8 ms·

Between this and the NBA's capitulation to making the Rockets' GM retract his statements on Hong Kong, at what point does appeasement just become acceptance of

• bigpumpkin 7y ago
  Wow, did not hear about the Rockets thing until now. Thanks. I am confused tho, as an NBA fan, should I support the Rockets now that the Chinese are boycotting it. Or should I boycott them cause they bowed down to Chinese pressure?
  • b88d80170 7y ago
    People really don't care.
    • tjpnz 7y ago
      And until people do corporations will continue to enact censorship on behalf of the CCP.
  • Mountain_Skies 7y ago
    The (new) ABA has lots of teams you could support. Lots and lots of teams. If you have some extra cash, you could probably even have your own ABA team.
• acangiano 7y ago
  A recent South Park episode parodied this quite well.
  • davidkuhta 7y ago
    Tegridy
  • Mountain_Skies 7y ago
    And as a result South Park has been banned in China.
  • on_and_off 7y ago
    It felt weird to see such a good episode from South Park after how much they have lost touch with reality at some point. Well .. subjectively I did not find it very funny so maybe not an all time high episode, but the critic was absolutely on point and something that very few people are talking about. China has a lot of control on what can be included in a hollywood movie. Propaganda is not exactly new ... after all the US army also has a lot of control when they give support to a movie and demand that they are portrayed favorably but this time it is from one country to another.
    • foota 7y ago
      "but this time it is from one country to another" Isn't Hollywood the same?
      • on_and_off 7y ago
        I am not sure I follow ?
        • foota 7y ago
          You said, with regards to China influencing things in the US: "Propaganda is not exactly new ... after all the US army also has a lot of control when they give support to a movie and demand that they are portrayed favorably but [this time it is from one country to another]" I'm pointing out though that the influence the US has through Hollywood is effectively global, and therefore also "from one country to another".
• latch 7y ago
  > Quite frankly this all stinks of 1930s European appeasement You're comparing this to an official policy of appeasing German and Italy's annexation of territory (and various other violations of the treaty), in an era of raising fascism and communism? Really? It's fine if you want to say that this is bad, worrisome or even evil, but lets call it what it is: the strong bully the weak. This is how the world works. So far China has largely been about flexing its economic power. This seems completely reasonable; why shouldn't they negotiate hard? I agree it's terrifying for those in the region that they could flex their military..but that's what superpowers do.
  • lacampbell 7y ago
    Communist China has annexed territory. It also has a civilian death count much higher than that of Nazi Germany. I often think that if Germany had won the war people today would be talking about how it wasn't pragmatic not to do business with the greater reich. "Sure they ethnically cleansed eastern europe but whataboutamerica?"
• notzuck 7y ago
  The appeasement policy was the right thing to do. The UK couldn't win a war in 1938 (no allies, no money, no air defence etc) and the bad taste of WW1 was still in peoples mouths. The policy did fail because Hitler was going to go to war no matter what but that is only with 20/20 hindsight. Appeasement wasn't the right policy, it was literally the only policy available to the UK at the time. I agree that we need to take a hard line with China though, I can't see how this is going to end given their massive increase in military size and technology plus we are all so tied together financially that we could cripple each other long before a shot is fired. My friends seem to think that war is the only way this will end and I've got a young son so I sincerely hope not.
  • notzuck 7y ago
    Thank you for the downvote. Much easier try to silence an opinion you don't like than leave a meaningful response. Why bother downvoting if you don't like what I said? This isn't reddit... or high school. I just watched two history professors debate this very topic here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmyecSXOla8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmyecSXOla8 A very interesting watch because unlike hit and run downvoters, I am interested in learning. side note: I now don't know what I think - both arguments were very good.
    • skavi 7y ago
      it's considered bad form to discuss votes. the link itself would have been enough
      • humanrebar 7y ago
        Meh. I think it's bad form to downvote without comment outside of pettiness or trolling.
        • on_and_off 7y ago
          Agreed. I wish that HN would force people to write a comment explaining why they are downvoting.
• spats1990 7y ago
  If you think 2019 China is that similar to 1930s Germany you should just come right out and say it, in my opinion. Let that argument stand on its merits. If you didn't intend a parallel between 1930s Germany and 2019 China, there is, again in my opinion only, probably a better way of making your point.
  • newshorts 7y ago
    Agreed I think it’s a little over blown to compare. That said, the social credit system is oddly reminiscent as well.
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    • scrollaway 7y ago
      Is it really overblown? Think about it. It's not like Nazi germany only had followers because they were being mind-controlled. They were slow-boiling the frog back then as well and those who didn't want to notice could easily justify everything. Well, sure, nazi germany ran concentration camps, keeping hundreds of thousands prisoner based on ethnicity and religion. It's not like China is doing that after all… … right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps (Asking again: What's overblown about GP's comparison?)
      • dirtyid 7y ago
        >Is it really overblown? Think about it. The problem is people in the west can only "think about it" in western lens which leads to readily accessible Godwin's Law. Chinese mental schema is not preoccupied with Hitler, most Chinese aren't familiar with Nazi death camps and the ones that are, don't attribute any particular significance to them because China is a 5000 year old country with a long legacy of extermination but also integration (i.e. manchu, mongol rulers got subsumed into broader Chinese culture). Anyway, these are "vocational training camps" because ostensibly that's their goal - forced integration into society not elimination. Yes many people died under disastrous CPC policies, but in terms of genocide and extermination, the victims of CPC purges are constrained and not ethnically targeted. Compared to say FaLunGong pratitionres. CPC isn't aiming to eliminate and entire Chinese minority, 1 one of 55 officially recognized by the constitution, if only because they have to change the constitution to 54 after to reflect it and that would look bad for Xi domestically. To contextualize what's happening in Xinjiang, it's useful to think of US melting pot analogy combined with brutal indigenous residential schools that are conceptually based around integration. Because that is literally the inspiration behind it. Yes, awkward golf clap for US inspiring Nazi and Chinese concentration camps. Here's a brief write up of the politics behind the scene: China is unofficially moving towards a 2nd generation MingZu (minority/ethnic) policy. The original ethnic policy was based around Soviet oblasts, autonomous regions with extra freedoms, i.e. tax break, family planning exceptions, affirmative action. These perks designed to ingratiate ethnic minorities to Chinese rule have not maintained serenity, post 2009 violent uprisings in Tibet and XinJiang which has led some thinkers to believe that ethnic autonomy and local identity has backfired. One of the extreme but prominent thinker was important at United Work. Forgot whom. Supposedly Xi pushed back on the idea initially. But the ground campaign happening now speaks for itself despite no official policy shift or changes in article 4 of the constitution (minority rights). The new MingZu policy emphasized national unity, instead of local identity. The new focus is on GuoZu (State race), abandon individual identity to one national identity. HanYu (Han language) / PuTongHua (common language) has been renamed to GuoYu (national language) in official documentation. In response to Uyghur intellectuals / upper class teaching Uyghur languages to their kids, promotion of ethnic languages has (supposedly) been internally elevated to great evil status after extremist, separatism, terrorism. Increasing Han migration to autonomous regions to promote ethnic mingling. New restrictions on religion that will likely touch all religions. Ironically, the proponents drew inspiration from US melting pot analogy that aims to treat everyone equally and eventual integration. Contrasting to the current 'salad bowl' approach - citing the division seen in extreme multiculturalism (European Islamic enclaves I think) as a point of failure. There's a lot going on: equalizing - read: repressing - legally "privileged" minorities back to equality status of the average Han without acknowledging other structural privileges of being Han in a Han dominated culture. Something, something, intersectionality. Edit: As always, I have to clarify that I do not endorse what is happening in XinJiang. I think CPC is capable of doing better without committing mistakes the west already learned. My prediction is something like the cultural revolution / cultural genocide that will last years and a few generations from now if the situation stabilizes the CPC will express some remorse and platitudes for past mistakes under different leadership (sounds familiar as a Canadian). The difference is XinJiang will be better off compared to the prognosis in the west because China has the infrastructure capability to uplift XinJiang living standards. Contrast to the shithole reserves without plumbing and dependent on water boiling in Canada. My biggest concern is that the CPC will probably pull it off, and the model for rapid integration will be exported around the world. Why do you think authoritarian muslim countries support China? The western narrative is Chinese $$$, but I think rulers of these countries are waiting on the sidelines trying (and secretly hoping) that the XinJiang experiment will work - you can easily swap out desecularizing with secularizing. Also see how sentiment towards muslim immigrants are shifting in Europe to see another possible future application. It wouldn't be the same of course, but vocation training center with European characteristics is more than plausible to me. Edit2: To add, one of the fundamental characteristics about Chinese growth/rejuvenation whatever is doing big things fast. Integration is something that takes generations to cultivate, but of course China going to try to rush it. It worked in industrial widgets, it worked in academic papers, it's crazy to think it will work on hearts and mind, but who knows, maybe it will. Xi himself is a product of work camps. He's a believer.
• Iv 7y ago
  Courage is in short supply.
  • thelittleone 7y ago
    Not in Hong Kong it seems, where protestors are well within the reach of the PRC.
  • Causality1 7y ago
    No, no, courage is when you remove the headphone jack from your phones so you can sell dongles and wireless earbuds.
• everdev 7y ago
  > at what point does appeasement just become acceptance of China's behavior? This seems to be US policy since Nixon's visit to China. The difference is now we're just more open about it.
  • Causality1 7y ago
    Someday we may regard those "achievements" as the worst strategic mistake by any sitting US president.
    • yumraj 7y ago
      Someday? I think we already do.
    • lainga 7y ago
      It wasn't a one-and-done deal between Kissinger and Mao on the first visit. While I think it's fair to assess the US's 1972-(2016? 2017?) policy toward China as regrettable overall, blame must also be put on the Carter (giving the PRC a waiver on the Jackson-Vanik amendment, 1980), Reagan (continuing those waivers), Bush Sr. (rejecting repeated Congressional motions to end that waiver after Tiananmen Square, 1989 and every year of the '90s), and Clinton (permanent normal trade relations, 2000) administrations. Successive administrations seemed to be fairly consistent on keeping China's access to US and world markets intact.
  • Analemma_ 7y ago
    I think this is as much a "business thing" as a "US policy" thing, and it's been going on much longer than the Nixon administration. IBM sold Nazi Germany the tabulators that powered the Holocaust, Chiquita (then United Fruit) ran slave plantations well into the 50's, et cetera. Don't expect corporations to stand up for what's right, especially overseas; you're always going to be disappointed.
• TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  At some point we have to accept that if the Chinese were coming over the hill with nothing but chopsticks we’d still lose. When that happens you don’t want to be on the PRC’s most wanted list.
  • dforrestwilson 7y ago
    If this were in any way true then China would have conquered the entire world long ago. No military or nation is invincible including China or the U.S.
  • spats1990 7y ago
    >nothing but chopsticks The Yellow Peril/Asian horde trope. Charming.
    • TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
      Hmmm, I didn't mean it like that. Coulda been any nation with 1.3+ billion, with their stereotypical eating utensils.
• RavlaAlvar 7y ago
  I can totally imagine the world which China could control the west through exerting pressure on these giant companies.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • ospider 7y ago
    This is what the west is doing to China now.
  • SyneRyder 7y ago
    China is already doing this. They threatened Qantas, Delta and other airlines that they would ban their aircraft from Chinese airspace unless their websites were changed to show Taiwan as part of China. They also blocked the Marriott website in China when Marriott included Taiwan as a separate country in a customer questionnaire. [1] https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/qantas-removes-references-to-taiwan-as-a-country-following-chinese-pressure/news-story/cc555336e51170414f7a242eafeab2ab https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/qant...
• pnako 7y ago
  It's not the job of Apple, the NBA or the Coca Cola Company to conduct foreign policy. It's a political issue. As far as I can tell, the sitting US President has, at least, identified the issue.
• TedHarr 7y ago
  Hong Kong has been a part of China since 1997. Funny that you compared it to the appeasement policy.
• hamilyon2 7y ago
  As far as I remember, Germany in 30-s was underdog, deprived of colonies, territories, with failing economy and zero weight in international relations. China is actual, undisputed world leader. They don't tolerate other nations telling them what to do on their land, and like economical expansion to neighbor states. They can afford it. I don't see parallels.
  • scythe 7y ago
    Germany in the prewar period had the second-largest domestic economy in the world: http://www.zuljan.info/articles/0302wwiigdp.html http://www.zuljan.info/articles/0302wwiigdp.html China is still second in the world by nominal GDP, although they're closer to us now than Germany was then.
• dang 7y ago
  You Godwinned up a huge flamewar with this. That's seriously not cool—political and nationalistic flamewar with Nazi overtones is a failure here. We'd appreciate it if you'd please read the site guidelines and take this one to heart: "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
  • yungcoder 7y ago
    So stating an opinion with valid comparisons is simply just flaming now, eh? Good to know the concept of "genuinely new" is up to you and you alone to decide.
    • dang 7y ago
      It's just that it's my job to make these calls. In doing so, I look at the effects a comment has. In this case we got a dismal flamewar. It looks like you've been creating accounts for the purpose of nationalistic/political battle. That's against the site guidelines, and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of which side you're for or against. A lot of the time, we don't even look at which side an account is for or against—it isn't necessary, and we don't care. Creating accounts to break the site guidelines with well eventually get your main account banned as well, so please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html