Once again another example of how Freedom of Speech is a foundational value of immense importance and should only be violated if there are extremely good reasons for doing so (and the vast majority of the time there are not).
Once again another example of how Freedom of Speech is a foundational value of immense importance and should only be violated if there are extremely good reasons for doing so (and the vast majority of the time there are not).
I'm sure the Party thought they had a good reason.
In fact, I'd think everyone who ever suppresses speech thinks their reason for doing it is a good one.
They did, and it’s one of the key reasons centrally planned economies always fail (really their resistance to failure is only determined by their people’s endurance for suffering). In a free market, value is set by supply and demand, bad decisions and bad ideas don’t survive, and you have some reasonably decent metrics to measure success. In a planned economy, value is set by the planning committee. As a decision maker in such a system, your value is determined by how successful you are at convincing those higher up the chain that you have good ideas and make good decisions. Every decision maker in the chain of command is incentivized to lie to their superiors, and the ultimate authority is incentivized to lie to the public. Small failures and course corrections are not possible under such a system, so for a failure to be acknowledged, it has to overcome the ability of the person who’s responsible for it to conceal it. It becomes essential for anybody with any power to control the “truth”.
You can see the same dynamics at play in any sufficiently large organisation (generally scaling proportional to the slowing feedback loop between decision and outcome, and with any form of complexity that would obscure the direct relationship between decision and outcome), though usually on a much smaller scale. China allows enough free market activity to take place to allow it to survive, but you can see the failures of its planning committees everywhere.
Indeed. For reference, pork in China is usually just referred to as "meat".
implying the usual Chinese Government stupidity isn't happening.
The Chinese government maybe evil, but it's NOT stupid and they do not hate piggies. Besides, you can say that pork is the most popular meat supply in China, but it's not like that the Chinese would die without pork, chickens and beef are both fine protein supplies. Please don't attach everything that happened in China to politics.
The article explained why the crisis is much worse than it would have been if the government had acted wisely. If you disagree, then present some specific arguments, not just the vague, general one that the Chinese government is not stupid and so therefore it must have acted wisely.
"Please don't attach everything that happened in China to politics" But the article was about governmental action.
But I am going to assume you know all that and you have avoided a discussion of specifics because you know that it indeed did screw up.
"Please don't attach everything that happened in China to politics" But the article was about governmental action. So what you are trying to do is divert attention away from the government's action. My observation is in the last year or so at HN, that has become the standard tactic for China government defenders.
https://www.zhihu.com/search?type=content&q=%E9%9D%9E%E6%B4%...
I wonder if it was affected farmers keeping their competitors from getting a leg up, or some flavor of domestic terrorism.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3042122/chi...
These should cover it. Most dystopian story I've read in years!