4 ms·

It seems very fashionable to pull out moral equivalency every time China's autocracy and misbehavior is mentioned. Simple experiment: 1. Walk down Pennsylvani

It seems very fashionable to pull out moral equivalency every time China's autocracy and misbehavior is mentioned. Simple experiment: 1. Walk down Pennsylvania Avenue with a sign that says "Trump is a pussy grabber who should be impeached". 2. Go to Tiananmen Square and hold up a poster-sized picture from the 1989 massacre. See how equivalent the governments are then. (As an aside... if I was employed by the Chinese government to spread propaganda in other countries, your comment is roughly what I'd write).

api 8y ago
You can make an exact comparison. Not too terribly long ago I saw protests holding up poster sized pictures of prisoner abuse from Abu Gharib and Guantanamo Bay, which is roughly like holding up a poster-sized picture from the 1989 massacre. Nothing happened to these people in spite of the fact that these pictures are deeply embarrassing to the US government and intensely inflammatory in regions of the world where we don't want to be inflammatory. As much as I give Snowden credit for exposing what can be dangerous autocratic programs, I also must point out that Snowden was not just some random protester. Snowden violated a government secrecy oath that he signed, which is a crime and this fact is printed rather boldly on the contract. Nobody forces you to sign these oaths. You can always say "I'm sorry, I can't sign this, I quit" and walk out and get another job. That's part of what "the rule of law" actually means. In a nation with the rule of law, the law applies objectively to everyone: crooks, politicians, and yes even do-gooders. If the law is wrong you can vote for representatives to change it, but until then what's written is the law. If the law says it's illegal to hop on a pogo stick, then anyone hopping on a pogo stick gets arrested even if they're on their way to feed starving orphans. (Secret courts are another matter, and I think those are un-American and should be shut down. But they are used far less in America than in China, and when they are used and the fact becomes known there's generally quite an uproar.) Also-- personally I find the NSA and CIA less alarming than Facebook and Google. Three-letter agencies operate with at least some democratic oversight and the intel they gather does tend to be used primarily for legitimate intelligence and national security purposes. Unfortunately we do not live on planet fluffy bunny hugs and we need an intelligence service and a military. Facebook and Google operate with zero oversight whatsoever and sell their surveillance services to the highest bidder. Private surveillance operations are completely lawless.
- ed_balls 8y ago
  Would you do something truly immoral, because "rule of law"? An example: Every new born child with Apgar score below 8 should be killed. Would you really do it? Would you stick to the rule of law? > Snowden violated a government secrecy oath that he signed, which is a crime and this fact is printed rather boldly on the contract. He broke the contract, but you can make a case that the contract was in violation of constitution.
  - api 8y ago
    If I were ordered to do something that deeply immoral by the state I might pretend I was going to comply, but only long enough to pack a "go bag" and get myself and my family out of the country. You picked an incredibly extreme example. Not only would I run out of unwillingness to do what was asked but also because living in a country that does that kind of thing is fundamentally unsafe. I agree that what Snowden did was generally positive and important, but I also agree that he broke the law as written. If I were Snowden's lawyer I would argue exactly what you've argued-- that he acted to expose programs contrary to the US constitution and that therefore his security contract was not valid since a contract to engage in illegal activity is not enforceable. It's likely that the case would make it to the Supreme Court. No nation is perfect and no system is perfect. I was responding to claims of moral equivalency between the USA and China. In the USA Snowden-like cases are rare. In China you have private citizens who have not signed secrecy oaths being arrested all the time for mere political activism.
    - dis-sys 8y ago
      > If I were ordered to do something that deeply immoral by the state I might pretend I was going to comply, but only long enough to pack a "go bag" and get myself and my family out of the country. explain these to those killed in Vietnam or Iraq. Immoral? You mean paying your tax to fund those wars started purely based on a lie, e.g. WMD in Iraq? That is pretty immoral to me. oh, btw, last time when I checked, your tax is still being used to keep the Guantanamo Bay open, immoral or not?
      - 8y ago
rorykoehler 8y ago
The Chinese example you mention is more akin to Chelsea Manning and we all know how that worked out.
- fermienrico 8y ago
  Please explain how Chelsea Manning is a more appropriate example. GP is literally comparing EXACT same thing. Protest against the president at a popular location in each country. I fail to see how this is an unfair comparison.
  - rorykoehler 8y ago
    I think you misread it. >Go to Tiananmen Square and hold up a poster-sized picture from the 1989 massacre.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - coupdejarnac 8y ago
      Fine, make the poster say Deng Xiao Ping ordered the army to shoot the protestors at Tiananmen Square.
      - rorykoehler 8y ago
        My point was when it comes to topics that matter there is little difference in the 2 powers.
        coupdejarnac 8y ago
        Drawing this kind of lazy equivalence does not produce insight. The two powers have substantial differences that influence how you would deal with either.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
throw2016 8y ago
Ironic you claim to stand up for dissent in China but so quickly insinuate 'propaganda' when it comes dissent here. Doesn't seem democratic. Speaking of misbehavior Iraq, Libya and Syria have been destroyed, hundreds of thousands killed and the countries set back decades if not centuries on completely made up premises. This is not just misbehavior, these are crimes against humanity that are happening right now. Yet some seem more concerned about Tienanmen square.

api 8y ago

You can make an exact comparison. Not too terribly long ago I saw protests holding up poster sized pictures of prisoner abuse from Abu Gharib and Guantanamo Bay, which is roughly like holding up a poster-sized picture from the 1989 massacre. Nothing happened to these people in spite of the fact that these pictures are deeply embarrassing to the US government and intensely inflammatory in regions of the world where we don't want to be inflammatory. As much as I give Snowden credit for exposing what can be dangerous autocratic programs, I also must point out that Snowden was not just some random protester. Snowden violated a government secrecy oath that he signed, which is a crime and this fact is printed rather boldly on the contract. Nobody forces you to sign these oaths. You can always say "I'm sorry, I can't sign this, I quit" and walk out and get another job. That's part of what "the rule of law" actually means. In a nation with the rule of law, the law applies objectively to everyone: crooks, politicians, and yes even do-gooders. If the law is wrong you can vote for representatives to change it, but until then what's written is the law. If the law says it's illegal to hop on a pogo stick, then anyone hopping on a pogo stick gets arrested even if they're on their way to feed starving orphans. (Secret courts are another matter, and I think those are un-American and should be shut down. But they are used far less in America than in China, and when they are used and the fact becomes known there's generally quite an uproar.) Also-- personally I find the NSA and CIA less alarming than Facebook and Google. Three-letter agencies operate with at least some democratic oversight and the intel they gather does tend to be used primarily for legitimate intelligence and national security purposes. Unfortunately we do not live on planet fluffy bunny hugs and we need an intelligence service and a military. Facebook and Google operate with zero oversight whatsoever and sell their surveillance services to the highest bidder. Private surveillance operations are completely lawless.

ed_balls 8y ago
Would you do something truly immoral, because "rule of law"? An example: Every new born child with Apgar score below 8 should be killed. Would you really do it? Would you stick to the rule of law? > Snowden violated a government secrecy oath that he signed, which is a crime and this fact is printed rather boldly on the contract. He broke the contract, but you can make a case that the contract was in violation of constitution.
- api 8y ago
  If I were ordered to do something that deeply immoral by the state I might pretend I was going to comply, but only long enough to pack a "go bag" and get myself and my family out of the country. You picked an incredibly extreme example. Not only would I run out of unwillingness to do what was asked but also because living in a country that does that kind of thing is fundamentally unsafe. I agree that what Snowden did was generally positive and important, but I also agree that he broke the law as written. If I were Snowden's lawyer I would argue exactly what you've argued-- that he acted to expose programs contrary to the US constitution and that therefore his security contract was not valid since a contract to engage in illegal activity is not enforceable. It's likely that the case would make it to the Supreme Court. No nation is perfect and no system is perfect. I was responding to claims of moral equivalency between the USA and China. In the USA Snowden-like cases are rare. In China you have private citizens who have not signed secrecy oaths being arrested all the time for mere political activism.
  - dis-sys 8y ago
    > If I were ordered to do something that deeply immoral by the state I might pretend I was going to comply, but only long enough to pack a "go bag" and get myself and my family out of the country. explain these to those killed in Vietnam or Iraq. Immoral? You mean paying your tax to fund those wars started purely based on a lie, e.g. WMD in Iraq? That is pretty immoral to me. oh, btw, last time when I checked, your tax is still being used to keep the Guantanamo Bay open, immoral or not?
    - 8y ago

rorykoehler 8y ago

The Chinese example you mention is more akin to Chelsea Manning and we all know how that worked out.

fermienrico 8y ago
Please explain how Chelsea Manning is a more appropriate example. GP is literally comparing EXACT same thing. Protest against the president at a popular location in each country. I fail to see how this is an unfair comparison.
- rorykoehler 8y ago
  I think you misread it. >Go to Tiananmen Square and hold up a poster-sized picture from the 1989 massacre.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - coupdejarnac 8y ago
    Fine, make the poster say Deng Xiao Ping ordered the army to shoot the protestors at Tiananmen Square.
    - rorykoehler 8y ago
      My point was when it comes to topics that matter there is little difference in the 2 powers.
      - coupdejarnac 8y ago
        Drawing this kind of lazy equivalence does not produce insight. The two powers have substantial differences that influence how you would deal with either.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

throw2016 8y ago

Ironic you claim to stand up for dissent in China but so quickly insinuate 'propaganda' when it comes dissent here. Doesn't seem democratic. Speaking of misbehavior Iraq, Libya and Syria have been destroyed, hundreds of thousands killed and the countries set back decades if not centuries on completely made up premises. This is not just misbehavior, these are crimes against humanity that are happening right now. Yet some seem more concerned about Tienanmen square.