[betwixthewires]

>meh, not really

I was basing my response on what was clearly stated. You can't just reinterpret what someone else said for them. There is a big difference between "distribution of free contraceptives" and "one child policy" and you can't wiggle your way around that.

[Barrin92]

I didn't reinterpret what they said, I argued that you overestimate how much of a difference there is in both policy outcome and intention. What's the difference other than the branding? Women have fewer kids and they enter the workforce. The demographic development in China doesn't even look much different than in South Korea, in fact they have even fewer kids in SK.

In 'free' societies when governing elites want a policy outcome they dress it in women's liberation and rights language, put a tax on something or hand you a subsidy to remind you of what you're supposed to do, in China they don't give a crap and send you somewhere by fiat. tomato tomahto

[betwixthewires]

The difference is forcing people do do something vs giving them options and letting them decide. I don't know how many more times I need to explain myself. People have agency. Authoritarianism denies our agency and defies us to use it. That is how you treat cattle, not human beings.

[Barrin92]

Liberalism at least in its modern technocratic version isn't any different. You're offered an illusion of choice and then you're 'incentivized' (every policy makers favourite word in the free world) to choose the correct thing. The beauty of it is of course that it, in contrast to authoritarianism, obfuscates existing power relations, because if you have choice there's nobody you can attack or hold responsible, you're always responsible yourself.

In that sense authoritarianism actually treats you less like cattle, because authoritarians think highly enough of their subjects to actually perceive them as a threat. The modern western technocrat on the other hand pretty much just thinks everyone's a number in an excel sheet.