|
|
|
|
|
by bluefirebrand
1882 days ago
|
|
The difference is that the ethical implications of you buying your espresso daily don't make you inherently less trustworthy. The "routine" of burying evidence, silencing dissidents, and constant propaganda does absolutely reduce China's trustworthiness. To the point where we can and probably should always assume the worst of that regime. |
|
What you said (and which I agree with) is that they always want to control the narrative. Not when they've done anything wrong, but always. I agree with that part — it's aregime that wants to control the narrative always, just so the populace won't get used to the existence of anything beyond control of the regime.
However, since the regime always wants to control the narrative, you cannot assume that wanting to control a particular narrative means anything more than "they're acting as usual". You can assume that the regime is untrustworthy in general, but you cannot assume anything particular about this instance.
Your argument is tantamount to "any control freak can and probably be assumed guilty of everything".