• egonallanon@lemm.eeEnglish
    411·
    3 months ago

    Hang on they asked a person who supports China (or apologist in their garbage language) to say something against China and they didn’t want to? Seems a pretty reasonable thing to refuse to do.

  • bumpusoot [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    391·
    3 months ago

    You claim to have free speech huh? The only way to prove that is to say exactly what I tell you!

    Literal playground tactics

    • Numuruzero@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      6·
      3 months ago

      I mean, “I don’t want to” is a valid response but it says something about the person and the culture they are raised in. Maybe they simply believe too strongly that it is unethical to say whatever they are asked to, or maybe… Either way, it’s made clear that they can’t or won’t criticize the thing they are asked to. Some things are not worthy of criticism, but most things can be. Especially leaders.

      • Evilsandwichman [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
        14·
        3 months ago

        this

        Exactly; some people simply won’t engage with juvenile behavior and their cultures stress respect of others; sadly this goes far beyond what the average journalist is capable of comprehending. You also have a country that’s been harassed for decades by the other country, and are now being asked to degrade themselves just for the amusement of the subhuman audience of the show. The guy could’ve given the apropos response of just a middle finger and walking off, but his culture stresses the importance of respect not just to others but of one’s self.

          • Evilsandwichman [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
            2·
            3 months ago

            Admittedly I’m trying to take what they said in good faith and to that effect filtered out whatever sounded like nonsense as perhaps them being unable to articulate themselves and found myself left with the words ‘ethics’ and ‘culture’ and went from there.

            I mean, “I don’t want to” is a valid response but it says something about the person and the culture they are raised in

            Maybe they simply believe too strongly that it is unethical to say whatever they are asked to

            Some things are not worthy of criticism, but most things can be. Especially leaders.

            These things sound too silly to take at face value, so I’m assuming either English isn’t their first language or they’re having trouble expressing themselves.

            (And because my humor seems to not register for most, I’m actually saying this person is very silly. My post was more to goad them into admitting they believe in racist and small-minded nonsense)

      • bumpusoot [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
        5·
        3 months ago

        it’s made clear that they can’t or won’t criticize the thing they are asked to

        okay? But there’s a big difference between being made clear either that they “can’t” or “can’t or won’t”. The latter is obviously the case, the ‘journalist’ is pretending it like the former is the truth. “They won’t humour my stupid request” != “They can’t say what they want”.

  • Clippy [comrade/them, he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    301·
    3 months ago

    i recall reading that the winnie the pooh thing started off because a bunch of hong kong liberals were paying notions to racism by saying “xi must be winnie the pooh, because obama is a tigger!(which i can only imagine they want to replace T with N being their butt of the joke)” which goddamn i can only imagine how feverishly fox like these people are with their nodding gestures laced in race hate

    e do not trust the liberals, they will betray you

  • miz [any, any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    25·
    3 months ago

    The question of “free press” and “free speech” is not separable from the question of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie versus the dictatorship of the proletariat. The idea of “political plurality” as such turns out to be the negation of the possibility of achieving any kind of truth in the realm of politics, it reduces all historical and value claims to the rank of mere opinion. And of course, so long as someone’s political convictions are mere opinion, they won’t rise to defend them. And so the liberal state remains the dictatorial organ of the bourgeoisie, with roads being built or legislation being passed only as commanded by the interests of capital, completely disregarding the interests of workers. Under regimes where political plurality is falsely upheld as a supreme virtue, the very notion of asserting oneself as possessing a truth appears aggressive and “authoritarian.”

    from https://redsails.org/brainwashing/