7 ms·

No. It's not fair to justify building the machinery of a totalitarian state as simply "abiding by local laws and regulations." Not when the consequences invol

No. It's not fair to justify building the machinery of a totalitarian state as simply "abiding by local laws and regulations." Not when the consequences involve clear violations of human rights. You don't have to look far to see how bad things have gotten recently in China, from abductions of booksellers in Hong Kong to an activist being carted away literally during a phone interview with Voice of America. When Western companies act like this is totally normal and even develop censorship technologies for regimes in countries with poor records for human rights, it lends false legitimacy to these unjust systems and even emboldens them to commit more serious violations of human rights.

throwaway2048 8y ago
Don't forget them placing 1 million Uyghurs (and counting) in "re-education camps" designed to destroy their culture and religion.
- justinjlynn 8y ago
  You mean engaging in actions that meet the UN-accepted definition of genocide? May as well just call it genocide.
- vkou 8y ago
  The last residential 'school' (which was aimed to do the same for First Nations people) in Canada closed in 1996, with little more then a hummm-hummm. Our shit stinks almost as much.
  - denorm 8y ago
    Whataboutism is a really poor argument. The history of the West is full of atrocities, but that doesn't somehow excuse the Chinese government from current human rights abuses. Nor does it mean that I as a Westerner do not have the right to criticize the Chinese government. In fact we have an obligation to condemn human rights abuses wherever they occur.
    - zaro 8y ago
      It is perfectly fine argument for calling out hypocrisy though, and I think that is the main point of it.
      - vertline2 8y ago
        It (whataboutism) is a favorite tactic of the "50 cent army." It's more to distract and sidetrack the topic.
      - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
        The issue is that "calling out hypocrisy" is crap. Hypocrisy is not a logical fallacy. When an addict tells you that you shouldn't use heroin because it will ruin your life, the fact that they used heroin and it ruined their life doesn't make them a liar, it make them experienced. And the sole legitimate purpose in calling out hypocrisy is to get the other party to follow their own advice. But that means for Nazism and McCarthyism to be relevant you have to identify some specific present day instance of them that currently needs to be eliminated. At which point we would need to oppose that and what China is doing.
        doombolt 8y ago
        When an addict tells you that you shouldn't use heroin it doesn't make them narcology expert. WRT "currently", does Guantanamo count?
        AnthonyMouse 8y ago
        > When an addict tells you that you shouldn't use heroin it doesn't make them narcology expert. Especially when what really matters is academic credentials and not first-hand experience. > WRT "currently", does Guantanamo count? Sure. So let's oppose Guantanamo and what China is doing. At not let one derail every attempt to address the other one -- because stopping both is more important than which order we do it in.
    - claydavisss 8y ago
topmonk 8y ago
Aren't you asking Western companies to take a stand, in place of yourself? Even if your moral position is correct, there should be a law made in the USA to do what you're talking about. Otherwise, less well known companies would be able to scoot under the radar, while more prominent ones would be taken down. So, to be fair, the onus is on you to stand up for what you believe in and campaign and vote for the ideas you want to bring about. Pointing your finger at others and telling them what to do, while you do nothing yourself, all to support your own agenda, is lazy and shows a false sense of entitlement.
- lx3459683 8y ago
  Parent's action or inaction regarding this matter makes zero difference to the subject at hand. You've attacked the parent post without actually refuting a single thing it contained. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
  - smallnamespace 8y ago
    What about 'practice what you preach'?
- geodel 8y ago
  You are right. Nissim Taleb describe as no skin in the game. I see it especially strong when all ethical concerns about Google/FB etc disappear while discussing huge salaries, bonus and stocks.
  - vertline2 8y ago
    More whataboutism, I read "skin in the game" it was ranty and poor, but beyond that, there is absolutely skin in the game for everyone when we are discussing a massive country falling into totalitarianism.
- Rapzid 8y ago
  Yes, there should 100% be a law. I believe the failure of even USA airlines to push back against the recent Chinese bullying over Taiwan is evidence of this. Luckily, a lot of current and ex-intelligence members are speaking up about China being the biggest national security threat. Not just a threat to the USA, but to liberal democracies around the world. Hopefully we will find some way to push back and get our Corporations on-board with the efforts. I firmly believe that the Chinese government is so fundamentally at odds with the values of modern liberal democracies that it's only a matter of time before it comes to a head. We may all end up regretting turning a blind eye to their BS for so long..

throwaway2048 8y ago

Don't forget them placing 1 million Uyghurs (and counting) in "re-education camps" designed to destroy their culture and religion.

justinjlynn 8y ago
You mean engaging in actions that meet the UN-accepted definition of genocide? May as well just call it genocide.
vkou 8y ago
The last residential 'school' (which was aimed to do the same for First Nations people) in Canada closed in 1996, with little more then a hummm-hummm. Our shit stinks almost as much.
- denorm 8y ago
  Whataboutism is a really poor argument. The history of the West is full of atrocities, but that doesn't somehow excuse the Chinese government from current human rights abuses. Nor does it mean that I as a Westerner do not have the right to criticize the Chinese government. In fact we have an obligation to condemn human rights abuses wherever they occur.
  - zaro 8y ago
    It is perfectly fine argument for calling out hypocrisy though, and I think that is the main point of it.
    - vertline2 8y ago
      It (whataboutism) is a favorite tactic of the "50 cent army." It's more to distract and sidetrack the topic.
    - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
      The issue is that "calling out hypocrisy" is crap. Hypocrisy is not a logical fallacy. When an addict tells you that you shouldn't use heroin because it will ruin your life, the fact that they used heroin and it ruined their life doesn't make them a liar, it make them experienced. And the sole legitimate purpose in calling out hypocrisy is to get the other party to follow their own advice. But that means for Nazism and McCarthyism to be relevant you have to identify some specific present day instance of them that currently needs to be eliminated. At which point we would need to oppose that and what China is doing.
      - doombolt 8y ago
        When an addict tells you that you shouldn't use heroin it doesn't make them narcology expert. WRT "currently", does Guantanamo count?
        AnthonyMouse 8y ago
        > When an addict tells you that you shouldn't use heroin it doesn't make them narcology expert. Especially when what really matters is academic credentials and not first-hand experience. > WRT "currently", does Guantanamo count? Sure. So let's oppose Guantanamo and what China is doing. At not let one derail every attempt to address the other one -- because stopping both is more important than which order we do it in.
  - claydavisss 8y ago

topmonk 8y ago

Aren't you asking Western companies to take a stand, in place of yourself? Even if your moral position is correct, there should be a law made in the USA to do what you're talking about. Otherwise, less well known companies would be able to scoot under the radar, while more prominent ones would be taken down. So, to be fair, the onus is on you to stand up for what you believe in and campaign and vote for the ideas you want to bring about. Pointing your finger at others and telling them what to do, while you do nothing yourself, all to support your own agenda, is lazy and shows a false sense of entitlement.

lx3459683 8y ago
Parent's action or inaction regarding this matter makes zero difference to the subject at hand. You've attacked the parent post without actually refuting a single thing it contained. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
- smallnamespace 8y ago
  What about 'practice what you preach'?
geodel 8y ago
You are right. Nissim Taleb describe as no skin in the game. I see it especially strong when all ethical concerns about Google/FB etc disappear while discussing huge salaries, bonus and stocks.
- vertline2 8y ago
  More whataboutism, I read "skin in the game" it was ranty and poor, but beyond that, there is absolutely skin in the game for everyone when we are discussing a massive country falling into totalitarianism.
Rapzid 8y ago
Yes, there should 100% be a law. I believe the failure of even USA airlines to push back against the recent Chinese bullying over Taiwan is evidence of this. Luckily, a lot of current and ex-intelligence members are speaking up about China being the biggest national security threat. Not just a threat to the USA, but to liberal democracies around the world. Hopefully we will find some way to push back and get our Corporations on-board with the efforts. I firmly believe that the Chinese government is so fundamentally at odds with the values of modern liberal democracies that it's only a matter of time before it comes to a head. We may all end up regretting turning a blind eye to their BS for so long..