on iphone (and maybe safari desktop, too?) you can tap to the left of the URL (the icon with a few horizontal lines) to get a non-ad view that often shows the full article, too.
Late to respond, but because outline sometimes doesn't work for me (for instance bloomberg articles), I've found it easier to just disable javascript in that tab via chrome dev tools.
Seemed a little shallow to me and focused on a small slice of the Chinese population born between 1981 and 1996 (a widely-accepted birth year range for "millenials").
During those years, there was almost no Chinese middle class. All the growth in China's urban middle class happened well after 1996.
Even with that growth, they're still greatly outnumbered by rural and working class families, whose millenial children are likely quite different from what's described in the article.
This felt like an article describing American "hipsters" who are nowhere close to a majority of their birth cohort.
I skimmed it, but didn't see much mention of something that I think is pretty big to my generation (I'm '83) in the West: counterculture, protest, etc. It's not as big as in the 1960s and 1970s had been (before I was born), but still, it was definitely a pretty big element, and LGBTQ+ and social justice seem to be important topics that affect many people here in the West. Here, much of this is expressed -- or social change is effected -- through protest culture, outrage, etc.
In China, everybody fully supports the government, don't they? I mean that what the Party does, has 100.00% approval rating at all times, there are no Facebook groups for discussing it, there is no activism protesting anything or driving for any kind of change, and everyone there just totally supports everything. (In Mainland China).
So how does this effect their youth and millennials, when they're literally 100.00% on board with everything, and there's no protest culture or counterculture of any kind?
-
EDIT: little help from downvoters? What am I missing? (It's a really genuine question about a huge difference between East/West.)
EDIT2: Thanks for the replies. I think we're all on the same page so I didn't edit my comment. We all are talking about the same facts. However, my specific question is how this effects millennial fashion, etc. (Being edgy, counterculture, etc.) In mainland China, is Millennial fashion missing these "edgy" or countercultural elements?
> In China, everybody fully supports the government, don't they? I mean that what the Party does, has 100.00% approval rating at all times, there are no Facebook groups for discussing it, there is no activism protesting anything or driving for any kind of change, and everyone there just totally supports everything. (In Mainland China).
I take issue with that description of China because any government that is in power usually is so because large numbers of its citizens supporting it.
That's something absolutely normal, as it doesn't work any other way. But with China, it's somehow made out to be something bad when the Chinese are supportive of their country and government.
Similarly: Facebook ain't the only platform for discussion and organizing, the notion that China doesn't have any such platforms, and thus no counterculture like that, is just silly.
Ridicule of the government is quite common on Chinese social media.
But then a lot of Chinese folks who cross over to Western social media find the anti-CCP sentiment to overreach (no doubt bc of the geopolitical considerations involved), and switch over to a defensive posture as a result.
Have you ever been to China? You can find yourself cornered by armed soldiers with assault rifles just for taking a photograph of the "wrong" building in a completely ordinary public thoroughfare. Dissent is literally banned and access to external social networks is cut off.
There's no way support for the government is completely genuine in such an environment.
I can name such places in Germany where the US military has jurisdiction.
Bad Aibling, with its ECHELON installation, used to be quite infamous for that because it was located in a pretty popular hiking region.
I doubt the US military is that much more lenient domestically about having their installations photographed/filmed, no military really is, and a lot of law enforcement/IP rights are neither [0].
Keep in mind you're also a (most likely) obvious foreigner taking pictures of perhaps a sensitive building in a foreign country. You don't think that given the current geopolitical climate, Asian people in the US taking pics of say, Mar-a-Lago, or a military complex or even an industrial park would sometimes run into trouble?
Also, you may have been to China, but have you ever taken the time while there to attempt to understand why there might be some support for the government? This is a country where even among the fairly young, most experienced poverty as children, where their parents and their grandparents have experienced hunger, sometimes severe famine, being invaded and conquered and brutalized by the Japanese, then civil war, and the civil strife and turmoil of the Cultural Revolution. Chinese families are close knit, most grow up living with their grandparents - these generational experiences are ingrained into the fabric of society. There's genuine and heartfelt appreciation for the recent policies and stability that has finally let a people raise themselves out from that poverty. (China in the 50's, 60's, and 70's was much poorer than Sub-Saharan Africa - per capita GDP was something from 1/2-1/3 of even places like the Congo and Zimbabwe). There is pride too, overwhelming pride in the grit and determination and hard work that has been poured into all that development and progress. Obviously, that's not to say that there isn't plenty of criticism and opposition and people making fun of aspects of the government and government policies, but the general support is not fake or coerced. I imagine it's not that different from the way a certain generation of Americans from a particular economic class saw FDR and his whole New Deal administration.
Just keep in mind that sometimes, depending on their background story and life experiences, people can see the same things in a very different light. They also have different utility curves - some might value a tootsie roll over a twix bar, some might value liberty over their own life, or some might just value stability and the opportunity to live their lives and raise their children over anything else in the world.
How does it "affect fashion, etc."? You act like China is this super isolated place where nobody knows what's happening outside of it and everybody is just a conformist wearing their state-sponsored grey unis.
When in reality Chinese people are as diverse a people as any other, they are just as influenced by Western pop-culture as any other people.
Case in point: Asian hip hop, yes even Chinese hip-hop has seen quite a rise in popularity.
They copy a ton of tropes out of the US, like most non-US hip-hop has been doing for decades, but they also inject their own Chinese identity as part of the narrative of the songs [0].
Of course, that's a rather acquired taste, but I would easily count as "counter-culture", after all that's also exactly what it started out as in the US.
"there is no activism protesting anything or driving for any kind of change,"
This isn't true. There have been several documentaries covering people trying to drive change in China that the west has documented. (Hooligan Sparrow, Ai WeiWei: Never Sorry, The Ivory Game, etc. just on Netflix alone) The problem is, these people are regularly disappeared in China and their lives are put at risk by doing this work.
In truth, most people know the chinese government, especially Xi, is behaving to preserve control first and foremost. That this benefits the chinese economically is a side effect- but now that effect is waning.
It affects how the counterculture is expressed. Look at the 996 movement for example. Things have to be done carefully, anonymously, covering your own tracks, with a sort of guerilla tactics and plausible deniability.
Or, if I can be blunt- the difference between the american idea of being edgy and contercultural and the chinese idea of being edgey and countercultural is that the government in america will not run you over with tanks if you organize a public sit down. (However, make no mistake, the government in america will eliminate dissidents of enough threat in similar ways to china- see chelsea manning or the black panther movement.)
so how does this effect clothing, dress, and behavior in public? on the surface does everyone look very compliant and homogeneous? or do they look the same and dress the same as the west? For example, do Chinese millennials use hair colors that don't occur in nature as often, etc?
"so how does this effect clothing, dress, and behavior in public?"
Of course it affects behavior in public, as well as clothing and dress. You can't openly support movements- including the wearing of logos, brans, slogans, sayings, etc.
"do Chinese millennials use hair colors that don't occur in nature as often"
I'm pretty sure dyed hair is still considered popular and fashionable in east asian cultures, given the pop bands coming out of there!
I'm guessing you're being downvoted for the pretty uninformed, tone deaf statement below.
>In China, everybody fully supports the government, don't they? I mean that what the Party does, has 100.00% approval rating at all times, there are no Facebook groups for discussing it, there is no activism protesting anything or driving for any kind of change, and everyone there just totally supports everything. (In Mainland China).
No they don't have 100% support. Where are you deriving this information?
Your point about Facebook is sort of bizarre. Are you aware that China has famously blocked Facebook?
That article explicitly states that CCP tolerates protest against non-CCP actors and issues that don't challenge their authority. The CCP supported the protest, so it was allowed.
> In China, everybody fully supports the government, don't they?
Do they? I remember a Chinese friend telling me about how elections worked in his town. When he was a student, their voting cards were checked by the teachers to make sure they supported the principal's friend. So maybe 100% support on paper, but definitely not 100% voluntary. (That's only one small part - there's definitely more opposition, not full support either way)
FWIW, my basic angle here is 'people are people'. If the board were overloaded with anti-American or anti-Russian stuff, I'd be making mostly the same points.
Eastern Europe in the 80s. Everything seemed mostly normal, everyone "supported the government", no social media, the economy went bad, people grumbled then suddenly in a year or two everything was upended.
>Now she is thinking of giving up the citizenship she worked so hard to get, and moving back to an authoritarian China where guns and drugs are strictly forbidden – at least her son would be safe.
To quote a friend, "all 'authoritarian' states (really, all states) distribute their 'authoritarianism' unevenly. that you aren't experiencing any right now doesn't mean it isn't being done, it just means you're not part of the demographic being targeted."
The commonly understood definition of "authoritarian" is pretty insufficient, since it doesn't capture non-state actors exercising authority, control or violence over your life.
Indeed. This was highlighted in the overthrow of Iraq. It was undoubtedly an authoritarian state where dissenters and minorities were murdered. However, non-dissenters from the ethnic majority were largely free to go about their business. The destruction of the state made the place entirely unsafe, with an interruption of basic food, medical and energy supplies.
The invasion happened in March 2003. Sixteen years later the country is still at war at the edges, as part of the larger Syrian civil war. Car bombs still happen in cities.
China appears to have chosen safety over freedom. The outcome is horrendous for minorities (Uighur etc), but for the majority?
(By comparison, the Chinese civil war's combat period lasted about nine years, with a wikipedia death toll of about nine million people. The war is still not formally concluded.)
Free press checkpoint RE: Iraq. They shut the internet off there last week to try and suppress ongoing protests/unrest.
It's been reported a little, but hardly wall to wall like the Hong Kong thing. Why?
Nobody sent out orders to the Anglo press about what to report, yet we still have this very marked phenomenon where the reporting takes 'the side' of Anglo world power.
It's worth thinking about for anyone who salutes the flag in between platitudes about freedom.
Because Iraq is a chaotic mess where we are generally impressed if it isn't literally exploding. It's not that shutting the internet off is acceptable, it's that compared to everything else that happens/has happened in Iraq, that's insignificant.
We hold (supposedly) functional, developed places to a higher standard in what we expect from them, and it takes smaller acts of injustice or violence to be noteworthy.
Americans generally don’t want to hear that our influence globally has been replaced by a combination of deference to autocratic regimes (the whole Russia / Turkey / Syria situation) or direct antagonism of rising powers (China, Iran).
I think Trump’s legacy will be as the symbol of American decline. He represents a hollowing out of core institutions that started long before him, but his presidency will be remembered as the time when the world realized American hegemony was over.
Yeah, that's my point. That's actually the only place I saw it reported. I checked the WP, NYT and Fox News that day after seeing it here. Nothing. Maybe there was a story hidden in the back that I couldn't find, of course.
Compare to the absolute deluge of HK stories across all media sources.
Minor correction about Iraq: ethnicity isn't that big a deal, religion is. Saddam and his government were Sunni muslims, the majority (2:1) are Shiite (both are predominately Arabs), with other tiny minorities making up the rest (Kurdish, Yezidi etc).
That's true, but I don't know if Slavs are comparable to Arabs. There are different Slavic ethnic groups with very distinct languages. Arabs are one ethnic group with one language, but part of the Semitic family.
I suppose the Sunni/Shia conflict has an ethnic component with the Persians mostly being Shiites, while most Arabs are Sunni.
Not convinced. According to arabs I know, they hardly understand each other at all if they are from to far away countries and never learned the "formal" form.
Yes, and remember that Iraq was already bombed from the richest third world country to the middle ages by the US army in 1990, which then blockaded the country, resulting in an estimated death of half a million children in the following 5-6 years...
> Now she is thinking of giving up the citizenship she worked so hard to get, and moving back to an authoritarian China where guns and drugs are strictly forbidden – at least her son would be safe.
> To quote a friend, "all 'authoritarian' states (really, all states) distribute their 'authoritarianism' unevenly. that you aren't experiencing any right now doesn't mean it isn't being done, it just means you're not part of the demographic being targeted."
Freedom is also not distributed evenly. The powerful can use freedom as a means to their ends all the while justifying everyone else's failures as their own choice since they had the 'freedom' to achieve the same for themselves. Just my 2 cents.
As a soon to be expat to Singapore, I am in agreement with the first quote. While I can understand the values and culture here, I am also not too fond of unfettered freedom where people think public infrastructure belongs to them rather than as a shared good that everyone has the responsibility to take care of. Furthermore, the immediate reaction to any government involvement as 'socialism/communism' to shut down a discussion is honestly quite tiring and annoying now.
> where people think public infrastructure belongs to them rather than as a shared good that everyone has the responsibility to take care of.
I do not understand how they are mutually exclusive. I personally believe I am responsible for what belongs to me, and I take care of my belongings. Is it really just me? I do not believe that. Plus, if they do not care about their belongings, what makes you think they will care about them if you claim that it is a "shared good", or how is this supposed to work?
They seem to be having a good time and some old man is uneasy about it. Nothing to see here.
The thing about uneasy old men, is they are happy only if everyone shares their uneasiness or someone shows up and holds their hand and tells them everything will be all right. If neither happens they get more and more cranky.
I have no idea what you’re referring to. Have we read the same article? I haven’t seen the part where the author expresses that they are uneasy about millennials, the whole article is mostly descriptive.
"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."
I'm not Chinese, and this article seems too...broad? I guess you can say anything about Millenials from anywhere, with condescending tone, and get pageviews.
Just an overall impression, in the idea that "Millenials are this", "Millenials are that". Most of the times when someone frames a group of people into common characteristics, it sounds condescending to me.
But that was a real cohort with an actual cause (soldiers returning home from WWII and starting families, leading to a large increase in births in the decade following 1945). Later generations called Generation X and Millennials are much more arbitrary because there isn't really a defined cause for their existence.
If the complaint is the name, as you seem to be suggesting, then pick whatever name you wish. If the complaint is that not everybody of a given age should be lumped together as one, then that's as true of any generation than any other.
Either way, Millennials are not being singled out.
While I don't think people born in the same time are all the same, the fact is a lot of Baby Boomers had at least a shared experience in having a father who came back from the war. I don't think there is anything comparable for us GenXers (who were basically defined as "not Baby Boomers") and the Millennials when the marketers realized the GenX term was going on for too long.
If I'm getting my dates right, "Baby Boomers" includes both the hippies who were shot at Kent State and the law-and-order types doing the shooting, so to speak. I still think that your objection applies as much to other generations as to Millennials, and that in all cases, the labels are shorthand for a very rough approximation of shared experience.
As for Gen X, the X is lazy, for sure. What we have in common are Baby Boomer parents.
Oh not even that. The older GenXers like myself (born 1970) have "Silent Generation" (1925-1944) parents that were born before or during the war (a rather small generation as the Depression and war weren't great times to have kids in). My parents were never hippies nor did my father face the risk of being sent to Vietnam -- they were too old for either.
The issue is that the boom went on for 30 years, so it's even more problematic to lump them in the same generation as the current 18-40 year old millennials.
I concur. The writing also somehow lacks much depth, at the start it addresses how they crazily follow the son of a rich and his lavish style then jumps out and turns back on money and work ethics without much thoughts on this. He seems just casually drifts around in any issue he can pen on.
A side note, Pornhub also is often praised on reddit for less toxic comments than like youtube
The weird thing to me is that it's not like the term "Millennial" was self-adopted by the generation it describes. It was pretty much involuntarily assigned to them. And the word alone just has such a lightning rod quality to it.
> They were offered free software that would enable them to dodge the Great Firewall of China – which blocks almost all major Western news sites and social media outlets – and browse the internet without restrictions. There was some surprise when it turned out that even elite students in China had little interest in finding out what Westerners were thinking. Only 53 per cent of the participants had activated the software (even after repeated reminders), and about 14 per cent of the ones who had activated it uninstalled it shortly afterwards. Active users were browsing content which wasn’t political.
If you’re a University student randomly offered “free software” to bypass the firewall of course you’re going to be acutely aware that your activity is still being monitored. Probably monitored even closer than usual. I’m not sure their browsing habits really indicate their interests in that scenario.
> I’m not sure their browsing habits really indicate their interests in that scenario.
You should read the actual study [1] then. E.g. "when news on the Panama
Papers broke (the week of April 4th, 2016) and when President Trump called the President of Taiwan (the
week of December 5th, 2016) — two of the highest news peaks during the experiment — Group-AE students
increased their weekly browsing time on the New York Times by 157% and 180% compared to their average
consumption, respectively. Overall, a 10% increase in the share of politically sensitive articles published corresponds to students spending 1.8 more minutes on the website during that week."
This is an even bigger joke if you know that residential areas of the 2 biggest Unis in Beijing have built-in VPNs allowing you to access google anyays :)
Go to Beijing. Go to one of the two best universities. Go to the residential area. Connect to wifi. Go to google.com. This worked at least 6 months ago and a student active confirmed that its how it has always been.
My limited understanding of how this works from reading descriptions by others is any registered organizational entity can apply to the CCP for an organization-wide VPN for approved purposes. But the CCP maintains the right to MITM the VPN and snoop your traffic to their hearts' content. I don't see how they can inspect your traffic in the clear though, without coercing you to install their VPN software in order to use a VPN appliance they supply/approve to forcibly modify your browser to accept their certificates, so I'm confused on just how much they can snoop.
You might be thinking that the majority of Chinese are constantly under the fear of being monitored. The reality is people don't care and use VPN all the time. You might've heard people get in trouble using VPN in China. Many of you assume that's the norm. At least for now it's not. It would be like people from other countries heard there are shootings in U.S. schools and assume there are shootings in every U.S. school every day.
Apologies, I wasn’t trying to insinuate the students feared monitoring. For example, when I use the internet at work I’m not afraid of being monitored by my employer but I’m definitely aware that my activity could be monitored. And it does change my behavior to some degree.
How much time do westerners spend on the Chinese internet? How much relevance does either set of sites have to someone living in the other hemisphere?
I find myself barely-remembering most western sites while I'm in China for even a couple of weeks, and language issues (mostly) keep me from spending much time on Chinese sites while I'm in the USA.
Based on my experience as a Westerner making trips to China, I find this VPN anecdote unsurprising.
Every once in a while I baidu search something to see if there are any results that are totally different than on western search engines. I have never heard of any of my friends, coworkers, or family doing this so it's probably really uncommon.
The truth is that censorship is terrifyingly powerful as most people won't work around it. This is why we must be extraordinarily vigilant in defending our freedom and attacking those who would take it away or those who have taken it away in their countries (Communist Party of China which is now a dictatorship).
Boycott the NBA and Blizzard and support those such as South Park who fight back
Why not? Chinese people use Instagram, too. This post by a Chinese celebrity has more than 800k comments, most of them in Chinese: https://www.instagram.com/p/B1HRZMWHPvc/
Instagram is pretty much the reason 99% of the females even scale the GFW.
Generally they hate talking about politics, and actively avoid the "smears" outside the GFW.
That's why the recent pro-China posters are often deemed bots for being inactive or new, they don't like Twitter coz it's full of fake news and smears to them.
As an American I would be somewhat alarmed by the claim that the Chinese millennials are not "rebellious" or anti-their-government.
But as someone born on the African continent I would shrug this off as a mistranslation between Marx & Lenin, Inc. and both the East and Africa. When communism came to Africa the response was: "Oh, you mean tribalism." I suspect that the East may have had a similar mistranslation in the gears turning China way back in the early 20th century.
Spoiler alert: generations are fiction used to quantify cultural behavior during a specific period of time. "millenials" is a very American idea now being applied to a completely different culture.
> They were offered free software that would enable them to dodge the Great Firewall of China – which blocks almost all major Western news sites and social media outlets – and browse the internet without restrictions. There was some surprise when it turned out that even elite students in China had little interest in finding out what Westerners were thinking. Only 53 per cent of the participants had activated the software (even after repeated reminders), and about 14 per cent of the ones who had activated it uninstalled it shortly afterwards. Active users were browsing content which wasn’t political.
People usually don't care very much about what foreigners think, particularly such a nationalistic people as the Chinese, who AFAIK often think that the West is using anti-Chinese propaganda. Not many Westerners would actively browse Chinese or Indian sites to see their perspective either.
Edit: One might think that the fact that the content is censored might make people curious, but I don't think that is the case if the people support the censorship. In my country, Holocaust denial is illegal, but that motivates few people to read the arguments of Holocaust deniers. Admittedly, the Chinese censorship might be more effective than the German one, making people more curious.
This article comes off as an anti-western propaganda piece. No mention of any of the serious problems China has or what Chinese Millennials think about them. Imho, the article seems to suggest that prior to Millennials substantial progress was being made on any and all relative fronts and now progress has become stagnant. However, I believe that in reality, all of the problems Millennials are facing were generated by previous generations. So is the author just frustrated that these Millennials aren't fixing all of his generations mistakes?
For a more close-up perspective, I recommend “Wish Lanterns: Young Lives in New China.” The author (himself a Western millennial) interviews and visits with six different Chinese young people over a period of years, discussing their goals, aspirations, worries and responsibilities.
110 comments
[ 0.23 ms ] story [ 101 ms ] threadDuring those years, there was almost no Chinese middle class. All the growth in China's urban middle class happened well after 1996.
Even with that growth, they're still greatly outnumbered by rural and working class families, whose millenial children are likely quite different from what's described in the article.
This felt like an article describing American "hipsters" who are nowhere close to a majority of their birth cohort.
In China, everybody fully supports the government, don't they? I mean that what the Party does, has 100.00% approval rating at all times, there are no Facebook groups for discussing it, there is no activism protesting anything or driving for any kind of change, and everyone there just totally supports everything. (In Mainland China).
So how does this effect their youth and millennials, when they're literally 100.00% on board with everything, and there's no protest culture or counterculture of any kind?
-
EDIT: little help from downvoters? What am I missing? (It's a really genuine question about a huge difference between East/West.)
EDIT2: Thanks for the replies. I think we're all on the same page so I didn't edit my comment. We all are talking about the same facts. However, my specific question is how this effects millennial fashion, etc. (Being edgy, counterculture, etc.) In mainland China, is Millennial fashion missing these "edgy" or countercultural elements?
I take issue with that description of China because any government that is in power usually is so because large numbers of its citizens supporting it.
That's something absolutely normal, as it doesn't work any other way. But with China, it's somehow made out to be something bad when the Chinese are supportive of their country and government.
Similarly: Facebook ain't the only platform for discussion and organizing, the notion that China doesn't have any such platforms, and thus no counterculture like that, is just silly.
But then a lot of Chinese folks who cross over to Western social media find the anti-CCP sentiment to overreach (no doubt bc of the geopolitical considerations involved), and switch over to a defensive posture as a result.
There's no way support for the government is completely genuine in such an environment.
Name a place in any USA city where you will be detained and your equipment confiscated for taking pictures from a public thoroughfare.
Bad Aibling, with its ECHELON installation, used to be quite infamous for that because it was located in a pretty popular hiking region.
I doubt the US military is that much more lenient domestically about having their installations photographed/filmed, no military really is, and a lot of law enforcement/IP rights are neither [0].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law
Also, you may have been to China, but have you ever taken the time while there to attempt to understand why there might be some support for the government? This is a country where even among the fairly young, most experienced poverty as children, where their parents and their grandparents have experienced hunger, sometimes severe famine, being invaded and conquered and brutalized by the Japanese, then civil war, and the civil strife and turmoil of the Cultural Revolution. Chinese families are close knit, most grow up living with their grandparents - these generational experiences are ingrained into the fabric of society. There's genuine and heartfelt appreciation for the recent policies and stability that has finally let a people raise themselves out from that poverty. (China in the 50's, 60's, and 70's was much poorer than Sub-Saharan Africa - per capita GDP was something from 1/2-1/3 of even places like the Congo and Zimbabwe). There is pride too, overwhelming pride in the grit and determination and hard work that has been poured into all that development and progress. Obviously, that's not to say that there isn't plenty of criticism and opposition and people making fun of aspects of the government and government policies, but the general support is not fake or coerced. I imagine it's not that different from the way a certain generation of Americans from a particular economic class saw FDR and his whole New Deal administration.
Just keep in mind that sometimes, depending on their background story and life experiences, people can see the same things in a very different light. They also have different utility curves - some might value a tootsie roll over a twix bar, some might value liberty over their own life, or some might just value stability and the opportunity to live their lives and raise their children over anything else in the world.
Unfortunately when dissent is explicitly illegal, opinion polls are scientifically invalid. That's the CCP's choice, not external propaganda.
When in reality Chinese people are as diverse a people as any other, they are just as influenced by Western pop-culture as any other people.
Case in point: Asian hip hop, yes even Chinese hip-hop has seen quite a rise in popularity.
They copy a ton of tropes out of the US, like most non-US hip-hop has been doing for decades, but they also inject their own Chinese identity as part of the narrative of the songs [0].
Of course, that's a rather acquired taste, but I would easily count as "counter-culture", after all that's also exactly what it started out as in the US.
[0] https://youtu.be/rILKm-DC06A
This isn't true. There have been several documentaries covering people trying to drive change in China that the west has documented. (Hooligan Sparrow, Ai WeiWei: Never Sorry, The Ivory Game, etc. just on Netflix alone) The problem is, these people are regularly disappeared in China and their lives are put at risk by doing this work.
In truth, most people know the chinese government, especially Xi, is behaving to preserve control first and foremost. That this benefits the chinese economically is a side effect- but now that effect is waning.
that's what I mean. how does this effect fashion?
Or, if I can be blunt- the difference between the american idea of being edgy and contercultural and the chinese idea of being edgey and countercultural is that the government in america will not run you over with tanks if you organize a public sit down. (However, make no mistake, the government in america will eliminate dissidents of enough threat in similar ways to china- see chelsea manning or the black panther movement.)
Of course it affects behavior in public, as well as clothing and dress. You can't openly support movements- including the wearing of logos, brans, slogans, sayings, etc.
"do Chinese millennials use hair colors that don't occur in nature as often"
I'm pretty sure dyed hair is still considered popular and fashionable in east asian cultures, given the pop bands coming out of there!
>In China, everybody fully supports the government, don't they? I mean that what the Party does, has 100.00% approval rating at all times, there are no Facebook groups for discussing it, there is no activism protesting anything or driving for any kind of change, and everyone there just totally supports everything. (In Mainland China).
No they don't have 100% support. Where are you deriving this information?
Your point about Facebook is sort of bizarre. Are you aware that China has famously blocked Facebook?
There is activism, too. For example https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qidong_protest
Are you familiar with the Tiananmen Square protest?
Do they? I remember a Chinese friend telling me about how elections worked in his town. When he was a student, their voting cards were checked by the teachers to make sure they supported the principal's friend. So maybe 100% support on paper, but definitely not 100% voluntary. (That's only one small part - there's definitely more opposition, not full support either way)
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
FWIW, my basic angle here is 'people are people'. If the board were overloaded with anti-American or anti-Russian stuff, I'd be making mostly the same points.
To quote a friend, "all 'authoritarian' states (really, all states) distribute their 'authoritarianism' unevenly. that you aren't experiencing any right now doesn't mean it isn't being done, it just means you're not part of the demographic being targeted."
The commonly understood definition of "authoritarian" is pretty insufficient, since it doesn't capture non-state actors exercising authority, control or violence over your life.
The invasion happened in March 2003. Sixteen years later the country is still at war at the edges, as part of the larger Syrian civil war. Car bombs still happen in cities.
China appears to have chosen safety over freedom. The outcome is horrendous for minorities (Uighur etc), but for the majority?
(By comparison, the Chinese civil war's combat period lasted about nine years, with a wikipedia death toll of about nine million people. The war is still not formally concluded.)
It's been reported a little, but hardly wall to wall like the Hong Kong thing. Why?
Nobody sent out orders to the Anglo press about what to report, yet we still have this very marked phenomenon where the reporting takes 'the side' of Anglo world power.
It's worth thinking about for anyone who salutes the flag in between platitudes about freedom.
Because Iraq is a chaotic mess where we are generally impressed if it isn't literally exploding. It's not that shutting the internet off is acceptable, it's that compared to everything else that happens/has happened in Iraq, that's insignificant.
We hold (supposedly) functional, developed places to a higher standard in what we expect from them, and it takes smaller acts of injustice or violence to be noteworthy.
I think Trump’s legacy will be as the symbol of American decline. He represents a hollowing out of core institutions that started long before him, but his presidency will be remembered as the time when the world realized American hegemony was over.
They didn't sound surprised to me. They sounded elated and fulfilled that they were right about the 'bad guys'.
News stories spread because people want to click them. Nobody wants to hear about Iraq, it's a bummer and a reminder that they probably supported it.
The other, though? Tell me how bad they are!
Compare to the absolute deluge of HK stories across all media sources.
I am more familiar with Yugoslavia. Look at the Serbs and the Croats. They are both Slavs.
Yet the war was hardly over Orthodox Christianity (Serbs) vs Catholic Christianity (Croats).
I suppose the Sunni/Shia conflict has an ethnic component with the Persians mostly being Shiites, while most Arabs are Sunni.
> To quote a friend, "all 'authoritarian' states (really, all states) distribute their 'authoritarianism' unevenly. that you aren't experiencing any right now doesn't mean it isn't being done, it just means you're not part of the demographic being targeted."
Freedom is also not distributed evenly. The powerful can use freedom as a means to their ends all the while justifying everyone else's failures as their own choice since they had the 'freedom' to achieve the same for themselves. Just my 2 cents.
As a soon to be expat to Singapore, I am in agreement with the first quote. While I can understand the values and culture here, I am also not too fond of unfettered freedom where people think public infrastructure belongs to them rather than as a shared good that everyone has the responsibility to take care of. Furthermore, the immediate reaction to any government involvement as 'socialism/communism' to shut down a discussion is honestly quite tiring and annoying now.
I do not understand how they are mutually exclusive. I personally believe I am responsible for what belongs to me, and I take care of my belongings. Is it really just me? I do not believe that. Plus, if they do not care about their belongings, what makes you think they will care about them if you claim that it is a "shared good", or how is this supposed to work?
The thing about uneasy old men, is they are happy only if everyone shares their uneasiness or someone shows up and holds their hand and tells them everything will be all right. If neither happens they get more and more cranky.
The article is about men and women.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I so rarely see the anti-"Millennial" crowd complain about the term "Baby Boomer"; usually it's the opposite, in fact.
Either way, Millennials are not being singled out.
Signed, a reluctant member of GenX.
As for Gen X, the X is lazy, for sure. What we have in common are Baby Boomer parents.
A side note, Pornhub also is often praised on reddit for less toxic comments than like youtube
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/millennials-to-sna...
If you’re a University student randomly offered “free software” to bypass the firewall of course you’re going to be acutely aware that your activity is still being monitored. Probably monitored even closer than usual. I’m not sure their browsing habits really indicate their interests in that scenario.
You should read the actual study [1] then. E.g. "when news on the Panama Papers broke (the week of April 4th, 2016) and when President Trump called the President of Taiwan (the week of December 5th, 2016) — two of the highest news peaks during the experiment — Group-AE students increased their weekly browsing time on the New York Times by 157% and 180% compared to their average consumption, respectively. Overall, a 10% increase in the share of politically sensitive articles published corresponds to students spending 1.8 more minutes on the website during that week."
[1] http://as.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu-as/econ/documents/2018-fal...
The study (or rather, an article based on the study) was discussed on HN before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20233268
Can you elaborate?
So how do these "approved VPN's" really work?
I find myself barely-remembering most western sites while I'm in China for even a couple of weeks, and language issues (mostly) keep me from spending much time on Chinese sites while I'm in the USA.
Based on my experience as a Westerner making trips to China, I find this VPN anecdote unsurprising.
Boycott the NBA and Blizzard and support those such as South Park who fight back
Really? On Instagram?
Generally they hate talking about politics, and actively avoid the "smears" outside the GFW.
That's why the recent pro-China posters are often deemed bots for being inactive or new, they don't like Twitter coz it's full of fake news and smears to them.
But as someone born on the African continent I would shrug this off as a mistranslation between Marx & Lenin, Inc. and both the East and Africa. When communism came to Africa the response was: "Oh, you mean tribalism." I suspect that the East may have had a similar mistranslation in the gears turning China way back in the early 20th century.
People usually don't care very much about what foreigners think, particularly such a nationalistic people as the Chinese, who AFAIK often think that the West is using anti-Chinese propaganda. Not many Westerners would actively browse Chinese or Indian sites to see their perspective either.
Edit: One might think that the fact that the content is censored might make people curious, but I don't think that is the case if the people support the censorship. In my country, Holocaust denial is illegal, but that motivates few people to read the arguments of Holocaust deniers. Admittedly, the Chinese censorship might be more effective than the German one, making people more curious.
https://www.amazon.com/Wish-Lanterns-Young-Lives-China/dp/16...