5 ms·

What is wrong with being political against an ideology threatening the World? World needs to reciprocate to China in like India did recently. If China is a clo

What is wrong with being political against an ideology threatening the World? World needs to reciprocate to China in like India did recently. If China is a closed garden with entry gates controlling the inflow into China, World needs to build exit gates controlling the outflow from China. No other justification is required.

saagarjha 6y ago
Marking an ideology as “threatening the world” is inherently political.
- genocidicbunny 6y ago
  Where is the fundamental problem in doing that? Would saying that genocide is bad be political? What about if a country's government and people believed in genocide of a specific race -- would saying that said country is committing genocide be political? If it is political, is it bad to be politically against that? What is the actual problem with being political, especially when being 'political' means being on the right side of morality?
  - slim 6y ago
    Your discourse is historically what provokes genocides. you seem to use "ideology" in place of "china" as a way to express xenophobic thoughts you're singling out a nation as dangerous for the future of humanity. as if they're not part of humanity. it's called "dehumanizing" and it's the first step in any genocide. Chinese are as human as you. Moreover the rest of humanity is happy to have China as a challenger to American hegemony. so you're mistaken in thinking it's China against the rest of the world.
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      Nobody's saying the Chinese nation is dangerous. China is a great country filled with wonderful people. The problem is the Chinese government, the totalitarian system that's doing a genocide as we speak and trying to bully the world into quietly ignoring it.
    - genocidicbunny 6y ago
      I can see how it would be easy to consider equal what I say with me being specifically against China, but I was speaking in broader terms; Genocide is something is very broadly considered to be a horrendous crime, hence my example of it -- the correlation with China is incidental and not intended to be the main focus. I single out specific ideologies as being dangerous for the future of humanity. It is the paradox of tolerance -- to be tolerant, you cannot tolerate intolerance, and that is what I am trying to grasp at. There are certain things that most people can universally agree to as being travesties and immoral (genocide being an example of such.) Any countries or governments participating in such activities, whatever the inclination of the people they govern, should be decried and blamed for such immoral acts. We should have to no tolerance for people and ideologies that are intolerant. And with that said, I don't think I ever blamed the Chinese people for what their government is participating in. While I wish there was more political will and influence in the general population in China to pursue friendlier policies, the current actions of the Chinese government are likely not directly condoned by their populace, and I lay no blame at their feet in this regard. At the same time though, I can blame their government for enacting and undertaking policies that are inherently anti-humanitarian and anti-ethical by most 'standards', and agitate for them to do better. I am just as happy to call out my own government for the various malfeasances it has participated in as well, but you focused on China, so there we are. I will gladly take the competition from China, or from Europe, or Africa, or Mars even for all I care, as long as its not on the back of the mistreatment of people. Until that's the case, I'm going to complain, whether its China, USA, Russia, Borneo or the Tooth Fairy that are doing bad things. So again I ask, what is the problem with being political, when being apolitical means being apathetic?
      - drieddust 6y ago
        Exactly tolerance of intolerance is suicidal. Ironically this is what left liberals are doing for a long time when it comes to intolerant idealogies like Communism and radical Islam.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
bllguo 6y ago
the hysterics when china is involved are amusing. "ideology threatening the world" is just a comical accusation to levy when juxtaposed with the West's track record of imperialism, forcibly spreading "democracy" and supporting coups worldwide, initiating wars across the globe - the list goes on. Be upfront with it already, we all know it's really about power and economics.
- daodedickinson 6y ago
  no, the CCP is far more ethnosupremacist and totalitarian
- licebmi__at__ 6y ago
  As someone who's pretty skeptic of US/west foreign policy, I see little difference, but still a difference. And I do believe the authoritarianism it's a kind of protectionism, a strategy that allows them to grow economically and politically while defending from foreign intervention, and find likely that they will reduce the authoritarian policy to US levels if they achieve the kind of hegemony that US has... But I might be wrong. So there's real danger.
  - drieddust 6y ago
    Exactly democracies have lots of problems but they don't compare to the totalitarianism of China.
- drieddust 6y ago
  Posted wrongly so pasting from above. WoW, lots of angry words. West has its problems but they don't compare to China. But to the current point if Google is restricted in China why should TikTok have free reign ? And to elaborate on threat to the world: 1. Who caused current pandemic and why? 2. How many died in Wuhan any why there is no honest disclose despite entire world suffering? 3. Why China is engaged in border conflict with every single neighbor on some pretext or other? 4. How do you justify oppressive social credit system?
  - 6y ago
javert 6y ago
No. We should not respond to tyranny by being a tyranny. We should respond to it by standing up for our values: freedom, free speech, individual rights, open borders, free trade, and so on. If our system is so good---and it is---China's system is no threat. Your point of view---responding to a perceived "threat" by abandoning our principles and freedoms---is why Bin Laden and the terrorists won 9/11.
- drieddust 6y ago
  > No. We should not respond to tyranny by being a tyranny How responding back by blocking companies is tyranny? Who had oppressed if TikTok it's blocked? > is why Bin Laden and the terrorists won 9/11 How ??
  - javert 6y ago
    > Who had oppressed if TikTok it's blocked Millions of Americans who use TikTok. Thousands of Americans who work at TikTok. American investors in ByteDance. And, when anyone's rights are violated, everyone's rights are violated. > is why Bin Laden and the terrorists won 9/11 Massive curtailment of freedom and massive growth of the police state in the aftermath of 9/11. This has caused far more harm to Americans than the attack itself. Bin Laden achieved what he wanted, which was to cripple our freedom and cause us to lose confidence in ourselves.
drieddust 6y ago
WoW, lots of angry words. West has its problems but they don't compare to China. But to the current point if Google is restricted in China why should TikTok have free reign ? And to elaborate on threat to the world: 1. Who caused current pandemic and why? 2. How many died in Wuhan any why there is no honest disclose despite entire world suffering? 3. Why China is engaged in border conflict with every single neighbor on some pretext or other? 4. How do you justify oppressive social credit system?

saagarjha 6y ago

Marking an ideology as “threatening the world” is inherently political.

genocidicbunny 6y ago
Where is the fundamental problem in doing that? Would saying that genocide is bad be political? What about if a country's government and people believed in genocide of a specific race -- would saying that said country is committing genocide be political? If it is political, is it bad to be politically against that? What is the actual problem with being political, especially when being 'political' means being on the right side of morality?
- slim 6y ago
  Your discourse is historically what provokes genocides. you seem to use "ideology" in place of "china" as a way to express xenophobic thoughts you're singling out a nation as dangerous for the future of humanity. as if they're not part of humanity. it's called "dehumanizing" and it's the first step in any genocide. Chinese are as human as you. Moreover the rest of humanity is happy to have China as a challenger to American hegemony. so you're mistaken in thinking it's China against the rest of the world.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    Nobody's saying the Chinese nation is dangerous. China is a great country filled with wonderful people. The problem is the Chinese government, the totalitarian system that's doing a genocide as we speak and trying to bully the world into quietly ignoring it.
  - genocidicbunny 6y ago
    I can see how it would be easy to consider equal what I say with me being specifically against China, but I was speaking in broader terms; Genocide is something is very broadly considered to be a horrendous crime, hence my example of it -- the correlation with China is incidental and not intended to be the main focus. I single out specific ideologies as being dangerous for the future of humanity. It is the paradox of tolerance -- to be tolerant, you cannot tolerate intolerance, and that is what I am trying to grasp at. There are certain things that most people can universally agree to as being travesties and immoral (genocide being an example of such.) Any countries or governments participating in such activities, whatever the inclination of the people they govern, should be decried and blamed for such immoral acts. We should have to no tolerance for people and ideologies that are intolerant. And with that said, I don't think I ever blamed the Chinese people for what their government is participating in. While I wish there was more political will and influence in the general population in China to pursue friendlier policies, the current actions of the Chinese government are likely not directly condoned by their populace, and I lay no blame at their feet in this regard. At the same time though, I can blame their government for enacting and undertaking policies that are inherently anti-humanitarian and anti-ethical by most 'standards', and agitate for them to do better. I am just as happy to call out my own government for the various malfeasances it has participated in as well, but you focused on China, so there we are. I will gladly take the competition from China, or from Europe, or Africa, or Mars even for all I care, as long as its not on the back of the mistreatment of people. Until that's the case, I'm going to complain, whether its China, USA, Russia, Borneo or the Tooth Fairy that are doing bad things. So again I ask, what is the problem with being political, when being apolitical means being apathetic?
    - drieddust 6y ago
      Exactly tolerance of intolerance is suicidal. Ironically this is what left liberals are doing for a long time when it comes to intolerant idealogies like Communism and radical Islam.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

bllguo 6y ago

the hysterics when china is involved are amusing. "ideology threatening the world" is just a comical accusation to levy when juxtaposed with the West's track record of imperialism, forcibly spreading "democracy" and supporting coups worldwide, initiating wars across the globe - the list goes on. Be upfront with it already, we all know it's really about power and economics.

daodedickinson 6y ago
no, the CCP is far more ethnosupremacist and totalitarian
licebmi__at__ 6y ago
As someone who's pretty skeptic of US/west foreign policy, I see little difference, but still a difference. And I do believe the authoritarianism it's a kind of protectionism, a strategy that allows them to grow economically and politically while defending from foreign intervention, and find likely that they will reduce the authoritarian policy to US levels if they achieve the kind of hegemony that US has... But I might be wrong. So there's real danger.
- drieddust 6y ago
  Exactly democracies have lots of problems but they don't compare to the totalitarianism of China.
drieddust 6y ago
Posted wrongly so pasting from above. WoW, lots of angry words. West has its problems but they don't compare to China. But to the current point if Google is restricted in China why should TikTok have free reign ? And to elaborate on threat to the world: 1. Who caused current pandemic and why? 2. How many died in Wuhan any why there is no honest disclose despite entire world suffering? 3. Why China is engaged in border conflict with every single neighbor on some pretext or other? 4. How do you justify oppressive social credit system?
- 6y ago

javert 6y ago

No. We should not respond to tyranny by being a tyranny. We should respond to it by standing up for our values: freedom, free speech, individual rights, open borders, free trade, and so on. If our system is so good---and it is---China's system is no threat. Your point of view---responding to a perceived "threat" by abandoning our principles and freedoms---is why Bin Laden and the terrorists won 9/11.

drieddust 6y ago
> No. We should not respond to tyranny by being a tyranny How responding back by blocking companies is tyranny? Who had oppressed if TikTok it's blocked? > is why Bin Laden and the terrorists won 9/11 How ??
- javert 6y ago
  > Who had oppressed if TikTok it's blocked Millions of Americans who use TikTok. Thousands of Americans who work at TikTok. American investors in ByteDance. And, when anyone's rights are violated, everyone's rights are violated. > is why Bin Laden and the terrorists won 9/11 Massive curtailment of freedom and massive growth of the police state in the aftermath of 9/11. This has caused far more harm to Americans than the attack itself. Bin Laden achieved what he wanted, which was to cripple our freedom and cause us to lose confidence in ourselves.

drieddust 6y ago

WoW, lots of angry words. West has its problems but they don't compare to China. But to the current point if Google is restricted in China why should TikTok have free reign ? And to elaborate on threat to the world: 1. Who caused current pandemic and why? 2. How many died in Wuhan any why there is no honest disclose despite entire world suffering? 3. Why China is engaged in border conflict with every single neighbor on some pretext or other? 4. How do you justify oppressive social credit system?