SpruceBringsteenWho to follow for what's going on in China?
darklamerOn this topic, I am myself somewhat partial towards the sources associated with Falun Gong, for while they obviously are highly motivated to spin everything to make the Communist Party look as bad as possible, they’re also not easily intimidated and well placed to find actual facts that few others are able to uncover.
🇵🇸antifa_ceoBro they’re a literal cult wtf
despoticruinThe alternative is outright state censored and strictly follows party lines. If you know how to read between the lines you can pick out the bits of actual news that don’t make it out through more mainstream sources. Granted, it’s still by and large just cult propaganda, but any port in a storm as they say.
As far as cults go, they don’t sound like a “literal cult” when reading about them on Wikipedia:
Ian Johnson argued that applying the ‘cult’ label to Falun Gong effectively “cloaked the government’s crackdown with the legitimacy of the West’s anticult movement”. He wrote that Falun Gong does not satisfy common definitions of a cult: "its members marry outside the group, have outside friends, hold normal jobs, do not live isolated from society, do not believe that the world’s end is imminent and do not give significant amounts of money to the organisation … it does not advocate violence and is at heart an apolitical, inward-oriented discipline, one aimed at cleansing oneself spiritually and improving one’s health."[74]: 224 David Ownby similarly wrote that “the entire issue of the supposed cultic nature of Falun Gong was a red herring from the beginning, cleverly exploited by the Chinese state to blunt the appeal of Falun Gong”.[63]
Falun Gong is anti China and you’re gonna take an anti China dude’s word on this uncritically?
It is a cult. Go look into it more than just on Wikipedia ffs.
“do your own research, but don’t trust the thing stitched together by obsessive nerds trying to help you do research” is the sort of thing conspiracy nuts say.
To support your position on contested facts, always provide a link. Any link, with as many options as you care to include. Quotes are nice but not required.
I don’t have time to try and educate someone who’s desire to learn stops at Wikipedia lmao. I have better things to do. Be more curious and challenge yourself a bit
If you have time to yell “go do your own research!” but can’t be bothered to provide even one link, please don’t get upset if you’re dismissed as a loon.
To paraphrase an old idea: That which was asserted without evidence should be dismissed without evidence.
Seems you are proving my point here instead of spending time to go look anything else up you’d rather remain ignorant and keep blabbing here lol
Nobody expects you to take time out of your very busy “doing nothing on the internet” schedule to teach a class on rhetoric.
But if you do want to be taken seriously when you write something that someone else disagrees with during that time, it’s usually worthwhile to provide supporting references if you want anyone to take your statements seriously.
“Do your own research!” is the cry of the fool.