3 ms·

This is getting downvoted but it’s an important sentiment. You can argue that America and China are equally bad (I disagree), but regardless, you can’t really a

This is getting downvoted but it’s an important sentiment. You can argue that America and China are equally bad (I disagree), but regardless, you can’t really argue that America and China are equally bad to Americans.

geofft 7y ago
So, I am an American, but my primary loyalty is to humanity as a whole. I think we should do what's best for the world, not what's best for Americans, if those two are in conflict. I don't think promoting the American intelligence apparatus is good for the world, and I think it has little enough value to Americans that I'm willing to abandon it. (I think you can construct an argument that America treats the rest of the world better than China, though. I don't think I believe it right now but I could be convinced.)
- rorykoehler 7y ago
  It's always disturbed me how Americans use the word Americans when humans would be much more apt. It shows that deep down the rest of the world is nothing but a resource to be exploited in the minds of many Americans.
- microcolonel 7y ago
  > So, I am an American, but my primary loyalty is to humanity as a whole. Being able to say that sort of thing with a straight face is the tremendous privilege of being an American. > I don't think promoting the American intelligence apparatus is good for the world In a vacuum I would not promote them, but in a counterintelligence scenario, I side with U.S. and Canadian intelligence services over the PLA, 100%. The thing I try not to do is believe the CIA when they say somebody is committing an act of war against the U.S, because their track record on that is not great. ;- ) > (I think you can construct an argument that America treats the rest of the world better than China, though. I don't think I believe it right now but I could be convinced.) Well, look into it. I don't think you can compare the callousness and limitless self-interest of the CCP (and the culture of the people they empower) abroad to even the greatest excesses of modern U.S. foreign policy. China is ruthlessly raping the developed world of its natural resources, and leaving superfund sites in its wake, and nobody is tempering that; some because they're afraid, others because they simply never cared. When the U.S. has an interest abroad, at least Americans feel they have a right and duty to keep tabs on it. That is a huge step up from most of the world. That doesn't mean that American businesses and U.S. government organizations don't do bad things abroad, but it does mean that ordinary Americans can say and do something about it. There's a false dichotomy here between trusting U.S. intelligence services, and trusting the PLA. If you don't trust either, you may still be surveilled by U.S. intelligence services in America; if you "equally distrust both", you will be surveilled by both, in America.
  - zeroxfe 7y ago
    > Being able to say that sort of thing with a straight face is the tremendous privilege of being an American. I think this is a really important point. It's hard to be rational and idealistic when you're under the stresses of scarcity and oppression.
  - chacha2 7y ago
    > Being able to say that sort of thing with a straight face is the tremendous privilege of being an American. Because America is the only developed nation...
Barrin92 7y ago
I'm not sure it's true though, paradoxically if you're an American subject to Chinese surveillance or vice versa you're probably better off than being under domestic surveillance, because at least you're out of the respective jurisdiction. Like, what is Huawei going to do if it has information on you and you live in Boston, compared to the local police? From the perspective of individual liberty it seems better to be subject to surveillance by someone who doesn't have legal authority over you than be subject to someone who does. I'm not sure the American prison population or minority groups have to fear a foreign government more than their own.
- microcolonel 7y ago
  > From the perspective of individual liberty it seems better to be subject to surveillance by someone who doesn't have legal authority over you than be subject to someone who does. Well, this idea is false. The CCP has power in the U.S. over people they surveil, through the information gained with that surveillance. It doesn't take much to compromise ordinary people, if you can watch a lot of what they do. > I'm not sure the American prison population... They're already in prison. > ...or minority groups have to fear a foreign government more than their own. Not sure what kind of minority you're talking here, but foreign governments can compromise you and take over your life just the same regardless of the colour of your skin.
  - Barrin92 7y ago
    Since when is the Chinese government in the business of compromising ordinary Americans? It's a daily occurence for marginalised people in the US to get arrested for minor drug offences, or be stuck in airport security or police checks, or more and more relevant facial recognition systems. What the average American does not need to worry about is the Chinese coming after him because he smoked pot on the weekend. The primary threat to American civil liberties is their own government, not distant foreign ones.
    - microcolonel 7y ago
      > What the average American does not need to worry about is the Chinese coming after him because he smoked pot on the weekend. The primary threat to American civil liberties is their own government, not distant foreign ones. Sure, your own government is responsible for not trampling on your civil liberties; that doesn't mean it's somehow not worse to be also surveilled by the Chinese government, in addition to your own. When China is spying on you, that doesn't mean the U.S. isn't; it means they both are. As far as I can tell, your argument is: Because governments in the U.S. don't recognize some things you consider civil liberties, like smoking cannabis recreationally, you don't care that the Chinese government is also spying on you, and you don't think the U.S. government should take a stance on that spying? It seems pretty incoherent to me. > Since when is the Chinese government in the business of compromising ordinary Americans? Roughly since they have had intelligence services. It's not like the Soviets invented Kompromat, and it's not as though they were the last to use it.

geofft 7y ago

So, I am an American, but my primary loyalty is to humanity as a whole. I think we should do what's best for the world, not what's best for Americans, if those two are in conflict. I don't think promoting the American intelligence apparatus is good for the world, and I think it has little enough value to Americans that I'm willing to abandon it. (I think you can construct an argument that America treats the rest of the world better than China, though. I don't think I believe it right now but I could be convinced.)

rorykoehler 7y ago
It's always disturbed me how Americans use the word Americans when humans would be much more apt. It shows that deep down the rest of the world is nothing but a resource to be exploited in the minds of many Americans.
microcolonel 7y ago
> So, I am an American, but my primary loyalty is to humanity as a whole. Being able to say that sort of thing with a straight face is the tremendous privilege of being an American. > I don't think promoting the American intelligence apparatus is good for the world In a vacuum I would not promote them, but in a counterintelligence scenario, I side with U.S. and Canadian intelligence services over the PLA, 100%. The thing I try not to do is believe the CIA when they say somebody is committing an act of war against the U.S, because their track record on that is not great. ;- ) > (I think you can construct an argument that America treats the rest of the world better than China, though. I don't think I believe it right now but I could be convinced.) Well, look into it. I don't think you can compare the callousness and limitless self-interest of the CCP (and the culture of the people they empower) abroad to even the greatest excesses of modern U.S. foreign policy. China is ruthlessly raping the developed world of its natural resources, and leaving superfund sites in its wake, and nobody is tempering that; some because they're afraid, others because they simply never cared. When the U.S. has an interest abroad, at least Americans feel they have a right and duty to keep tabs on it. That is a huge step up from most of the world. That doesn't mean that American businesses and U.S. government organizations don't do bad things abroad, but it does mean that ordinary Americans can say and do something about it. There's a false dichotomy here between trusting U.S. intelligence services, and trusting the PLA. If you don't trust either, you may still be surveilled by U.S. intelligence services in America; if you "equally distrust both", you will be surveilled by both, in America.
- zeroxfe 7y ago
  > Being able to say that sort of thing with a straight face is the tremendous privilege of being an American. I think this is a really important point. It's hard to be rational and idealistic when you're under the stresses of scarcity and oppression.
- chacha2 7y ago
  > Being able to say that sort of thing with a straight face is the tremendous privilege of being an American. Because America is the only developed nation...

Barrin92 7y ago

I'm not sure it's true though, paradoxically if you're an American subject to Chinese surveillance or vice versa you're probably better off than being under domestic surveillance, because at least you're out of the respective jurisdiction. Like, what is Huawei going to do if it has information on you and you live in Boston, compared to the local police? From the perspective of individual liberty it seems better to be subject to surveillance by someone who doesn't have legal authority over you than be subject to someone who does. I'm not sure the American prison population or minority groups have to fear a foreign government more than their own.

microcolonel 7y ago
> From the perspective of individual liberty it seems better to be subject to surveillance by someone who doesn't have legal authority over you than be subject to someone who does. Well, this idea is false. The CCP has power in the U.S. over people they surveil, through the information gained with that surveillance. It doesn't take much to compromise ordinary people, if you can watch a lot of what they do. > I'm not sure the American prison population... They're already in prison. > ...or minority groups have to fear a foreign government more than their own. Not sure what kind of minority you're talking here, but foreign governments can compromise you and take over your life just the same regardless of the colour of your skin.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  Since when is the Chinese government in the business of compromising ordinary Americans? It's a daily occurence for marginalised people in the US to get arrested for minor drug offences, or be stuck in airport security or police checks, or more and more relevant facial recognition systems. What the average American does not need to worry about is the Chinese coming after him because he smoked pot on the weekend. The primary threat to American civil liberties is their own government, not distant foreign ones.
  - microcolonel 7y ago
    > What the average American does not need to worry about is the Chinese coming after him because he smoked pot on the weekend. The primary threat to American civil liberties is their own government, not distant foreign ones. Sure, your own government is responsible for not trampling on your civil liberties; that doesn't mean it's somehow not worse to be also surveilled by the Chinese government, in addition to your own. When China is spying on you, that doesn't mean the U.S. isn't; it means they both are. As far as I can tell, your argument is: Because governments in the U.S. don't recognize some things you consider civil liberties, like smoking cannabis recreationally, you don't care that the Chinese government is also spying on you, and you don't think the U.S. government should take a stance on that spying? It seems pretty incoherent to me. > Since when is the Chinese government in the business of compromising ordinary Americans? Roughly since they have had intelligence services. It's not like the Soviets invented Kompromat, and it's not as though they were the last to use it.