• OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Its a very weakly sourced state sponsored media article reporting on their state enemy. You have to be willfully credulous to believe their claims without further proof.

    • Durotar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t mean that reports are false just because two states are enemies (which is an exaggeration).

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t mean that reports are false just because two states are enemies (which is an exaggeration).

        If they were strongly cited I would not be criticizing people believing them. All sources are biased, the question is how factual a source is.

        The BBC is strongly biased against China. If they make claims without proof the most logical course of action is to not assume they are telling the truth and not incorporate what they say into your beliefs. (Note that this is different than “assume they are lying”)

      • socsa@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Aren’t these threads wild? These people don’t want to engage in actual discussion here. They just want to remove your agency by calling you brainwashed, do the sealion “source” thing, and then ad hominem away any sources you do provide.

        I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - the world deserves a better class of communist.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It isn’t sealioning to expect a government or corporate news agency to provide strong citations when making contentious claims.

        • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          They just want to remove your agency by calling you brainwashed

          Unlike when the liberals in this very thread accuse people of being brainwashed or paid shills, because then it is righteous!

          do the sealion “source” thing,

          lmao what dastardly trolls they are to care about sourcing

          and then ad hominem away any sources you do provide.

          Like you’d ever accept People’s Daily or whatever. The “tankies” need to mostly rely on liberal outlets because you will discard reporting out of China (etc.) out of hand.

          the world deserves a better class of communist.

          If we had a better class of communist, you’d hate them too because you’d believe everything you’re told about them, just like you do with the existing breeds.

    • Freeman@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I saw a piece about the shadow police in germany lately. I am sure that the chinese foreign police exists.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have no doubt, every nation has secret police. I simply doubt they are doing what the article suggests theyre doing. It seems to me the article is interested in explaining why there aren’t many uyghur Muslims joining their narrative and why a lot of them are supportive of China and feel their culture is respected.