Live data from Hacker News

China

drewdevault.com

411–420 of 497 posts

Re: China

#411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Xi's in a trap. The nationalist fervor that the CCP has whipped up for decades, coupled with the demonization of the HK protestors by Chinese media and Xi's 'no compromise' stance, makes it impossible for him to lighten up -- and the protests to de-escalate -- without him seeming weak. Yeah I don't have any sympathy for him or for the CCP. Appealing to nationalist sentiment to amass political power is making a deal…

> The West naively thought the "free market" would liberalize China (and Russia) and we were very wrong. We have all heard this idea thrown around now for some time. It’s only in the last few years it seems people have accepted that it wasn’t going to work. In the context of the trade war and everything lately, I’ve really been thinking about this theory. On one hand, we know the current reality. An ascendant authori…

Yeah, that's all fair and counterfactuals are impossible. My instinct, though I have nothing to back this up, is:

- The US foreign policy of regime change and bullying hegemony was a complete failure, and totally counterproductive.

- We should have deployed soft power, like aid, diplomacy, and the Peace Corps, to places that were vulnerable to falling into authoritarian rule long term, and invested in the development of poorer countries.

- We should have more seriously considered deploying hard power to places that initially fell into authoritarian rule. I know Cuba was a failure and I know military action has serious consequences (especially for civilians), but compared to authoritarian governments wielding vast nuclear arsenals and ponderous economic weight... it's a tough choice.

- We should internalize that as the US goes, the world tends to follow. Whenever we violate sovereignty, human rights, or our own values and laws, the world takes notice. Like it or not, we're responsible for showing the world how a liberal superpower behaves. We need to take that responsibility seriously.

Re: China

#412
post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a lot of mainland people in the US who think the western medias are all biased and that they are helping HK to separate from China.

Several highly-educated Mainland China associates and colleagues have shared such thoughts with me and expressed general disdain for the HK protestors.

Well educated ≠ well informed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsWa9fieWSU

This interview was in Melbourne, Australia. Many of the interviewees were mainland students in Australia.

Not saying your associates and colleagues must be like one of them. Just offering one possible explanation.

You can also test their knowledge, by asking them about the Five Demands of Hong Kong protestors, and also Hong Kong legislative and government structures. Some of the answers can be found in the original article.

Re: China

#413
post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't take HN threads further into political flamewar or use HN primarily for political battle. We ban accounts that do that. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I know you very well, you specifically only target pro-trump posters. You have NEVER ever said anything to anti-trump baiters.

You must have missed all of those! Here's one from yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21573934

Also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21430000

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21288038

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20929962

...and so on.

Re: China

#414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"global concept" =/= "global endorsement", nevermind that there are constant reforms and improvements to Chinese legal system, the anticorruption drive for instance which the west dismiss as power consolidation but subsequent analysis has concluded to be a broadly genuine effort. Or to acknowledge that reforms take time, and is subject to regression depending on conditions. How long did it take African Americans to g…

> nevermind that there are constant reforms and improvements to Chinese legal system, the anticorruption drive for instance which the west dismiss as power consolidation but subsequent analysis has concluded to be a broadly genuine effort This is certainly possible, and I of course applaud anti-corruption policies. We have something of a corruption problem here in the US you may have heard about. The mistrust comes f…

This all boils down:

> Here you are justifying China's violation of human rights because they're a developing nation.

...

> So let's be honest, you're setting an impossible standard so you don't have to take responsibility.

Again, I'm not absolving China of their failures and abuses. But I also recognize that currently, China is operating within hegemonic standards set by 70 years of US leadership. That is, the privileged to ignore international laws and norms because as the great power, standard bearer, US set the precedence for such behavior. XJ specifically maps onto hysteric over reaction to post 9/11 attacks. There's a reason that XJ crackdown plays well to domestic audiences besides shared Islamophobic ignorance - there has no been no serious extremist attacks since the security apparatus was established. Great powers with the resources to keep their population safe will do so even if the cost is disproportionate to the risk or if the cost means eating away at domestic rights. This isn't an argument that China has a "moral right" to conduct such abuses like US in their war against terror, both are gross human right violations, rather the precedents set by the largely unchallenged US actions abroad, outside of concerned words like this letter, set the established the allowable scope of of atrocities in the name of security. So if Americans wants to have a credible podium to compel others to reduce their scope of atrocity, then they must also reduce their own. Security follows MAD logic in that regard, no one is willing to do less than what is acceptable. And if free and fair elections are the bedrock, then every American is culpable for setting the bar this low. Personally I wouldn't attribute blame to voters, because I find the US electoral system too imperfect to express populace desires when these conflict with challenge national interest.

> You are again arguing that economic development trumps human rights.

Economic development IS human rights. It's the basis for establishing the four freedoms Roosevelt preached everyone ought to enjoy - speech, worship, want, fear. There's a reason most Chinese / developing countries are preoccupied with "want" and countries that are victims to extremist attacks over react in response to "fear", because physiology and safety is the base of maslows hierarchy of needs. Not everyone has the luxury of affluence to fulfill everything freedom right now. Sometimes they must choose, moral calculus is not easy when every decision are bad trolley problems.

>And I deeply hope the world won't buy the kinds of arguments you're making. In fact, I hope you come around too :) Everyone can change.

This is your fundamental misreading of my position. I prefer liberal values as well but understand the conditions they spring from, and the long trajectory it takes / will take to get there in developing countries. All the Asian tigers that the west hoped China would emulate sprung from established authoritarian regimes who grew their economies via protectionism policies until the people reached a level of wealth that made pursuing other freedoms attractive. IMO China will be no different, even accounting current developments in surveillance society. And more specific to the quoted point, my criticism is the lack of US moral consistency and leadership is what makes the Chinese model attractive. And it is. Most developed western country that requires immigration to support their future is being destabilized by massive demographic and social changes, read non white immigration influx no small fault to US ME policy, leading to nativism and populism that's springing up in liberal societies around the world. No one has a solution to this, US is not offering a credible alternative. Nor do they have competing plans to help underdeveloped countries like Chinese B&R. If Chinese integration camps work in XJ, expect it to be adopted elsewhere relabeled as civic lessons with * characteristics. IF BRI works well, expect the many countries it touches to be Sino aligned if not out of ideology but dependence. Focusing on China bad and debt trap is ultimately deflection to the fact that an absence of US moral leadership and inability to address contemporary and global problems is causing people to lose faith in the model that US is championing.

Re: China

#415
post #43

Xi's in a trap. The nationalist fervor that the CCP has whipped up for decades, coupled with the demonization of the HK protestors by Chinese media and Xi's 'no compromise' stance, makes it impossible for him to lighten up -- and the protests to de-escalate -- without him seeming weak. The HK protestors/population at this point are so angry and the radical wing so large, that they won't willingly de-escalate. Even if…

I think your comment about the Olympics is very insightful and something I had not considered. It’s a shame they’re not a year sooner.

Re: China

#416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which means he is voting to keep the incumbent in This is a binary choice dem or repub any other choice is a vote for the incumbent

I have someone I work with who quite literally mocks people for voting for a 3rd party and actually tries to "shame" them for it, usually using a line like "which means he is voting to keep the incumbent in" (usually with more colorful words about the incumbent and the voter). Voting 3rd party exercises your right to say you don't like either of the other 2 candidates. I will not argue which candidate it will help, b…

I like to think of it as showing up to not vote. You made an effort to express your disappointment that can't just be argued away as 'people are too busy'.

Here in Australia at least I can do that every time and still have my vote go to the lesser evil due to preferences.

Re: China

#417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re right and entirely sideway to my point, which is that narrative pushing are not just from one side alone.

Let's consider a hypothetical scenario similar to the one you put forward then. Suppose the US government conducts mass imprisonment of a certain population in concentration camps, like CCP is doing to Uighurs in Xinjiang. Well, it's not hypothetical, we already did it during WWII to Americans of Japanese ethnicity. And newspapers across the US spoke up against this atrocity [1]. Contrast that with China where the ne…

> Suppose the US government conducts mass imprisonment of a certain population

I'd argue that's not hypothetical at all, even with Xinjiang the US has by far the highest rate of imprisonment on the planet both of adults and children.

Most are black. Vast majority are not violent crimes.

It's entirely out of step with the rest of the developed world.

Re: China

#418
post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> But defining good as having access to cheaper goods is an intensely political statement > This would be apolitical in all but the most semantic of arguments. "Buying the things I want to buy" is assumed to be a good thing by the vast majority of people. That's a myopic view: it's not the only good thing, and it's arguable that it's not even the most important good thing. The politics are embedded in the shape of t…

Arguing against that being the most import good thing is the most ridiculous straw man.

[deleted]

Re: China

#419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Xi's in a trap. The nationalist fervor that the CCP has whipped up for decades, coupled with the demonization of the HK protestors by Chinese media and Xi's 'no compromise' stance, makes it impossible for him to lighten up -- and the protests to de-escalate -- without him seeming weak. Yeah I don't have any sympathy for him or for the CCP. Appealing to nationalist sentiment to amass political power is making a deal…

> The West naively thought the "free market" would liberalize China (and Russia) and we were very wrong. We have all heard this idea thrown around now for some time. It’s only in the last few years it seems people have accepted that it wasn’t going to work. In the context of the trade war and everything lately, I’ve really been thinking about this theory. On one hand, we know the current reality. An ascendant authori…

Interesting.

It is important to realize that experts believe the NK situation would be totally unsustainable without China.

Ergo, if China were like NK, it wouldn’t last long, because there is no big-brother economy that could support the (disaster) situation.

Re: China

#420
post #43

Xi's in a trap. The nationalist fervor that the CCP has whipped up for decades, coupled with the demonization of the HK protestors by Chinese media and Xi's 'no compromise' stance, makes it impossible for him to lighten up -- and the protests to de-escalate -- without him seeming weak. The HK protestors/population at this point are so angry and the radical wing so large, that they won't willingly de-escalate. Even if…

Social media in China is also heavily censored and manipulated. There are quite a few in mainland China who understands what's going on here in Hong Kong, but most buy into the state propaganda and wants us exterminated for being "separatists" and "traitors of the Chinese race."

Do they believe the CIA is running the concentration camps in China?
Post reply on HN