4 ms·

I don't think anyone would ever argue that the West isn't active or that they've never done anything wrong. Obviously there are huge wikipedia articles and hund

I don't think anyone would ever argue that the West isn't active or that they've never done anything wrong. Obviously there are huge wikipedia articles and hundreds of books on the subject. But from what it seems of what little we know of that world, the US seems to have some kind of value system, and the CCP has almost none. Freedom of speech is a good example. If the US were to spy on a citizen, they wouldn't end up in a concentration camp. The US also encourages its allies, as much as it can, to promote "Western democratic values". For example, we were instrumental in turning South Korea into a democracy, from a dictatorship. So it's not as simple as "US bad china good" or "China bad, US good" but I think it's pretty clear China is a totalitarian system which has few scruples, if any. So that's what we mean by "benign". Some rough understanding of "the right thing". It's not that the US does everything great, forever, because clearly...

free_rms 6y ago
Oof, Korea? Bad example. We spent 4 years fighting, with 3 million casualties, in order to leave the border between north/south in the same place we found it, and install an allied dictatorship for the following 30 years. I guess it worked out eventually, but that's to the credit of the Koreans, not us. We were fine with a capitalist dictatorship as long as the Cold War was on. Did you ever hear about this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwangju_Uprising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwangju_Uprising Thousands of protestors killed, by US weapons, while our defense dept was kept in the loop. And I had never even heard of it until I went to fact-check myself about the length of the dictatorship there. Funny. I wonder why.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  Ok about korea, I'll look up the uprising. What about this bit he said "If the US were to spy on a citizen, they wouldn't end up in a concentration camp". Seems a valid point in general.
  - free_rms 6y ago
    I mean, I'm not trying to say "china always good, USA always bad", either. I'm just trying to add some perspective. If I were to take that on as some sort of debate challenge, I'd point out the mass incarceration and the fact that we still have a bigger chunk of people in jail despite being so much freer. Of course, that's a bit of a rhetorical gambit. As far as the characterization of china, it depends. Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government, they just lose opportunities. Party membership is a big part of getting ahead there. They go to prison if they start getting organized, holding meetings, being an alternative political party. Xinjiang is a whole other can of worms.
    - eric-hu 6y ago
      > Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government, they just lose opportunities. This is verifiably false. Han vine Chinese book store owners in Hong Kong were kidnapped to mainland China, incarcerated and forced to sign confessions. Their ‘crime’ was selling books critical of the CCP.
      - free_rms 6y ago
        I was speaking more generally. WeChat is monitored and things get said there, the gulags aren't full. There was a lot of outrage over that doctor that died after blowing the whistle about C19, for example. HK was more of a hot situation, you had protestors waving UK flags and talking about independence. I'm not justifying anything, but that's exactly the 'credible threat' vs 'talking shit' distinction I was talking anout. In the cases you're referencing, are they still locked up? I'll check out a link if you've got one.
        throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
        >>> Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government, they just lose opportunities. >> This is verifiably false. > I was speaking more generally That response is meaningless (the classic 'nebulous response' to an inconvenient question) and thus sidesteps addressing his point. Also please elaborate on what 'losing opportunities' means - I hope it doesn't extend to eg. the right to eat food does it? > In the cases you're referencing, are they still locked up? It's irrelevant if they are still locked up or released, they got locked up for political reasons. Right?
rixed 6y ago
Different countries may have different values. Citizens of those countries are educated to value those different (quite abstract) ideals, such as "freedom of speach" in the US, or "economic development" in China. Like a religion, those systems of values are flexible and abstract enough that you can make them mean whatever you want. Then automatically we tend to think of our system of values as better than any other; indeed, that's what we use values for. So what have we learn so far? Nothing, apparently.
- jorblumesea 6y ago
  I believe in cultural relativity, but that ends at, for example, mass concentration camps. Your argument is basically "let any country do whatever they want within their borders" and I don't think that makes sense. Or, there are limits to that. I would also argue that the acceptance of totalitarian values as "cultural norms" isn't entirely correct. Historical Chinese culture has little to do with the social credit system and the CCP is not Chinese culture.
  - netsharc 6y ago
    Remind me what's happening to the refugees (including infants) in the south border? Maybe they deserve it for being criminals, just like the Muslims in Xinjiang deserve it...
  - rixed 6y ago
    I do not think cultural relativism, if you want to call it that way, means that one can never judge what others do, and I'm surprised my comment came across as this. I'd like to help you realize that despite all your values of freedom of speech, free thinking and so on, this very set of strong emotional values makes you live in a fantasy world where countries/cultures are impersonated by good or bad characters, the actions of which are either justified or not despite they are all equally questionable. Of course the USA have had concentration camps (China and France also), of course people were interned based on religion or skin color also in the USA (China and France too), of course the USA invaded countries while lying in the face of everybody about the reasons (like France and China also did). I don't know, whatch Powell's speech to the UN about the weapons of mass destruction in a loop until it clicks? All countries (I included France just because I happen to write this from there) would likely do the same on the same circumstances regardless of their official values, because no country act because of values. Countries are not real characters, they do not act, and have no values. Individuals do and have, and it is important that individuals of the most powerful country in the world would adopt another set of guiding values than "when that's my gouvernement doing it it's Ok but when that's others it's evil". Because they have been subjugated by their ruling class[1] for a long time now, and the consequences have been dramatic. [1] For lack of a better term
netsharc 6y ago
It's interesting how biased you are, that you see the inherent good in the US and view China as totally evil. The Chinese version of you would probably see it the opposite way, and you'd call him brainwashed and deluded... I remember reading a cynical blog post about how what occupies governments are how to have the most influence in the world. USA used to be good at that, but well, we know where that's gone. As for "Western democtratic values", one could cynically view that as trying to install a free market so American companies can exploit resources and the population. Just look up where the term "banana republic" came from.

free_rms 6y ago

Oof, Korea? Bad example. We spent 4 years fighting, with 3 million casualties, in order to leave the border between north/south in the same place we found it, and install an allied dictatorship for the following 30 years. I guess it worked out eventually, but that's to the credit of the Koreans, not us. We were fine with a capitalist dictatorship as long as the Cold War was on. Did you ever hear about this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwangju_Uprising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwangju_Uprising Thousands of protestors killed, by US weapons, while our defense dept was kept in the loop. And I had never even heard of it until I went to fact-check myself about the length of the dictatorship there. Funny. I wonder why.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
Ok about korea, I'll look up the uprising. What about this bit he said "If the US were to spy on a citizen, they wouldn't end up in a concentration camp". Seems a valid point in general.
- free_rms 6y ago
  I mean, I'm not trying to say "china always good, USA always bad", either. I'm just trying to add some perspective. If I were to take that on as some sort of debate challenge, I'd point out the mass incarceration and the fact that we still have a bigger chunk of people in jail despite being so much freer. Of course, that's a bit of a rhetorical gambit. As far as the characterization of china, it depends. Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government, they just lose opportunities. Party membership is a big part of getting ahead there. They go to prison if they start getting organized, holding meetings, being an alternative political party. Xinjiang is a whole other can of worms.
  - eric-hu 6y ago
    > Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government, they just lose opportunities. This is verifiably false. Han vine Chinese book store owners in Hong Kong were kidnapped to mainland China, incarcerated and forced to sign confessions. Their ‘crime’ was selling books critical of the CCP.
    - free_rms 6y ago
      I was speaking more generally. WeChat is monitored and things get said there, the gulags aren't full. There was a lot of outrage over that doctor that died after blowing the whistle about C19, for example. HK was more of a hot situation, you had protestors waving UK flags and talking about independence. I'm not justifying anything, but that's exactly the 'credible threat' vs 'talking shit' distinction I was talking anout. In the cases you're referencing, are they still locked up? I'll check out a link if you've got one.
      - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
        >>> Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government, they just lose opportunities. >> This is verifiably false. > I was speaking more generally That response is meaningless (the classic 'nebulous response' to an inconvenient question) and thus sidesteps addressing his point. Also please elaborate on what 'losing opportunities' means - I hope it doesn't extend to eg. the right to eat food does it? > In the cases you're referencing, are they still locked up? It's irrelevant if they are still locked up or released, they got locked up for political reasons. Right?

rixed 6y ago

Different countries may have different values. Citizens of those countries are educated to value those different (quite abstract) ideals, such as "freedom of speach" in the US, or "economic development" in China. Like a religion, those systems of values are flexible and abstract enough that you can make them mean whatever you want. Then automatically we tend to think of our system of values as better than any other; indeed, that's what we use values for. So what have we learn so far? Nothing, apparently.

jorblumesea 6y ago
I believe in cultural relativity, but that ends at, for example, mass concentration camps. Your argument is basically "let any country do whatever they want within their borders" and I don't think that makes sense. Or, there are limits to that. I would also argue that the acceptance of totalitarian values as "cultural norms" isn't entirely correct. Historical Chinese culture has little to do with the social credit system and the CCP is not Chinese culture.
- netsharc 6y ago
  Remind me what's happening to the refugees (including infants) in the south border? Maybe they deserve it for being criminals, just like the Muslims in Xinjiang deserve it...
- rixed 6y ago
  I do not think cultural relativism, if you want to call it that way, means that one can never judge what others do, and I'm surprised my comment came across as this. I'd like to help you realize that despite all your values of freedom of speech, free thinking and so on, this very set of strong emotional values makes you live in a fantasy world where countries/cultures are impersonated by good or bad characters, the actions of which are either justified or not despite they are all equally questionable. Of course the USA have had concentration camps (China and France also), of course people were interned based on religion or skin color also in the USA (China and France too), of course the USA invaded countries while lying in the face of everybody about the reasons (like France and China also did). I don't know, whatch Powell's speech to the UN about the weapons of mass destruction in a loop until it clicks? All countries (I included France just because I happen to write this from there) would likely do the same on the same circumstances regardless of their official values, because no country act because of values. Countries are not real characters, they do not act, and have no values. Individuals do and have, and it is important that individuals of the most powerful country in the world would adopt another set of guiding values than "when that's my gouvernement doing it it's Ok but when that's others it's evil". Because they have been subjugated by their ruling class[1] for a long time now, and the consequences have been dramatic. [1] For lack of a better term

netsharc 6y ago

It's interesting how biased you are, that you see the inherent good in the US and view China as totally evil. The Chinese version of you would probably see it the opposite way, and you'd call him brainwashed and deluded... I remember reading a cynical blog post about how what occupies governments are how to have the most influence in the world. USA used to be good at that, but well, we know where that's gone. As for "Western democtratic values", one could cynically view that as trying to install a free market so American companies can exploit resources and the population. Just look up where the term "banana republic" came from.