4 ms·

Again [1] this narrative of the protectionist US vs. free-trade champion China. Yet China has been heavily protectionist since long before the US started firing

by deogeo 7y ago

Again [1] this narrative of the protectionist US vs. free-trade champion China. Yet China has been heavily protectionist since long before the US started firing back [2]. I cannot imagine these journalists lack this very basic knowledge, which makes me think they are being deliberately deceptive in their framing. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-imf-worldbank-china/china-denounces-protectionism-in-swipe-at-u-s-trade-policy-idUSKCN1RP0HU https://www.reuters.com/article/us-imf-worldbank-china/china... [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/douglasbulloch/2016/10/12/protectionism-may-be-rising-around-the-world-but-in-china-it-never-went-away/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/douglasbulloch/2016/10/12/prote...

DeonPenny 7y ago
yeh its a crazy misunderstanding of the facts. It makes think someone getting paid to make this narrative happen.
dang 7y ago
That's clearly not what this article is about. Please focus on what's new and interesting about an article instead of hauling in old links to restart old flamewars. Repetition is the enemy of curiosity. We want the latter. Edit: one can see this problem in the very first word of your comment: "Again". "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- deogeo 7y ago
  But the framing is interesting. I agree that "they started it!" won't make for a very interesting discussion, but talking about which facts the press focuses on, and which it ignores, could be.
  - dang 7y ago
    That is simply not a significant aspect of the article. In fact, I didn't see it there at all, though I only skimmed it.
    - deogeo 7y ago
      That it (Chinese protectionism) is not there at all is precisely my point.
      - dang 7y ago
        In that case your post was an example of what that guideline asks you to avoid: flamebait and generic tangents. Shoehorning a pre-existing grievance into the thread is exactly how we get repetitive flamewars. I know it feels more important, but it always feels that way, and that feeling needs to be resisted if we're to have curious discussions about new things. The art of being a good commenter involves focusing on the specific new information in an article.

by deogeo 7y ago

DeonPenny 7y ago

yeh its a crazy misunderstanding of the facts. It makes think someone getting paid to make this narrative happen.

dang 7y ago

That's clearly not what this article is about. Please focus on what's new and interesting about an article instead of hauling in old links to restart old flamewars. Repetition is the enemy of curiosity. We want the latter. Edit: one can see this problem in the very first word of your comment: "Again". "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

deogeo 7y ago
But the framing is interesting. I agree that "they started it!" won't make for a very interesting discussion, but talking about which facts the press focuses on, and which it ignores, could be.
- dang 7y ago
  That is simply not a significant aspect of the article. In fact, I didn't see it there at all, though I only skimmed it.
  - deogeo 7y ago
    That it (Chinese protectionism) is not there at all is precisely my point.
    - dang 7y ago
      In that case your post was an example of what that guideline asks you to avoid: flamebait and generic tangents. Shoehorning a pre-existing grievance into the thread is exactly how we get repetitive flamewars. I know it feels more important, but it always feels that way, and that feeling needs to be resisted if we're to have curious discussions about new things. The art of being a good commenter involves focusing on the specific new information in an article.