• KiaKaha [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Without reading, let’s see if I can guess it.

    1. Employing people to collect garbage is a form of social control by keeping unemployment low.
    2. Using the military to plant trees is a way of keeping a military employed and ready to murder protesters/freedom fighters/contras at a moment’s notice.
    3. Using the military to plant trees is pro-military propaganda.
    4. Addressing people’s concerns about the environment isn’t because the Party cares about the environment but rather because they fear an uprising if they don’t.

    Someone who’s willing to subject their eyeballs to The Economist: how did I do?

    • thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      The funniest part is that it's #1 but without the second part. It's literally "They're making people recycle and punishing you if you don't!!!!!!"

      • KiaKaha [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Oh so it’s just the rubbish sorting scheme stuff, but bad because fining people for poor trash disposal is authoritarian.

        I’m a little surprised the Economist isn’t gushing about how this appropriately attributes externalities of poor recycling to the end users. Maybe they’d like it more if there were a recycling credit trading scheme attached.

    • yang [they/them, any]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Sadly, it's behind a paywall/registration. I'd rather not go through that effort.

    • DivineChaos100 [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      To be fair #1 is actually a thing (idk if it is in China, but in Hungary unemployed peole are put into a public work program which is basically picking up garbage or working on some of the mayor's lands because corruption. Oh and they get paid half of the minimum wage.