5 ms·

I'm confused. So we are upset with China and it's lack of human rights. But we get upset with Trump for talking to Taiwan... If we were advocating human rights

I'm confused. So we are upset with China and it's lack of human rights. But we get upset with Trump for talking to Taiwan... If we were advocating human rights we would also advocate against One China policy.

laurent123456 10y ago
Except that Trump only talk to Taiwan as a way to bargain with China, which is a dumb diplomatic move (since, given how complex the situation is, the status quo is probably what's best for both Taiwan and China). Probably the last thing Trump care about is human rights.
- philliphaydon 10y ago
  My point is that if America wants to talk about human rights in china, then it also has to denounce its acceptance of One China policy.
  - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    Probably not wise to mention Trump then, who praised the Chinese regime for crushing the pro-democracy "riot" (his word) in Tienanmen Square.
    - Neliquat 10y ago
      Citation?
      - BEEdwards 10y ago
        https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/11/donald-trump-tiananmen-square-china-playboy-interview https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/11/donald-trump...
        dqv 10y ago
        That source chain is really weird to me. It goes Guardian -> Independent -> filthy.media - a news company founded in 2016. I guess they have a license to the content? Otherwise, I don't get why Guardian wouldn't just link to the original Playboy interview. Okay, on to the Guardian article, which does well to quote the original content. >When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of the world— Honestly, I don't know what that means - it's bordering unintelligible. The way he used pronouns in that sentence completely obfuscates who he was calling vicious and who he was calling strong. So, I can go with how I feel about Trump as a person and use the Guardian as my source for how I should interpret what he said: "he praised the Chinese regime". Or I can just go with what I really feel which is "I have no idea what that means."
        fjdlwlv 10y ago
        It's tricky but translatable. He's saying that the government was vicious as horrible, but it worked for them because they where forceful. Then he maps it back to the US, saying that we need to be forceful to be successful (presumably we won't be horrible and vicious, though) Strength is bad when evil people (THEY) use it but good when good people (US) use it. He's using the King Arthurian logic of "Might makes Right in this world, but WE shall use Might in the service of Right" and holy cow my required liberal arts elective is directly applicable to modern government policy.
        burkaman 10y ago
        Trump does not have a core set of principles, so you cannot presume and read between the lines, you can only take what he says at face value.
        techthroway443 10y ago
        Silly question but how did you find the source? Must be overlooking it but I don't see Independent listed anywhere on that page.
  - tdaltonc 10y ago
    Why? I don't see and necessary relationship between those two things.
est 10y ago
> against One China policy. That means war for the mainland Chinese and Chinese who live on an island which calls themselves non-Chinese (but actually Chinese in every way)
seanmcdirmid 10y ago
> So we are upset with China and it's lack of human rights. More like disappointed. > But we get upset with Trump for talking to Taiwan... I'm not sure where you are getting your info on this. It is really something I personally don't care about. I just hope China and Taiwan don't go to war, that would suck. > If we were advocating human rights we would also advocate against One China policy. This is a straw man. It would be much better for China to simply have better human rights, the sovereignty of Taiwan isn't related (and even they only got human rights in the 80s).
davesque 10y ago
I'm no Trump fan but, when he spoke with the Taiwanese leader, I actually thought it was a good thing, although I think he did it more out of ignorance than insight. Either way, it just served to underscore how dumb it is that all these countries around the world have all kinds of complicated reasons for not liking each other. From this, we get this complicated system of dos and don'ts which, to outside observers, just seems ridiculous.

laurent123456 10y ago

Except that Trump only talk to Taiwan as a way to bargain with China, which is a dumb diplomatic move (since, given how complex the situation is, the status quo is probably what's best for both Taiwan and China). Probably the last thing Trump care about is human rights.

philliphaydon 10y ago
My point is that if America wants to talk about human rights in china, then it also has to denounce its acceptance of One China policy.
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  Probably not wise to mention Trump then, who praised the Chinese regime for crushing the pro-democracy "riot" (his word) in Tienanmen Square.
  - Neliquat 10y ago
    Citation?
    - BEEdwards 10y ago
      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/11/donald-trump-tiananmen-square-china-playboy-interview https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/11/donald-trump...
      - dqv 10y ago
        That source chain is really weird to me. It goes Guardian -> Independent -> filthy.media - a news company founded in 2016. I guess they have a license to the content? Otherwise, I don't get why Guardian wouldn't just link to the original Playboy interview. Okay, on to the Guardian article, which does well to quote the original content. >When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of the world— Honestly, I don't know what that means - it's bordering unintelligible. The way he used pronouns in that sentence completely obfuscates who he was calling vicious and who he was calling strong. So, I can go with how I feel about Trump as a person and use the Guardian as my source for how I should interpret what he said: "he praised the Chinese regime". Or I can just go with what I really feel which is "I have no idea what that means."
        fjdlwlv 10y ago
        It's tricky but translatable. He's saying that the government was vicious as horrible, but it worked for them because they where forceful. Then he maps it back to the US, saying that we need to be forceful to be successful (presumably we won't be horrible and vicious, though) Strength is bad when evil people (THEY) use it but good when good people (US) use it. He's using the King Arthurian logic of "Might makes Right in this world, but WE shall use Might in the service of Right" and holy cow my required liberal arts elective is directly applicable to modern government policy.
        burkaman 10y ago
        Trump does not have a core set of principles, so you cannot presume and read between the lines, you can only take what he says at face value.
        techthroway443 10y ago
        Silly question but how did you find the source? Must be overlooking it but I don't see Independent listed anywhere on that page.
- tdaltonc 10y ago
  Why? I don't see and necessary relationship between those two things.

est 10y ago

> against One China policy. That means war for the mainland Chinese and Chinese who live on an island which calls themselves non-Chinese (but actually Chinese in every way)

seanmcdirmid 10y ago

> So we are upset with China and it's lack of human rights. More like disappointed. > But we get upset with Trump for talking to Taiwan... I'm not sure where you are getting your info on this. It is really something I personally don't care about. I just hope China and Taiwan don't go to war, that would suck. > If we were advocating human rights we would also advocate against One China policy. This is a straw man. It would be much better for China to simply have better human rights, the sovereignty of Taiwan isn't related (and even they only got human rights in the 80s).

davesque 10y ago

I'm no Trump fan but, when he spoke with the Taiwanese leader, I actually thought it was a good thing, although I think he did it more out of ignorance than insight. Either way, it just served to underscore how dumb it is that all these countries around the world have all kinds of complicated reasons for not liking each other. From this, we get this complicated system of dos and don'ts which, to outside observers, just seems ridiculous.