> then what is it that makes the policy authoritarian or not?
Typically when a person says, 'that policy is authoritarian', they are making the claim that ~'that policy can only practical be made and enforced in an authoritarian political system, where political power is withheld from the masses'.
So in this case the implied claim is that the only reason the CCP can get away with limiting video game hours for those under 18 to 3 hours a week is because of their system of government is authoritarian, where the masses do not have practical say in the policy.
This also implies the commentor does not think the masses in China would choose this policy for themselves.
That’s a reasonable explanation, of course, but it contradicts the two points in this thread that caused me to ask those questions:
1. It was claimed that the the China policy is authoritarian, but the U.S. policy is not authoritarian, because the latter is a democratic government.
2. It was claimed that any reported approval of the Chinese government by the Chinese population is irrelevant, either because the report is fake or because the people are manipulated or “brainwashed.”
> That’s a reasonable explanation, of course, but it contradicts the two points in this thread that caused me to ask those questions:
> 1. It was claimed that the the China policy is authoritarian, but the U.S. policy is not authoritarian, because the latter is a democratic government.
I think my above point offered a method to resolve this miscommunication by giving a more complete description of what is often meant by 'that policy is authoritarian'.
> 2. It was claimed that any reported approval of the Chinese government by the Chinese population is irrelevant, either because the report is fake or because the people are manipulated or “brainwashed.”
I think there is a similar miscommunication here that can be resolved, but I am not interested in delving into more topics currently.
Typically when a person says, 'that policy is authoritarian', they are making the claim that ~'that policy can only practical be made and enforced in an authoritarian political system, where political power is withheld from the masses'.
So in this case the implied claim is that the only reason the CCP can get away with limiting video game hours for those under 18 to 3 hours a week is because of their system of government is authoritarian, where the masses do not have practical say in the policy.
This also implies the commentor does not think the masses in China would choose this policy for themselves.
edit: remove accidental double negative