5 ms·

As much as I tend to hate on China for its extreme policies of government censorship and social control, it's somewhat disingenuous to tar them for lobbying (ev

As much as I tend to hate on China for its extreme policies of government censorship and social control, it's somewhat disingenuous to tar them for lobbying (even ~threatening) other UN diplomats. I mean, doesn't ~everyone do it? Having been interested in the Palestinian issue, and the build-up to the invasion of Iraq, it's pretty clear that Israel and the US have done just what China is doing. And no, this isn't whataboutism. I'm calling bullshit on the US etc for "pot calling the kettle black" bullshit. Also, although I'm not a huge fan of cultural relativism, it is true that Chinese culture is very old, and very different from European culture. Including the US and other former colonies, obviously. But maybe not so much from India and other former colonies in Southeast Asia. But anyway, given that, what's the argument that we're "right" and they're "wrong"? Because God said so? But which God, then?

devoply 8y ago
The god of humanism and human rights. We are right and Chinese are wrong for oppressing their own people with what amounts to racism and fascist nationalism.
- mirimir 8y ago
  OK, but why does our god beat their god? Their god is a fuck of a lot older ;) Is it just because we can? And that we'll kick their ass hard enough and long enough that they worship our god? That's cool, I guess. But we ought at least be honest about it. And what if we can't? What then?
  - devoply 8y ago
    Their God was invented by Marx, Mao, Fascism, and Capitalism. This has nothing to do with Confucianism or Buddhism or Taoism.
    - mirimir 8y ago
      So you say. But I've heard even vaguely liberal Chinese argue differently. And seriously, have you actually read Confucius? Or the Yi Jing? Concepts like social benefit trumping individual freedom, and respect for authority, go back a long way. Fascism and Communism are relatively modern European inventions. Even Chinese Communism, at its peak, was never anything like what Marx and Engels imagined. Although they talked about social evolution, they were fundamentally operating in the context of individual freedom.
      - devoply 8y ago
        Yes historically Chinese civilization has been highly hierarchical and authoritarian. Which has to do with their state craft, not something due to the will of the people. So much so that they used to completely mistreat people, like for instance see how the great wall was built. That does not mean that we should laud or tolerate that as their culture and the way that it has to be. And if we're talking about living in the past then we should be arming the Uighurs to defend themselves as that's a part of our cultural heritage. In the end the point is for people to have rights and not be subjected to arbitrary harassment, detention or murder by the state. That's a universal global thing now. And that's for the better. I have nothing with the Chinese wanting to be great. That's the purview of all humans. I just have a problem with the way they have decided to go about it. And the rest of the world should as well.
        mirimir 8y ago
        > That's a universal global thing now. Except for China. And not really even for India. Or for much of the Middle East, for that matter. Or even for Russia, when you really get down to it. So maybe not so much a "global" thing. Maybe a European culture thing. Which thinks that it ought to be global. And yet, I do believe that it ought to be global. But I realize that I'm on shaky ground there.
frotak 8y ago
There was a time when there were powers and authorities in the Western world that would silence dissent via violence and murder. See Galileo and the Catholic Church as an example. Or the Inquisition. Or any number of other examples of absolute authority executed by a State or State based actors in the pursuit of silencing dissent and controlling discourse. A fundamental component of American ideology is the protection of free speech and dissent. Pretty much unequivocally. E.g., the "old" and "different" culture of authoritarianism that controlled Western civilization was overturned to give individuals more freedom. So far this dedication to individual liberty and freedom of thought and expression is a relatively short lived blip in human history - but arguing that Chinese culture is just "old" and "different" side steps the fact that on the one hand we see an evolving and changing culture that embraces the individual...and on the other we see a continuance of abusive authoritarianism that subjugates individuals in pursuit of preserving the status quo.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Sure, I get that. That's why I came to the US. And I do believe that, for the most part, the US does display an honest commitment to those values. But still, imposing your values on others is an iffy thing.
  - frotak 8y ago
    In the one case you have China actively violating the freedoms and liberties of the people living under its control and on the other hand you have the UN as a collective body seeking to have a discussion about that. China is actively seeking in this case to kill any sort of discourse. The UN has no power to impose its values on anyone else. It can, as a body, take certain actions to indirectly affect nations of the world...but it is not a world government that can impose anything. In this case all that was on the table was a discussion - and even that was untenable to China. That is China imposing it's values on others in a very absolute way - and I agree...that's an iffy thing. I would go even further and say it's unacceptable (by any country) to try to completely silence discussion.
    - 8y ago
confusedhnguy 8y ago
Obviously nobody cares about right or wrong. The average westerners only want to accuse China so they can feel good about themselves for a while, and their leaders only want to secure world domination. Look at some of the comments here, people have no idea what they are talking about. Seriously? A civil war is good in his/her book? How many people do you think is going to die? And would the US and the Europe happily accept Chinese refugees? It is fine for millions of people from other parts of the world to die, billions to suffer, as long as it is for western values. Just look at the Middle East. Also, an unbaised standard does not exist when it comes to international affairs. Do you think the billions of poor people in India are enjoying their lives? How come the west always focus fire on the Chinese when they talk about human right issues? Have you heard of the caste system? About culture, as a Chinese living in the US, many Americans have asked me whether I eat dogs, or do I have microwaves/tap water back in China. Do you think they will change their minds even if I try my best to explain my experience to them? Americans want culture diversity as much as kids want to visit a zoo: lol look at these barbarians, now let's go back to our modern, superior way of life. Edit: People read several biased articles online and think they know everything about China, because why would the media lie? We obviously do not need to set foot on this huge country to see it for ourselves, a few news reports are all we need.
- guitarbill 8y ago
  > and their leaders only want to secure world domination. projection? > the west always focus fire on the Chinese when they talk about human right issues? we don't. maybe you just pay attention to those stories more though. > Also, an unbaised standard does not exist when it comes to international affairs. i'll agree with this, however it doesn't make morally wrong things less wrong, or mean people don't suffer. > as a Chinese living in the US, many Americans have asked me [...] do I have microwaves/tap water back in China this could just be a weird thing Americans do, even in Canada or Europe they'll ask if it's safe to drink tap water. out of interest, how many of your countrymen to have access to clean tap water?
  - confusedhnguy 8y ago
    Judging from how active and well-received Dalai Lama is in the west and how many westerners have bothered to go to Tibet to see it for themselves, I would say yes you focus too much on our human right issues for how little you care about what's really happening. Right or wrong do exist, I also think Xi is an a-hole. But people ignore issues that are "inconvenient" for them and their allies is what drives me crazy. I would prefer people put their own oxygen masks on before helping others. For the southern parts of China, I would say almost all the countrymen have access to tap water. For the northwestern parts, it is still pretty bad, a lot of them still rely on rivers/wells, although I don't have numbers. As for how clean the water is, that is something I have no idea about, and I am not optimistic. Edit: grammar.
scruple 8y ago
> ...it's somewhat disingenuous to tar them for lobbying (even ~threatening) other UN diplomats. We're not tarring and feathering them _for_ lobbying. We are tarring and feathering them for _what_ they are lobbying. Is that not a valid distinction? What strikes me as disingenuous is to frame your argument in this way, when it misses the point of _why_ this is drawing any attention in the first place.
- mirimir 8y ago
  On the scale of what the US does about those who trade with Iran, say, what China is doing is nothing.
  - scruple 8y ago
    Trying to sweep human rights violations, to put it as mildly as humanly possible, under the rug, using threats by your own admission, is nothing? Why is your default position here whataboutism?
    - mirimir 8y ago
      OK, not Iran. The trade embargo on Iraq, which killed many thousands through starvation. How is that not a human-rights violation? And the thing here is that this is about how China is treating people in areas that are part of China, and have off-and-on been part of China for thousands of years. Some of them were part of China long before the proto-US was importing slaves from Africa. So if the US wants to focus on human-rights violations, they arguably ought to focus on African-Americans. Some huge percentage of African-American men are, or have been, in prison. Far more than the Chinese are fucking with. And fundamentally, it's not whataboutism. It's about realistic expectations. I mean, just consider what the US diplomatic response would be if China started organizing a UN conference on treatment of African-Americans. Pretty soon, as with China, it'd come down to "don't mess with us".

devoply 8y ago

The god of humanism and human rights. We are right and Chinese are wrong for oppressing their own people with what amounts to racism and fascist nationalism.

mirimir 8y ago
OK, but why does our god beat their god? Their god is a fuck of a lot older ;) Is it just because we can? And that we'll kick their ass hard enough and long enough that they worship our god? That's cool, I guess. But we ought at least be honest about it. And what if we can't? What then?
- devoply 8y ago
  Their God was invented by Marx, Mao, Fascism, and Capitalism. This has nothing to do with Confucianism or Buddhism or Taoism.
  - mirimir 8y ago
    So you say. But I've heard even vaguely liberal Chinese argue differently. And seriously, have you actually read Confucius? Or the Yi Jing? Concepts like social benefit trumping individual freedom, and respect for authority, go back a long way. Fascism and Communism are relatively modern European inventions. Even Chinese Communism, at its peak, was never anything like what Marx and Engels imagined. Although they talked about social evolution, they were fundamentally operating in the context of individual freedom.
    - devoply 8y ago
      Yes historically Chinese civilization has been highly hierarchical and authoritarian. Which has to do with their state craft, not something due to the will of the people. So much so that they used to completely mistreat people, like for instance see how the great wall was built. That does not mean that we should laud or tolerate that as their culture and the way that it has to be. And if we're talking about living in the past then we should be arming the Uighurs to defend themselves as that's a part of our cultural heritage. In the end the point is for people to have rights and not be subjected to arbitrary harassment, detention or murder by the state. That's a universal global thing now. And that's for the better. I have nothing with the Chinese wanting to be great. That's the purview of all humans. I just have a problem with the way they have decided to go about it. And the rest of the world should as well.
      - mirimir 8y ago
        > That's a universal global thing now. Except for China. And not really even for India. Or for much of the Middle East, for that matter. Or even for Russia, when you really get down to it. So maybe not so much a "global" thing. Maybe a European culture thing. Which thinks that it ought to be global. And yet, I do believe that it ought to be global. But I realize that I'm on shaky ground there.

frotak 8y ago

There was a time when there were powers and authorities in the Western world that would silence dissent via violence and murder. See Galileo and the Catholic Church as an example. Or the Inquisition. Or any number of other examples of absolute authority executed by a State or State based actors in the pursuit of silencing dissent and controlling discourse. A fundamental component of American ideology is the protection of free speech and dissent. Pretty much unequivocally. E.g., the "old" and "different" culture of authoritarianism that controlled Western civilization was overturned to give individuals more freedom. So far this dedication to individual liberty and freedom of thought and expression is a relatively short lived blip in human history - but arguing that Chinese culture is just "old" and "different" side steps the fact that on the one hand we see an evolving and changing culture that embraces the individual...and on the other we see a continuance of abusive authoritarianism that subjugates individuals in pursuit of preserving the status quo.

mirimir 8y ago
Sure, I get that. That's why I came to the US. And I do believe that, for the most part, the US does display an honest commitment to those values. But still, imposing your values on others is an iffy thing.
- frotak 8y ago
  In the one case you have China actively violating the freedoms and liberties of the people living under its control and on the other hand you have the UN as a collective body seeking to have a discussion about that. China is actively seeking in this case to kill any sort of discourse. The UN has no power to impose its values on anyone else. It can, as a body, take certain actions to indirectly affect nations of the world...but it is not a world government that can impose anything. In this case all that was on the table was a discussion - and even that was untenable to China. That is China imposing it's values on others in a very absolute way - and I agree...that's an iffy thing. I would go even further and say it's unacceptable (by any country) to try to completely silence discussion.
  - 8y ago

confusedhnguy 8y ago

Obviously nobody cares about right or wrong. The average westerners only want to accuse China so they can feel good about themselves for a while, and their leaders only want to secure world domination. Look at some of the comments here, people have no idea what they are talking about. Seriously? A civil war is good in his/her book? How many people do you think is going to die? And would the US and the Europe happily accept Chinese refugees? It is fine for millions of people from other parts of the world to die, billions to suffer, as long as it is for western values. Just look at the Middle East. Also, an unbaised standard does not exist when it comes to international affairs. Do you think the billions of poor people in India are enjoying their lives? How come the west always focus fire on the Chinese when they talk about human right issues? Have you heard of the caste system? About culture, as a Chinese living in the US, many Americans have asked me whether I eat dogs, or do I have microwaves/tap water back in China. Do you think they will change their minds even if I try my best to explain my experience to them? Americans want culture diversity as much as kids want to visit a zoo: lol look at these barbarians, now let's go back to our modern, superior way of life. Edit: People read several biased articles online and think they know everything about China, because why would the media lie? We obviously do not need to set foot on this huge country to see it for ourselves, a few news reports are all we need.

guitarbill 8y ago
> and their leaders only want to secure world domination. projection? > the west always focus fire on the Chinese when they talk about human right issues? we don't. maybe you just pay attention to those stories more though. > Also, an unbaised standard does not exist when it comes to international affairs. i'll agree with this, however it doesn't make morally wrong things less wrong, or mean people don't suffer. > as a Chinese living in the US, many Americans have asked me [...] do I have microwaves/tap water back in China this could just be a weird thing Americans do, even in Canada or Europe they'll ask if it's safe to drink tap water. out of interest, how many of your countrymen to have access to clean tap water?
- confusedhnguy 8y ago
  Judging from how active and well-received Dalai Lama is in the west and how many westerners have bothered to go to Tibet to see it for themselves, I would say yes you focus too much on our human right issues for how little you care about what's really happening. Right or wrong do exist, I also think Xi is an a-hole. But people ignore issues that are "inconvenient" for them and their allies is what drives me crazy. I would prefer people put their own oxygen masks on before helping others. For the southern parts of China, I would say almost all the countrymen have access to tap water. For the northwestern parts, it is still pretty bad, a lot of them still rely on rivers/wells, although I don't have numbers. As for how clean the water is, that is something I have no idea about, and I am not optimistic. Edit: grammar.

scruple 8y ago

> ...it's somewhat disingenuous to tar them for lobbying (even ~threatening) other UN diplomats. We're not tarring and feathering them _for_ lobbying. We are tarring and feathering them for _what_ they are lobbying. Is that not a valid distinction? What strikes me as disingenuous is to frame your argument in this way, when it misses the point of _why_ this is drawing any attention in the first place.

mirimir 8y ago
On the scale of what the US does about those who trade with Iran, say, what China is doing is nothing.
- scruple 8y ago
  Trying to sweep human rights violations, to put it as mildly as humanly possible, under the rug, using threats by your own admission, is nothing? Why is your default position here whataboutism?
  - mirimir 8y ago
    OK, not Iran. The trade embargo on Iraq, which killed many thousands through starvation. How is that not a human-rights violation? And the thing here is that this is about how China is treating people in areas that are part of China, and have off-and-on been part of China for thousands of years. Some of them were part of China long before the proto-US was importing slaves from Africa. So if the US wants to focus on human-rights violations, they arguably ought to focus on African-Americans. Some huge percentage of African-American men are, or have been, in prison. Far more than the Chinese are fucking with. And fundamentally, it's not whataboutism. It's about realistic expectations. I mean, just consider what the US diplomatic response would be if China started organizing a UN conference on treatment of African-Americans. Pretty soon, as with China, it'd come down to "don't mess with us".