Young people in China are becoming more rebellious, questioning their nation’s traditional expectations of career and family

  • Grogon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    183
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    It’s interesting because people are people and it doesn’t matter where you are born.

    If you look at it from a birds eye view you will see a younger, smart generation trying to fight it’s own governments.

    It’s not USA vs China vs Russia vs Europe etc. it is the younger generation vs the old generation. Currently each generation is fighting it’s own government and slowly realising how poor they have done in the last decades.

    Nobody wants war.

    • DessertStorms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      118
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      t’s not USA vs China vs Russia vs Europe etc. it is the younger generation vs the old generation

      No, it’s owning class vs working class, anything else is a distraction in service of the owning class.

      Workers of the world, unite! ✊

      (edited in image. If you need image description - source)

      • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Even marxists don’t simplify the classes as much as that diagram suggests. It’s missing peasants, artisans and the petty bourgeois. It’s also never been as simple as capitalist vs working class. Capitalists regularly fight amongst themselves as do the working class. This whole idea of class struggle being the only struggle is so oversimplified it’s kinda silly.

        I don’t think it’s honest to frame it in generational language either btw. Though that is a component of it.

        • DessertStorms@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Imagine that - an infograph gives a concise summery of a larger idea… 🤯

          Either way - it is really that simple and splitting the working class in to splinter groups is just another division, which again - only serves the owning class. Them fighting amongst themselves is irrelevant, they’ve been united enough to maintain this system for centuries because they have the same goal - stay in power, make as much money as possible. If that happens via collaboration one week, then they’ll collaborate that week, if it means they need to go to war the next week, then they will, and have been, doing exactly that.

          In contrast, as long as the working class stays divided (along race, gender, ability, and even “work level” or whatever you’d call the division you’ve brought up) we will never be free.

          I’m the furthest thing from a class reductionist, and I think intersectionality is vital, but all of the systemic barriers we face (racism, sexism, ableism, querrphobia, and so on) exist to serve capitalism and those who benefit from it. That doesn’t mean those systems don’t need addressing, but part of doing that is understanding why they exist, and how they serve to divide us.

          Seriously, what end could splitting hairs over “peasants” or “artisans” possibly serve (And are those hundreds of years old terms even relevant in our world with our technology?)? Even the petit bourgeois is oppressed by the owning class, the system convincing them that a “middle class” exists is part of the fucking con, and the whole fucking point is to see how irrelevant these semantics are and fucking unite so that we can have a better society for everyone… 🤦‍♀️

          • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Seriously, what end could splitting hairs over “peasants” or “artisans” possibly serve (And are those hundreds of years old terms even relevant in our world with our technology?)? Even the petit bourgeois is oppressed by the owning class, the system convincing them that a “middle class” exists is part of the fucking con, and the whole fucking point is to see how irrelevant these semantics are and fucking unite so that we can have a better society for everyone… 🤦‍♀️

            You haven’t read marxist or anarchist theories very well if this is what you think.

            Artisans are any one man business. They don’t have employers to exploit them that’s why they are an important class in marxist analysis.

            Petty bourgeois aren’t middle class necessarily; it refers to small business owners. They are exploiters of the workers beneath them while being exploited by others. Small time land lords would be petit bourgeois for example. These people are in essence part of the “owner class” because they own a business or building.

            Peasants are not considered to be a revolutionary class because they aren’t the proletariat. Not a problem in western societies but some countries still have peasants.

            all of the systemic barriers we face (racism, sexism, ableism, querrphobia, and so on) exist to serve capitalism and those who benefit from it.

            You don’t think racism affects business owners or landlords? Or sexism? Or anything else?

            This is the kind of assertion given without evidence that made me leave marxists behind. I am sick to death of people claiming all these problems are because of capitalism. If anything capitalism has helped address some of these issues like sexism because women not working is bad for the system. In fact not fully utilizing people because of prejudice in general is bad for capitalism which is all about efficiency and exploitation.

            Edit: also policy regarding peasants is one area where marxism and anarchism differ significantly from what little I understand of anarchism.

        • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          This whole idea of class struggle being the only struggle is so oversimplified it’s kinda silly.

          There’s nothing wrong with a simplified model if it gets you the results you’re looking for. And for the vast majority of the working class thinking in simplistic terms such as capitalist vs. worker would improve their lives tremendously.

          The more complex models might be useful for explaining how things change and evolve. But mainly complexity is introduced by capitalists (or capitalist simps) to sow discord among workers and keep us from organizing effectively.

          • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Why are all the marxists coming out of the wood work? Y’all can’t run a society for shit. Why are you still here and existing?

            China was one of your experiments that went wrong. Go and build a working model for a socialist or communist society and I might listen. Until then you have nothing to add. Anarchists had better luck than you guys and you killed them for it.

            • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              I mean, call me whatever you want. It’s irrelevant. Do you need my vote or not? If you don’t then ignore me. If you do then pay attention.

    • extant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I’m waiting for Gen Z to realize that they’ve grown up interconnected and have the ability to coordinate like no one ever could before and when they realize that I expect them to flip the monopoly board.

      • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        52
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        This is exactly why the billionaires are dismantling the current social media platforms. Organizing is the only threat they truly fear.

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          11 months ago

          As phrased in a recent anti-union campaign by Amazon: Watch out, your co-workers might be “vulnerable to organizing”.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          11 months ago

          Can you expand on how billionaires are dismantling social media?

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              17
              ·
              11 months ago

              No. I don’t see how it was “dismantled.” Can you explain?

              • BURN@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                11 months ago

                Rate limiting and heavily pushed “premium” options have made Twitter near useless for large scale organizing.

                • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  This is just repeating the claim. Can you explain how so?

      • daltotron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        11 months ago

        I am of Gen Z. The opposite is true, I would think. Or, rather, the truth is more complicated in both directions. It’s not true to say we’ve “grown up interconnected”, by the 2010’s, most of the mainstream culture was basically gone. You had maybe the marvel movies, but, you know, social media, the internet, kind of revealed a self-evident truth. That there wasn’t a grand a unifying “american culture”. At the very least, such a thing had been waning for a long time, but the counter-cultural movements of the 90’s could still be considered a unifying culture of gen X, and elder millennials. Lots of people watched MTV. The closest thing zoomers have is stuff like mr beast, or kai cenat, which we might all be tangentially aware of, but we’ve all become atomized, there’s a limited number of zoomers who watch that and that’s not “the culture”. There is less genuine engagement with a “the culture”, and more awareness of a variety of subcultures, of a broadness.

        You know, along those lines, there’s also a lack of ability to coordinate. We can “coordinate”, yes, you can use social media to DM and communicate with other people, but you’re doing so at great risk. Basically every social media site now, of the major ones, is a fed honeypot, and you can be banned at any time for any truly revolutionary action or coordination. Your coordination is also easily trackable and visible and thus easily co-opted, corporatized, destroyed. I would’ve thought that tech literacy would’ve gone up with Gen-Z, you know, kind of along the same lines as a fish swims in water, but, you know, owing to that same metaphor, what the fuck is water, david foster wallace style. I don’t know shit about that guy other than that single joke. The kids have no tech literacy, because everything has been crafted to be easily accessible, and simplified, by the companies that now control the internet.

        I think the only shot really is if the tech oligopoly is broken up, and not just in terms of regulation, like what the FTC does, but it has to be bred out. The environment and technology must change in such a way as to no longer allow those sorts of fiefdoms. Tech adoption must happen that eliminates that. Which it kind of can’t, because the technology is still subject to all the material conditions and market forces, but then we’re kind of encountering a chicken and egg problem. Fediverse is pretty good as a solution but we’ve seen limited buy-in, partially as a result of the conceit of the thing, and I think, you know, if we don’t learn any lessons from the classic internet (we won’t), we could just see some fediverse instance, a singular instance, get uber-popular, and then just kind of separate from all the others after they’ve grown to encompass the whole thing. Migrate away, bam, new monopoly, just as happened in days past.

        In any case, the environment must change, tech literacy, media literacy, all the literacies must rise, and then I think we would be primed to flip the chess board. I would say that Gen Alpha might be the ones primed for it, but I think, you know. They’re all like, the true Ipad kids, that are condemned to watch youtube kids content, which is the most reprehensible shit imaginable, with the worst of millenial parenting that I’ve seen. Maybe number blocks and alpha-blocks and bluey will save everyone, but I kind of doubt it somehow, the millenials seem a little bit too fucked up to break the cycle and I kind of don’t really want to see what happens when a bunch of Gen Z parents who watch mr beast and can breathe in the polluted water start having kids. You know, I think the reaction is going to be much the same generation to generation, in terms of people who uncritically propagate the same shit, people who are nihilistic and angry at everything and take it out on their kids, and people who do their best to give the best to their kids and end up sheltering their kids in the process. I dunno. I kind of hope I’m wrong.

        Also climate change is happening at a really good clip so that’s maybe a bigger priority, cause unless that gets stopped, then this is all a moot point.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        I would expect nothing of the sort. They’re already been misdirected into the blanket “boomers bad” mentality, that all the old people living in poverty are somehow to blame for all their ills.

        The ruling class will continue to rule, because they know exactly how to manipulate the plebs.

        • Kingofthezyx@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Of course it’s the super rich, but who is voting for policies that support the super rich? It’s not young people.

          • Blackmist@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            11 months ago

            Well the young don’t vote at all most of the time.

            But when was the last time you saw a party with policies that didn’t support the super rich? Since Reagan, no matter if the president wears a red or blue tie, the rich have gotten richer.

            The only choice is how much poorer the poor get, with a side order of “other” hate. When the Zoomers are 50, don’t worry. There’ll be a whole new bunch of “others” to hate on, to distract them from the fact that they can just barely pay the rent. The boomers thought they’d be different too. Peace and love and hippies and Woodstock. Gen Z will be no different.

            • daltotron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              Peace and love and hippies and Woodstock. Gen Z will be no different.

              This but with the emphasis on the people who got fucking killed or put in prison or aged out of the ability for revolutionary action, while the rest of them kind of, left those guys to rot in jail, and went on to just exist passively in the system, and purport the same hippie mentalities, and then get sorted, just the same as last time. Power corrupts and is magnetic to the easily corruptible.

              You know, I do wonder if, as the contradiction builds, and the farce kind of becomes more obvious, with like, the starbucks pride month rainbow logo while they also crush their unions, I wonder if everyone will make progress along that, as the marxists kind of tend to predict, with the whole “capital contains the seeds of it’s own destruction” spiel. I dunno. I think probably people don’t give a shit about contradiction though and are free to just keep living with a totally normalized cognitive dissonance.

        • deur@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Haha okay dude, you’re clearly out of touch with the youth these days. Gen Z says “okay boomer” and that’s pretty much it en masse. Gen Z is however not putting up with corporate bullshit as much.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s kinda been that way since the internet has been readily available.

    • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Idk, if I was young and rich I probably wouldn’t give a shit about changing anything. I’d maybe even invest in anything that promised to keep things the same

      • speaker_hat@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s EXACTLY what they do - invest I’m anything that promised to keep things the same, this is our salary.

    • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Boomers want a war.

      I actually think that the biggest damage the parents of the Boomers committed was glorifying their war stories. Don’t get me wrong, I probably would have too so I’m not saying this out of judgement. But I think the Boomers grew up feeling like the only way to prove themselves was to fight as hard as their parents did. And when there weren’t any Nazis to be found, they found fights with anybody they could.

      … including their own children.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    123
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Amazing arc, like watching the last 120 years in the US compressed down to a couple decades. From rural to industrial powerhouse to the kids going “fuck this shit”.

    What’s next?

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s like watching a speedrun: Capitalism any%.

      Next? Some of them have to be thinking “wait, this is a communist country, isn’t it?”

      • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        48
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I don’t think anyone think of China as a communist/socialist country for a very long time. Maybe except older generations and tankies.

        Ironically, I have met more tankies in six month on lemmy than my 18 years growing up in China. It is truly a wild culture shock that I didn’t expect. LOL.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          A “tankie” isn’t a communist anymore than an American Republican wants individual freedom.

          Anyone that supports China is going to say it’s communist, and anyone from the right shitting on China is going to say they’re communist.

          But both groups are pretty much the same and no one should listen to either

          • maynarkh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            My pet conspiracy theory is that a bunch of tankies are actually CIA trolls, in an effort to tie criticism of the US together with completely bonkers causes. The end goal being that if you think the US is not the best thing ever, you must be a tankie, and you support authoritarian regimes like Iran and China.

            • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Some of the tankie(bots) I have argued with on here are so contrarian that it seems that way to me, as well. They don’t try to argue in good faith, and they never concede no matter how much they are proven wrong. I wouldn’t be surprised if at least some of them are bots or bad actors either from the CIA, China, or Russia.

          • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            The CCP doesn’t even claim that China is communist though. Idk where you’re getting that from.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              The CCP doesn’t even claim that China is communist though

              Can I get a source for the communist party of China saying they’re not communists?

              • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                The CCP are communists though. There is no denying that. That doesn’t mean they think China is a communist country. Communism to them doesn’t just mean the communists are in power. Communism to them is more of an ideal they aim to work towards.

                • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  That’s not a source…

                  And it’s like saying American Republican voters want personal freedom.

                  It doesn’t matter what someone says if their actions are the opposite

        • xep@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Without draconian censorship you can’t really replicate the experience of Chinese social media. I mean, I’m sure I’d be able to say things like sprinkling pepper 撒胡椒面 or facilitating commerce while loosening my clothing 通商宽衣.

          Just doesn’t feel the same.

    • Moira_Mayhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Fascism of course, just like we are heading towards.

      To be clear, I violently oppose fascism, just that it seems to be to historical outcome of socially disconnected youth about the time they hit adulthood. Those disaffected youth become the audience that charismatic dictator-wannabes can manipulate.

      China MAY be able to avoid this as their social controls are far more strict but with the internet and how tech savvy the disaffected Chinese youth are, this isn’t a guarantee.

      • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yes blame the “youth” when the average age of our politicians is 65. Makes perfect sense.

          • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            What you mean like the fucking Boomers who keep voting for these pieces of shit? Yeah I agree.

          • Moira_Mayhem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yes this is true but there is nothing you can do to fix gullible people so no action can be taken to mitigate their idiocy.

            I don’t care about blame, I just want to stop our nation from falling into fascism.

        • Moira_Mayhem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          They’re going to be dead soon from old age, I’m more worried about all the gamergaters and magapedes that will be old enough to vote this year and all the elections afterward.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        China is already essentially an authoritarian dictatorship. There’s no big leap to fascism for them, they just need to fetishize the military and act more nationalistic than they already do. They’re already prejudicial, blaming minorities within for all sorts of problems, attempting to control speech and thought, etc.

        • Moira_Mayhem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          China has other problems right now which is why they are playing nice, they’re heading into a population collapse and it’s gonna be real messy.

          They already fetishize the military and are nationalistic AF, but they also have leadership more invested in the status quo than becoming the dominant military, so their new weapons are finance and trade instead of bombs and bullets. That said, they have a FUCKTONNE of bombs and bullets and MILLIONS of people willing to use them.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      94
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Its just a generic filler article that gets posted about young people every year or two.

      “Quiet Quitting” was the thing in 2022.

      “Great Resignation” was the thing in 2021

      You can find articles about this in 2019, 2016, omfg all over the place in the wake of 2008, “Jobless Recovery” from 2004 to 2006, in the 90s it was “Slackers” and in the 80s it was “Punks” and in the 70s and 60s it was “Hippies” and then back to Beatniks and Anarchists and of course, the old crowd favorite, Pinko Commies.

      This is just a more recent mash up of the “China Bad” and “Nobody Wants To Work Anymore” meme

    • Jessvj93@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Can say I’ve definitely “stopped striving”, don’t know if it’s from Long Covid, living paycheck to paycheck cause my pay gets min/maxed for the business, personal infighting thanks to Fox News and Republican bullshit tearing apart and killing families over vaccinations, or maybe it’s just the weather 🤷‍♂️ lol fuck

    • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Probably it has happened all over the history as well, not just right now. Wanting not to take the torch from the previous generation is a pretty normal thing to do for people in their 20s.

  • 0x0001@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    摆烂 bai3lan4

    A slang term that means “stop striving”, I’d say it’s loosely akin to the phrase “quiet quitting” but a bit more general.

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ll say this some time and someone will tell me I’m an idiot for quoting some awful person, but right now - not knowing if it is a quote or not - I love this

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’ve always thought the value of quotes (when they have any) is based entirely on their content rather than who spoke them. A smart quote from an awful person is still smart. And a dumb quote from a smart person is still dumb, like that definition of insanity one that often gets attributed to Einstein.

        • JargonWagon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m sure there’s some sort of logical fallacy to be said about negating the quality of a quote based on the person who said it. Like, if Einstein said it, then it must be smart. If Hitler said it, then it must be evil. Etc.

      • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Well, you got me curious.

        Seems like the first use was in a life magazine article by someone who didn’t want to take explicit credit, so chances are it was something thought of by his students. And then it was repeated by various comedians over the years.

        For what it’s worth, my quick skim of the author, William Sloane Coffin’s wiki makes him seem like a pretty great guy.

    • philthi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is a great quote, I also like to say (especially in places like airports or government buildings):

      It’s not a rat race, it’s a rat queue.

  • RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    One of the behavioralist psychologists, I think it was Pavlov, ran an experiment on dogs where he shocked them for both bad behavior good.

    Eventually, the shocks had no effect.

    • No_Eponym@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      It was Martin Seligman who did dog shock experiments and developed the theory of learned helplessness in 1967. While Seligman demonstrated that learned helplessness did occur, we still don’t know why learned helplessness occurs (especially in humans).

      Pavlov was much earlier (1897) and formed the theory of classical conditioning where a primary stimulus (food) was paired with a neutral stimulus (a bell) under the right conditions until the neutral stimulus would evoke a similar automatic response as the primary stimulus (e.g. drooling).

      What you are describing also sounds a little like operant conditioning, where a learned behaviour is reinforced or punished with the application or removal of a stimulus. Or in this case, where the link between a behaviour and a stimulus is eroded to the point where the learned link goes extinct, and the subject becomes desensitized to the repeated stimulus.

    • Coreidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Wait so you’re telling me abusing dogs results in a negative outcome?

      Shit who would have thought!

  • TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Late stage capitalism is a blight of humanity, there’s gotta have to be some sort of revolutionary changes to society at the rate this is all headed. The world is not healthy right now.

  • krolden@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Funny, people in the USA have been doing that for 20+ years

    • ugjka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Weirdly TikTok only shows me streets full with fentinels in USA. I don’t know if that’s propaganda or is it real bad out there

      • PRUSSIA_x86@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        Propaganda. Every city has one or two neighborhoods (usually full of working class minorities) where police dump the homeless and addicts from everywhere else. Each of those areas has one or two particularly bad streets that look like shit and make for great fear mongering.

        • player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          At the risk of sounding like propaganda myself… Just because you don’t witness poverty and crime doesn’t mean it is propaganda. US has a major homeless and drug epidemic that is getting worse. It is easy for those with money to put it out of sight and ignore it.

          I’m visiting China for the first time right now for 2 weeks and I must say I’m very impressed with how clean the cities are and the lack of homeless and drug addicts.

          In the US my old house in OKC has been broken into twice by homeless and my parent’s house in Miami twice as well, and their car stolen twice. Walking to work in Brooklyn, people are literally sleeping on the sidewalks under trash bags every night as everyone walks past like they aren’t there.

          Even in my my home town in Vermont, population under 10,000, there are always homeless people out in the cold begging and sleeping in tents in the woods. These people have given up on life, or given bad luck, or addicted to drugs.

          I haven’t seen any of that in China so far. Sure there are some areas outside the city centers that are more depressing looking, lack much personality, and have run down buildings but at least everyone has a home, a job, and is taken care of. People here seem to have more respect for themselves and for others. It is part of the culture here.

          Everyone I talk to here says it is incredibly safe. In fact, today I saw my first 2 police cars on the highway for the first time a week into my trip. And we’ve been driving an average of 3 hours per day everywhere between Shenzhen and ChengDu (visiting factories ). There are many cameras everywhere but there isn’t a need for hundreds of police to patrol the streets non-stop like in every city in the US. I haven’t heard a single siren the entire trip either - in cities of 20 million. You won’t find that in NYC which has half the population. Just some thoughts I wanted to share, thanks for reading.

          • PRUSSIA_x86@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Oh there is absolutely poverty. I’m specifically referencing what the commenter above me was discussing, which is a trend on social media of finding a bad area of town, taking pictures from 40 different angles, and presenting it as though American cities are nothing but miles upon miles of tent encampments and despair. I will admit I have only ever lived in the rust belt, so it may very well be like that in other places, but in general you see one or two small areas of extreme poverty mixed with working class, a few rough-ish neighborhoods adjacent to those, and the rest is pretty quiet, if not always the most affluent. By your description, it sounds like Chinese law enforcement keeps closer tabs on people through mass surveillance rather than active patrolling. Personally I’d rather have more crime and fewer government CCTVs, but to each their own.

            • player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Side note: here at the airport you check your flight information by just walking up to a screen and it uses facial recognition to instantly pull up your flight information, gate, seat, etc. lol. Completely different comfort level with cameras here haha…

      • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        100% propaganda. Since Andrew Callaghan did his good faith SF video, every nut in the country in need of a haircut grabs their camera and shitty mic to go do bad gonzo journalism from skid row in order to dunk on people experiencing hell. Or worse, clout chase off of people experiencing hell.

  • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    11 months ago

    Can a Chinese speaker clarify something? “Let it rot” in other sources is 摆烂 (Bải làn) which translates as “showed away” When I translate “let it rot” I get either 让它腐烂 (simplified) or 讓它腐爛.

    What’s the difference? How does showed away become let it rot?

    • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      95
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      This is another case of a foreign word don’t have a good translation in English (and vise versa). Both 摆烂 and 让它腐烂 don’t have the same tone as “let it rot”.

      To me, “let it rot” means watching something collapse with a sense of enjoyment. I cannot recall a Chinese word with this exact sentiment of the top of my head. But I can try to explain both Chinese words.

      “让它腐烂” is the literal translation of “let it rot”, word for word. It don’t have the cultural and sentimental meaning behind it, merely stating the fact. More like “let the leave rot in the compost pile”.

      “摆烂” is probably what the article is referring to. Its meaning is similar to civil disobedience, and 躺平 (“lay flat”, another word that was popular couple years ago).

      “摆” means put, “烂” means something poorly made, broken, etc. “摆烂”, together as a word, means “displaying a broken (bad) attitude, no matter the outside influence”. However, “烂” also means rot, which is probably where the translation “let it rot” came from.

      The original usage is much more playful, like your cat would lay on the floor no matter what toy or treat you give it, then it is 摆烂. But with the recent increase in pressure for many young people in China. 摆烂 and 躺平 (lay flat) become more of a act of civil disobedience and refusal to participate in the broken system/economy.

      So 摆烂 is not a exact translation for “let it rot”, but they do share the meaning of “no action” and the sentiment of joy. And “let it rot” sounds much cooler and concise than my explanation.

        • slowwooderrunsdeep@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          11 months ago

          Ditto. Respect for anyone who not only knows two languages well enough to explain one in the other, but is willing to share that knowledge.

          • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Thank you for your kind message. China is my cultural root, and both its culture and language are of great importance to me.

            I was very active on r/translator before I left reddit. It is my great joy to see that I still have opportunity here to convey Chinese cultures to kind strangers on lemmy.

      • Aabbcc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        The article title sounded like they were letting the system rot, but if they’re laying flat then the metaphor is that the people are laying and rotting? Or did I misunderstand

        • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          That is what I mean when I say there is no exact translation.

          摆烂 doesn’t mean see the system collapse, merely displaying the lack of interest to participate. So the speaker is displaying the 烂 (bad attitude, rot), not the system. I believe 摆烂 is more akin to “civil disobedience” or “quit quitting”, than “let it rot” (if anything, it is closer to the literal meaning of “let me rot”).

          I want to make it more clear in my original comment, but I was afraid it would be too verbose and distract the reader.

          • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I also read that as “quiet quitting”. Would you try to translate that from English to Chinese could cause all kinds of linguistic issues.

      • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Thank you for the commentary. I figured there was some cultural and lingual baggage that was the difference.

  • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    11 months ago

    Great phrase, much more impact than quiet quit. I have plenty of sympathy for them, though that dipped substantially when one of the people they profiled became a “certified life coach” oh my god.