6 ms·

And is it your view that, in contrast, the news media in China is highly responsible?

metalman 2mo ago
the contrast is that Chinese media follows the rule to never mess with brand China and act as chear leaders, oh and gently make sure no one forgets the centuries long attempts to destabilise, enslave, collinise, and exploit China by any means availible. The other relavent thing is that China has whole massive citys and regions which are all but hermeticly sealed off from the rest of the world, with NO airports or western presence whatsoever. Which reminds me of one of my many forays into ethnic grocerie stores and asking what a murky plastic bag of stuff was, from a store attendnt, upon which , he looked at me, looked at the bag in my hand, looked at me, glanced at the bag, and then responded with no "r's, "noh fo yu", and now a good many visits to stores with similar stuff later, he is still proving to be correct, and is something they do there best to be upfront and plain about, blunt, but not mean,and on another occasion bieng confronted with, "who you?, WHO YOU!" what you want! so, from my view, I have found myself in the position of explaining that I am strictly on MY side and have no particular agenda, and have found myself at some particular point, between where I was, and where I am going to be, but cant bring myself to apologise for taking up the room under my feet. and so far nobody has realy hurt me, but thinking about it, guns have been waved around, and even discharged quite a few times, though not in China, which I do think more and more of travelling through
- JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
  > centuries long attempts to destabilise, enslave, collinise, and exploit China violently annexed Tibet in the 1950s. Trying to pretend there is a moral gradient is revealing.
  - oliculipolicula 2mo ago
    You are playing the generic tangent game here. I wish I could replicate how PP makes his points, but here I think he doesn't give it enough credit. US (& even its allies) have been portrayed to be welcoming, or at least less unwelcoming. than China, which too have had an inbred commitment to hospitality . to the average foreigner. The reality on the ground is generally the opposite. Chinese law enforcement (especially urban) is mostly hands-off, aloof. The powers behind the scenes have different ideas, but they have limited influence on how things play out in everyday detail. This is the same in the US but NYT feel like it is in their interest to muddy the waters. Vibes are a big part of why I admittedly despise the [soft-elitist] centre (left and right) in the US (& "North-Central Europe[0]"). These inaccurate vibes promulgated by leftleaning "elite humanist" media have for the longest time (250 years?) "quietly" enabled overzealous foreign interventions [why can't they just do that world-policing in the manner of Chinese "Public Safety"? Brandishing weapons as an after-thought?] They are waking up to their own hubris and ignorance though, thanks to the polarising situation in the ME. Not quickly enough. Congress is now weak because of these errors of character [0]https://youtu.be/_qYg4DXwdcs https://youtu.be/_qYg4DXwdcs
    - JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
      > You are playing the generic tangent game here Nope. I'm calling out evil where it resides. > US (& even its allies) have been portrayed to be welcoming Balance of power. If you're Canada, right now, balancing America with Chinese power is favourable. > These inaccurate vibes promulgated by leftleaning "elite humanist" media The media environment is almost orthogonal to military and geopolitcal decisionmaking. (For folks who only consume ad-supported media, sure–the line may be impossible to delinate. If you have any decisionmaking authority in these areas, you or someone else is paying for you to have better information than TikTok or whatever.)
      - oliculipolicula 1mo ago
        >I'm calling out evil where it resides. I disagree but imho this is a much deeper issue that should be left to a later time-- I have to think about it. Very similar to "is (abstract) psychological projection moral"? Tolerating paranoia and other personal but also culture-wide psycho-emotional issues[0] ? Those are deeper than the question of whether that kind of evil is still entrenched in CCP policy. Which is still worth thinking about, but I don't find relevant to this context. There are many other issues that are immediately actionable _and_ tied to those deeper questions. I try to learn from Mamdani in that regard. Idealism.. but also pragmatism (thanks metalman!! As always).. and a huge serving of listening to everyone >For folks who only consume ad-supported media.. Unfortunately, most Congress people seem to not meet these basic criteria. Again, I disagree, but NYT seem not more trustworthy than TikTok-- where ads are the message? I blame the declining quality of journalists hired at that place (I'm personally glad you submit more FT and WSJ!! Nominally finance papers have higher default standards it seems) [0] more bi-partisan than they seem (& I'm sure China has their own version of this one. I won't _declare_ that it's universal tho (some Nordics/Greenland?)) https://phys.org/news/2026-08-rhetoric-metoo-focused-violence.html https://phys.org/news/2026-08-rhetoric-metoo-focused-violenc...
  - metalman 1mo ago
    the very little known detail is that Tibet engaged in armed resistance and killed Chinese soldiers useing US weapons that somehow mysteriously ended up in some monks hands, which fits in with the destabilise part of my point. we could get into the whole back story, up to including how the yuan dynasty emperor granted the title "dalai" to a certain Tibeten lama, and I could then detail my own personal dilema of having a Mongol ethnic background, and how Chinas repression of non han in "China" effects me. there are a lot of facts, and perhaps an even greater number of conclusions, but pragmatism is still the strongest force.

the contrast is that Chinese media follows the rule to never mess with brand China and act as chear leaders, oh and gently make sure no one forgets the centuries long attempts to destabilise, enslave, collinise, and exploit China by any means availible. The other relavent thing is that China has whole massive citys and regions which are all but hermeticly sealed off from the rest of the world, with NO airports or western presence whatsoever. Which reminds me of one of my many forays into ethnic grocerie stores and asking what a murky plastic bag of stuff was, from a store attendnt, upon which , he looked at me, looked at the bag in my hand, looked at me, glanced at the bag, and then responded with no "r's, "noh fo yu", and now a good many visits to stores with similar stuff later, he is still proving to be correct, and is something they do there best to be upfront and plain about, blunt, but not mean,and on another occasion bieng confronted with, "who you?, WHO YOU!" what you want! so, from my view, I have found myself in the position of explaining that I am strictly on MY side and have no particular agenda, and have found myself at some particular point, between where I was, and where I am going to be, but cant bring myself to apologise for taking up the room under my feet. and so far nobody has realy hurt me, but thinking about it, guns have been waved around, and even discharged quite a few times, though not in China, which I do think more and more of travelling through

JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
> centuries long attempts to destabilise, enslave, collinise, and exploit China violently annexed Tibet in the 1950s. Trying to pretend there is a moral gradient is revealing.
- oliculipolicula 2mo ago
  You are playing the generic tangent game here. I wish I could replicate how PP makes his points, but here I think he doesn't give it enough credit. US (& even its allies) have been portrayed to be welcoming, or at least less unwelcoming. than China, which too have had an inbred commitment to hospitality . to the average foreigner. The reality on the ground is generally the opposite. Chinese law enforcement (especially urban) is mostly hands-off, aloof. The powers behind the scenes have different ideas, but they have limited influence on how things play out in everyday detail. This is the same in the US but NYT feel like it is in their interest to muddy the waters. Vibes are a big part of why I admittedly despise the [soft-elitist] centre (left and right) in the US (& "North-Central Europe[0]"). These inaccurate vibes promulgated by leftleaning "elite humanist" media have for the longest time (250 years?) "quietly" enabled overzealous foreign interventions [why can't they just do that world-policing in the manner of Chinese "Public Safety"? Brandishing weapons as an after-thought?] They are waking up to their own hubris and ignorance though, thanks to the polarising situation in the ME. Not quickly enough. Congress is now weak because of these errors of character [0]https://youtu.be/_qYg4DXwdcs https://youtu.be/_qYg4DXwdcs
  - JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
    > You are playing the generic tangent game here Nope. I'm calling out evil where it resides. > US (& even its allies) have been portrayed to be welcoming Balance of power. If you're Canada, right now, balancing America with Chinese power is favourable. > These inaccurate vibes promulgated by leftleaning "elite humanist" media The media environment is almost orthogonal to military and geopolitcal decisionmaking. (For folks who only consume ad-supported media, sure–the line may be impossible to delinate. If you have any decisionmaking authority in these areas, you or someone else is paying for you to have better information than TikTok or whatever.)
    - oliculipolicula 1mo ago
      >I'm calling out evil where it resides. I disagree but imho this is a much deeper issue that should be left to a later time-- I have to think about it. Very similar to "is (abstract) psychological projection moral"? Tolerating paranoia and other personal but also culture-wide psycho-emotional issues[0] ? Those are deeper than the question of whether that kind of evil is still entrenched in CCP policy. Which is still worth thinking about, but I don't find relevant to this context. There are many other issues that are immediately actionable _and_ tied to those deeper questions. I try to learn from Mamdani in that regard. Idealism.. but also pragmatism (thanks metalman!! As always).. and a huge serving of listening to everyone >For folks who only consume ad-supported media.. Unfortunately, most Congress people seem to not meet these basic criteria. Again, I disagree, but NYT seem not more trustworthy than TikTok-- where ads are the message? I blame the declining quality of journalists hired at that place (I'm personally glad you submit more FT and WSJ!! Nominally finance papers have higher default standards it seems) [0] more bi-partisan than they seem (& I'm sure China has their own version of this one. I won't _declare_ that it's universal tho (some Nordics/Greenland?)) https://phys.org/news/2026-08-rhetoric-metoo-focused-violence.html https://phys.org/news/2026-08-rhetoric-metoo-focused-violenc...
- metalman 1mo ago
  the very little known detail is that Tibet engaged in armed resistance and killed Chinese soldiers useing US weapons that somehow mysteriously ended up in some monks hands, which fits in with the destabilise part of my point. we could get into the whole back story, up to including how the yuan dynasty emperor granted the title "dalai" to a certain Tibeten lama, and I could then detail my own personal dilema of having a Mongol ethnic background, and how Chinas repression of non han in "China" effects me. there are a lot of facts, and perhaps an even greater number of conclusions, but pragmatism is still the strongest force.