• ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Do you have any evidence of disinformation campaigns being directed by Xi towards political opponents internally within China or are you talking out of your ass

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where did I say that there were disinformation campaigns directed against Xi?

      I’ve just said it’s possible to rig elections every so often. Surely that isn’t an objectionable idea to you?

      • ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well you called Xi a dictator, which is a pretty big claim.

        If you can evidence that it would be great, from my understanding China is a democratic centralist country that has popular support from the billion+ people living there.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You yourself say that you cannot sustain any disinformation campaign indefinitely, even if they might be successful for the occassional vote. So, using your own logic these hypothetical disinformation campaigns you’re doing hand wringing over don’t actually matter in the grand scheme of things.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You are making a disingenuous argument that ignores the entire point I made.

          Disinformation campaigns do matter if you’re only having occasional votes - you can slip through a bad decision every once in a while. If you vote on everything, then it wouldn’t matter, because you’ll have a vote in review where the flawed vote would be corrected.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The only one making disingenuous arguments here is you bud. Your whole argument is based on a completely unfounded supposition that the current system does not end up fairly representing the will of the public. There is no evidence to suggest anything of the sort that I’m aware of.

            Meanwhile, the whole idea of direct democracy that you’re peddling here doesn’t scale beyond small communities. Failing to understand why delegation of concerns is a necessary aspect of any complex organization exposes infantile understanding of the subject you’re attempting to debate.