Hotznplotzn @ Hotznplotzn @lemmy.sdf.org

Posts

175

Comments

37

Joined

6 mo. ago

Unfortunately there is only a German version of the study, I don't know whether you speak German or you may manage to get a automated translation.

Study: Junges Europe 2025 / Young Europe 2025 - (PDF)

In the study (85 pages) you see each question and the response.

Last year the study was also available in English (Young Europe 2024 - pdf)

I hope this helps somehow.

This is a very weird framing of this study. The original study (which is linked in the article) is in German. Those who don't speak German will find a useful translation provider, I provide the study's summary literal translation:

>Young people: EU and democracy are good, but reforms are needed

• 57% prefer democracy to any other form of government - 39% think that the EU does not function particularly democratically
• Young Europeans want change - 53% criticize the EU for being too preoccupied with trivialities instead of focusing on the essentials
• Cost of living, defense against external threats and better conditions for businesses should be priorities for the EU
• Only 42% think that the EU is one of the three most powerful global political players

Among others, the study also says (again, a direct translation, I am not paraphrasing):

48% of young Europeans believe that democracy in their country is under threat, compared to 61% in Germany. Two thirds rate their country's membership of the EU as positive. At the same time, 53% of young people criticize the fact that the EU is too often concerned with minor issues. Half of 16 to 26-year-olds think the EU is a good idea, but very poorly implemented.

I don't say that everything is perfect, but the whole study paints a completely different picture than this article - and especially its headline - appears to suggest.

[Edit my comments for clarity, translation has not been edited.]

The Daily express is a tabloid with a more than troubled history, including mutliptle accusations of xenophobia and hate speech. That's not a credible source.

Yeah, you should expect ... but that's not the case. The article is not biased.

@shirro@aussie.zone

Someone else already wonders that there are many other accounts in the Lemmyverse that post much more articles critical of Australia, the EU, U.S., Big Tech, and many other things, let alone the pure propaganda comms where everything that is only slightly critical of China gets immediately deleted. No one complains about that. Why?

There are a lot of non-Chinese people in the Lemmyverse who defend China by parroting the government's narratives, although most of these people know China as tourists at best.

This 'tankie propaganda' talk is one major reason why Lemmy is still barely used and doesn't take off imo. Too many accounts, Lemmy is seen what it supposedly was in the very beginning: A dumping ground for cheap autocratic propaganda.

[Edit typo.]

@Salvo@aussie.zone

How is a simple poll a "disgraceful propaganda campaign"? (And how gives your link proof of that?)

If not Australians, which people do you have more faith in?

@null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Online Event June 9: China's Transnational Repression Efforts | Citizen Lab

On June 9, join the Citizen Lab’s Emile Dirks to discuss China’s influence, interference, and repression in Canada.

In this online session hosted by the Canada China Forum, Emile Dirks, senior research associate at the Citizen Lab, and Bradley Jardine, managing director of Oxus Society for Central Asian Affairs, will explore the PRC’s lawful and unlawful influence practices, the fine line between influence and interference, as well as how the international society should respond to China’s advancements.

Quick reminder that the Hong Kong National Security Law imposed by Beijing on 30 June 2020 is a breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and a demonstration of China breaking its international commitments.

Addition:

Hong Kong’s Freedoms: What China Promised and How It’s Cracking Down -- [Last update March 2024]

• Before the British government handed over Hong Kong in 1997, China agreed to allow the region considerable political autonomy for fifty years under a framework known as “one country, two systems.”
• In recent years, Beijing has cracked down on Hong Kong’s freedoms, stoking mass protests in the city and drawing international criticism.
• Beijing imposed a national security law in 2020 that gave it broad new powers to punish critics and silence dissenters, which has fundamentally altered life for Hong Kongers.

These are empty words. What exactly did he do?

If you just parrot propaganda, I won't respond anymore.

What makes him an 'enemy of the state'? What crime did he commit? There is absolutely nothing.

This is not about "China vs USA". The US (or the EU, or any other continent, bloc, and country) has nothing to do with this issue, may it "suck" or not.

There is a good video documentary. It is from 2021, but still very accurate and worth watching.

How Tim Cook Surrendered Apple to the Chinese Government -- (Invidious link)

Apple is making billions of dollars integrating into countries with authoritarian regimes. Even if it means helping to cement the power of the ruling elite or enabling egregious abuse of human rights. And there doesn’t seem to be anything Apple wouldn’t do for the sake of growth and expansion. Apple cites compliance with local laws as the reason for giving human rights abuse a go. But the actions of the most valuable company in the world go far beyond compliance with the law.

(Here is the original YT link to the video.)

[Edit typo and for clarity.]

Downvote for the next whataboutism.

The degree and form of whataboutery on Lemmy takes weird shapes.

especially while China is actually offering to work with us and to help us out in dealing with our biggest immediate threat.

I don't think that China wants to work with anyone to 'help' them. They just try to take advantage of the situation, but the Chinese government hasn't become better because the U.S. got worse.

Ukraine hits Chinese firms with sanctions after accusing Beijing of arming Russia

The [sanctions] list [...] named Beijing Aviation And Aerospace Xianghui Technology Co. Ltd, Rui Jin Machinery Co. Ltd, and Zhongfu Shenying Carbon Fiber Xining Co. Ltd, all described as registered in China.

It did not give details of why they had been added to the sanctions list, which bans companies from doing business in Ukraine and freezes their assets there.

Ukraine exported $8 billion of goods to China in 2021, mostly raw materials and agricultural products, while it imported from China just under $11 billion, mainly in manufactured goods, according to the Ukrainian government.

Accusing people of bad faith without reason just because they disagree with you is one of the most disingenuous things you can do.

I fully agree. Just read many of the comments about the linked article. They do exactly what you portray.

The 50 cent warriors are somewhere else.

Amazing how this thread illustrates how many tankie alt accounts are here on Beehaw already.

Just read the article before you (intentionally?) misinterpret the content:

The admission of Chinese responsibility came during a secret meeting between outgoing Biden administration officials and Chinese representatives on the sidelines of a summit in Geneva in December 2024. [...] The Chinese attendants referred indirectly to the activity as being a warning for the US to stay away from any attempts to support or defend Taiwan.

Interesting paper on the topic by Estonia's International.Centre For Defense And Security (download on the linked page):

Russia’s Hybrid Attacks in Europe: From Deterrence to Attribution to Response

Russia is not unique in using hybrid methods, so their effects and our response are closely followed by other actors, first and foremost China. Autocratic regimes favour hybrid warfare precisely because democratic states struggle with responding directly and proportionally. Hybrid attacks are usually deliberately designed to complicate detection, evade accountability, and hinder decisive responses. Additionally, the targeted nations may lack the capability or the political will to respond effectively.