Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 132 posts

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#121

Post by yorwba »

pas wrote: post #89
yorwba wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's directly making slave labor unprofitable. That only works if sanctions apply to slave labor, but not to comparable non-slave-labor. Sanctions based on geographic region ("Made in China"/"Made in Xinjiang") ethnicity ("Made by Uyghurs") or product category (cotton) can't achieve that, because they don't apply differential pressure that allows non-enslaving businesses to outcompete enslaving ones (and then hire…

Sorry, I wasn't detailed enough. Sanctions help other countries', so let's say the Vietnamese cotton producers. > dedicated inspection teams That would be a very welcome development in international labor/human rights.

Helping other countries may be a good thing (although the Vietnamese government's human rights record isn't that great) but it doesn't offer a way out to current victims of forced labor, who can't just move to another country to benefit from the improved conditions there. Do you think they'd just get released once exploiting them becomes unprofitable? That would put a bunch of angry unemployed people on the streets, so the security services are unlikely to be in favor. The most likely path forward would be gradually transferring them into regular work, which works best if such work is available, i.e. there's no blanket ban making everything equally unprofitable.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#122

Post by dang »

BrandoElFollito wrote: post #120
dang wrote: post #116

All: these threads have all become the same hellish flamewar, endlessly repeated. Anything this flamey and/or repetitive is off topic here. HN is for thoughtful, curious conversation, not smiting enemies: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . Please see these recent explanations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26637365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26630159 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?…

I am genuinely curious (even though this may not be the best place to ask) : are you the only mod running around trying to keep HN in one piece or are there more (also because you often say "we" (banned, warned,etc.)) In any case, great work.

There are more but I'm currently the only public one.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#123

Post by KlinkEastwood »

dang wrote: post #119
KlinkEastwood wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CCp is not image conscious. That's honestly a totally asinine statement. That's like saying a mafia boss is image conscious because he threatens to murder anyone who speaks out about his crimes. And speak for yourself, I would like few political things more than to see the ccp overthrown and a bunch of apparatchiks hanged from the forbidden palace.

We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political/nationalistic/ideological/racial/whatever-this-is battle. We ban such accounts regardless of what they're battling for or against because it destroys the curious conversation this site is supposed to be for. Please don't create accounts to do that with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

okay well then go fuck yourself you censoring shithead

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#124

Post by bufferoverflow »

KlinkEastwood wrote: post #46
c0nducktr wrote: post #28

Anyone care to say what they believe should be done, or is this just another mad about things thread? Anyone have ideas? What is the solution?

The answer is war. It's really that simple. Do we want to bear that cost? Personally my answer is please God no, but that doesn't mean war isn't the only real option.

Nuclear war ends badly for all the participants and their allies, no exception. And not great for everyone else either.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#125

Post by TeeMassive »

thereare5lights wrote: post #111
TeeMassive wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you consider that until very recently, it was legal for NYPD officers to have sex with people in their custody That has nothing to do with the subject.

On the contrary, they're both things that should obviously be illegal. The question is why aren't things that should obviously be illegal not actually illegal. I answered that question. However, it seems like some people reflexively support the police so they don't read past the surface.

Your example is a glitch, of law, the other is obvious on its face.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#126

Post by deanCommie »

blackrock wrote: post #73
Leary wrote: post #3

[flagged]

This is actually an interesting question. The western countries are accusing China of fake genocide here, such as suppressing the Uyghur culture, their language, their food, their clothing, even their haircuts. But yet, H&M is a western brand, that sells jeans and T-shirt, which are western style clothes. So, if the Uyghurs are buying and wearing H&M clothes, instead of traditional Uyghur clothes, then they are in ef…

> So, if the Uyghurs are buying and wearing H&M clothes, instead of traditional Uyghur clothes, then they are in effect genociding themselves.

"She accused him of rape, but then the next day had sex with someone she met at a bar. So which is it?"

That is the logical equivalent of your post.

I simply cannot believe that you would not be able to tell the difference being an issue of CONSENT and AGENCY.

H&M is not FORCING anyone to adopt western cultural standards or abandon their heritage.

The CPC is.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#127

Post by deanCommie »

blackrock wrote: post #105
sofixa wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

] The western countries are accusing China of fake genocide here, such as suppressing the Uyghur culture, their language, their food, their clothing, even their haircuts First of all, that's not a fake genocide. Forced cultural assimilation is still considered genocide. Second, the accusations are far more serious - concentration camps with various human rights abuses. That's in classic genocide territory, going as f…

> Forced cultural assimilation is still considered genocide. Interesting point of view there. You sure you want to die on this hill? Ok, let’s take that a step further. In the Western countries, the United States, Canada, Australia, and Europe, they all force their immigrants to culturally assimilate. They do this by socially shaming the immigrants to adopt local names, and to not speak their own native language. Thi…

> In the Western countries, the United States, Canada, Australia, and Europe, they all force their immigrants to culturally assimilate. They do this by socially shaming the immigrants to adopt local names, and to not speak their own native language.This is very prevalent in the white countries, where white people scream out: “Why don’t you speak English, and learn our culture!”

This happens by a sub group of Conservative regressive minority of the population. It is not government sanctioned and in most of the countries you mentioned not supported by the majority of the public opinion. These are exceptions not the rule.

> And in grade schools, the immigrants are mocked for being foreign.

You're comparing the behavior of petulant children against government policy of the CPC? Apt, I suppose, if that's the standard you hold them to.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#128

Post by stunt »

KlinkEastwood wrote: post #46
c0nducktr wrote: post #28

Anyone care to say what they believe should be done, or is this just another mad about things thread? Anyone have ideas? What is the solution?

The answer is war. It's really that simple. Do we want to bear that cost? Personally my answer is please God no, but that doesn't mean war isn't the only real option.

Don't believe everything you read on the news.

Occurrence of war based on fake allegations isn't rare in our history. We now have enough motivation to have a war against China and human rights isn't one of them. It's all about power and that's why there is so much focus on media about it.

Why nobody talks about KSA/Saudis? We have strong proof for all the terrible things they have done and they are still our dear partner. It's all BS if you ask me. Everything is about power and interest.

Travel to China and see what they are doing. China isn't an utopia, but most of the Chinese are happy about their progress. They complain about lack of freedom of speech but they also celebrate their victory in ending extreme poverty. They also have a lot of respect for western values unlike what politicians are trying to make you believe. It's pretty significant that they have order with a population of over 1.4 billion, most of whom were not educated.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#129

Post by pas »

yorwba wrote: post #121
pas wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I wasn't detailed enough. Sanctions help other countries', so let's say the Vietnamese cotton producers. > dedicated inspection teams That would be a very welcome development in international labor/human rights.

Helping other countries may be a good thing (although the Vietnamese government's human rights record isn't that great) but it doesn't offer a way out to current victims of forced labor, who can't just move to another country to benefit from the improved conditions there. Do you think they'd just get released once exploiting them becomes unprofitable? That would put a bunch of angry unemployed people on the streets,…

Usually sanctioned countries have quite a lot of room for domestic economic growth, most obstacles are internal inefficiencies (like human rights abuses, inefficient ideology based policies), and naturally since the sanctions are a direct result of some alleged problem, as the problem is getting addressed the sanctions can be too. Diplomacy never rests.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#130

Post by DreamScatter »

dang wrote: post #114
Klwohu wrote: post #12

Wow somebody came in and downvoted EVERYBODY in this thread. Five cent army, assemble!

You've seriously broken the HN guidelines. Please read the rules and stick to them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . If you'd like more explanation, there is plenty at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26652363 and the links back from there. Edit: we had to warn you about this before ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26549570 ). Continuing to break the rules like this will get your account b…

So, you're also a chinese shill?
Post reply on HN