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

China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 523 posts

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#161

Post by trhway »

nekusar wrote: post #147
paytonjjones wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may well be true, but that hardly applies to the current case of taking $325M in bribes

US folks will contort to the extremes about any discussion of gross illegal conduct in China. This guy took $325M in bribes, embezzlement, abuse of power, and money laundering. And he did this as a public servant for over 30 years. I say good on China for attacking such brazen corruption so directly. Violating the public trust should be extremely harsh.

>And he did this as a public servant for over 30 years.

and it was discovered just now? May it be that he played exactly by the rules, the real rules, of the regime - corruption being among the foundational rules of it - and thus it was going for 30 years? And right now he just got his turn like it usually happens in totalitarian regimes. The regime will for show find an excuse to execute you if you got your turn, corruption is just the easiest one.

Also note that corruption is for the officials, state treason is for regular citizens. Same as in Russia. The regime wouldn't want to create impression of political disunity among the officials.

>Violating the public trust should be extremely harsh.

definitely. The only question why the comrade Xi is still not executed?

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#162

Post by SoftTalker »

lonely_wanderer wrote: post #13
onion2k wrote: post #5

I don't really understand the mentality of people who do this sort of criminal activity. If he'd stopped after, say, $5m and just retired he'd probably have managed to get away with it. Continuing to such a ridiculous degree through sheer greed led him to a death sentence. That's just plain stupid.

In for a penny, in for a pound. Unless you are extremely crafty, you don’t get to retire from this sort of criminality. Everyone who enabled you wants more and you have a semi-permanent metaphorical sword hanging over your head.

> Everyone who enabled you wants more

And once you've taken the first bribe, they now have leverage.

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#164

Post by jst1fthsdys »

haunter wrote: post #97
tyre wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xi has shown repeatedly that he’s serious about corruption. As others have noted, some of the highest civilian and military officials have been removed for it. Some sentenced to death. He sees it as a challenge to his legitimacy and China’s power, which, as you’d expect are the most important things to him; even if you take the most cynical view. Another timely example, because it is the World Cup, is the Chinese foo…

tbh my take as someone who follows sports heavily: China is just not good at team sports. If we consider the most relevant ones (part of the Olympics games): - volleyball. Probably their best team sport. Men's team have nothing to show but the women's team won the competition 3 times (1984, 2004, 2016) and the World Cup twice (1982, 1986) - basketball. Women's team are usually there at the Olympic games and they won…

Ah yes, race essentialism. I'd say I'm surprised to see this on HN, but I'm not.

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#166

Post by cumshitpiss »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #157
Aeolun wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution Maybe, but they hit the rich. All the selective prosecution in the US hits those least able to resist.

Counter-example: Sam-Bankman Fried. Biden's second biggest donor. Sentenced to 25 years in jail. Prosecuted even though it wasn't a clear cut case so there were excuses to hang a lack of prosecution on. No pardon.

[dead]

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#167

Post by trencedamp »

dzonga wrote: post #144

does punishing corruption with a death sentence - look excessive ? Yes! is it prone to abuse by those who yield power - Yes! however - the alternative - where corruption goes unchecked is even worse!! if you come from a poor country e.g in Africa - you would've experienced the effects of corruption. American are now experiencing it now - & the country is already worse off. though before corruption in American was use…

Death sentence is excessive. But many people here will be comparing it to the USA where the current punishment for corruption is nothing. Literally nothing. You just get away with it in plain sight

We don't need death sentence, we just need, like, any regular sentence

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#168

Post by vkou »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #157
Aeolun wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution Maybe, but they hit the rich. All the selective prosecution in the US hits those least able to resist.

Counter-example: Sam-Bankman Fried. Biden's second biggest donor. Sentenced to 25 years in jail. Prosecuted even though it wasn't a clear cut case so there were excuses to hang a lack of prosecution on. No pardon.

The case was pretty clear-cut, and as for the pardon... He clearly didn't pay the right president, Trevor Milton got one right at the start of this presidency.

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#169

Post by mikeyouse »

nonethewiser wrote: post #94
mushufasa wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xi Jinping rose to power on a message of anti-corruption, and part of the reason he remains in power on an indefinite term is by presenting himself as the "only trusted" person to maintain anti-corruption amongst all the factions. While I'm sure he doesn't catch all corruption and the CCP overall has selective enforcement, the reason they do have measures like this is in large part because of Xi Jinping's specific re…

You seem to be circling the issue. Corruption can mean anything from taking bribes to exerting influence that is outside Xi’s interests.

And far too people are aware that Xi is extraordinarily corrupt..

"Similarly, Xi’s siblings, nieces, and nephews held assets worth over $1 billion in business investments and real estate"

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ODNI-Un...

Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes

#170

Post by mrandish »

haunter wrote: post #97
tyre wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xi has shown repeatedly that he’s serious about corruption. As others have noted, some of the highest civilian and military officials have been removed for it. Some sentenced to death. He sees it as a challenge to his legitimacy and China’s power, which, as you’d expect are the most important things to him; even if you take the most cynical view. Another timely example, because it is the World Cup, is the Chinese foo…

tbh my take as someone who follows sports heavily: China is just not good at team sports. If we consider the most relevant ones (part of the Olympics games): - volleyball. Probably their best team sport. Men's team have nothing to show but the women's team won the competition 3 times (1984, 2004, 2016) and the World Cup twice (1982, 1986) - basketball. Women's team are usually there at the Olympic games and they won…

> China is just not good at team sports

One thing we know is important for a country to be globally competitive in team athletics is having pervasive grass roots youth leagues developing talent from an early age. My sense is the Chinese have a structured selection system where they try out kids in key sports and select the best for special development.

Compare this with Western democracies where kids of most skill levels are generally able to keep playing club sports through high school as long as they have an interest and any aptitude at all. In America, pee wee football, girl's soccer leagues, etc are part of the social fabric of communities. It's considered worthwhile to let kids practice, play and develop even when they show no professional or collegiate potential.

The deep reach and years of development of kids with no clear aptitude matter because it's about identifying outliers. I suspect it comes down to chaotic but pervasive casual development beating central planning.

Post reply on HN