What part of what i just wrote made you think I give a shit about western opinion polls either?
I don’t have one offhand that isolates Tibetan responses, but there’s a pretty good chance you can find one. At the very least, you should be able to extrapolate a range from looking at the places where responses were isolated and then using population proportions to set up a possible range for the local average.
Why would I do a bunch of work to derive a number that I think is completely worthless, like all opinion polls?
You’re literally just keeping yourself in a state of epistemic suspense so that you can continue to lick boots.
Pretty sure I'm the only one not licking boots here. Sorry I don't start chowing down as soon as I see that the boot is red.
I can buy that logic, but it would really only apply to western state propaganda - western businesses who are active in china (who would the ones taking the poll) would absolutely still be incentivized to side with the PRC.
Fair enough, this is basically the situation I was thinking of, and the contents makes it clear they'd want to fudge things, but have trouble with it.
Now, this poll isn’t particularly relevant to the question of Tibet (though perhaps it might cool your hatred of the PRC?)
I don't hate the PRC, certainly not more than any other bourgeois state. I just don't see the need to make excuses' for their imperialism because they have a socialist aesthetic. I also don't believe in the outlandish Uyghur genoicde claims, although the PRC are clearly run by Han chauvinists.
but I think it provides an analytical basis for getting some information on how things stand in Tibet.
Now that I really don't see. The contents of the pdf fit with my opinion that China is, despite authoritarian, a capitalist state that is in less decay than much of the west. This competency translates both into real material gains and popular support - but I don't see how that changes the situation in Tibet. There are absolutely historical examples, like Lombardy or Bohemia, in which an imperial power managed to govern competently and create a decent economy, but is still oppressive and did not have popular support.
Oh I'm sorry, you're right, those opinion polls are correct because they were produced by the red bourgeoisie and not the blue bourgeoisie.
deleted by creator
What part of what i just wrote made you think I give a shit about western opinion polls either?
Why would I do a bunch of work to derive a number that I think is completely worthless, like all opinion polls?
Pretty sure I'm the only one not licking boots here. Sorry I don't start chowing down as soon as I see that the boot is red.
deleted by creator
I can buy that logic, but it would really only apply to western state propaganda - western businesses who are active in china (who would the ones taking the poll) would absolutely still be incentivized to side with the PRC.
deleted by creator
Fair enough, this is basically the situation I was thinking of, and the contents makes it clear they'd want to fudge things, but have trouble with it.
I don't hate the PRC, certainly not more than any other bourgeois state. I just don't see the need to make excuses' for their imperialism because they have a socialist aesthetic. I also don't believe in the outlandish Uyghur genoicde claims, although the PRC are clearly run by Han chauvinists.
Now that I really don't see. The contents of the pdf fit with my opinion that China is, despite authoritarian, a capitalist state that is in less decay than much of the west. This competency translates both into real material gains and popular support - but I don't see how that changes the situation in Tibet. There are absolutely historical examples, like Lombardy or Bohemia, in which an imperial power managed to govern competently and create a decent economy, but is still oppressive and did not have popular support.
deleted by creator