• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      The trick is to always assume “China is lying about its internal statistics” and inflate whatever number they give by an arbitrary large percentage. 1.7M is obviously an under-count because the CCP is always lying about everything.

      Also, you can do some broad brush “Everyone in Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, North Korea, and Taiwan are prisoners of the Chinese state, so actually that’s over 60M people” napkin math to make the numbers look better.

      • wpb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        I think this is a good rule of thumb in general. When statistics agree with my preconceived notions, I consider them trustworthy, and if not, I assume that reality lines up with what I expect. For example, the referendum in held in the Baltics about leaving the USSR ended in favor of leaving, which I think is a good example of a trustworthy statistic. But the subsequent referendum in the remaining members ended in favor of staying in the USSR, and I think that’s a little suspicious, don’t you?

        • davel@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          When statistics agree with my preconceived notions, I consider them trustworthy, and if not, I assume that reality lines up with what I expect.

          I… thought you were being sarcastic. This is an obvious and severe flaw to have in one’s rational thinking.

          prejudice (noun)
          1. The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions.
          2. An adverse judgment or opinion formed unfairly or without knowledge of the facts.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Why would it be suspicious? Different members of the USSR had different national conditions, some were quite nationalist and opposed being a part of the USSR, some were more internationalist and wished to retain the Soviet system. In the following years, there have been many studies verifying that of those who lived through Socialism, the majority wish it had remained over the devastation Capitalism brought to the majority of people.

          • wpb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            It’s suspicious because it disagrees with my preconceived notions about communism.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 hours ago

              The opening of the Soviet Archives backs up these claims. If your pre-concieved notions about Communism are negative, I really recommend giving Blackshirts and Reds a read if you’ve got the time and willingness.

              • wpb@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                7 hours ago

                See now there you’ve made a crucial error. You’re recommending a book which, while it has some criticism of the specifics of how the USSR implemented socialism, on the whole it’s quite positive about the idea of establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat in general. Obviously that disagrees with my preconceived notion that humans are greedy, and that therefore capitalism is good, so I would never read a source that contradicts this, because I would have to dismiss most of it outright. And that’s just a hassle.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 hours ago

                  I don’t follow, the author being positive about the working class running society rather than privledged elites having dictatorial control a la Capitalism doesn’t mean you need to dismiss the facts it brings up outright. Are you saying that, as someone biased towards Capitalism, you dismiss any criticism of Capitalism and any positive opinions on Socialism outright? If so, I can’t imagine how you live your life in other areas that contradict your current understanding!

                  To return, I don’t at all believe it’s suspect that the majority of people wished to retain Socialism, and this fact is further cemented by this same general notion being repeated over and over again in polling.

                  • wpb@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    6 hours ago

                    Look, it’s like the scientific method, right? You start with a theory, and then you gather a bunch of data, and the stuff that agrees with your theory you keep, and the stuff that doesn’t you either dismiss outright, or you rationalize. I feel like I really can’t make my position any more obvious than that.

                    I appreciate your patience and your continued efforts to educate folks on this website, but I think you’re barking up the wrong tree here.

      • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        No, Occupied China doesn’t control DPRK or ROC

        If we play that game we can’t trust American numbers either so the whole conversation becomes pointless