for good governance. If citizens do not know what is going on and are unable to voice criticisms, their government will be less accountable and responsive to their needs. Also, while I agree that Western governments -- like all governments on earth -- sometimes engage in cynical manipulation of information, this does not mean that free speech is just empty rhetoric. In fact, much of the information you relied upon in your video (for example, the video clip of Edward Snowdon revealing how the NSA collects information and the media story about Western governments' involvement in the Colour Revolutions) are good examples of free speech in action. If the US government was able to suppress such criticism, I'm sure it would have a 90% approval rating too. But would it be better governed? I think not.
Actually, many Chinese travels out of China to western countries for educations and work. And many choose to return back to China. Young Chinese have ways to access the news and information like everyone else, the firewall acts more like a restriction on the less educated (believes to be more easily persuaded or influenced), and older generations.
The 90% approval rating for the CCP is not from their media, it is from the change in people's lives. There are many independent videos showing how good the Chinese people's lives are. Lifting 800 millions people out of poverty. Best infrastructure in the world. Growing religious society. Cleaner environment. Better healthcare, longer life and safer. While the west is on the decline, with social disorder, unhealthy lives, mental illness, homelessness, inflation, increasing gun crime and deteriorating infrastructure. I have been to both the US and China. China may not be the wealthiest or the most powerful but it has a better society and culture and people are happier.
Actually Chinese people have more criticism of their government that the west. The local Chinese government visits and talks to the common people to find out the problem and solve the problem.. In the west, before a local election, I see some flyers at some door steps, but not on every block and the local candidate only visits and talk to the resident who donors a lot of money. The western gov, has too much capitalism in play in their politic.
The intensity of surveillance is enough to build mathematical models that simulates almost every group in a society while they keep their mouth shut. China is more technocracy (with a bit of Foucault, gov knows you more than you know yourself) than any traditional authoritarian regimes. Depends on how you define "better governed", a nation can still thrive as a whole while its citizens remain expendable fuel.
Maintaining its technological and geopolitical superiority, while keep most citizens' living standards just above where they start to get rebellious, is possible. Discussing whether it's evil doesn't negate the possibility.
@@TheJayJayYoung Then why it's always the alt-right garbage and conspiracy theories that got dumped into Chinese public discourse, while barely anything from the progressive side can get through? Calling it a WALL is hiding the fact that it has always been a FILTER. and to the "return back to china" issue, those who can afford foreign education are already (at least) upper middle class from elite family background, yet they are no one if they stayed in a foreign country.
Case eloquently advocated. Well done and food for thought.
You have lots of good points in your videos. But here you simply try to rationalize something bad as normal. I grow up in communism and now live in democracy, so I know both sides. Censorship is bad, it doesn´t matter if it is done by woke activists, nazi Germany, French monarchy, Islamic sharia, or spanish inquisition. You pointed woke bullies, or cancel culture. Yes, it is here, but thanks to freedom of speech we can criticize it. Whole progress in world was achieved through critical thinking - and it was based on speech and argumentation. Otherwise we will still believe that Earth is center of the universe. Freedom of speech is always in threat, in Europe are now many grups that want only their truth, same as woke activist, cancel culture nazis, simply young people who believes that their truth is THE TRUTH and therefore they have some rights to enforce people into their belief. And if there are tools to censorship, you never knew who will come to power and which crazyness he will impose.
And fear of this is useless. Yes, we can fight with some liberal extremism, or crazy beliefs, or choose some life paths for us, or our children, but there are no big changes. In many countries (including UK, or USA) you can check that media show politicians lie, or shown that they don´t know basic knowledge about world, or their jobs, or even show connections to shady business. And what it gets? Nothing. Still are same politicians in power and people only can grumble publicly instead of in secret. But it change nothing. People criticize wars, but they are still happening, criticize economic restrictions and they are still happening and diminish middle class in Europe, not to mention hardship of middle and low class in US.
So yes, there are similarities. But censorship is always bad.
The key difference is wether the restrictions are from a social consensus or from an authoritarian role. What's more, how is the authority obtained?
I will keep it simple for you:
China in the world press freedom index comes at the 179 th 0:31 position out of 180 countries justn front of N Korea ,overall freedom position 166
I would lie on my nationality if I was Chinese ,so embarrassing!
Chinese don't care about the index if they feel not the same way. It can be worse to put China to 180.
Besides, I'm very proud to say I'm Chinese from China. Which means a country full of diligent smart people, who dare to challenge any country, say no, who cares to anyone. That's super cool!
I read somewhere that as many as 140 million Chinese people travel outside their country on holiday and approximately 450 000-00 study abroad every year . The USA is the favourite destination for studying . Many Chinese people therefore have a good idea what the world look like outside China . Chinese people of your generation will decide what your country will look like in the future . I live in a poor but “ democratic “ country . I am certain that almost all of those very poor people in my country will trade in an a blink of an eye “ democracy “ for a country with an effective government and a plan to free them from their poverty . We can all learn from what has been accomplished in China . China must be one of the few countries in the world where it’s people are largely positive about the future .
You have a nice shtick when it comes to being an apologist for the Chinese ruling regime. But it's cute and I actually watch your videos all the way to the end. I learn things. Every now and then, though, you slip. 0:33 There is no violation of 1st Amendment rights when someone is banned from a forum owned by a private enterprise. Freedom of speech, as guaranteed under the US Constitution, means that the government can't put you in jail for expressing your views, no matter how vile.
My thoughts entirely. I really hope she replies to this comment.
I'm an American currently living in China, your videos are always very interesting and informative. You have a great, balanced perspective. Thank you!
Excellent video. Balanced, researched and clear. Please continueee!
Thank you BailelaVida. i'm glad you find it helpful. surely I will do!:)
Now you pass the speech consensus system responsibility to the emperor?
@@SimingLanwhich government division are you working for? Which program? Are they hiring more young, good looking TH-camr to explain their standard cliche to the world again?
It’s china prohibit western website to make western government prohibit Chinese website, now you said these two are the same thing? Have you ever learned the basic logic before you make these cliche video?
@@SimingLando you write these script by yourselves? Or you are the anchor? CCTV team will editing the video for you?
Practicing as a doctor here in Australia, we were heavily censored by the Medical Board as to what we can say or not say about Covid during the pandemic. There was a government approved 'scientific understanding' of the situation and all doctors had to toe this line. Talking off script risks your being deregistered by the Board as many Dr's had experienced.
Then there is also the Gaza conflict censorship where ironically your compatriot Ai Weiwei previously celebrated by the West for his Anti China stance was cancelled when he publicly supported the Palestinians.
I also agree that there is no absolute free speech in the world, but relatively, there is less free speech in China .
You give allowance to the west.
Chinese give allowance to China.
Censorship is censorship.
A good life is not really how much you can bad mouth others, just to push your ideology through.
I have the luck to be taught in saint louis schools in late 60’s. The priest for catechism said respect your grandmother when she asked you to accompany her to make offerings to the temple, in her heart there is a god.
Thanks!
Thank you Larry! :)
This is also what I believe is correct as well. The west has such a strong influence. It really affects some of us in developing countries as well, if something happens in the US it will at least be talked about by many of the younger generations. At times problems that may shape the country for the next few years might get overshadowed by ideals that have been of little problem or just isn’t at all the public opinion. To me it makes sense why China took this step
Are you willing to define what 'the West' is? People speak in such broad generalities these days. It bothers me but I can't seem to avoid using rthe same terms.
Latin America exists entirely within the Western hemisphere. Is it Western? I think so, but not everyone agrees. How about Israel? Yes, no, or maybe?
My country (NOT the USA) lies on the North American continent but hosts immigrants from every other. I am of European descent, married to a non-European. We live in a neighborhood where people of European descent are a small minority. My clients at work are mostly Chinese.
My friends at church are of European, African, and Indian descent.
'The West' experienced a powerful bomerang effect as a result of European colonialism. It has also been sought by refugees from many parts, and opportunists as well. The resulting racial and ethnic diversity has significantly changed the character of Western countries significantly over the past generation or two, making PLURALISM a defining features which separates them from
China among many others.
'White' domination in the West is fading, and I thank God for that.
China has certainly replaced the USA as the world's predominant expansionist imperial power.
This has become quite concerning for us, owing to Chinese influence-peddling and election interference.
The demographic weight of the Christian Church has shifted away from the West, toward the Global South.
Incidentally, more Christian missionaries come out of South Korea (per capita) than any other country.
South Korea jumped from the status od 'developing nation' to First World status in about two generations. I believe that the widespread embrace of Christianity had a powerful if indirect impact on economic development.
@@marcusonesimus3400 America is located in North America, and to China it is located in the East, but it is still a Western country. The West here refers to the ideological West, not the geographical or blood West. As for Western ideology, this one is difficult to describe in a commentary, because it is very complex and specialized, and it is a discipline. If you are interested in this, you can find the information yourself.
@@cuishlemo4973
@@cuishlemo4973
@@marcusonesimus3400 I don’t know which media you heard that China is an imperialist country, and China interferes in other countries’ elections. I want to say that this is not true. China has a history of 5,000 years, and it was one of the world’s great powers three centuries ago. China can colonize at that time if it wants to, instead of waiting until now, China has no interest in interfering with other countries. People take it for granted that a big country has influence, like a mountain that people can see when they look up, and that mountain will not actively affect anyone.
How the West is defined depends largely on philosophy and geography. Chinese philosophy is very different from Western philosophy, which leads to differences in people's moral concepts, logic of action, and ways of expression.
China has a territorial area of 9.6 million square kilometers, a marine area of 3 million square kilometers, and a land area of 12.6 million square kilometers. It is the only country in the world with an all-terrain landscape. Any natural geographical environment in the world can be found in China (excluding the north and south poles).
"Geographic determinism" believes that human living habits, cultural characteristics and political systems are determined by the geographical conditions of the location. There are 56 ethnic groups in China, and each ethnic group lives in different geographical conditions. So Chinese culture is very complicated. China is very diverse in terms of immigration and diversity. The culture of each province in China is different.
If you are interested, you can watch this documentary about Chinese history.
th-cam.com/video/CTRvs6bW6CQ/w-d-xo.html
I can freely express my disdain for my leaders and they only have power through the consent of the governed.
You can make false equivalencies and attempt to muddy the waters all you’d like. It’s nonsense.
George Orwell: “Journalism is printing what someone else does not want published". Good old George was on to something. Censorship is everywhere, and the means of controlling the narrative are oddly similar around the globe.
I started my career as a teenager at a big newspaper in western Europe and was quickly taught the lesson by (rather cynical) news room veterans that new was made - not brought.
Back in the day many juicy stories never saw the light of day for a myriad of reasons, with the most important one being a code of quiet self censorship - a tacit understanding that some topics are untouchable.
Today, with the neo-liberal world order falling apart everybody in a position of power wants to tell the people what to believe - even if it is only partly true or pure nonsense.
Totally agree. With the development of AI, creating News will be more efficient, and humans may be surrounded by Fake news, for instance, Forced labor in Xinjiang
china tend to tell mostly true though some maybe abit stretched, they play the long game and therefore cant risk losing credentials when stories get debunked
As a Chinese born, raised and living in the mainland. I strongly disagree with your opinion that China is under siege by the Western world just because of its different culture and choice under this culture. Also heavily influenced by Confucianism, why Japan and Korea have completely different relationship with other countries, especially Westerners? The PRC and many others inside China always tell me it is because we, the Chinese, are so different. But I am telling you that I am not, and neither are many of my friends.
We want to choose our own leader for our city, even for my neighborhood committee, but we can't; we are educated adults, why can't we choose what I want to read and why can't I distinguish right from wrong? Is our education system too bad to teach people to think critically instead of knowing how to assemble an iPhone?
Realizing that I have written a lot, I want to emphasize that we, the Chinese, are part of the human race, so we desperately want to choose as normal people, live as normal people, just like Taiwanese do. As Chinese, we will certainly vote differently from Western people, but we don't want to be ruled by an emperor.
Ironically, we are discussing different views on a Western platform, which is not allowed on the Chinese mainland platform. Besides, I have been to Xinjiang for 5 times for I love there, education camp is the have to choose with an unavoidable cost? I think no, and I think PRC should take most of the criticism. But, but, we Chinese should not avoid to see the reality, should not stop to seek the truth. Who is right is the least important, the most important is that we have conscience and courage to seek the truth.
韓國軍權在美國手裹，日本也差不多，戰敗國，權力構上有太多的美國影響力，關於選舉制度大國對弱小國家的滲透。
批判性思考不是簡單技能，要有太多的知識前前置條件，歷史，外交關係，經濟，政府思想，法律，要懂太多了。
你就沒考慮到美國對日本和韓國的控制。
你的批判性思考根本就不行，對世界的認知都不。
你怎選舉自己的領導，你的知識根本不夠，連對中國體制的了解也不夠。
在你所說的正常人一樣生活的國家（台灣）等，教育出來的人也只是少數有批判性思考能力。
媒體像屎一樣，選舉完就跳票，只考慮短期利益，宗教拉票，三權分立失敗，黑幫橫行。
教育營是必須代價嗎，那你的方案呢，只質疑沒有意義，太假大空
你是台灣人吧
You have a shallow understanding of geopolitics, racism and colonialism. Why do you think the west label China as Yellow Peril and Red Scare? Do you know this goes back over 200 yrs since the 1800's. The Chinese Exclusion Act (they make it a law!!) was passed since 1850's. They wanted to suppress China. The west created 2 Opium Wars to conquer China n enslave China. It is not about freedom. It is about western imperialism, superiority, racism and colonialism. Haven't you learn anything about a Century of Humiliations fir China. Every major western powers curved up China into a pie for economic exploitations, slave cheap labor and domination. The Chinese should always bow to western ideology and way of life. It had been embodied into the DNA of the western countries.That's why they cannot the rise of China. Freedom does not exist for China, only fir the west. They use "Freedom n Democracy" as an illusion to trap China, like the Opium War. China learned fr history and will never repeat the mistake. Western Freedom is toxic to China designed to cause social unrest, destabilize the China, riots, violence and weaken China. Very easily destabilize bcos of China's very large population, 1.4 billion people.
This is very insightful. I can say hand on heart that western governments played a very key role in a negative disinformation campaign against the previous government in Zambia. The negativity and bias particularly on social media platforms brought a tension never before in a general election. Primarily because the government of Edgar Lungu was pro China.
How is that Chinese debt forgiveness going on in Zambia? a land-locked country bigger than Texas, rich in copper and loaded with Chinese debt - and so poor that most of its population lives on less than $2 dollars a day. I hear a lot of Chinese are doing very well in Zambia..... a lot more that $2 a day.
@@Andy-Pwhat a dumb
Sure, Siming has many valid points. However, I would like bring to her audience the following points to ponder: -
Firstly, look at what the free speech has done in the US. It gives freedom of propagating fake news, propagandas and hate speeches. There is no law to control that, i.e., censorship. Any suggestion to introduce such control will face a dead end before even reaching the Congress.
Secondly, western democracy has its problem with political boycott. In all western democracies, it is very difficult to get any project start, regardless how good it is for national interest. When you have opposition party, they almost always face opposition for the sake of political point scoring.
The hypocrisy of democracy vs. dictatorship has been going on in the western sphere without attracting any notice. US, with its hegemony agenda has been acting as a dictator to every nation in the world, especially to its own allies. For example, the way they are controlling EU and NATO vis-a-vis Ukraine War. They enforce their "Rule based International Order" globally, and for them it is either "You are with US or against US", as simple as that. (By the way, the Rule based International Order is not international law).
On the contrary, China is a pragmatic country. It does not want to waste time and energy to go through such nonsense. It has already known what the most likely end results will be. It is better to focus on the betterment of the economy of the country and individuals. When people's tummies are full and the living standard has improved, people will be happy, and the issue of free speech might not even be there. People want free speech to complain, because there is no restriction on positive free speech.
The Chinese style democracy works better that the western kind. With one party system people are united and there is no political point scoring. Therefore, everything can get done quickly and efficiently. That has been proven by the breathtaking progress made by China itself. In the west, under Westminster system, people will sigh with relief when both chambers of the parliament are dominated by the same party. That's an acknowledgment of the desirability of one-party system.
Chinese is often portrayed by the west as a "communist authoritarian" country, while I don't see it that way. It is a hybrid of socialism and capitalism. It is not authoritarian, with the president being democratically elected by the caucus, and it has 3000+ members of Congress which are elected the same away as the Congressmen and women in the US.
I have to restrict the length of my view here, but my main point is, both systems have its positive and negative aspects. We just have to weigh between the two systems, and I think China has chosen the best they can to achieve their immediate objectives, i.e.. to lift Chinese people up from hundred years of humiliation and poverty.
This was a point of view I have never heard before and you really have me thinking. Thank you.
My country Indonesia 1965 and your country 1989 we all victim of US meddling
Thank god the TH-cam algorithm took me to your channel! You have so many interesting perspectives and reflections, many which I agree with 😊 You got a new subscriber from Scandinavia. Keep up the good work, and you channel will become big! 👏🏻
This video is great. I hope you continue making videos :).
cheers :)
Correction : China does allow all the foreign internet companies to operate in China, but they need to put their servers for Chinese information in China. All of the American internet companies opted to exit from China. China's request is the same as what the US government asked from TikTok, by the way. As for Huawei, there is simply no proof that its system has a back door to the Chinese government, it has more to do with no back door to the US governemnt 😂
How about the Chinese laws that demand full cooperation of companies if the state asks for it?
You don't need a "backdoor" if you can literally just walk in the front door legally.
Don't interpret this as USA good, China bad. I'm not American. I'm just pointing out that claiming "no proof of backdoors" is a strange argument in this case.
@SimingLan: Have you talked to @CyrusJanssen? Both of you should interview each other. Thank you very much to both, and many others, for making the world a better place.
As a journalist who left Hong Kong because of the said situation, I find your words fair and objective that I don’t usually find from many people talking from your country. Thanks.
i wish you the best man
关于言论自由方面，主要是因为你们很多人就是看问题，太二极管了，但是你们又会导致有些人就是做出一些暴力行为，比如香港那个黑暴运动，当然还有我们中国最大的民主社会实验文化大革命。
所以后来中共政府，就对言论有很多管控，但是你如果是理性的正常的，当然你不能够点名道姓反共反政府，这个是挺正常的，你如果理性不要那么二极管，其实是想说什么就说什么，重点你不能够点名道姓知道吗？
因为你又不是他们肚子里的蛔虫，你因为你的主观判断，带节奏，让其他人去骂什么习近平毛泽东，这是应该的吗？
我把毛泽东很多的文章和会议演讲还有电报记录，都看完之后，我才能对他有个客观的评价，基本上那个决议也没有多大问题，但是我相信的一件事就是毛泽东，他的初衷是好的，他是个理想主义者，是个有共产主义信仰的人，只是在执行过程中，犯了左的错误，还有教条主义的错误，就是建设国家时，照搬苏联，然后苏联后来斯大林死了，赫鲁晓夫又搞那一套，结果导致中苏交恶，很多的苏联专家从中国回去了，进而导致很多城里人失业，这些人得安排就业呀，所以就安排他们下乡呗，这个是下乡的一个原因懂了吗？
后来的文化大革命，是因为很多老干部腐化，老毛这个人呢，他又是非常相信群众力量的，毕竟他革命成功靠的就是群众啊，但是他搞革命的那个时候，离群众非常近，所以他的政策不是那种主观主义，如果偏离了，他想要的，他可以及时的修正，但是对吧，他发动文化大革命的时候身体都不怎么样了，特别林彪死后，基本上就不能够出去考察，他只能够通过第三方，还有自己的一些主观推倒，去决定该怎么做？
那个第三方主要是哪些人呢？可能有投机分子，也可能有那个真正的极左，而且我说实话，后来也证明毛泽东当年，你可以说他脑补的吧，就是后来真的出现了世家门阀，你看看邓小平孙子，还有江泽民的后代，李鹏的后代，你看看他们这些人都在干什么。
那你说毛泽东他发动的初衷有问题吗？
只是人算不如天算，想改造人的思想哪那么容易，我现在对马克思主义还很反感呢，但是我同时非常喜欢用马克思主义去分析现实问题。
所以客观评价对吧。大跃进确实是毛泽东发动的，但是执行的是邓小平和刘少奇，这两个人更狂啊，把毛泽东提出的数据还往上提了提了，他们犯了更左的错误，比如那个小高炉，那毛泽东发现了，也及时的要求不要那么左。
还有文化大革命就更复杂，他的目的是好的，但是这个东西又是不现实的，因为他得不到党内大多数人支持，他非要和党内大多数人对着干，支持他的呢，要么就是投机主义者，要么就是极左，这怎么可能能成功呢？特别的当时，人民群众普遍文盲比较多，也不像现在，有科技力量的支持，你如果目的是好的你想做事，那群众会支持你，最起码中下层的那些真正有信仰的干部会支持你，因为这个信息不像以前对吧，他只能通过广播传播，现在会方便很多，所以你想做的事面对的阻力和毛泽东那个年代相比是小很多的。
比如他那个年代，他给一个大方向，然后执行层面，可能有的人就是说一套做一套，或者就是把它这个大方向往左边带，导致走出极左的错误路线，这都非常有可能的。
但是现在这个年代就不大存在了。
你看那些贪官都是现金，他们都不敢存银行的。
觉得很神奇，西方人总是有这样的思想，你跟我不一样，你就是没有自由，你没有实行我一样的制度，就是不好的制度。。中国讲究和而不同，中国既不输出革命，也不输出战争到别的国家去，为什么总是有教师爷在那里对中国说三道四呢？难道这个世界上只有美西方发展一种文明模式？最近这两百年，西方欧洲，全球哪一个国家不是被美国挑起战争？被颜色革命？被美元收割？炸燃气管道，被迫买高价天然气过冬？中国人过的好与坏，不需要黄鼠狼的操心，某些人过好自己的生活就挺不错了。
Siming, you have a rare gift in your craft:
1. You have a nice way of leading the audience into your discussions, viewpoints and positions.
2. You delivery is natural, easy, authentic and captivating. The pace is perfect.
3. Your command of the language is fabulous considering that’s your second language. BTW, your British accent is adorable.
4. Last but not least, your arguments are authentic, personal, insightful and persuasive.
Your perceptions and understanding of western cultures and societies are excellent, personal and again authentic. Western societies are like shinny objects with irresistible allure. It is easy to reject the Chinese culture when you’re dazzled by these shinny objects.
Obviously, you have done a lot of soul searching on these matters. Clearly, you have arrived at a better and deeper understanding and appreciation of the Chinese culture, society and governance. Congratulations!
It was a pleasure viewing your broadcast. You’d make a fantastic “ambassador” for China to the young people in the west.
Keep up the good work!
And you seem to have . You would make a fantastic “ambassador” for China, particularly for
ya but her facts are off. she acts like every company has too go threw the government to do anything. thats the China system. they dont have that in the US any app developer can make any app on line or web site with out getting the government involved at all. and she doesnt seam educated enough to understand the US system
her view point and facts are totally misleading , be careful.
Well researched, thoughtfully nuanced, very balanced presentation on a most difficult subject ! Kudos !
I am always happy to see your excellent videos. Whether I agree or disagree with your opinion I enjoy them because you present them clearly with support and are not out here pushing a propaganda narrative like many folks.
Thank you Da Wei, your comment just made my day :) you are more than welcome to share your thoughts if you disagree with me!😊
wondering are you a real person or just a part of the propaganda on this channel???
@@1962diamondthis whole channel is propaganda and nothing less. Propaganda with some sexy lipstick
@@SimingLanisn't dawei David?
@@SimingLanYou are so obviously a CCP mouthpiece.
Even as someone who is not conservative and often sees social media favouring, promoting and tolerating far right speech while banning and throttling the accounts of left and liberal voices, I do not believe free speech is about private entities and their platforms. The right to free expression protects you from the government, not from being thrown out from a private property you were yelling in.
You fail to mention the Tiananmen Square protests at all.
You mentioned a few issues with Hong Kong, but you didn't really touch on the, sometimes mind-blowing aspects of it. For example, even the BBC has reported that none of the "Hong Kong Booksellers", who supposedly 'disappeared' from Hong Kong and somehow ended up arrested on the Chinese mainland, actually claimed that they were arrested in Hong Kong. According to the BBC, that claim doesn't actually come from the booksellers themselves, but instead comes from one of the bookseller employees. The evidence suggests that 4 of the booksellers were peddling their fictional books (which they promote as "factual") on the Chinese mainland when they got arrested. The single other bookseller was arrested in Thailand and deported to the Chinese mainland. That story never did make any sense.
The other point about Hong Kong which is worth looking into is how western powers created a mandatory course for all Hong Kong students, from Elementary school through to University, titled "Liberal Studies" immediately after the handover in 1997. This course is full of anti-China ideology and rhetoric, and made extensive use of the BBC's coverage of China in the classroom (the BBC's coverage of China is now, justifiably, considered a sick joke in China and is constantly made fun of as a result). Basically, while China took the agreed-upon approach to have a hands-off approach to Hong Kong following the handover, the U.K. and U.S. immediately got to work brainwashing the Hong Kong student population against the Chinese mainland. Also, before the handover, courses in Chinese history were mandatory in Hong Kong classrooms, but they became electives following the handover. It was all pretty incideous.
Can not agree less!
You are a clever apologist for China. That’s not what is even more clever…… Amazing how so many viewers don’t get this.
She talks about the Chinese culture help the country to unify and traditions get passed over. But that's not true, it is just that most of the Chinese people don't know how to communicate in an equal manner. The American tradition has passed for hundreds of years but the way American treat others are more equal than the traditional Chinese.
Haha, you just blew it for me young lady. In my country, Australia, and the UK, most European countries etc, governments tolerate massive levels of criticism. They don't regulate that at all. That's completely different to the situation in China. That difference is undeniable. You make a silk purse out of a sows ear with your eloquent argument, but in the end, there is a massive difference between freedom of speech here and in China, and the implications for citizens are massive.
三年前我来到美国生活，开始浏览各种西方主流媒体和社交媒体，一开始的体验是“中国完全没有必要屏蔽这些内容，完全可以老百姓看看各种不同的观点和声音”但是过了几个月之后我的想法完全变了“必须屏蔽”因为那些关于中国的报道很多是虚假的，大部分是断章取义的，绝大多数只说对西方有利的一部分事实。我的专业是新闻学，大学里所学都是西方新闻理论与实践。不幸的是这几个月的阅读经历彻底击溃了我对西方新闻价值观的推崇。题外话，在美生活了几年后，我更以自己是中国人，来自中国而自豪！并坚持让孩子学习中文，说中文，用中文。很高兴，他们在学校从不会羞愧说出自己来自中国（他们都出生在中国，虽然是美国公民）
There is a difference between using public opinion to punish people who go against some political standard that one private or political group or another doesn't like, and using the power of the state to jail those who criticize the state. Autocratic systems use this power to prevent the spread of alternate opinions not out of a desire for stability, but for control of the political and cultural narrative. All countries have these narratives. In the West, this narrative plays a constructive role in mainly communicating public opinions to their representatives; it is bottom up. In China, the direction of the narrative for the most part flows in the opposite direction; from the top to the bottom. In China, the Internet is a propaganda tool wielded against thought that the CCP deems subversive, and biases the narrative in a way that supports the regime. In both systems the flow goes both ways, but the limits of dissent in China are clearly demarcated and crossing red lines will end with those expressing these opinion ending up in jail.
This produces self-censorship. As it is dangerous to express contrary ideas, the safest course of action is to shy away from anything too controversial or substantial. When I lived in Taiwan during the one party rule of the KMT, ordinary people could not express their political opinions publicly for fear of being jailed. The result was a culture that was obsessed with food. That was always the main topic of conversation in any kind of social setting. Political discussion was taboo in public. That doesn't mean that people didn't have opinions; just that they couldn't express them. In the case of Taiwan, this dissent eventually became too intense to be ignored and, over time, contrary thought was allowed to be expressed. This ended up with a peaceful transition of power to a multiparty system. In the case of the Arab Springs, it was the violent suppression by the states that caused chaos in the wake of these revolutions and left them politically and culturally divided.
In the West we found democracy to be the most stable form of government as it gives all people a way to express discontent without having to blow up everything with a revolution. This may not be the case for China. China for centuries had periods of benevolent autocracy in which stakeholders from all sectors of society knew what their rights and responsibilities were. There were no constitutions or independent judiciary. But the tenants of Confucianism were deeply ingrained in the Chinese psyche, and ideals of justice and humanity were well understood. In modern day China, Confucianism has been replaced by a foreign ideology. In Confucianism, harmony between Fathers and their Children, local officials and the people they ruled, provincial officials and the central monarchy was governed by a shared responsibility and loyalty to each other. Fathers should be listened to, but the welfare of his children is his sacred responsibility, and so up the hierarchy. Without this bi-directional responsibility, society fails and falls into chaos. The current system is no longer bi-directional; the Chinese are asked to pay unswerving loyalty to the CCP without reciprocal actions by the latter. As you admit in your video, China is not a welfare state. Often times justice is subverted to meet the immediate needs of the central authority. People are deprived of their homes in urban villages without proper compensation. Pensions that they were promised were cut. Health care for most people is expensive and poorly provided. Stability that comes from suppressing the ability of people to make their needs known to their rulers, is fleeting. I am not advocating democracy for China; that is a system that has worked well in Europe and America, and may not work in China. But, regardless of political system, perverting the reciprocity between ruler and ruled is destructive to social stability and ultimately leads to exactly what the authorities hope to avoid.
Very well said sir.
Historically, Chinese people who sacrificed their lives defending corrupt, useless regimes usually got praised as being loyal to the country. It has caused a major problem even today, that many people consider party, government and nation as one thing, being loyal to ccp(like those emperors in the past) is equal to patriotism. It’s hard for many people to understand that one can love a country and hate the government at the same time.
But I think today’s people are changing, such “unconditional support” to the government will eventually change, no matter how hard the government tries to control people’s thinking, it’s undeniable that more and more people got westernised ideologies. I feel rather than “love” the CCP, it’s more like there’s kind of mutual agreement between people and the party. This agreement is based on a thriving economy and peaceful international relations, as the economy growth stalls, it’s going to be a lot harder for CCP to gain trust in the coming years.
Let the West be.... The Chinese have their owns ways and its none of the West business
Well articulated, researched and produced view from China's perspective. I'm sure that Chinese social media have plenty of western accounts explaining the views of the West.
Exactly and that is what makes her initial statement disengenous.
China doesn't have a perspective. China has people. People have perspectives. are you pretending that there's a Mono Mind in China? that sounds a little ... racist, no?
Thank you for this. It was very enlightening.
Your view on China’s censorship laws are exactly how I see it too. China understood even from the very start that losing media control to the west will be detrimental to her political stability, and more amazingly to have the foresight of the west’s willingness to abuse it. Besides, the west is equally culpable of censorship although in a more subtle manner.
CCP apologist
Well done Siming!! Nicely researched. Thoughtful and presented very respectfully!
Well, people who have already experienced freedom rarely give it up by themselves later. In the case of China, this is not the case because it has never been free according to Western standards. But Japan, too, was a much less free country before WW2. If China was a bit more like today's Japan , there would be no questions about Taiwan and the relations between the West and China would be much less tense.
under your logic shouldn't be any foreigner nor USA citizen living on China, but the reallity shows you the opposite.
Unfortunately, this video makes some very wrong assumptions, leading to a very confused narrative.
1. Socially-driven trends governing the acceptance of certain ideas IS NOT the same as government censorship. Ex: Twitter being pressured by public opinion (and advertisers) to block Trump IS NOT the same as a government-mandated silencing of Hong-Kong protesters. There's a big difference between bottom-up and top down movements. Having to impose ideas top-down, through surveillance and police action is a mark of an authoritarian regime that lacks legitimacy.
2. Even if you consider the "western media" biased (can we really call CNN a puppet organization?), you cannot possibly "balance" this by actively suppressing the publication of facts. The Tienanmen Square Massacre, the extermination of the democracy movement in Hong-Kong and the cover-up of the COVID breakout did, actually, happen. Again, having the need to distort the truth is a mark of and authoritarian regime that lacks legitimacy.
Thanks!
Thank you Gary!
Excellent information. The effort to provide historical and cultural context is much appreciated.
They didn't lift them out of poverty, they redefined poverty. There is a difference.
I would also add to another factor: it’s an effective way to control for western technological monopoly. So it has a lot of economic interests as well. Chinese government is heavily promoting using Chinese apps which has been effective in keeping western monopoly away. But also at the same time compromising more free speech of course
Free speech does not have to come from the west. Free speech could be free in that country. Like USA media does not accept free speech from China but always bashing China one sided in their media, or accept free speech from RT America, Russian media but banned RT instead. What free speech from the west you are talking about?
@@Robert.3399 what are YOU talking about? Where in my comment did I say free speech comes from the west? Please learn to read first.
I think your translation apps aren't working very well. 😂
国家安全+信息媒体主权，所以中共这点是很聪明的，世界上大部分国家没有媒体主权，所以很容易被美国操控，就像那个所谓的阿拉伯之春
Excellent video. Two thumbs up. Long live China !!!
You forget the most prominent example in your intro: Julian Assange
Once again very well done and I REALLY enjoy your approach to explaining China. Much better than the mindless parroting of the hyper nationalists. I can feel you own thoughts have gone into this and I applaud that. Where the argument of "this is a cultural difference" comes in I believe is where it breaks down. This is something I term as a cultural excuse. Culture is simply a way of doing things with a a group or society. It can be affected by many factors, one of which would be government. What you refer to as a Chinese way of doing things is dictated to you by the current and past governments. Anyone with any degree of sense can view the people in Shenzhen versus Hong Kong and spot the massive cultural differences between them. The biggest difference in governance. Culture is used as an excuse far too many times in history. People historically (and to this day) used culture to excuse slavery, women rights and you name it what else. Just saying something is cultural doesn't make it wrong or right either. But lets make no mistake that the reason why Chinese buy into this system is because they are constantly indoctrinated through rigorous campaigns and censorship to believe it is "correct" and best for them. Whether that is correct or not is another argument but let not stray from this fact. All governments have a high degree of influence on people and culture but China is on a completely different level. They erase their own culture at the flick of a switch when it suits them. I have watched it happen countless times sometimes for better or worse.
It tells us that Chinese propaganda not matter how illogical it is, it still very effective. Removing people's right to speak out against ideas is a crime against humanity and you can easily see the scar it leaves on Chinese when you walk through the streets of any city in China. @@GrantRussell705
Grassroots movements??!! We have a very different understanding of this term. The groups that you mentioned, in my opinion, are not grassroots movements. They are movements funded by very rich donors.
How are you uploading the video to TH-cam? Via VPN, and over the firewall?
She’s a CCP shill, that’s how…
You referenced popular attitudes and the actions of software corporations like it was federal mandate - Persons (humans and companies) in the USA have the ability to attempt to police speech to a point, but the government mustn’t - Apples and Oranges…
Very well explained the topic, subscribed and liked you, thank you, and keep on with your great work
great to have you on this channel! you are so welcome and hope to see you soon😊
The real question should be 'is free speech a good thing'? Should you be able to 'speak truth to power' without fear of reprisal? To question authority? To call out those actions and ideas you disagree with? Saying 'one group of people does it and so it's fine if I do it', is something a 5 year old would say. Either you support checks and balances or you don't.
Great content and wonderfully presented. Chinese people all over the world are proud of you
Would you be willing to go on a talk show with one of the people who was gassed at the protests in HK? I'm sure they'd love to interview you about why that was necessary.
Actually she use just friendly explaination about xinjiang , Suggest you read more about another side of XInjiang history. Not only from one side.