[tpm]

The point is we have no way to distinguish what is "genuine" in this case. Compounding that problem is the current massive Chinese propaganda offensive, which makes it even harder to believe any positive opinions. Especially when at the same time we can see what is happening in HK, for example.

[dirtyid]

I've wrote elsewhere in this thread that this alleged "Chinese propaganda offensive" especially on western social media is massively overblown. In terms of data, we have decades of western analysis of polling and sentiments in PRC suggesting people are genuinely supportive of central government, reflected in opinions of millions of Chinese diasphora populations who post on western media and/or interact regularly with people in the west. Even substantial percentage of HK itself is supportive of PRC, hence yellow/blue camps. So at minimum the issue is divisive with proponents and opponents, including in HK itself. Except the opponents are trying to create this narrative that proponent opinions can't be genuine because propaganda when that narrative itself is propaganda. All I can say is in my experience, folks in modern PRC voice dissent all the time, this isn't the 70s under Mao where one can be literally dispeared for private conversation. The stazis/red guards days are over. These days negative messages get deleted, positive messages get amplified. It's filtered. In the west the filtering goes the other way. Positive messages of get suppressed, negative ones get attention.

[tpm]

I did not mention social media, but I know things about Chinese influence in e.g. academia. It's not overblown at all; we are not talking nearly enough about it.

See, I already mentioned polling in totalitarian society does not make sense - it's quite simple really - and you are still using it as an argument. That's not a good way to have a discussion.

[dirtyid]

>polling in totalitarian society does not make sense

Why? There's tons rigorous analysis by western institutions with decades history polling in PRC [1]. The allegations that you can't get useful polling because communism is facile. There's no basis to it other than projection and feels. It's common among East Europeans who abscribe their experiences on PRCs, which is very different. Unlike Soviet Block countries during cold war, PRC prior to mid 2010s was saturated by western NGOs who were given broad access because it was seen as helpful to modernization. Also the topic covered HK polling, if you think that's biased even pre NSL, then there's no reason to believe pro-HKers either.

[0] >The “Surprise” of Authoritarian Resilience in China https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2018/02/surprise-authorit...

>I did not mention social media, but I know things about Chinese influence

The original topic was about astroturfing, so assumption was when you talk about massive propaganda ops it would be related.

>academia

Where is the massive propaganda campaign? Thousand Talent particapants being poorly prosecuted by DoJ's China Initiative covered ~80 cases where only %50 had anything to do with espionage/theft. Even then high profile cases had to be dropped because FBI basically admitted they lied and were just targetting / profiling Chinese academics. Of course there's PRC influence in academia, but it's not as substantial as all the engineered headlines suggests.

[tpm]

> There's no basis to it other than projection and feels.

The basis is that the authorities can lock you up if you dissent. You have no right to free expression and no chance for a fair trial. You know this and will deny it happens.

I am not saying that for example HK polls are biased pre-NSL (they are because smart people knew what is coming 2047 or sooner), I am fully aware that half the people will support any government, no matter how bad. That also happened in Eastern Europe, so China is not as unique as you seem to think. It simply does not matter. Once dissent is not allowed - or you know you might be prosecuted for dissent in the future, or your family in China might be in danger - you will start self-censoring.

> Where is the massive propaganda campaign?

all over the world. See for example the Confucius Institute network associated with various universities, its overt task is to teach language and culture, but covertly to manipulate and to pressure lecturers and students and basically anyone around to toe the party line (happened to a friend very recently). Many similar stories all over academia, pressuring companies etc.

[dirtyid]

Your assertion was that:

> makes it even harder to believe any positive opinions.

Despite acknowledging that conventionally ~50% of the population are pro government. Ergo statistically there are genuine positive opinions, many in fact. On the mainland or in the west, this is magnified by the PRC population / diaspora scale. So why calibrate your belief meter so unevenly as to reject any positive opinions except dogma / feelings when statistically they are bound to exist in massive numbers.

> The basis is that the authorities can lock you up if you dissent. You have no right to free expression and no chance for a fair trial. You know this and will deny it happens. ... >It simply does not matter.

None of that matters to genuineness of positive opinions. Self-censorship doesn't translate negative opinions into positive ones, it turns them into silence or contrition. Dissidents who get swept up don't do a 180 and enthusiastically praise CCP, they stay quiet or do boiler apologies and acknowledge being "wrong". In PRC: many people voice their negative opinions in a variety of forums because the chances of being locked up with "picking quarrels and provoking trouble" is stupendously small. Creative critiques that circumvent censorship are everywhere, posts get deleted, particularly troublesome agitators get invited for tea, repeat multiple times before state security commits resources. No one denies self-censorship or persecution happens, it just doesn't happen on a pervasive enough scale to meaningfully collapse public opinion where the default assumption should be positive opinions are not believable. You can argue negative opinions are suppressed, and positive amplified, but that doesn't make positive any less likely to be genuine. Indeed one would expect more genuine opinions by virtue of pervasive propaganda. In the west you have manufactured consent forming genuine anti-China opinions, and Chinese diaspora who self-censor due to stigma and social pressure, but self-censoring of pro-China opinions doesn't make pervasive anti-China opinions less genuine.

>That also happened in Eastern Europe

The comment was addressing the history/state of mainland polling, Eastern Europe during the cold war was absolutely not home to a plethora of western NGOs that operated with relatively loose oversight. PRC was, hence decade+ of western institutions surveying PRC before internal security modernized to the point of having tenable grasp on public opinion. Reason why this was even allowed in the first place is CCP wasn't in position to trust its own data and relied on western data / expertise for development.

>covertly to manipulate

US allocating 300s million to anti-China influence operations doesn't mean we discount genuineness of anti-China opinions formulated by western propaganda. One can suggest brainwashed useful idiots are being misinformed, but doesn't mean they don't genuinely believe the propaganda. This applies to Chinese propaganda as well. Lots of useful idiots genuinely support the PRC narrative, but on balance one can argue the Chinese exposed to both east + west are in a better position to make a more informed decision. PRC diasphora who understands state propaganda is witnessing how manufactured consent can porduce equally brainwashed populous via cover manipulation is something I'd hope someone who escaped east europe can identify.

[tpm]

> So why calibrate your belief meter so unevenly as to reject any positive opinions

Because negative opinions can get you locked up or worse.

> Self-censorship doesn't translate negative opinions into positive ones

In this case you are again simply wrong. It was again quite common in EE from my experience to say something quite positive if one was invited to opine, even if it was a complete lie and fabrication, just to be saved from trouble. And why not? For some people it is easier to say something than to say nothing. Or even staying quiet or not being enthusiastic enough can be understood as dissent. And all that is before we even start to talk about so-called internal enemies, witchhunts so popular in "communist" parties and organizations.

> No one denies self-censorship or persecution happens, it just doesn't happen on a pervasive enough scale to meaningfully collapse public opinion

There is no public opinion. There is only the opinion of the CCP. To have a public opinion would first need to have a public discussion in which various opinions are freely floated, which is not possible.