I feel reminded of the current apple issue.
Are people really that ready to accept dictate over their and their kids behaviour in the name of moral and health? Isn't "time spent online" miles away from what the government should be allowed to regulate in your life?
> Are people really that ready to accept dictate over their and their kids behaviour in the name of moral and health?
To be clear, most commentators here are probably from outside China. There isn't anything anyone commentating here can do about this. So all we can really commentate is on the outcomes and what it might mean.
For anyone who can think for themselves it is, but the CCP has crippled its population's ability to think independently with their constant, forced propaganda. This brainwashing is a form of violence against its people and I hope they rise up someday, but I don't know how that could happen.
---
A high level official from China's propaganda department visits the CNN, and asks to learn the state of the art in propaganda.
Bemused, CNN receptionist replies: we are living in a free country, there are no propaganda here.
CCP official: That's exactly what I'm trying to learn!
Videogames are extraordinarily addictive. They should absolutely be limited for kids.
If the CCP decided to ban smoking, it would be a violation of people's rights. But it would also be a net benefit to almost everyone, and to society (health care costs would go down). That kind of authoritarianism is a LOT easier to stomach than, say, putting the Uygars into concentration camps. At least to me. (Singapore is an example of what I would call a mostly-benevolent authoritarian regime, for example.)
I think you are conflating “banning” with “convincing people to stop”; these are not the same. The PRC has banned lots of things without actually stopping them, and lots of countries have banned lots of addictive drugs without stopping their use, and with a whole lot of social harms resulting from the attempts to enforce the bans.
> health care costs would go down
Health care outcomes would no doubt improve if smoking was reduced by a ban, but healthcare costs would probably go up. IIRC, most studies have shown that reducing smoking increases lifetime healthcare costs (because, simplifying, people spend more time dealing with treatable problems instead of dead from incurable lung cancer.)