China and playtime

 Xi Jinping has gone too far this time

Oh I've bitten down on my tongue for this matter, on a number of principles that felt good and right at the time. First and foremost being that this isn't a political blog, and I think that the very idea of a 'political blog' sounds like the single worst thing humanely imaginable, just behind the concept of Twitter. Secondly, and this was spurred on my other things that I read, I sort of felt like I didn't really have a voice in this matter, not being a citizen of China myself or knowing anyone from there, so who am I to comment on their social edicts? What flies just well for other parts of the world don't always land well everywhere and I think that's totally fine, I'm happy that we have such different ideas for what makes society tick around the world. (providing, you know, the ideas actually have merit and/or work.) But this has gone beyond the pale, Jinping and his CCP have crossed the Rubicon, and what's more it crossed into the realm of gaming and outside of strictly politics from the inception of the story, thus watch me as I expend far too much effort justifying the most tame take of 2021. China's mandate of limiting gaming time to 3 hours a week sucks. (Gasp! Rabble rabble rabble...)

Now first I want to address the obvious point, in that I'm perhaps being a little alarmist with the way I phrased that, and I am. The mandate limiting the amount of time that people play isn't for all gamers, rather it's for children so that they can be programmed into imposing these limitations on themselves into adulthood. (Suppression works so much smoother with a healthy opening does of indoctrination thrown in) And that is the first thing people like to bring up whenever you offer a raised eyebrow to this forced gaming-time limit; "this is for the good of the youth to ensure that they don't become hooked to gaming that may hurt their grades and swallow up all their free time. It's for the children!" And who are we to say that public health mandates made in another country to fit a demographic you aren't part of is draconian? All good points which I accept, there's over a billion citizens in China and I'm sure their perspective on sweeping social policy is influenced by that unique fact. But here's a related question, should policing the free time of children really be the job of the government? Isn't that what the parents are for? I mean- that's why they became parents right? Because they want to raise this human, rather than watch it be raised for them? If this really is all about helping the children and solely about that, then couldn't the same end be reached with much less invasive and degrading measures, such as creating programs to teach parents how and why they should keep and eye on their children's free-time activities? (Maybe Xi just wants to feel like he's in everybody's living room with them, or something, playing Uncle Discipline.)

But wait, isn't this something of a toothless decree. I mean, how could the CCP feasibly enforce such an ungainly and wide reaching policy short of knocking down every door in the country (Which doesn't seem all that feasible given the population numbers.) Well they've actually solved that, because you see; China already had a pretty good stranglehold on all entertainment that can legally enter the country, and their government has the utmost control over entertainment created within their borders. As such, every Tencent game is fitted with a login feature that requires identifying data in order to play a session, proving the age of who's gaming. (As well as handily allowing the government to keep track of all player's gaming times so that they judge and manipulate social credit scores accordingly. This bracketed stuff is alleged, I feel legally obliged to say) Whatsmore, there's talk that logging into these games are starting to all require a live webcam section to the login so that details can't just be lent out to kids, the player will be clearly visible to... who? Will there be an AI checking ages with facecam footage? Do they have a team dedicated to just this task? Is Xi Jinping himself taking the opportunity to spy on gamers in their most vulnerable state like a creep? Who can say?

Now you might wonder, given that this effectively makes it impossible for any significant playtime to be racked up by young players, how the internal games companies are reacting to the time bans. Well if you wish to take state funded and run industries at their word, and who doesn't, then we can see the results on their profits are largely negligible. Tencent claimed only a measly margin of the money they make is off the back of children, and tossed away potential shortfalls with the carefree abandon of someone who's bills are covered by the government they serve. They're making enough money not to be wound up by these measures, but considering how every company on this diseased, greying, earth is forever in pursuit of all the money; I have to wonder if there are true, unspoken, thoughts bubbling away in the studios. (EA has shown just how profitable catering to children can be, afterall)

But if we're going to come down on real reasons, or rather the best assumptions we can make on the topic regarding the evidence to hand, then things become interesting. Whilst 'protecting the minds of our youth' seems like a noble goal, well- let's just say that nobility hardly makes for believable motivation when we're talking about a government who happily courts human rights violations on the regular. (Or at the least, that would be hugely hypocritical) Instead I think we saw a sliver of the truth leak out in a now infamous state article which attacked video games, tanking stock and spurring Chinese games companies to drastic measures. This article used a very specific term to describe gaming. "Spiritual Opium". A clear reference to the way that the British historically broke and addled the Chinese youth with the opium trade, resulting in several wars. An understandable reason for persisting animosity between China and the West. But what does that mean for the way they view video games? Well I think it's pretty clear, China see it as product of influence from the West that threatens CCP influence. At it's heart this isn't about the mental wellbeing of any children, this is about control. 

Recently this came to a head in my eyes when it was discovered that Chinese censors had made changes to the designs from outside the country in order to curve what they label as 'effeminate' characters. Actually, this push goes beyond gaming and into all cultural influences entering the country, but we have an example from the gaming world too. This is just another piece of evidence, if you needed it, that the CCP are so invested in managing their citizen's lives that they must dictate the very concept of what it is to be 'male' in order to appease some pathetic antiquated stereotype that they deem to be 'moral'. Too much chest showing? That's not manly. Wearing pink? None of that. Long hair? Better cut that down to regulation length now. It's not hard to see the unspoken attack on homosexuality barely hidden under these dictations, alongside the much more predictable disparaging of non-conformity in general. 

These are the sorts of standards that the CCP stands for, archaic and repressive as they sound, and those who buy into their narrative of 'positive social reform' and 'proactive policy establishment' merely need to look beyond the headlines. Again, this isn't a political blog, and so every opinion I share is primarily directed to the way these people view art and gaming, but when it bleeds into the real world like this I can't just ignore it. I think the idea of 'negative effeminacy' really struck a cord with me because I immediately reflected on how policy-makers like this would view a property I supremely love, like Jojo's Bizarre Adventure. Most every member of the Jojo cast, main or side, are always depicted with lavish extravagance and eye-popping colours, often whilst posing like supermodels. Also, most of them are male. It's a style that often runs hard against the stoic, boring, tough-guy model of the stereotypical 'manly man', and yet I respect that image a lot more than I do of the dull male protagonists of most other anime. A microcosm of this debate, perhaps, but I feel that has a relevant place in this conversation, because I believe that 'masculinity' is in no way limited to something as vapid and ephemeral as how you look and act, but instead is derived from the strength of your character. And besides, what's a cuddly little Pooh-bear like Xi Jinping know about how to be a manly man anyway? His evenings are no doubt spent curled up in a ball under his bed with a comically large terracotta jar inscribed with the title 'Hunny'.

So now we can come back on the whole 3-hour time limit on video gaming and see what it actually represents. It's an identification of gaming, as they have already done before with other forms of art, as an act of expression that runs counter to the goals of the government, however they specifically pan out. (I don't claim to know the inner workings of the Chinese government's hivemind, I can only paint broad strokes.) It's action made to try and exorcize gaming, and other societal influences, from the routines of children in the hopes that they don't pick them up as an adult. And it's an attack on individual freedoms. Now perhaps the Chinese public don't hold 'personal freedoms' to the same standard as the rest of the world, and I don't mind them viewing things that way. They may be utterly happy with the rulings and what it represents. I, however, look upon it all and see a poor policy, established in bad faith, to dubious ends. (Yeah, I have a feeling I'm not going to get approved for that vacation to Shaanxi anytime soon...)