lmao. Crickets.
In fact, propaganda does not really exist in democracies.
In fact, propaganda does not really exist in democracies.
I occasionally write for The Economist.
Checks out.
insert the joke about the KGB guy complimenting the CIA guy on the quality of their propaganda
lmao, holy shit.
The whole quote is fantastic
This is not propaganda, and everything I write in the book is, to the best of my knowledge, true.
In fact, propaganda does not really exist in democracies. That is not to say that democratic governments don’t lie. They do, all the time.
But propaganda is something that false or heavily-spun information put out by governments in a heavily controlled media environment where there is no other side to rebut it.
Just look at Minneapolis this weekend. A man gets shot. The government calls him a “domestic terrorist.” If this were China, that would be the end of it.
Lmao
He literally did the thing!!
During the height of the cold war, a Soviet is given a diplomatic assignment in America and is travelling to the US.
On the flight over there, he is seated next to an American and they strike up a conversation.
“Gee, you guys in the Soviet Union really have some impressive propaganda over there!”
“Perhaps. But the propaganda that you have in the US is far better.”
“…what propaganda?”
“Exactly.”
America: “At least we know the government is lying about the masked federal agent killed that innocent person!”
China: “You have masked federal agents killing innocent people?”
But propaganda is something that false or heavily-spun information put out by governments in a heavily controlled media environment where there is no other side to rebut it.
Ah, I see, he’s using a weird idiosyncratic definition of propaganda and expecting everyone else to magically know it
Reminds me of the guy who tried to tell me that opposition to genocide “isn’t political”
but even by that weird definition, it doesnt work. western mainstream media is in lockstep, refusing to call what’s happening in gaza a genocide, parroting israel’s blatant nonsense, etc.
i guess to these idiots, if it’s not called a ministry of agitprop, it doesnt exist.
One thing I did differently, to make Chinese history understandable to normal readers who don’t usually pick up books on China, is I said fuck it, I am going to do all the shit that no academic would ever do, in order to tell people that this is a book for them, not just the eggheads. The book has a chapter called “The Most Important Motherfucker in Taiwanese History,” which talks about the 1670’s sex scandal that may help cause WWIII.
Wow. This is freaking EPIC bacon. You win the Internet, good sir.
I also enjoyed the 2am chili comic 14 years ago, but I wouldn’t want to consume that kind of content in anything more than a quick internet post.
He doesn’t know about the Super Soldier program!
Dang, people are rude. I’m just trying to get an expert’s opinion on my app and getting all sorts of downvotes. So hostile!
good work comrade
lol, thank you. Appreciate it.
deleted by creator
A brief list of issues off the top of my head with his post even though its probably a waste of time: • Pretending “not formally governed” = “not Chinese.” Pre-modern states did not work like modern border states. Lack of a permanent bureaucracy does not mean lack of integration.
• Using modern Western sovereignty rules on feudal Asia. This is historical anachronism. No pre-capitalist state functioned the way modern nation-states do.
• Claiming there was “no solid contact” before the 1560s. False. There are records from Sui, Tang, Song, and Yuan periods showing contact, trade, navigation, and military expeditions in the region.
• Misusing the ambiguity of the word 琉球 to imply “maybe China never reached Taiwan.” Ambiguous naming does not equal absence of contact. Medieval geography everywhere used vague terms.
• Pretending written records are the only form of historical evidence. Material migration, trade routes, archaeology, and population movement matter more than paperwork.
• Ignoring continuous Chinese fishing, trade, and settlement activity. Taiwan was part of the Fujian maritime economy long before 1683.
• Acting like Taiwan existed outside China’s economic system. It did not. Food, labor, migrants, tools, taxes, and markets flowed from the mainland.
• Claiming the Dutch “made Taiwan Chinese.” Absurd.
• Treating Han migration as a European colonial byproduct. Chinese migration was driven by land shortages, class stratification, and coastal capitalism, not Dutch planning.
• Downplaying that most settlers came directly from Fujian. This was regional migration, not foreign colonization.
• Portraying Koxinga as only a pirate or warlord. He governed Taiwan using Ming laws, institutions, taxation, and bureaucracy.
• Ignoring that the Zheng regime explicitly identified as Chinese. It never claimed Taiwan was a separate nation.
• Framing the Qing as “foreign Manchu colonizers.” Liberal racial framing. The Qing ruled through Chinese institutions and class structures.
• Pretending the Qing were not a Chinese state. Historically false and rejected even by mainstream historians.
• Treating 1683 as “the first time Taiwan became Chinese.” It was the first time of direct imperial administration, not the beginning of Chinese integration.
• Using sensational sex scandals to replace political analysis. Tabloid storytelling instead of material history.
• Reducing historical change to personal morality and drama. This is liberal moralism, not historical explanation.
• Equating historical complexity with illegitimacy. Late incorporation does not invalidate sovereignty.
• Seemingly Ignoring Japanese colonial rule entirely. Conveniently skips the actual foreign colonization of Taiwan. (I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)
• Ignoring US military occupation after World War II. This is central to the modern Taiwan issue.(I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)
• Ignoring the KMT dictatorship and White Terror. Over 100,000 Taiwanese were killed or imprisoned under a US-backed regime. (I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)
• Erasing US Cold War control of Taiwan’s political system. Taiwan’s current status is a product of American imperialism, not ancient history. (I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)
• Pretending the Taiwan issue is about the 1600s. It is about post-1949 imperial containment of China.
• Using “Beijing doesn’t want you to read” propaganda framing. Standard Cold War marketing tactic.
• Appealing to Western audiences’ anti-China bias. The tone and structure are built to flatter liberal prejudices.
• Claiming academic authority while writing pop-imperialist content. Credentials (he doesn’t even have the right ones) used as a shield for ideology.
• Ignoring economic continuity across dynasties. Class relations mattered more than dynastic names.
Probably many more but I have no interest in reading his slop book or further digging through the post or comments.
A Reddit link was detected in your post. Here are links to the same location on alternative frontends that protect your privacy.
