Thank you for your polite response. I am in favour of democracy. I support Taiwan’s right to sovereignty. I think China is a repressive regime in many respects. Don’t get me wrong, there are valid criticisms to be made.
But those two youtubers are just wilfully misleading. They are stirring up division for their own financial gain. It is so irrresponsible and dangerous. That’s what I object to. It’s not that I’m pro-China.
This you labelling them right wing and anti-china?
Well said. It’s easy to get put in the wu mao barrel.
I think this is demonstrably true from their videos. Some of the other youtubers I linked to have done lengthly analyses of their content where they show this to be the case.
Labelling someone a “wumao”, on the other hand, is suggesting that they are secretly on the payroll of the Chinese government. This is much harder to actually prove. So I don’t think the two things are equivalent
No. It goes both ways.
You can’t label while simultaneously rejecting other labels.
Jayoe is benefitting, directly or otherwise from his videos in China in a time of totalitarianism and unprecedented state control of opinion.
There is a major conflict of interest and it’s completely impossible to be 100% independent in Jayoe’s position. He has every incentive to disparage Serpentza and Laowhy, secondly, he wasn’t part of their legal issues nor was he there. He can’t know unless the government gave him the details.
You’re gonna have to find a better source for your argument. I can’t accept it from Compromised Jayoe.
I’ve watched Serpentza on and off throughout the years. He has actually been rather fair towards China, he kept out of the politics for a long time regarding “internal” Chinese issues like Taiwan, Tibet, HK.
It really wasn’t until the last 1-2 years where he started to speak out more and more about China’s BS openly.
My wife is chinese and occasionally gets abuse for being so. Happened this week.
Doesn’t happen every week. I got stuck in the downstairs neighbor this time so polite to me, not so polite to the missus
Because he’s independent and can speak freely. When his editorial independence was under threat in China, he left.
It’s no longer possible to have an independent editorial stance in China.
Be that as it may. It doesn’t negate his criticisms of Serp/Lao. He is just dismissed as a “wumao” but if you actually listen to his arguments he makes some pretty compelling points (IMO).
I think it does. I can’t trust Jayoe, he is compromised. Willing or not, he’s now a wumao for benefitting, directly or indirectly from his conflict of interest. There’s no escaping it.
Once he says something the CCP doesn’t like, it’s game over. He can’t be independent if he wants to live in China.
Therefore, I can’t trust what he says to be true or accurate.
I would like an independent source.
Many of his criticisms of the other two are objectively verifiable.
For example. Serpentza made a video about how Chinese people don’t have hobbies because they haven’t reached a sufficient level of sophistication. Matt made a response video demonstrating that this is simply untrue.
So what? That’s just a whataboutism. Your argument is Winston makes opinion. Matt makes another opinion. Whoooptydoo. They’re independent people making opinions. Great
Again, Jayoe is not an independent source. I can’t trust it.
My point is the exact opposite. It’s not about opinion. Whether or not people in China have hobbies is hardly a matter of opinion. It is verifiable.
So what? People can’t make disagreeable opinions from time to time? They must be perfect? I have opinions of Taiwan and locals here that people might disagree with.
But I’m in a country where I can freely speak my mind.
The number 4 GDP/capita in the world is consistently Ireland — a high tech country that has recently managed its infestation of priests and nuns
Of the top 10 GDP/Capita in the world, 7 of 10 have natural resources (oil). Ireland has none.
I watch them for entertainment, personally I don’t believe any political bullshit on YouTube.
Old adage was don’t believe everything you read , modern times is don’t believe everything you watch.
Wait, how then can I interpret your post . . .
[head explodes . . . ] 
Guy
You’re conflating truth with fairness. Cherry picked facts are still facts, regardless of whether or not facts favorable to the other side in a debate are taken into consideration. (This is a general principle; I haven’t watched the video in question.)
This statement is false. 