3 ms·

While I completely agree with you, YC is a private organization and not a political one. The above message allows everyone to save face while getting the job d

by yumraj 7y ago

While I completely agree with you, YC is a private organization and not a political one. The above message allows everyone to save face while getting the job done. YC doesn't need to say anything beyond this.

learc83 7y ago
>Doing business with a fascist state or in a fascist state is deplorable >While I completely agree with you, YC is a private organization and not a political If you agree that doing business with a fascist state is deplorable, it doesn't stop being deplorable just because you're a private company.
colechristensen 7y ago
That is exactly the problem. Saving face. Causing PRC to lose face is the only way to stop them outside a war which nobody wants. If American companies started cutting ties and explicitly calling out their behavior it would make a real difference.
- skybrian 7y ago
  1. PRC loses face. 2. ??? (Does not include war.) 3. New Chinese government takes control. I don't think anyone knows how to do what you want. Just because a problem is important doesn't mean it has a solution.
  - tossAfterUsing 7y ago
    Step 2: globally orchestrated sanctions on a fascist dictatorship Step 2b: hopefully we avoid WWIII
    - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
      Yeah, about step 2b: Note that part of the reasoning behind the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was the US's sanctions on Japan for their actions in China.
    - skybrian 7y ago
      That might work for a smaller country like South Africa, but China too big for that. China could probably make everything it needs itself, or learn in a decade or two. So it sounds to me like a new iron curtain, leaving both sides poorer and the people caught in the middle suffering from the separation. (And good luck fighting global warming.) But though there's a lot of pressure to choose your side, I doubt every country will do so. If forced they might choose China?
      - tossAfterUsing 7y ago
        > China could probably make everything it needs itself, or learn in a decade or two. Even the elites want out... i'm not sure the system wouldn't eat itself before then.
      - throwawaybbb 7y ago
        >That might work for a smaller country like South Africa, but China too big for that. China could probably make everything it needs itself, or learn in a decade or two. So it sounds to me like a new iron curtain, leaving both sides poorer and the people caught in the middle suffering from the separation. (And good luck fighting global warming.) The majority of the US and Soviet population was better off with the iron curtain than without in real terms. The US median hourly wage only surpassed that of 1968 in the last 3 years.
      - yumraj 7y ago
        I don't think that is correct. In fact 1) China is massive with huge labor class, 2) China is heavily export driven, 3) current generation in China has been affluent. So, even moderate global sanctions will have a massive impact with both affluent class and the labor class revolting. However, remember, oil embargo drove Japan to WW-2, I'm sure China will react similarly unless that internal revolt happens first. Too difficult to predict.
- yumraj 7y ago
  In my observation, for what it's worth, current China regime does not react well to losing face. They just dig in further. Not sure if it's a cultural artifact. We have seen that time and time again. However, China will react to economic loss. As such pulling out of China, surely and quietly, is the best approach.
DavidHm 7y ago
And yet private organizations so often want to sit on the moral perch and pet themselves about all the non-profit oriented actions they take.
- yumraj 7y ago
  And that is their right, and nothing wrong with that IMHO. And, I will support that. However, I was simply noting that it is not a requirement for private organizations.
fzeroracer 7y ago
You can't say you're an apolitical organization when you work with China given the way running a business in China works. The message is obvious that companies are afraid of angering the Chinese government by speaking ill of it as they commit increasing atrocities because that could potentially eat into their profit margins. Profit over people.

by yumraj 7y ago

learc83 7y ago

>Doing business with a fascist state or in a fascist state is deplorable >While I completely agree with you, YC is a private organization and not a political If you agree that doing business with a fascist state is deplorable, it doesn't stop being deplorable just because you're a private company.

colechristensen 7y ago

That is exactly the problem. Saving face. Causing PRC to lose face is the only way to stop them outside a war which nobody wants. If American companies started cutting ties and explicitly calling out their behavior it would make a real difference.

skybrian 7y ago
1. PRC loses face. 2. ??? (Does not include war.) 3. New Chinese government takes control. I don't think anyone knows how to do what you want. Just because a problem is important doesn't mean it has a solution.
- tossAfterUsing 7y ago
  Step 2: globally orchestrated sanctions on a fascist dictatorship Step 2b: hopefully we avoid WWIII
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    Yeah, about step 2b: Note that part of the reasoning behind the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was the US's sanctions on Japan for their actions in China.
  - skybrian 7y ago
    That might work for a smaller country like South Africa, but China too big for that. China could probably make everything it needs itself, or learn in a decade or two. So it sounds to me like a new iron curtain, leaving both sides poorer and the people caught in the middle suffering from the separation. (And good luck fighting global warming.) But though there's a lot of pressure to choose your side, I doubt every country will do so. If forced they might choose China?
    - tossAfterUsing 7y ago
      > China could probably make everything it needs itself, or learn in a decade or two. Even the elites want out... i'm not sure the system wouldn't eat itself before then.
    - throwawaybbb 7y ago
      >That might work for a smaller country like South Africa, but China too big for that. China could probably make everything it needs itself, or learn in a decade or two. So it sounds to me like a new iron curtain, leaving both sides poorer and the people caught in the middle suffering from the separation. (And good luck fighting global warming.) The majority of the US and Soviet population was better off with the iron curtain than without in real terms. The US median hourly wage only surpassed that of 1968 in the last 3 years.
    - yumraj 7y ago
      I don't think that is correct. In fact 1) China is massive with huge labor class, 2) China is heavily export driven, 3) current generation in China has been affluent. So, even moderate global sanctions will have a massive impact with both affluent class and the labor class revolting. However, remember, oil embargo drove Japan to WW-2, I'm sure China will react similarly unless that internal revolt happens first. Too difficult to predict.
yumraj 7y ago
In my observation, for what it's worth, current China regime does not react well to losing face. They just dig in further. Not sure if it's a cultural artifact. We have seen that time and time again. However, China will react to economic loss. As such pulling out of China, surely and quietly, is the best approach.

DavidHm 7y ago

And yet private organizations so often want to sit on the moral perch and pet themselves about all the non-profit oriented actions they take.

yumraj 7y ago
And that is their right, and nothing wrong with that IMHO. And, I will support that. However, I was simply noting that it is not a requirement for private organizations.

fzeroracer 7y ago

You can't say you're an apolitical organization when you work with China given the way running a business in China works. The message is obvious that companies are afraid of angering the Chinese government by speaking ill of it as they commit increasing atrocities because that could potentially eat into their profit margins. Profit over people.