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

431–440 of 523 posts

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

#431

Post by ClumsyPilot »

libertine wrote: post #429
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how you are unable to separate actual crimes from government policies you disagree with. >> corruption is an institution >> Or for example, how has IP theft policy changed? Another country may decide to have no IP protections, that’s not a crime. Furthermore Intellectual property is legal fiction, some people and countries don’t believe in it. Apparently Anthropic don’t believe in IP either, they are stealing…

I'm not being unable to separate crime from policy, you're the one trying to dilute both as showing a signal to policy change. If this was just a political action to take down just another corrupt official enabled by the government, how is this a good thing? Well for a lot of countries protecting inventions with patents was a major trigger for development, so much so it became a cornerstone and you can even say an in…

> So of course it would be viewed as corruption by any country with such institutions

It’s not viewed as corruption. US gov made numerous public statements condemning IP theft, and never even once classified it as corruption - it’s simply a different crime.

Furthermore, you suggested a benchmark is: “How wealthy are the ruling elites”

Well let’s see - the richest man in the world is American, 70% of 100 richest people are American, American has higher inequality than China.

By what robust quantitative measurement does this effort look less genuine than American one?

Are you accessing any objective facts or you simply are unable to accept that a country you are opposed to is making genuine progress?

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

#432

Post by nekusar »

libertine wrote: post #429
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how you are unable to separate actual crimes from government policies you disagree with. >> corruption is an institution >> Or for example, how has IP theft policy changed? Another country may decide to have no IP protections, that’s not a crime. Furthermore Intellectual property is legal fiction, some people and countries don’t believe in it. Apparently Anthropic don’t believe in IP either, they are stealing…

I'm not being unable to separate crime from policy, you're the one trying to dilute both as showing a signal to policy change. If this was just a political action to take down just another corrupt official enabled by the government, how is this a good thing? Well for a lot of countries protecting inventions with patents was a major trigger for development, so much so it became a cornerstone and you can even say an in…

Im assuming youre likrly from the USA.

Go look up the history of the USA and creation of copyright/patent/trademark was done, and how we dis-recognized all European claims. They were howling similarly.

Go look at how extreme patent law perverted and kept airplanes locked to the Wright brothers, and held down an industry, while other countries (many European as well) were at the forefront of avionics. Patents held the USA back until the US GOV eminent domained the patent freeing it for WW1 armament.

Or go look up why Hollywood was a thing. Again, patent laws on cameras, and eacaping to California was all about screwing over patrnt holders over royalties.

And sure, China didnt recognize our copyrights. Ok. And? We dont recognize theirs either.

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

#433

Post by jingpostmedia »

mmooss wrote: post #329
threatofrain wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming that this guy was actually being prosecuted for crimes or that this guy lacked loyalty to Xi Jinping. A tremendous number of top generals and leadership has been wiped out in a short time and not necessarily refilled, and it's not because China has a huge disloyalty problem.

> it's not because China has a huge disloyalty problem. Why not? Dictators often purge anyone who is a threat, often because they form a possibly competitive power structure (regardless of their intent), and often because of paranoid perceived disloyalty, and for actual disloyalty. And corruption is the cover story they commonly use - it's vague, general, the public sees enough gov't corruption to believe it and to h…

[flagged]

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

#434

Post by goobatrooba »

TrackerFF wrote: post #8

I sometimes see people "celebrate" this, with the rationale that China is cracking down on white-collar crimes and handing out sentences unheard of in the west. But, are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution? Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing, if they were to be caught doing the same?

While other commenters take the lesson that Xi goes after corruption, I would restate it:

* he goes after corrupt officials, in both minor roles and very public big cases; and * he also accused inconvenient people (mostly potential contenders) of corruption to get rid of them (see the list of party leaders purged since Xi came to power, with some even led off stage at the main CCP Congress in a show of power). * How many corrupt officials are not persecuted due to political favouritism is by definition impossible to know from the outside.

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

#435

Post by refurb »

Danox wrote: post #115

The antifreeze toothpaste people didn’t get away with it, nor did the 3000 pigs in the river people, and nor did that one group of executives who were in charge of a fertilizer/chemical plant that was one of the largest industrial catastrophes in the world let alone China. If you get caught in China, Vietnam, or Singapore the penalties for white collar criminals is zero tolerance. You can’t buy your way out if you do…

I’ve lived in 2 out of 3 of those countries and I can assure you people get away with fraud and corruption all the time.

If you’re well connected (or making the right people rich) they are happy to overlook it. But if you bite off too much and they need a head to roll they will find one (usually someone lower level).

I mean look at the number of military leader simply dismissed in China for massive corruption. They get a fat pension and go away quietly and the small guy pays with his life.

Not sure I’d be expounding the greatness of that system.

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

#436

Post by jiaosdjf »

Danox wrote: post #115

The antifreeze toothpaste people didn’t get away with it, nor did the 3000 pigs in the river people, and nor did that one group of executives who were in charge of a fertilizer/chemical plant that was one of the largest industrial catastrophes in the world let alone China. If you get caught in China, Vietnam, or Singapore the penalties for white collar criminals is zero tolerance. You can’t buy your way out if you do…

China is as corrupt or more corrupt as anywhere else. You can absolutely buy your way out, or otherwise wrangle something. Zero tolerance death penalty for this sort of thing is a sign of extreme desperation - the fact that there are any such scandals despite the penalty is telling.

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

#437

Post by refurb »

saxonww wrote: post #332
nixon_why69 wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They ran a rolling internment program for a few years, holding people against their will in mandatory patriotism camp for months at a time. That's bad and wrong but you need to be killing people to call it genocide. It's been a master class in propaganda on this topic, look up the name Adrian Zenz and see how often he gets uncritically quoted.

> you need to be killing people to call it genocide No, you don't. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/... See Article 2.

So the “-cide” root of the word which means “kill” no longer means that?

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

#438

Post by throw2827274 »

illiac786 wrote: post #424
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? Do you have an example of substantial disaster or scandal that resulted in loss of life and loss of face for China, but perpetuators got away? For UK I have: Grenfell tower scandal (over 100 dead, no one in prison), infected blood scandal (thousands dead, no one in prison), postmaster scandal (thousands falsely imprisoned , no perpetrator in prison), etc.

Well but the point was, that these are wiped from the internet. Sure it’s convenient, but I wouldn’t put it past the Chinese government - I’m sure they have erased quite a bit of uncomfortable facts.

I don't understand how they could simultaneously wipe some things completely off the Internet and other things are completely leaked out.

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

#439

Post by illiac786 »

throw2827274 wrote: post #438
illiac786 wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well but the point was, that these are wiped from the internet. Sure it’s convenient, but I wouldn’t put it past the Chinese government - I’m sure they have erased quite a bit of uncomfortable facts.

I don't understand how they could simultaneously wipe some things completely off the Internet and other things are completely leaked out.

If it leaks into independent medias, they probably will have a hard time erasing it. If they erase it before it makes it to any independent media, they have a good chance it will never surface again. At least that’s how I imagine it.

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

#440

Post by vkou »

palmotea wrote: post #395
vkou wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#1 is a net-better outcome for everyone else than doing nothing.

> #1 is a net-better outcome for everyone else than doing nothing. You kill some corrupt guy, just to replace him with another corrupt guy who's in the leader's good-graces. How is that "a net-better outcome for everyone else"?

Another possibility exists - the new one might well be less corrupt.

Given that this one took nearly half a billion, it is, in fact, quite likely.

Post reply on HN