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

NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

foxbusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 477 posts

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#251

Post by voldacar »

avn2109 wrote: post #153
nostromo wrote: post #14

It's not much of a dilemma though, is it? Already-rich folks kowtowing to fascists for a quick buck is beyond pathetic. US companies should stop targeting China for growth. If they don't steal your IP completely, they'll eventually freeze you out like they just did the NBA. It's happened to many companies and will eventually happen to you too. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

>> "... kowtowing to fascists ..." "Fascists" is probably not a good description of the Chinese Communist Party, since Fascism is widely regarded as always and everywhere the diametric opposite/enemy of Communism and Communists. Examples of this include [0] and [1] and [2] and [3], which are the results of me googling "is fascism the enemy of communism?" for 5 seconds. Probably you mean "Totalitarians" or "Statists"…

Fascism and Communism differ mainly in their aesthetic. The universal end result is authoritarianism and mass suffering. If they were diametric opposites, China would never have been able to pivot so quickly and easily from fairly orthodox communism during the Mao years to the sort of Fascist/state capitalist model they use now.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#252

Post by thelittleone »

bilbo0s wrote: post #159
ashelmire wrote: post #89

I find it interesting that there isn't a Boycott / Divest / Sanctions movement for China, despite the human rights abuses they've always committed, in addition to more recently holding people in concentration camps. Surely their offenses are far more egregious than Israel's? Where's the movement for Hong Kong, for the Uighur? Does anyone know of such an effort?

Well, what would we do though? I mean, start boycotting China, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Rwanda, etc, etc etc. I mean, I guess I should ask, in your view, where would that stop? Boycott every nation in the world with human rights violations?

You could do that, or just boycott the one(s) you feel strongly about. Any action is better than inaction.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#253

Post by ilaksh »

The problem is that the type of moral outrage in this thread is exactly the kind of thing that is necessary to motivate mass killing (otherwise known as war).

War is an appropriate conflict resolution approach for ant colonies, but not for people. I hope people here realize that.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#255

Post by mruts »

justaduderr wrote: post #107
NotSammyHagar wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about it-ism doesn't get us anywhere. The US is bad but has aspirations, historical, theoretical and actual of recognizing mistakes and doing better. Among many things we recognize today in the us is that it was wrong to imprison Japanese people in the US in ww2, Jim Crow laws were wrong, slavery was wrong and we changed the constitution to deal with it (and fought a war), changed laws against Jim Crow type thin…

> What about it-ism doesn't get us anywhere. This is false. Energy, money, time and resources are better used focusing on domestic concerns that can easily be resolved, not foreign matters. The USA has never owned up to anything without violent protests, and as you say yourself, a war. China will have the same growing pains I'm sure. I won't bother list what USA has done in foreign nations, but suffice it to say it's…

[flagged]

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#256

Post by lacampbell »

avn2109 wrote: post #153
nostromo wrote: post #14

It's not much of a dilemma though, is it? Already-rich folks kowtowing to fascists for a quick buck is beyond pathetic. US companies should stop targeting China for growth. If they don't steal your IP completely, they'll eventually freeze you out like they just did the NBA. It's happened to many companies and will eventually happen to you too. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

>> "... kowtowing to fascists ..." "Fascists" is probably not a good description of the Chinese Communist Party, since Fascism is widely regarded as always and everywhere the diametric opposite/enemy of Communism and Communists. Examples of this include [0] and [1] and [2] and [3], which are the results of me googling "is fascism the enemy of communism?" for 5 seconds. Probably you mean "Totalitarians" or "Statists"…

Fascists and Communists are very similar. Mussolini used to be a marxist, the Nazi party started out as an explicitly socialist party and was until Hitler took over. Many people today call the regimes of Mainland China and North Korea fascist. People used to call Chiang Kai Sheks regime fascist, but earlier in his career he was the "red general".

The two seem to always be found near each other.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#258

Post by wuliwong »

munificent wrote: post #158
ivankolev wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are taking a stance: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/08/media/nba-adam-silver/index.h...

My I'm just feeling cynical, but this just sounds to me like an easy way to have it both ways: 1. Placate the US by putting out a public statement saying "We support freedom of speech for our people." 2. Placate China by using a backchannel to ensure that no one in the NBA actually uses this nominal freedom to say something that hurts China's feelings. Actually standing up would require supporting a statement that ha…

You are just theorizing that #2 is happening with no evidence.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#259

Post by uoaei »

tooop wrote: post #96
uoaei wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Self-made" is almost always a misnomer because there's a point very early in the process of accruing wealth where you use it to bootstrap its own operations, i.e., you start paying other people for their output to collect a net profit. At that point, "self-made" no longer applies because now other people are involved. At what point that transition happens determines how "self-made" they are, but no one is ever 100%…

Self made means that you didn't inherit your money, win it in lottery or somebody just gave it you. Self-made doesn't stop applying when other people are involved, that is just absurd.

This conflates "self-made" with "started with nothing". In some ways they align but they're not useful as synonyms.

The major difference between inheriting money and attracting investors is that you need to be more convincing for the latter to get the money on offer. The investor to whom you are otherwise a stranger might want to put some contract together to make sure they see a slice of the pie if you're successful (big if!), but if you fail they don't demand their money back.

But how can you call it "self-made" if you're using someone else's money? It doesn't matter which pocket it comes from, at some point very early in the process you are dependent on the pocketbooks of others.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#260

Post by lacampbell »

voldacar wrote: post #251
avn2109 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> "... kowtowing to fascists ..." "Fascists" is probably not a good description of the Chinese Communist Party, since Fascism is widely regarded as always and everywhere the diametric opposite/enemy of Communism and Communists. Examples of this include [0] and [1] and [2] and [3], which are the results of me googling "is fascism the enemy of communism?" for 5 seconds. Probably you mean "Totalitarians" or "Statists"…

Fascism and Communism differ mainly in their aesthetic. The universal end result is authoritarianism and mass suffering. If they were diametric opposites, China would never have been able to pivot so quickly and easily from fairly orthodox communism during the Mao years to the sort of Fascist/state capitalist model they use now.

Which communist society was not "State Capitalist"? IIRC State Capitalism is a term invented by Trotsky, who used it to describe state control of the economy is opposed to workers control in the utopian vision of communism. But the early USSR rapidly abolished the workers councils while he was still a major figure in the USSR.
Post reply on HN