4 ms·

Exactly. The problem is, the West gets a moral high ground and even if they get criticism for their actions, the highest repercussions they encounter is "a slap

by vms20591 6y ago

Exactly. The problem is, the West gets a moral high ground and even if they get criticism for their actions, the highest repercussions they encounter is "a slap to the wrist".

avmich 6y ago
West gets moral high ground not because it's blameless - it isn't - but because it's faults are smaller. It could be counterproductive to judge something on a boolean scale - "perfect" vs. "not perfect so perfectly bad". West is much more transparent than non-West, so we have better chance to differentiate good parts from bad parts. If we don't have such opportunity, and we consistently get burned with bad parts, we're forced to assume the whole non-Westness is bad. Here "West" and "non-West" is somewhat similar to "USA" and "China". If China would be more transparent, if West would see differences, and interactions between those differences, and could judge the parts by those interactions, the scope of blame can be refined. Similarly with more transparent West we can see evolution of society or its parts towards more or less cruelty towards each other and judge and act accordingly.
- wonnage 6y ago
  You can only say this because you've been brainwashed into thinking all the atrocities committed before, say, 1950 don't count anymore. That was a different time! Racism is solved too. *edit, that should probably be 1975 because we pretend the Vietnam war never happened
  - coldtea 6y ago
    Plus 4-5 government topplings, invasions, and occupations in the last 20 years. But that's "in the past" too.
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  Would you consider forced sterilization of women, 'acceptable'? https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower-and-forced-sterilization https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower...
Veen 6y ago
Perhaps you should think about why, when faced with evidence of an atrocity, your reaction is not "this is horrible and should be stopped" but "look at all these hypocrites denouncing the horrible thing". It seems to me a serious moral miscalibration.
- wonnage 6y ago
  Your reaction is "this is horrible and should be stopped" and that's what makes you susceptible to anti-China hysteria. This is just "we don't negotiate with terrorists" in another context. Apparently anyone uncooperative with American business interests in the Middle East turned out to be a terrorist who needs to be bombed/assassinated/coup-ed. America has sanctioned North Korea for going on 50 years now, has that produced a measurable improvement in human rights? Or has it just caused endless suffering?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Veen 6y ago
    I'm curious what entitles you to claim I am "susceptible to anti-China hysteria"? How could you possibly know that? And what do Uigurs have to do with the Middle East or Korea? And what does American foreign policy have to do with me? I am not an American. There's no logic or reason in your response. You write like an AI bot trained on nothing but Chomsky interviews.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - wonnage 6y ago
      You can resort to name calling if you want but the fact remains that none of the countries we've sanctioned for human rights abuses have stopped them. Which becomes continued justification for maintaining sanctions. At what point do we admit that sanctions are pointless?
  - 6y ago

Exactly. The problem is, the West gets a moral high ground and even if they get criticism for their actions, the highest repercussions they encounter is "a slap to the wrist".

avmich 6y ago

West gets moral high ground not because it's blameless - it isn't - but because it's faults are smaller. It could be counterproductive to judge something on a boolean scale - "perfect" vs. "not perfect so perfectly bad". West is much more transparent than non-West, so we have better chance to differentiate good parts from bad parts. If we don't have such opportunity, and we consistently get burned with bad parts, we're forced to assume the whole non-Westness is bad. Here "West" and "non-West" is somewhat similar to "USA" and "China". If China would be more transparent, if West would see differences, and interactions between those differences, and could judge the parts by those interactions, the scope of blame can be refined. Similarly with more transparent West we can see evolution of society or its parts towards more or less cruelty towards each other and judge and act accordingly.

wonnage 6y ago
You can only say this because you've been brainwashed into thinking all the atrocities committed before, say, 1950 don't count anymore. That was a different time! Racism is solved too. *edit, that should probably be 1975 because we pretend the Vietnam war never happened
- coldtea 6y ago
  Plus 4-5 government topplings, invasions, and occupations in the last 20 years. But that's "in the past" too.
gremlinsinc 6y ago
Would you consider forced sterilization of women, 'acceptable'? https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower-and-forced-sterilization https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower...

Veen 6y ago

Perhaps you should think about why, when faced with evidence of an atrocity, your reaction is not "this is horrible and should be stopped" but "look at all these hypocrites denouncing the horrible thing". It seems to me a serious moral miscalibration.

wonnage 6y ago
Your reaction is "this is horrible and should be stopped" and that's what makes you susceptible to anti-China hysteria. This is just "we don't negotiate with terrorists" in another context. Apparently anyone uncooperative with American business interests in the Middle East turned out to be a terrorist who needs to be bombed/assassinated/coup-ed. America has sanctioned North Korea for going on 50 years now, has that produced a measurable improvement in human rights? Or has it just caused endless suffering?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Veen 6y ago
  I'm curious what entitles you to claim I am "susceptible to anti-China hysteria"? How could you possibly know that? And what do Uigurs have to do with the Middle East or Korea? And what does American foreign policy have to do with me? I am not an American. There's no logic or reason in your response. You write like an AI bot trained on nothing but Chomsky interviews.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - wonnage 6y ago
    You can resort to name calling if you want but the fact remains that none of the countries we've sanctioned for human rights abuses have stopped them. Which becomes continued justification for maintaining sanctions. At what point do we admit that sanctions are pointless?
- 6y ago