China's latest online crackdown targets mean girl online fan clubs that turn toxic China is trying to make its cyberspace a bit kinder and is targeting a phenomenon appealing largely but not solely to female teenagers known as "fan quan", or fan clubs, to do so. The campaign known as “Clear and Bright,” initiated by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), started yesterday and will continue for the next …
Yes, but at least they are Thinking Of The Children (TM).
We have our sob stories on this side where girls were actually driven to suicide. I think we could do with a bit of cleaning up as well.
Yes, it's China, and yes, it is a totalitarian state, but in this case, what it is doing is protecting children and young teenagers from their own excesses and from bad influence. There is no political bias here, it is not to impose the Will Of The Party and have them all sing the national anthem every time they log on.
I approve this move. Children must be safe online.
"on the other hand, it looks like the State telling what is good to think and what isn't, the Big Brother way"
No "looks like" about it. This is absolutely the CCP telling it's citizens what it deems acceptable. It's not a democracy, there's no 'bill of rights' or anything similar. In China, the government decides what people can do online (or anywhere else), and the people have to obey that or face the consequences.
Well, it was sometimes funny to watch from this side of the Atlantic, when I wasn't terrified that half the US thought that an idiot and conman was the perfect person to be in control of nuclear weapons, but "love" is a putting it a bit strong.
I was just making the point that China's political system is very different to the west, and saying it's draconian is, well, from the point of view of the CCP, that's a feature, not a bug.
How to rob the poor to give to the rich - it's fun to see how a country ruled by a Communist party is a heaven for the worst oligo-capitalism, or maybe that's exactly the cause. When you're brainwashed since childhood to admire and worship some "dear leader" without any doubt, you're going to look for one.
Is this a menace?
Because Marx could have dreamed of something different, but his system is so flawed that since 1917 we just saw Communism leading directly to bloody dictatorships with some oligarchs at the top using the State as a private property.
So China is not a blot - it's just another instance of a flawed idea, and thereby it can't really be different.
No, China is entirely Marxist communism. Marx intended communism to be a totalitarian elite with absolute control over the non-cadre/plebs, in order to properly and utterly reshape society. Then the society would logically take the next and final step to the high halcyon fields of socialism.
Thing is, that interim step is kinda the ideal and end-point for the Parasite class. And once they're ensconced, they don't wanna shift.
Downvoted because you clearly don't know much about Karl Marx or what he thought. Here's a link to some quotes that might give you some insight into the man and his thinking. https://yourstory.com/2017/05/quotes-by-karl-marx/amp e.g. “Catch a man a fish, and you can sell it to him. Teach a man to fish, and you ruin a wonderful business opportunity.”
You might actually have liked Marx if you had an opportunity to have a few beers with him.
Problem is that taking the means of production away from greedy capitalists may sound like a good idea. But it doesn't seem to work very well in practice. I imagine that if Marx were alive today (he died in 1888) his views on Capitalism might not have changed much. But I doubt he'd embrace 20th century Communism.
BTW, although nominally communist, China switched its economic system to capitalism forty years ago after the disastrous "Cultural Revolution". Turns out that they're rather good at capitalism.
Anyway, capitalism does seem possibly to have a few flaws. As they say in Russia Everything Marx told us about communism was wrong. Unfortunately, everything he told us about capitalism was right. The US and friends like to pretend that Capitalism is self-governing. The Chinese try to limit its excesses. It remains to be seen which approach works better.
Some versions of socialism work extremely well, such as the Scandinavian versions, but yes, they do have problems but far less than so called capitalistic states like the USA.
Much of Europe is sort of socialist as well, in fact the EU could be described as an experiment in socialism, and it works, contrary to what Farage, BoJo et al claim.
My post immediately-after-that-one demonstrated I know rather a lot about Marx. You'll note I quoted from his hand-written personal correspondence. Because I've read a fair whack of it. Also other people's recountings of conversations with him. Whereas your post suggests you know little of Marx -- you offered a link to his carefully-honed-for-publicity pre-prepared staged bon mots as if it reflected what he thought, rather than what he wanted other people to think. Worse, your understanding of Marx's communism is taken from the modern revisionist playbook, not from Marx. 20thC communism is precisely what he intended. He was quite clear about what he intended, and even (occasionally) quite clear that he was not serious about it being genuinely interim, that that thing about moving on to socialism was just sugar/carrot to get the plebs on board; he actually considered what you call "20C" communism, the end-point.
I would no more have "liked" "a few beers" with Marx than I would with any other two-faced hypocritical social-status-obsessed/-needy parasite suffering from extreme narcissism and routinely evincing contempt for the little people/plebs, while preaching a movement cynically designed to elevate himself and cadre to high-privilege at the expense of the little people/plebs.
Your China assertions seem likewise eyebrow-raising revisionism. China did not "switch" -- the surrender to allowing some bottom-up freedom came as a one-man desperation move late-in-the-day which got seriously out of control, not an up-front teleogically strategic group goal chosen as a way of fixing the Cultural Revolution.
Have you even noticed you're using "capitalism" 2 different ways? As in, 2 wildly different concepts/dimensions. Standard practice in the revisionist schools.
Actually, given your other statements, I'll provide some real-world info below re the China "switch", as you put it.
Your post's odd assertions suggest you are well trained but via very selective/selected-for-you sources.
I suggest you broaden your sources.
Includes some unusual details which only got outside China a few years ago.
Specifically, Zhao Ziyang while a provincial up&comer had managed to wangle (part of) Shenzhen as what he'd hoped to be a template for salvaging the ongoing China debacle/decline: a semi-free-enterprise/-capitalism zone. Later as he rose to national ranks and finally General Secretary (highest rank in CCP), he pushed and pushed to widen it to all China, but not only got nowhere, he also created a bad smell for himself in the inner circles. Result: Zhao got rolled by Li Peng in his own bid to move from Premier to top-dog General Secretary, deliberately inflaming then using Tiananmen Square to backdoor Zhao with Deng Xiaoping (who was still very much the throne rather than the power behind the throne, nominal job-titles notwithstanding).
___weneedanindentcode___ (Aside: An insight into China-CCP's ur-attitude to other countries: Zhao had just about hosed things down once he got back in the country (Li had arranged a high-profile high-rank foreign tour which needed the (unsuspecting) General Secretary), when Li gave a speech which blew the whole thing up overnight --> from winding-down-and-calming to outraged-riots overnight. Why that reaction? According to the protestors, the Premier had spoken to them like they were Westerners (same style, phrasing, etc), and they were incensed that their leaders were lying to them. Ponder the implications of that for a minute.)
Anyway, plebs'-lives brushed aside in standard elite fashion, Li's machinations worked well but not perfectly. Zhao got ousted as planned (and spent the rest of his life under house arrest)(managed to record & smuggle out some tape recordings), BUT Li didn't get his treasured prize of General Secretary; it went to another. Poor ol' Zhao got rolled for nothing.
Later, as China continued to tank and major unrest growing, Deng, on tour and increasingly desperate, discovered the only happy place and the only non-desperate place and the only growing place, was Zhao's Shenzhen special semi-commercial zone. Deng promptly declared this approach/freeing-up would be general policy. And took credit for the whole thing.
Subsequently, CCP's internal power got swamped (by globalisation's cost-only swivelling --further fuelled by CCP tanking the fx rate-- to outsource most production to this new and HUGE supply of mostly slave labour, leading to explosion in activity & uncontrolled individualism which CCP didn't realise until too late) but they're hauling back in now; have been for the last 20yrs or so and IMO are past the tipping point. Still holding the tail of the tiger, but now the spear is firmly back in hand. Ask Jack Ma about "capitalism"...
No. The idea isn't the problem, people are. Neither Capitalism nor Socialism work in isolation, but a mix of the two does, and the world is slowly moving towards Socialism. Most of your "bloody dictatorships" were the opposite of Marxism, they were built on Fascist Capitalism.
How to rob the poor to give to the rich - it's fun to see how a country ruled by a America party is a heaven for the worst oligo-capitalism, or maybe that's exactly the cause. When you're brainwashed since childhood to admire and worship some "Der flag" without any doubt, you are washed , rinsed and spun any way the merkins want, and you don't even need to live in muricia
Fixed it for you
Hardly unique to China. A few years ago a fundraiser was created for Kylie Jenner and exactly the same points were made. People are willing to support some odd causes but if it is their money who are you to say they can't spend it as they will?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
