Inspired by @lychee's poll in the past 'Would you become a pet to a higher being?', I wanted to create another similar setting with a different scenario. In this scenario, you are living in a state of a country. This state is special because it isn't governed under the same system as the rest of the country. This state enjoys much more freedom compared to the rest of the country in terms of capitalism, internet access, freedom of speech etc. Because of that, the citizens of the state enjoy a much higher quality of life compared to a lot of other countries. However, this state is just a small part which is still largely reliant on the country. The country provides 80% of the water, 66% of electricity and also 70% of food. For years, the state's leader has been elected with evident bias, hugely in support of the interests of the country rather than the state. However, in recent years, the country has been making apparent efforts to change the governing system of the state to be alike with the rest of the country. These changes include: 1) A social credit system Surveillance cameras that have facial recognition are placed everywhere and you are allocated points for how you behave in public. (See Black Mirror's 'Nosedive' episode for idea). If you behave well, you can earn points that will allow you to live a smooth and better life. The more points that you earn, the more advantages you will enjoy (eg. if you are a parent then your child is given more priority in the acceptance list of a good school). If you fail to reach a certain amount of points, you could be banned for leaving the country and be re'disciplined'. This positive and negative reinforcement system ensures that no crime will run rampant within the state so every citizen can live with a definite sense of security. This also enhances the image and reputation of the state. 2) Restriction to certain internet access The country is very strict on safeguarding its own national interests. They dislike foreign influences and aim for the unification of the entire country. They have built their own search engine, own social medias, etc and you are expected to use that and only that. Any other country owned service/product will become unavailable to use unless you use VPN. In addition to that, they also restrict any information that spreads hate against the country from being spread on the internet. Any posts shaming the country would immediately be taken down and the person will be hunted by the police for questioning. As a normal citizen of the state who enjoys the high quality of living, how would you feel about this incoming change? Would you resist and fight for freedom? Or would you prefer to turn a blind eye/accept matters as is? Why? PS. Any countries sharing semblance to the scenario above is purely coincidental.
Nah, pretty sure you and everyone knows who you are talking about, but lets not get this thread banned. Also, I would pick one, if most of my needs are satisfied and that higher social points means I get to access more weird porn in the internet. Though I believe letting the big bro having all the shitty cams in order to see how I behave like a good boi dampens my mood to wank. Incoming molotov to the nearest building.
SHHHH U GONNA GET US FOUND OUT but yeah, not trying to stir any debate lol just wanted to see reactions from fresh perspectives.
I was born free and I shall live free. When the quality of my life is infringed upon by outside parties, to make it less than what it is. I will not take such overreach of authority lying down. That's what would be playing in my head. Realistically though, I'd probably abide by the norm, which is wait to see which side wins. Out of fear for my life, I'd rather not get injured for a cause, even if I believe it to be righteous
If you're going to talk about China, at least have the guts to say it out. How are you saying you are going to make a "stand for freedom" when you can't even dare to say things aloud? Personally, I see all countries as "works in progress". If they want to go "social state", good for them, Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations, I'll just wait and see if it works. If it doesn't, then like Communism and Fascism, I expect it'll die off as a fad over time. Governing systems and governments come and go, the people will abide even if the "country" as a grouping might not. That includes the US. Which is the "better" system? Who knows. A lot of it is personal preference and only time will tell.
@Nightow1 Off-topic....... Hey we joined on the same day, although its a year apart. It's like we share the same birthday Sorry, I know it was random, but I couldn't help but notice.
lol "wave!!" IMO there is always a need for "balance". Too tight a grip and you make people miserable but too lax and the people will make themselves miserable. You know the old saying "nature abhors a vacuum"? Same thing. If you do not control the people, then the criminal underworld will because there is a "power gap" that is open for people that have no accountability to take over. I mean, even the most liberal country has laws and jails, so there really isn't such a thing as total freedom and without police enforcement (unfortunately sometimes with guns), I'm not that fond of getting mugged every day. Of course, the reverse, a government gone power mad and koo-koo isn't a good thing too, it just becomes a form of "legal underworld" where they both do the same thing, just one side has lawyers. Hence "balance". If I lived in an area where warlords rob, murder, abduct and rape every day, even if the CCP comes marching in with tanks and guns, I suspect I'd cheer to see them, simply because what was before was worse. On the other hand, if I were, for example, a student from Hong Kong, I strongly suspect I would not be happy to see them. It's also "comparative situations". Anarchy -> Authoritarian, people are happy. Free -> Authoritarian, people will protest. So it also depends on the "former situation".
Obviously you're new to NU in which case, let me enlighten you. One of NUF policies is to never discuss politics in public because people get too heated in debates. Now I don't ever recall expressing direct support for freedom in my thread and if I did, kindly highlight it out so I may change it to a more neutral tone. Also since you glossed over the thread, please see my reply as to why I even opened this thread in the first place. Honestly, you came on a little too strong son and I'm not sure why.
Hmm, I actually had a conversation about this topic at our Thanksgiving party, and it's really interesting because different viewers have grossly different opinions on the issues. I also think the media (Western and Eastern) are both heavily biased, and I think a lot of people are casually throwing "support" for one side or another without really comprehending the situation at all. It's very particular because I hear Americans with different opinions than overseas Mainland nationals... which differ from the opinion of overseas HK nationals (who have a much more nuanced view than what is simplistic-ly interpreted by third parties). In either case, the main thing I want to argue that the situation definitely isn't a binary, and it's sort of a mistake to present in the situation in that way. It's not really a question of pro-Democracy vs. pro-Authority, and it's important to focus carefully on the issues that are actually being pushed by the protesters. As far as I'm aware, there isn't any plan to implement a social credit system or censorship in HK. Technically, the protests started because the HK president wanted pass a law permitting extradition between HK and other countries (originally police collaboration with Taiwan, but included Mainland so that worried people) -- so in many regards the protesters aren't really protesting the Mainland, but more so protesting their own government. Later the scope of the protests expanded to demand the resignation of the president, allowing universal suffrage at their polls, and re-examining police brutality. There were numerous incidents that occurred, which damaged the image of all parties involved. + + + I think the big thing for me is that the protests represent domestic distrust of their own government. Many people feel betrayed by their own president, and they are upset by the policies that their President wanted to support. Which of course, raises the question of how this happened? Was the President corrupt? Is she a puppet? How did this happen? + + + RE: OP I think it's important to consider the extent of self-censorship that occurs. It's very common for many countries (particularly in SEA) to have pro-China parties, who see the economic benefits of pursuing alliances or closer economic ties with certain powerhouse countries. When a weaker country or political party wishes to establish closer relations with a more powerful country, there's a lot of ass-kissing that is done. This also happens with countries that ally themselves with Western countries. It's simply the nature of politics. Why would the US send money or sign a favorable trade agreement with a small country that is constantly insulting the US? Politicians are cognizant of this, and historically it has always been the case that countries sort of mold themselves after the primary superpower they are allied with or seek economic benefits from. When there is somebody people are trying to impress, self-censorship is a powerful force that drives people's behavior. I would argue that mainland China primarily operates through self-censorship moreso than centralized censorship. If you're a CEO of a company and you speak out against the Chinese government... as a CEO you're aware of the fact that the Chinese government can easily send the Chinese IRS agents to review your tax returns. All of it is technically "legal", but the reality of this is very complicated. If you "investigate" nearly anybody long enough, you can dig up dirt on anyone. Consequently, nobody in China wants to draw unnecessary attention towards themselves. I mean, nobody wants to kill their job promotion prospects. No country has the resources to "investigate" everybody, and even in the US you have a lot of people flubbing their tax returns or doing suspicious things. A lot of people break the law a lot of the time, whether it is torrenting CDs or checking the "nothing to declare" box at airport customs. Probably every single politician currently in the government has dirt on them, but so does a majority of the population.