Cowbee

Nice! If energy is the limiting factor, then that's actually a good thing, the PRC is rapidly improving solar production and nuclear energy, as well as rapidly expanding it. I just hope the global oil industry gets phased out in favor of cheap solar and nuclear.

As for fascism, Wikipedia pretty clearly puts it at a far-right ideology, one that first appeared in Italy with Mussolini. I don't really put too much stock in Wikipedia vs books on the subject, but I'm not really aware of any non-far-right version of fascism.

Urumqi is in Xinjiang, seems cool to visit! Would love to. Most of my Chinese friends are online, so they don't really say where they are from (neither do I), but I'd expect somewhere near the coast or more populous like Congqing or Chengdu, Shangai, etc.

Already working on becoming vegan personally. Given that the PRC has developed tech to combat desertification, I do think they are more likely to invent tech to combat CO2 in the atmosphere.

You don't get "disappeared" for "slandering the government in any way." That's a very western framing of cracking down on capitalists that get out of line and try to undermine the socialist government. You have your anecdotal evidence, I also speak with Chinese citizens, and they more often than not do agree with the graph.

Fascism is specifically a bourgeois ideology that emerges when property rights are in danger and the ruling class needs to assert itself. Fascism isn't just "when the government does stuff I don't like," it's an irrational ideology that emerges out of the rational interests of the bourgeoisie when capitalism is in crisis.

I believe you missed @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net's comment.

Sure, the PRC has rule by the majority. It's definitionally democratic. The EU poll specifically tested for liberal models of democracy designed to give more freedom for capitalists and work against social cohesion.

In the section on how democratic a country is, it says "freedom of the press," which is taken to mean freedom of the private press as that's what isn't very high in China.

As for why things like allowing the private press to way whatever they want even as they are funded by the wealthy, political pluralism, etc, the concept of a state that changes hands constantly or is fractured and led by factions is more of a liberal thing. Socialist countries tend to have one major party and perhaps a few other special interest parties, because the goal is unity and cohesion.

That doesn't mean there's no room for discussion either, in fact that becomes far more important because it doesn't become a party v party issue but one that anyone can give their input on. Same with separation of powers, there is room for specialization, but the idea that government needs to be hostile to itself to function is more liberal.

"Peaceful transition of power" in the context of the PRC means the bourgeoisie can succeed in ousting the CPC, in a country where class struggle is definitely very alive you have to limit that.

Gov transparency isn't the worst metric, but it also isn't what makes something democratic. Freedom of speech in the context of a socialist country that still has a capitalist class means freedom for the bourgeoisie to mouth off and destabilize the system, so in practice it's typically billionaires like Jack Ma that are oppressed. Rule of Law isn't bad, but it has little to do with democracy.

All in all, all of these are things Europeans describe democracy as, but the very word means "rule by the people," meaning different countries have different views on what that looks like. The questionaire seems to benefit one where the press is freely dominated by billionaires, where there is endless squabbling in government between parties vying for power, etc while not allowing democratic one party states to be seen as democratic even if the people believe it to represent their interests.

No, I don't. China doesn't have a more effective propaganda machine than western countries.

The social credit system is really overblown, it isn't extensive and it's more for businesses to prevent tax evasion and whatnot.

Depends on the space you're in.

That survey acknowledges that different countries see democracy differently, both in what it is and what the purpose of democracy is. The EU, for example, says it's about "protecting individual rights and freedoms," while China says it's about "improving living standards and well-being."

The kicker is that they specifically ask questions surrounding how well a country abides by liberal, capitalist democracy while not asking how well a country abides by socialist democracy! As you admit, they focus on concepts like "separation of powers," or "freedom of the private press," or "political pluralism," as well as "peaceful transition of power." This fundamentally is meant to disqualify socialist concepts of democracy, focused on cooperation, cohesion, social unity, rule by the common people, and limiting of the powers of the wealthy over society.

Ultimately, both polls are accurate. What's dishonest is the EU poll framing democracy purely in a liberal manner. It isn't a survey about democracy, it's a survey about how well a country abides by Eurocentric, liberal democracy. This isn't an example of polls conflicting each other, when polled in a manner that reflects how well society represents the interests of the common person, the poll I cited is a much better reflection.

You may need to work on your media literacy.

If China is so bad, why the constant need for propaganda?

Ultimately, all media pushing a narrative is propaganda. Propaganda isn't bad in and of itself, it can be used to push good messaging and good information. The reason why there's strong pushes for pro-China sentiment from the left is because right now, in the west, the majority sentiment is anti-PRC based on US State Department narratives.