China's crackdown on well stuff

[Dwarvenhobble]

So people might have missed these two stories of China cracking down on more things.

First online gaming

Shares slide after China brands online games 'electronic drugs'

In recent months Beijing has cracked down on China's technology and private education industries.

www.bbc.co.uk

The claim they're pushing mostly is it's somehow responsible for the large amounts of myopia being seen on the countries next generation. The game time limits are meant to be something like 1 hour per day for anyone under 15 and 1 hour 30 minutes for those aged 15-18. Also spending limits on he games too.

Another story that is somewhat connected

China cracking down on celebrity online culture

China cracks down on celebrity online culture

Weibo is to remove a list ranking celebrities by popularity on social media amid state criticism.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sina Weibo - China's Twitter equivalent - is to remove an online celebrity list following criticism by state media of celebrity culture on social media.
State-owned newspaper People's Daily criticised platforms that make stars out of "unworthy individuals".

Weibo said its decision was due to what it described as "irrational support" some fans were showing for celebrities.

This is all along with the social credit system becoming mandatory last year which allegedly would punish people for buying Japanese Manga be reward people for buying work boots because all purchases feed into the social credit system too.

It could well be the celebrity culture crackdown and the online game crackdown are just another bit of China's attempt at social engineering to try and push people and especially young people to become more productive for the glory of the party and nation and not waste time on more frivolous things like celebrity social media and online video games when they should be studying to help make China glorious and a world leader.

 

[Trunkage]

So... They're restricting hours that teenagers can play games... so... I restrict how many hours my preteen play games.

Yep, shouldn't be the government doing this but... it's not that big of a deal... maybe?

Plus, Dave Rubin will be happy knowing someone acknowledges that play video games is killing the species with gen Z not sexing enough

As to celebrity culture thing... you were VERY pro-government intervention against social media. But now it's bad? What happened?

 

[Specter Von Baren]

So... They're restricting hours that teenagers can play games... so... I restrict how many hours my preteen play games.

Yep, shouldn't be the government doing this but... it's not that big of a deal... maybe?

Plus, Dave Rubin will be happy knowing someone acknowledges that play video games is killing the species with gen Z not sexing enough

As to celebrity culture thing... you were VERY pro-government intervention against social media. But now it's bad? What happened?

Trunkage... can you at least TRY to not be so blatantly hypocritical.

 

[immortalfrieza]

It's just China being oppressive because they can, no surprise there.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

As to celebrity culture thing... you were VERY pro-government intervention against social media. But now it's bad? What happened?

More pro working to keep it open.
Anti applying more restrictions

 

[Trunkage]

Trunkage... can you at least TRY to not be so blatantly hypocritical.

1. Did I say I was against all government intervention?
2. This statement is a realisation that what they are intervening in is probably normal for parents
'So... They're restricting hours that teenagers can play games... so... I restrict how many hours my preteen play games.'
3. This is a recognition that the government shouldn't be doing this
'Yep, shouldn't be the government doing this'
4. Recognition that of ALL the government interventions that China has made, this is one on the bottom
'but... it's not that big of a deal... maybe?'
China has done some incredibly bad stuff, but we have to pretend that this is the crisis?

 

[Bartholomew]

China has done some incredibly bad stuff, but we have to pretend that this is the crisis?

This seems like the fallacy of relative privation. "It could be worse!"

If something is presented as bad, pointing out that there are worse things is not a refutation of the argument.
If all you want to say is that it's not "that big of a deal", then that's fine, but it could be construed as trying to defending it or attempting to downplay it.

I think the point is that all government overreach into the realm of human rights, including the rights of parents to raise their own children how they see fit, needs to be noted and resisted.

 

[Gergar12]

If they touch Genshin Impact I will go back to being a neocon

In reality, they are trying to apply free-market logic to China. Can't work if you play video games all day in your parent's basement.

 

[09philj]

The CCP is constantly trying to juggle control with economic growth. They want everything the West has but don't want any of it to be allowed to threaten them.

 

[Avnger]

I think the point is that all government overreach into the realm of human rights, including the rights of parents to raise their own children how they see fit, needs to be noted and resisted.

Pure nonsense. No human right is absolute because there are always areas where one person's rights conflicts with another's rights.

A parent's right to "raise their own children how they see fit" can be and should be restricted if it infringes on the children's rights. Children are not stuffed animals to be treated as property. Some easy examples: No parent has the right to purposely malnourish their child. No parent has the right to lock their child away in a basement for their existence. No parent has the right to purposely inflict emotional harm on their child.

Where exactly the line of when the government and/or society should or needs to step in can certainly be discussed, but your claim that there shouldn't be a line at all is bullshit.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

1. Did I say I was against all government intervention?
2. This statement is a realisation that what they are intervening in is probably normal for parents
'So... They're restricting hours that teenagers can play games... so... I restrict how many hours my preteen play games.'
3. This is a recognition that the government shouldn't be doing this
'Yep, shouldn't be the government doing this'
4. Recognition that of ALL the government interventions that China has made, this is one on the bottom
'but... it's not that big of a deal... maybe?'
China has done some incredibly bad stuff, but we have to pretend that this is the crisis?

1) Thing is I'm against both government and private corporations getting too much power / control and influence.

I see that the corporate congress won't be any better than the present governments and might end up far worse. I'd rather now have Atlus Shrugged or Continuum become how things play out.

2) Hard cap restrictions from the government are a bit different to parents allowing stuff. 1 hour a day means that all the time. Schools out? oh you still only get 1 hour. Done well on a test and it's the weekend? Too bad 1 hour only. Reaching a point in the game where you need a few more minutes to finish? Too bad 1 hour only.

4) Oddly it may be one of the more sinister ones (outside of the camps and organ harvesting stuff) at least in terms of goals because it's social engineering stuff at the end of the day it's about making people and kids focus on what the government sees as productive and making them the most productive cogs in the machine they can be rather than seeing them as people.

 

[Bartholomew]

A parent's right to "raise their own children how they see fit" can be and should be restricted if it infringes on the children's rights. Children are not stuffed animals to be treated as property. Some easy examples: No parent has the right to purposely malnourish their child. No parent has the right to lock their child away in a basement for their existence. No parent has the right to purposely inflict emotional harm on their child.

I agree 100%.

I didn't mean to say that parents should have the right to harm their children. Of course, that should be a given, you do not have a right to harm your children. Please excuse me for not saying that, but I thought it was obvious.

If you agree that parents should not be infringing on children's rights, then you agree that the rights of children are inviolable. You agree that inviolable rights exist.
If children have inviolable rights, then parents do too.

Just like parents cannot infringe on children's rights, neither should government be infringing on parent's rights. Among those are the right to raise children how they see fit, providing, of course, that this does not bring harm to the child.

There is a difference between "government overreach into human rights", what I am against, and "governments should be able to act to protect the rights of children", what I am not against.

 

[Worgen]

The fun part of this is that they risk pushing too hard and having the populous rebel against them.

 

[Avnger]

The fun part of this is that they risk pushing too hard and having the populous rebel against them.

That would be very, very unlikely. If there's one thing that will lead to a populace accepting authoritarian government actions, it's rising living standards. The CCP has led China from a very much third world power to challenging the US as a peer superpower. Whether you want to make the argument that the CCP caused that or it happened in spite of them doesn't matter to Chinese citizens. All that matters is nearly all of them, even in rural backwater villages, are enjoying significantly better lives than their parents (something that isn't true in the US anymore...).

 

[Worgen]

That would be very, very unlikely. If there's one thing that will lead to a populace accepting authoritarian government actions, it's rising living standards. The CCP has led China from a very much third world power to challenging the US as a peer superpower. Whether you want to make the argument that the CCP caused that or it happened in spite of them doesn't matter to Chinese citizens. All that matters is nearly all of them, even in rural backwater villages, are enjoying significantly better lives than their parents (something that isn't true in the US anymore...).

The way that works though is to take away things slowly, give people time to get used to little things being taken then take something else. Do too much of it at once and people will panic and start to rebel.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

The fun part of this is that they risk pushing too hard and having the populous rebel against them.

Didn't work to well with the umbrella protests etc unfortunately.

 

[Seanchaidh]

ITT: people fantasizing over the possibility of an increase in human suffering

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

This seems like the fallacy of relative privation. "It could be worse!"

If something is presented as bad, pointing out that there are worse things is not a refutation of the argument.
If all you want to say is that it's not "that big of a deal", then that's fine, but it could be construed as trying to defending it or attempting to downplay it.

I think the point is that all government overreach into the realm of human rights, including the rights of parents to raise their own children how they see fit, needs to be noted and resisted.

It's not that "it could be worse" more like there's already way worse things that the Chinese government is doing. It seems kind of silly to focus on video game restrictions when there's ethnic cleansing and organ harvesting going on.

It's not that this is being downplayed, but in the grand scheme of things this is more like the straw that broke the camel's back. There's already heavier things there and this is relatively minor in comparison to all the other sinaster shit that China is doing.

 

[Bartholomew]

It's not that "it could be worse" more like there's already way worse things that the Chinese government is doing. It seems kind of silly to focus on video game restrictions when there's ethnic cleansing and organ harvesting going on.

It's not that this is being downplayed, but in the grand scheme of things this is more like the straw that broke the camel's back. There's already heavier things there and this is relatively minor in comparison to all the other sinaster shit that China is doing.

I agree that it is kind of silly, and that there are way worse things that the Chinese government is doing.

But "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance", and I would add for clarity: against all threats, large and small.

Some crimes committed by China are worse than others, sure, but we ought to make a note of all of them and add them to our repertoire. Any abuse, large or small, should be noted and remembered so that we do not permit or commit the same offenses.

If we only take notice of the large stuff, then we allow the small stuff to fly under the radar. Then, when it happens to us, we don't notice, because we were only focusing on genocide-level events. We ought not to think that any human rights violation is too small to take notice of.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

So people might have missed these two stories of China cracking down on more things.

First online gaming

Shares slide after China brands online games 'electronic drugs'

In recent months Beijing has cracked down on China's technology and private education industries.

www.bbc.co.uk

The claim they're pushing mostly is it's somehow responsible for the large amounts of myopia being seen on the countries next generation. The game time limits are meant to be something like 1 hour per day for anyone under 15 and 1 hour 30 minutes for those aged 15-18. Also spending limits on he games too.

Not to sound too skeptical, but where are you getting those solutions from? They aren't in the article and I didn't find a link to anywhere else. All I'm getting from that article is trying to curb addictions and kid's access to micro transactions, which honestly makes sense to me.

Also, some monopoly busting regarding music streaming. (Side note, we should kill Spotify)