The global south (and the global north) must stop breeding non-human animals for food because it’s a barbaric thing to do. What a bizarre comment. People from the global south are not infallible and people from the global north are not always wrong. Do you also think homophobic racists from the global south are beyond criticism? That’s ignoring the fact that the country with the most vegans is India, so framing veganism as some kind of western thing is doubly silly.
Removed by mod
“Could it be that we made the extremely isolated country less isolated? Nah, they just got lucky somehow”
I think the distinction is between the name of the work itself (like there are actual comic books called Batman or whatever), versus the name of a character in the book. I ain’t a lawyer though so I’m not sure
I read the whole previous thread before commenting. No, they weren’t talking about a sanctuary, they were talking about an aquarium that uses non-human animals to make money. That’s the whole thing that (justifiably) pissed of Eiren. Calling it a sanctuary is white-washing. Like how people will white-wash native schools. Once again, the only reason you think my comparisons are ridiculous are because of your fundamentally reactionary and unjustifiable belief that non-human animals are objects to used for human pleasure, to be looked at for entertainment or murdered to make a meal slightly tastier.
That’s a ridiculous argument to make on an instance that frequently calls for death to various reactionaries. Your position on this fundamentally comes down to your own reactionary position on non-human animals, in seeing thinking, feeling, independent beings as the same as or little better than objects. Eiren’s anger was fully justified at someone who was advocating for a concentration camp.
Would you ban someone who insulted a reactionary that said, for example, that Native American reservations were a good thing and that the schools native children were sent to were a ‘charity’ that helped them by giving them an education? I’m sure you wouldn’t ban someone for insulting a reactionary like that. You’d rather ban the reactionary. You’d understand why someone was angry at a reactionary who said that. That you take the opposite approach here is no fault of Eiren’s, but rather your reactionary beliefs.
If you think that that’s an unfair thing to say, or that it’s ridiculous to compare humans and non-human animals, once again this attitude just stems from your own reactionary position. Humans are animals, there’s no reason not to compare them. Non-human animals are capable of feeling emotions like fear, pain, suffering, stress and also joy, happiness, bonds etc. They don’t want to die. They don’t want to be caged. They don’t want to be raped. They don’t want their children ripped away from them shortly after they’re born. These are all object scientific facts. There is no reason not to consider non-human animals to be people and to treat them with the dignity that that entails.
Nature is a well-regarded peer-reviewed journal. They don’t just publish any slop that gets submitted to them, they have quality standards. Plus the reasons people usually give for why this would be the case don’t explain why it wouldn’t also happen to non-Chinese institutions. It might just be racism, but there are ways a reasonable person could come to have an unreasonable belief. It could be the case that where-ever this person is finding Chinese articles is highlighting only lower quality Chinese articles, and only higher quality non-Chinese articles. Like if they’re getting articles from some kind of news outlet or something, and not just looking through articles about a specific topic they need.
Edit: I guess it could also be a translation thing. Translations from Chinese works can often be complete ass (my experience is with books but I imagine it would also apply to research article), so that might affect his opinion even if the methodology is sound.
Also interesting to note that the almost all the institutions with a growing share are Chinese, and almost all the institutions with a diminishing share are non-Chinese (at least in the first 50 or so before I stopped going down the list)
I think Aria means that the bourgeois states will spread propaganda to their people and no one will hear Xi’s speech. I don’t think they think that China did any of that
Improving people’s well-being? So, like making sure they have good food and a place to live and medicine and clothes and transport and some entertainment and stuff? So, having a good economy?
Anybody who uses a text editor more modern than Vim or it’s variants is a tech bro
In addition to other comments, the first part
Where someone attempts to invalidate anything that’s problematic to their narrative and/or would trigger cognitive dissonance
is just plain ol’ confirmation bias
I wish people would stop using animal as an insult. Humans are animals! There’s nothing wrong with being an animal! Pigs and dogs are cool! It’s not bad to be compared to them!
(Death to ‘Isreal’ obv)
Yeah, tech peaked in 1991 with the creation of vim. It’s been mostly downhill since then
Clearly you can’t comprehend elementary statistics like the central limit theorem lol
What? The central limit theorem states that if you take many averages of a distribution, the distribution of averages will be a normal distribution. What does that have to do with anything? Since the resulting normal distribution has a variance of sigma/n, the central limit theorem supports these kinds of polls, since they get more accurate as the number of responses increases. You know you can’t just say the words ‘central limit theorem’ like it’s some kind of magic spell right? Like you have to actually make an argument that uses the central limit theorem to support your conclusion.
Unless you mean that stuff about outliers? But again, the underlying distributions for different countries are different, so the central limit theorem doesn’t apply. There is a more general version of the theorem, but that has many preconditions for validity, so again, you have to show your work that it applies here. You are extremely arrogant for someone who doesn’t understand statistics.
And honestly god damn you tankies give communists and socialists such a bad name with all your braindead bullshit. Nothing talks me out of trusting china more than talking with you idiots
Even if everyone here did have invalid arguments, trusting China less for someone on the internet having a bad argument is a fallacy fallacy. So much for your critical thinking skills.
Look I know it’s easy to think that there’s a singular big bad out there. That there’s just this one entity called “the west” and you’ll be able to fight and conquer it. It’s easier to believe things are black and white, that certain countries are innately good and others innately bad at all times. But that’s not reality.
Communists regularly criticize China, they criticize the actually bad parts about it, rather than the delusions that only exist in liberal minds, so if you’re coming in here with “The ebil authoritarians” commies don’t take a ‘nuanced’ outlook, because the situation has no nuance. What a massive strawman. So much for your critical thinking skills.
If you give into those kinds of delusions you’re not really better than the people who blindly believe in Trump or God etc. It’s easy believe that kind of blind faith because it’s less scary than admitting you might be wrong. We are driven to cling to the idea that there are hero’s out there, a righteous nation behind us fighting for good, someone we can always depend on, but if you don’t see reality as it is, you’re setting yourself up for more pain.
Once again, massive strawman. So much for your critical thinking skills.
If you’re delusional people won’t believe what you say even if it’s true. So if you constantly go around attacking people with ad hominem,
Just saying mean things isn’t an ad hominem. If I say ‘You’re wrong because x, therefore you’re stupid’ that’s just an insult. If I say ‘You’re wrong because you’re stupid’, that would be an ad hominem. So much for your critical thinking skills. Also real smart complaining about insults in the middle of a massive insulting screed.
or claiming literally everything is western propaganda without actually providing evidence
They did provide evidence. Not great evidence, but more evidence than anyone provided to claim that China is authoritarian, which is zero. So more than enough evidence for the situation, in other words. If any libs made more specific claims with more specific evidence, more specific counter evidence would have been provided. So much for your critical thinking skills.
you’re really just hurting the causes you’re trying to support
“You’re just hurting your own cause” says the person who hates us and our cause.
Anyway dude
You know, getting overly familiar with someone you don’t know during a disagreement by saying things like ‘dude’, ‘bro’ and ‘buddy’ comes off as massively disrespectful and arrogant.
I hope your days go well, and I wish you peace and happiness mate
Hell of a thing to say to someone you just insulted and belittled. I might almost think you’re being disingenuous.
Fun statistical fact: outliers are a sign your sampling methodology is flawed, especially when the outliers are a set of samples and not just a singular data point.
“This jet’s speed is an outlier in this set of planes. Outliers mean the methodology must be invalid, so jets can’t be faster than planes.”
This is nonsense. China and the euros have fundamentally different political systems, there is no reason to suppose they should have similar outcomes. The whole point of the discussion is that China’s system is superior, if you say that any data that supports that is an outlier, and therefore must be invalid you’re just presupposing your conclusion.
On your other point about the usefulness of this data: while it is true that there can be many different explanations for the observed results, that just means that we need more evidence to show which system is more democratic, not that this evidence is useless. Saying that people’s opinion of their own system is irrelevant is extremely chauvinistic. In the case of China, we can see the massive increase in quality of life of it’s citizens, as well as a systematic overview of it’s political structures like here. I’ve also heard the book Socialism with Chinese Characteristics: A Guide for Foreigners is good, but I haven’t read it yet myself.
Furthermore, your point about manipulation of public opinion goes the other way, too. Where did the idea that China is authoritarian come from? People going to China and studying what life is like there, or media manipulation? Who do you think is more likely to be manipulated like that, the people living there who actually experience the political structures of China, or rando westerners whos only source of information is capitalist media? A simple poll like this is more than enough to debunk the people who think China is authoritarian based on nothing but vibes from capitalist media.
Real ones only code in Befunge
One of us! One of us! 🐧
In the same way that anti-racists can still have unaddressed racist beliefs, vegans can still have unaddressed carnist beliefs that they should try to get out of their minds. Thinking of uneaten meat as a ‘waste’ of food is one such belief. It means you still ultimately think of non-human animals as products to be eaten. Like, do you consider a burial to be a ‘waste’ of good human meat? Why do you have a different opinion on non-human meat? If you don’t like seeing them rotting in the trash, you can give them a burial.
Unless you do consider burials a waste of resources I guess, then keep doing what you’re doing.