4 ms·

> as long as I don't think the Chinese government is interested in hurting me or anyone I care about I can't imagine why you don't think that when the CCP acti

> as long as I don't think the Chinese government is interested in hurting me or anyone I care about I can't imagine why you don't think that when the CCP actively pursues Chinese activists and Uighur Muslims, including Chinese-Americans with ties (like family) to the mainland. Or maybe those people just aren't anyone you care about.

anniefrost 6y ago
You can't really imagine huh? Because they were promoting separatism? Falun gong were captured after they wanted to be separated from China.
- themacguffinman 6y ago
  You don't seem to be disputing the basic premise that China is interested in hurting those people.
bryanrasmussen 6y ago
sometimes stating something as a hypothetical - in which to give the widest possible latitude to opposing viewpoint in order to still triumph over it - can attract the attention of indignant moralists who then hector that no possible latitude must ever be given in argument; for those who give latitude are wallowing in corruption.
- themacguffinman 6y ago
  I generally think it's more productive to address assumptions and arguments head on instead of vaguely implying that criticism of your hypothetical scenario comes from indignant moralists. Perhaps there's a fault in my criticism you want to address? If you have something to say about the comment instead of the person who made it, I suggest you express it clearly and directly.
  - bryanrasmussen 6y ago
    I argued one possible reason why people should fear Chinese companies more than American, you seem to be in agreement that people should fear Chinese companies as well, but the argument I used was not your argument, at which point you implied that there was something morally deficient with me (at least that is how I read your comment: "Or maybe those people just aren't anyone you care about.") for not making the argument you find preferable. >vaguely implying that criticism of your hypothetical scenario comes from indignant moralists. No, just your criticism so far. I'm sure there are other criticisms people might make but I read yours as an accusation of being morally bad for not hitting the notes you want hit, as if by not hitting those notes in this comment I cannot ever do so in another one should I feel the timing is right. I guess you also feel you were making a comment on my immorality because otherwise you would have said something like "you've misread my comment, perhaps don't be so quick to aggravation"
    - themacguffinman 6y ago
      I wasn't commenting on your morality and I probably could have phrased it more neutrally. I wanted to point out that China's actions aren't a mystery, so the scenario that you appeared to phrase as a possibility/hypothetical is more clear cut than that. I honestly found it odd that you'd phrase it with "as long as I don't think..." as if China's actions aren't well established. My last sentence "Or maybe those people just aren't anyone you care about" isn't necessarily some kind of veiled insult, it's a real position that some people hold and one that I offered as an option. There was actually a reply to my comment (it's currently flagged so you may not be able to see it) that implied China's actions are justified because Falun Gong is a separatist group. This kind of reasoning is not uncommon in Chinese nationals, among others.
      - bryanrasmussen 6y ago
        fair enough, I had meant "as long as I don't think" as something akin to a parameter passed to a function changing the result of that function, not as a true reflection of my current state of mind about anything. So that said, sorry for taking offense. I guess I am on edge recently.

anniefrost 6y ago

You can't really imagine huh? Because they were promoting separatism? Falun gong were captured after they wanted to be separated from China.

themacguffinman 6y ago
You don't seem to be disputing the basic premise that China is interested in hurting those people.

bryanrasmussen 6y ago

sometimes stating something as a hypothetical - in which to give the widest possible latitude to opposing viewpoint in order to still triumph over it - can attract the attention of indignant moralists who then hector that no possible latitude must ever be given in argument; for those who give latitude are wallowing in corruption.

themacguffinman 6y ago
I generally think it's more productive to address assumptions and arguments head on instead of vaguely implying that criticism of your hypothetical scenario comes from indignant moralists. Perhaps there's a fault in my criticism you want to address? If you have something to say about the comment instead of the person who made it, I suggest you express it clearly and directly.
- bryanrasmussen 6y ago
  I argued one possible reason why people should fear Chinese companies more than American, you seem to be in agreement that people should fear Chinese companies as well, but the argument I used was not your argument, at which point you implied that there was something morally deficient with me (at least that is how I read your comment: "Or maybe those people just aren't anyone you care about.") for not making the argument you find preferable. >vaguely implying that criticism of your hypothetical scenario comes from indignant moralists. No, just your criticism so far. I'm sure there are other criticisms people might make but I read yours as an accusation of being morally bad for not hitting the notes you want hit, as if by not hitting those notes in this comment I cannot ever do so in another one should I feel the timing is right. I guess you also feel you were making a comment on my immorality because otherwise you would have said something like "you've misread my comment, perhaps don't be so quick to aggravation"
  - themacguffinman 6y ago
    I wasn't commenting on your morality and I probably could have phrased it more neutrally. I wanted to point out that China's actions aren't a mystery, so the scenario that you appeared to phrase as a possibility/hypothetical is more clear cut than that. I honestly found it odd that you'd phrase it with "as long as I don't think..." as if China's actions aren't well established. My last sentence "Or maybe those people just aren't anyone you care about" isn't necessarily some kind of veiled insult, it's a real position that some people hold and one that I offered as an option. There was actually a reply to my comment (it's currently flagged so you may not be able to see it) that implied China's actions are justified because Falun Gong is a separatist group. This kind of reasoning is not uncommon in Chinese nationals, among others.
    - bryanrasmussen 6y ago
      fair enough, I had meant "as long as I don't think" as something akin to a parameter passed to a function changing the result of that function, not as a true reflection of my current state of mind about anything. So that said, sorry for taking offense. I guess I am on edge recently.