This thought-terminating cliche is getting so tired. You may as well just say “let’s just agree to disagree”.
It’s telling that this cliche is most often applied when western whataboutism is correctly called out, and all it does is serve to legitimize the act of manufacturing consent against China.
USA invents credit score way back in the 50s
credit score is immediately used to pull off the most calculatingly misogynistic, racist, and classist financial enforcement in modern history.
china implements a technically similar system that aims not to control working people’s financial agency, but to strengthen public trust.
the west immediately spins up the presses and releases dozens of hit pieces a year that manufacture consent against China by portraying the Chinese social credit system as an orwellian nightmare that will rip a child out of their parent’s home if the household spends too much time on videos games.
leftists identify this whataboutism and correctly call it out
liberals drop one of their various thought-terminating cliches to (not so) subtly bolster the western narrative - thus manufacturing consent against China.
You’ve been effortlessly oriented by the State Department and its various propaganda apparatus.
Brother i don’t want to live in a country that scores my social media nor one that scores my credit. I have the right to not want either of those things
I’m still going to engage with you despite you not engaging with any part of my comment…
i don’t want to live in a country that scores [me]. I have the right to not want [that].
You sure do have that right. Your right to not want that is just dandy. However, Chinese people, by and large, do support their implementation of the social credit system. The Chinese people are developing their vision of socialism. For you to personally not like certain features of Chinese socialism is fine and dandy. But to condemn the Chinese for some aspect of their development of socialism that enjoys high support is chauvinistic of you.
Since when does having a “good behaviour score” have anything to do with socialism? Seriously wtf is this revisionism? It’s gotten so bad that so called “Marxists” accept any nonsense as long as it has a hammer and sickle on its flag.
What is wrong with you people? Does anyone even read anymore?
Oy, both of you are acting like the social credit score is real. It’s not. China implemented a social credit score for businesses based on how much harm they were doing to society and some provinces ran limited experiments with individuals years ago. It went very poorly and the government, being democratic, responded to the people and ended the pilots.
There’s another credit score that Alibaba offers which is opt-in only and it tracks your financial behavior (paying on time, paying back debts, not over borrowing in a short time period, etc) and it’s used to give financial incentives and discounts, but again is opt-in only.
You’re arguing the morality and alignment of something that only exists in Western propaganda. Read something, I am begging you.
Not necessarily. You can consider two things and decide that none of them are good. You don’t know how much I considered both systems. You’re just guessing and are mad that I don’ share your opinion.
You’ve been effortlessly oriented by the State Department and its various propaganda apparatus.
Can you explain to me, how I’m propagandized by a foreign government when I’m not cheering on the policies of their opponent?
I’m not taking any sides on this conflict, because it’s not my conflict. I’m a socialist… Let me assure you that my fundamental critique of the chinese state apparatus doesn’t really align too much with the US state propaganda.
That you critique China without researching it is aligned with the US State Dept. That you share lies about China (e.g. the social credit score) is aligned with the state department. That you don’t think there’s anything to discuss positively about the Chinese project aligns with the state department.
You said “you don’t know how much I considerer both systems” in another comment.
That’s pretty much all the back up one needs.
The social credit system in China does not apply to individuals. It was originally designed for businesses. A limited pilot in certain locales was applied to individuals. That pilot program was shutdown in 2019.
So sure, go ahead and consider both systems that actually really exist. Go ahead and claim that both things can be bad. Keep on pretending!
If that’s all you need to accept a wild fucking guess: you do you.
Go ahead and claim that both things can be bad.
Cool, I will.
Keep on pretending!
… that two things can be bad at the same time? Are you claiming that I “pretend” that malaria and the flu are both bad and actually one of them is great?
I am claiming that you pretend malaria and bad humors are both bad. One exists. The other doesn’t. You don’t seem to have the willingness to acknowledge that. The social credit score in China that effects individuals does not exist. Sure. You can say both the US credit scoring system and the nonexistent Chinese personal social credit score are bad, but that would be foolish.
You could be saying that the US credit score system and the Chinese social credit score that is used to manage negative externalities of businesses are both bad, but I would disagree with you.
But I am pretty sure you don’t know that the social credit score for individuals does not exist.
If you believe China’s social credit system is a good way to “strengthen public trust” then I want to know how you feel about people like Xu Xiaodong, whose social credit was destroyed for exposing fake martial artists and refusing to apologize to them.
If you violate a court order in my country you get sent to prison. China is so progressive that you aren’t even put under house arrest for the same offense.
The Chinese government ended the pilot programs for social credit scores for individuals in 2019 because the Chinese people didn’t want it, so Xu Xiaodong is likely one of those examples where a local government running their implementation of the pilot overreached and the central government, responding to the will of the people, ended it.
I like that you brought up an example that can be analyzed. The court ordered him to apologize and he didn’t follow through, there has to be some consequence to disobeying a judge. But it seems to me they could benefit from less hegemonic judges.
No because France, Portugal, Spain, The Netherlands, and Germany are all problematic in the same ways, as are their colonies, former colonies, contributions to the body of work (like racism), and collaboration with the problems of today (Third Reich, NATO, etc). We could even include more European nations in the list for these same reasons.
This thought-terminating cliche is getting so tired. You may as well just say “let’s just agree to disagree”.
It’s telling that this cliche is most often applied when western whataboutism is correctly called out, and all it does is serve to legitimize the act of manufacturing consent against China.
You’ve been effortlessly oriented by the State Department and its various propaganda apparatus.
Brother i don’t want to live in a country that scores my social media nor one that scores my credit. I have the right to not want either of those things
…
I’m still going to engage with you despite you not engaging with any part of my comment…
You sure do have that right. Your right to not want that is just dandy. However, Chinese people, by and large, do support their implementation of the social credit system. The Chinese people are developing their vision of socialism. For you to personally not like certain features of Chinese socialism is fine and dandy. But to condemn the Chinese for some aspect of their development of socialism that enjoys high support is chauvinistic of you.
Since when does having a “good behaviour score” have anything to do with socialism? Seriously wtf is this revisionism? It’s gotten so bad that so called “Marxists” accept any nonsense as long as it has a hammer and sickle on its flag.
What is wrong with you people? Does anyone even read anymore?
Oy, both of you are acting like the social credit score is real. It’s not. China implemented a social credit score for businesses based on how much harm they were doing to society and some provinces ran limited experiments with individuals years ago. It went very poorly and the government, being democratic, responded to the people and ended the pilots.
There’s another credit score that Alibaba offers which is opt-in only and it tracks your financial behavior (paying on time, paying back debts, not over borrowing in a short time period, etc) and it’s used to give financial incentives and discounts, but again is opt-in only.
You’re arguing the morality and alignment of something that only exists in Western propaganda. Read something, I am begging you.
How is it thought terminating to consider two different things bad at the same time?
because you don’t actually consider them; you just assume they are
Not necessarily. You can consider two things and decide that none of them are good. You don’t know how much I considered both systems. You’re just guessing and are mad that I don’ share your opinion.
yeah, you’re right, i was assuming too :)
I really don’t know what you are trying to say here
Can you explain to me, how I’m propagandized by a foreign government when I’m not cheering on the policies of their opponent?
I’m not taking any sides on this conflict, because it’s not my conflict. I’m a socialist… Let me assure you that my fundamental critique of the chinese state apparatus doesn’t really align too much with the US state propaganda.
That you critique China without researching it is aligned with the US State Dept. That you share lies about China (e.g. the social credit score) is aligned with the state department. That you don’t think there’s anything to discuss positively about the Chinese project aligns with the state department.
So not liking something from China automatically means I didn’t “research” it? Interesting. /s
Care to back up that bold claim?
Sure you’re not talking about someone else?
You said “you don’t know how much I considerer both systems” in another comment.
That’s pretty much all the back up one needs.
The social credit system in China does not apply to individuals. It was originally designed for businesses. A limited pilot in certain locales was applied to individuals. That pilot program was shutdown in 2019.
So sure, go ahead and consider both systems that actually really exist. Go ahead and claim that both things can be bad. Keep on pretending!
If that’s all you need to accept a wild fucking guess: you do you.
Cool, I will.
… that two things can be bad at the same time? Are you claiming that I “pretend” that malaria and the flu are both bad and actually one of them is great?
I am claiming that you pretend malaria and bad humors are both bad. One exists. The other doesn’t. You don’t seem to have the willingness to acknowledge that. The social credit score in China that effects individuals does not exist. Sure. You can say both the US credit scoring system and the nonexistent Chinese personal social credit score are bad, but that would be foolish.
You could be saying that the US credit score system and the Chinese social credit score that is used to manage negative externalities of businesses are both bad, but I would disagree with you.
But I am pretty sure you don’t know that the social credit score for individuals does not exist.
Disengage
If you believe China’s social credit system is a good way to “strengthen public trust” then I want to know how you feel about people like Xu Xiaodong, whose social credit was destroyed for exposing fake martial artists and refusing to apologize to them.
If you violate a court order in my country you get sent to prison. China is so progressive that you aren’t even put under house arrest for the same offense.
The Chinese government ended the pilot programs for social credit scores for individuals in 2019 because the Chinese people didn’t want it, so Xu Xiaodong is likely one of those examples where a local government running their implementation of the pilot overreached and the central government, responding to the will of the people, ended it.
I like that you brought up an example that can be analyzed. The court ordered him to apologize and he didn’t follow through, there has to be some consequence to disobeying a judge. But it seems to me they could benefit from less hegemonic judges.
Could we stop saying “west” when you seem to mean commonwealth?
No because France, Portugal, Spain, The Netherlands, and Germany are all problematic in the same ways, as are their colonies, former colonies, contributions to the body of work (like racism), and collaboration with the problems of today (Third Reich, NATO, etc). We could even include more European nations in the list for these same reasons.
I see what you did there.