top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 141 points 1 year ago (113 children)

I lived in china for 4 years and Winnie has Def never been outlawed. Chinese censorship is much more sophisticated than "hey, that's illegal." There's not a list of pictures or memes or phrases that if you're caught with you'll get a visit from the police. No no no. There are hundreds of thousands of people monitoring social media for the latest "subversive" trends. When a new trend develops that content is blacklisted and just not allowed to be spread. You'll send your friend a picture and it never shows up on their phone. There's no indication on your end that it didn't send or they didn't get it. You can have this content on your phone, the CCP doesn't care. They care about it spreading. And you'll never get in trouble for trying to spread it because the system doesn't allow it to spread.

  • source
  • hideshow 113 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (81 children)

    That's actually kinda cool in a techno dyatopian kinda way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 81 child comments
  • [+] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (78 children)
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [+] 97 points 1 year ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (43 children)
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I think the top comment is the real answer on this.

    There is censorship in China, as well as in the west. They just operate very differently.

    In the west, outside the US, I think it'd be fairly easy to argue there's more censorship in China. (Even with the pretty depressing clamp down on right to protest, and suppressing of anti-israel speech in many forms happening at the moment)

    Equally though, people massively overblow what censorship is actually like in China. I'm not gonna get disappeared next time I go to China just for this comment. Or even if I overtly criticised the government on real-name social media.

    tl;dr "China bad!" and "China so good!" are both equally annoying positions to find on the internet.

    Reality is nuanced, but that doesn't seem to make people happy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (34 replies)
    [–] 85 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm literally in a Chinese hostel right now with a Winnie the pooh mattress.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago

    It's always projection. Even if they're not literally doing the thing that they accuse their opponent of doing yet, the fact that they're making the accusation reveals their intention.

    Ah shit, this means they're gonna do everything they made up about Xinjiang (if they're not doing it already at the alligator place)

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Makes sense, ones an inoffensive cartoon, the others a cunt who should die.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I'm just curious if the "fun countries" will "let me right in" because of my profile picture?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    The many faces of JD Vance

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Didn’t this turn out to be fake?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 140 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    No, his face really does look like that

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 57 points 1 year ago*

    None of the documentation or statements by US officials are consistent, and appear to include a bit of lying. So people are leaning towards him being at least partially correct in his accusations.

    In short, they saw the picture and then began an extended interview where they made a bunch of false claims, and used made up reasons to deny him. Then later claimed they used more reasonable argument, which also doesn't really hold water.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I think US customs said it was because he admitted to using drugs in the past and had photos of a paraphernalia on his phone. He said they ignored that stuff and focused on the photo. So it comes down to whether you think one specific customs employee could potentially see something they don’t like and choose to refuse entry for another reason or that customs is being honest and open about the reason his entry was refused and that the people making the announcement fully understand the situation (including the thoughts of the person that examined the photos).

    I feel like the latter is unlikely, but I don’t have enough evidence to say either way. I don’t think drug paraphernalia in a photo or admitting past drug use are good reasons to refuse entry either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›