So, while I recognize the last one was US-backed, do we have any evidence at this point to believe this one was also?

"Zuniga, for his part, said in televised comments that he expected the government to change and that he also intended to release “political prisoners,” including the former interim president, Jeanine Anez.” https://www.dw.com/en/bolivia-top-general-arrested-after-coup-attempt-fails/a-69486191

Is that evidence enough?

They do not touch on the real reasons for these amendments. One is to look tough and nationalistic to their domestic audience. Another is to inflict psychological fear in Taiwanese and those who support Taiwan internationally that the CCP could potentially be coming for us, not only in China, Hong Kong and Macau, but in 45 other countries as well.

Hey guys did you know the real reason is to look tough and nationalistic and not (among other reasons) the US attempt to have an unsinkable air craft carrier to project power

According to human rights NGO Safeguard Defender

Lel

Taiwans ADIZ

I wonder why this extends into the mainland. Could there be historical context?

When the CCP is planning another dramatic change of the status quo, they go out of their way to also pick a date when it will send a message.

For example, often when countries switch diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China, the announcement will be timed to pack a punch, such as Nauru making their announcement right after William Lai (賴清德) won the election. Similarly, there was no way the enormously complex live fire training exercises China launched to upend the status quo could have been planned in the tiny window of time from the-then US House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi’s announcement she was to visit Taiwan and her arrival. They had planned it long in advance, — her trip was merely an excuse. To this day, it is common to see the Chinese military gray zone menacing behavior that continues being traced to Pelosi’s visit, almost as if she were somehow to blame.

Hey trust me they’ve been planing this for a long time. And these misogynists of course blame girl queen Pelosi. Not like China denounced the visit in advance. Classic reversal of cause and effect.

You’re right it actually is “dronie”.

Thank you for your encouragement, dronie…

I mean sure it is, but you’re also implying "The more your media landscape criticizes it’s own government the less critically you can consume it”

Sure. That’s a way to interpret your comment to @bilb@lem.monster also

With a little self awareness you’d know that the context is the comment chain above and that it’s basically what youre saying llmao

It’s a similar social construct as “tankie”. While “tankie” describes anyone left of Bernie Sanders, “dronnie” describes anyone that’s wittingly or unwittingly pro US imperialist.

“The more your media landscape criticizes it’s own government the less critically you can consume it”

Lol

There you go dronnie:

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/china-nuclear-fusion-reactor-artificial-sun-chengdu-b1767393.html

Next time Google it yourself

Edit: Actually that one’s from 2020. Youll have to wait until western sources “verify” (read: cope) about it in a week or two

Just reactionaries banding together

Unlike what you prefer to read, which is not propaganda, right?

https://archive.md/11Ks6

Fyi: just type archive.md/[Original Link] to get it

All governments are authoritarian. Read Engels https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm

The CCCP? Yeah, English speakers don’t usually refer to it by that acronym. It’s almost universally referred to as the USSR. I’m reasonably well informed on history and I had to look it up.

While you’re right in saying that USSR is the common western spelling CCP definitely makes a loose association with CCCP for older generations and brings up cold war memories.

Also while the article you shared is basically saying it’s inconsequential and that even the CPC can’t keep it consistent and only people who are online care, it does say the preferred official acronym (CPC) and whether it’s racist or not depends on context (which is always true). The poster I replied to didn’t use it negativy for example.

As a general observation thought (which the article doesn’t go in to) is that CCP is mostly used by by people that have a negative view of China and CPC is used by people that have a more nuanced view.

The country ramped up coal-fired generation, but also added more renewable capacity than the rest of the world combined, according to the annual Statistical Review Of World Energy from the Energy Institute (EI). This means the carbon intensity of its energy is actually falling.

Chinese consumption is being driven by the expansion of data centres, 5G infrastructure and car charging, while many factories are also running at full tilt to meet demand for goods overseas.

“We should not ignore the energy and emissions that Europeans have effectively exported to Chinese manufacturers,” EI chief executive officer Nick Wayth said.

Personally I prefer the FT, WSJ, Foreign affairs articles where the ruling class admits things that other outlet don’t e.g. where the “spy balloon” had “surveillance capabilities” i.e. weather surveillance capabilities