51
TIL: About the 2007 Chinese slave scandal
(en.wikipedia.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2025
51 points (98.1% liked)
Today I Learned (TIL)
8384 readers
2 users here now
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
/c/til is a community for any true knowledge that you would like to share, regardless of topic or of source.
Share your knowledge and experience!
Rules
- Information must be true
- Follow site rules
- No, you don't have to have literally learned the fact today
- Posts must be about something you learned
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Government is government, it's all 1 party, right?
There's different levels of government, with people working at different priorities. Even though is a one party system, provinces and local government have kinda independent approaches to govern. For a local officer having slaves could make sense for personal purposes, short term monetary wins, or showing its projects finish faster and cheaper. But for a higher level officer than kind of things wouldn't make sense, can't be big enough to give them a profit, without blowing on their face first. They already control a pseudo slave market, that is stable and accepted, with little resistance.
The top down nature of the authoritarian system allows corruption to flourish at all levels. One cannot pick and choose what parts are true Scotsmen.
You're not wrong.
But it's looking like the alternatives are also fertile ground for corruption, so this doesn't really render an effective criticism.
I don't like a 1-party system. I'd like a 0-party system, but I suspect in practice it'd either behave like a 1 party system or a typical western partisan system where people form voting blocks.
Such a youngster take
Ad hominems are for kiddos
You are a disgrace to the name Makhno.
…no? From my perspective, that's like saying:
When it was really the city, or at most state-level government getting in trouble. I know China isn’t federalized to the extend the US is, and it’s technically true since all govt is CCP, but still.
It sounds like you are implicating national officials when there's no mention in the source.
...no? It sounds like I'm implicating party officials, which is literally the wording I used.
Yeah. Exactly
I’m bristling at this because it’s exactly what Trump does here. Some local official screws up or does something bad, and it’s blown up on Twitter and generalized to all “Democrats.”