4 ms·

There's a lot to unpack here. But no, European countries can't realistically take too many measures, mostly under the threat of economic and political retaliati

There's a lot to unpack here. But no, European countries can't realistically take too many measures, mostly under the threat of economic and political retaliation. No more than Chinese citizens are free to take whatever actions they see fit against their leadership. We're all free to take any action we want but it's not freedom if we can't exercise it out of fear of retaliation. You can see this in action with most EU countries disagreeing with many sanctions imposed on US enemies but eventually caving under pressure from the US. Or when having to switch the frequencies used for the Galileo system to something that could be more easily jammed by the US. The US is exhibiting towards other countries the same kind of tyrannical behavior bent on maintaining power that the Chinese leadership is exercising towards its citizens. It's the age old need to maintain power, and the more power, the further you're willing to go to maintain it. From a global surveillance exercise where every human is spied on relentlessly, to meddling into most countries internal affairs to the point of changing regimes to suit them, to oppressing their own citizens. These are all publicly and officially documented issues. It's all great if and only if your interests align. If you cannot acknowledge this then you are certainly not prepared to have a discussion beyond "we're good, they're bad".

bagacrap 6y ago
I don't think the US is the same as China even if the US isn't perfect. The CCP actually commits genocide, takes political prisoners, and its justice system is a kangaroo court. Compare that to the US which spies on people and is taken to court for even attempting to kill a citizen who's become an enemy combatant in a warzone and has a justice system which often invalidates the actions of the legislative branch. Europe with GDPR does set its own rules for how American tech can operate and penalizes them heavily for perceived infractions. So that continent is taking the actions they want to take which is their right. Beyond that, there are more examples: Spain did effectively shut down Google News, and I don't remember any retaliation.
- buran77 6y ago
  Look at the wars the US continuously waged over the past decades and count the the deaths and destruction. You can rationalize it any way you want if it makes you feel better, you can pretend it's a fight for freedom on one side, and a fight for oppression on the other, you can say those school children were just combatants. But in the end it's the same on either side: those with power kill to maintain it. Some kill locally, some kill globally. On the other hand the examples you gave are absolutely minor and barely noteworthy. I referred decisions with global impact, not inconsequential things like Google News being affected in Spain. Intel never payed the fine the EU imposed for unfair practices close to a decade ago. Facebook and Google barely saw a blip due to GDPR since it was basically (and legally it seems) rolled into their ToS. The real consequential things are the public support the US demands from the EU for sanctions or wars. For political and economical issues that involve far more than you mentioned as a counterpoint. For countless human lives lost.
- officeplant 6y ago
  The US isn't the same, it's just worse as a whole over a longer period. What we've done to South America and the Middle East will impact those areas for decades more. We've got a lot of blood on our hands in the name of democracy, colonialism, and oil futures. Even more with how our soon to be ex-president pardons convicted war criminals on a whim.
- trasz 6y ago
  USA actually performs genocide; its prisons are full of people convinced for political (mostly racial) reasons, see the justification for war on drugs; and it’s courts can punish convinced murderer with a fee instead of proper sentence. Not mentioning crimes, which often end up with decorating the perpetrators.
- adrian_b 6y ago
  It would be nice if US would be taken to court for everything done, but that is very far from the truth. For example the US is guilty of criminal negligence during the invasion of Iraq, when an important part of the historical heritage of the entire humanity has been destroyed. It would have been extremely easy to avoid that, and there were ample efforts to warn the US political and military leaders to take appropriate actions, but all the warnings from competent people were ignored. A common thief or vandal who destroys one picture from a museum might rot in jail, but US presidents or generals who have destroyed historical artifacts far more valuable will never be punished in any way.
thunderbong 6y ago
A long time ago, in a 'Modesty Blaise' book, when Wille Garvin is incarcerated and the guard tries to cut a deal with him saying that he'll set him free - Garvin says "I already have my freedom, what you'll give me is liberty". I always think of this phrase whenever questions of freedom come up. And like you mention, all of us our free, but mostly our liberty is curtailed by external circumstances or by our own fears of retaliation.
marcinzm 6y ago
> But no, European countries can't realistically take too many measures, mostly under the threat of economic and political retaliation. They can also threaten economic and political retaliation. That's international politics and negotiation and diplomacy in a nutshell. It's a dirty game but the rules have been known for centuries. Europe isn't some tiny South American nation, it's a global power whose GDP rivals the US. That it's failed to successfully do this is the fault of Europe and no one else. Europe has failed to protect itself against US power and now you seem to be upset that the US wants to not fall into the same trap in terms of China?
- buran77 6y ago
  See, you're not actually contradicting me, just finding a justification for why the US is to the world what China is to its citizens. > They can also threaten economic and political retaliation. Sure but threats and negotiations work if you actually have the bigger gun and leverage. Given that the US is both the largest economy and military power this feels like a moot point. > Europe has failed to protect itself against US power Yes, just like Chinese citizens failed to protect themselves against their leadership. They aren't just a tiny South American nation, they are 1.3bn people who want freedom. That they failed to successfully do this is the fault of the people and no one else. But really, the fact the EU stood quietly next to the US while the US tightened its grip on the world is indeed a failure of the EU (Europe, given that this started happening long before the EU). They took the easy road of growing in someone else's shade, even if post WW2 it may have been the best or only thing Europe could have done. This doesn't change anything about my characterization of the US, it's just a tangent. I'm not saying what China is doing is ok because the US does it too. But just like OP, I pointed out the double standards obvious even here on HN. Whether it's mis- or dis-information, ignorance, hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance, or whatever else you may call it, the fact that people hold 2 completely different and opposing opinions on the same kind of action differentiated only by "us vs. them" is a massive failure of those people.
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    >Sure but threats and negotiations work if you actually have the bigger gun and leverage. Given that the US is both the largest economy and military power this feels like a moot point. China's growing influence and Russia's influence on international politics clearly show that it's not about absolute power but how you apply it. Europe is large enough and powerful enough that the US can't invade it or cause massive economic damage without significantly hurting itself. Europe has massive leverage in negotiations and politics and diplomacy. It just fails to use it likely because it's not unified enough to fully and quickly apply it. Please stop blaming Europe's diplomatic failures on external factors. All that does is ensure that they will continue to happen because you won't blame the government that is actually at fault.
throwaway4good 6y ago
Maybe we should add to this that this is a unforceable ban (as the TikTok and WeChat bans demonstrate) probably mostly designed to annoy incoming Biden administration.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
The best way to understand all this is that the US basically acquired Western European Empire in all but name after WWII. If you look at history, the US exercises about as much control of Western Europe as Rome did. Basically the areas were free to run their daily affairs but military matters went through Rome. Similar to now. The fiction lasted well throughout the Cold War but is starting to fray. It will be interesting to see what happens going forward.
stale2002 6y ago
Whataboutism is simply not a good justification for a country doing bad things. Go ahead and say that the US does bad things. But, regardless of that, we should still retaliate against China for doing bad things to us. And you bringing up even more bad things that the US has done is not relevant at all, to how we should definitely still stop China from doing bad things.
- buran77 6y ago
  It was a means to highlight the double standards many people (on HN included) hold, as OP also pointed out. Deciding whether atrocities get a free pass or not depending on the country doing it is just nationalism. Somehow considered those atrocities "necessary" due to some misguided Messiah complex is extremism. Others have done it in the past so we should know how to recognize it. You're judging nationalities instead of crimes, giving murder a free pass when you do it, punishing it when other nationalities do it. At some point you punish them simply because you already established they're bad. > we should still retaliate against China [...] we should definitely still stop China from doing bad things You can retaliate. Should implies an obligation. Since the narrative (yours included) is that you're punishing actions ("bad things") not nationality, not following up with retaliating against your own leadership for the same "bad things" or worse means having exactly that misguided Messiah complex (misguided because you don't understand the purpose of your own country's actions) as well as holding a healthy dose of double standards or hypocrisy. You live in a democracy, this is your will. The unspoken desire to enjoy and exert dominance, followed by the inevitable rationalization that gives it a morally acceptable varnish. As I said in my original comment on this thread: > If you cannot acknowledge this then you are certainly not prepared to have a discussion beyond "we're good, they're bad".
  - stale2002 6y ago
    > Should implies an obligation. That is a weird phasing. By "should" I mean that it is a good thing to call out bad things that happen, such as in this case with these apps, and I am happy when the US retaliates against bad things, such as what is happening in this example. The reason being, that these apps are doing bad things that should be stopped. You have not contradicted this point. > established they're bad In this specific case though, regarding these app and the actions that they are taking, they are bad though! > You live in a democracy, this is your will. Ok. And bad things being punished in this specific example. Thats good. And misdirection to talk about something different does not overrule the fact that it is good in this specific example that these specific bad things are being punished/retaliated against. > gives it a morally acceptable varnish. Specifically in this example, it is morally accepted to punish these specific bad things that these apps are doing though. So there are no problem with retaliating against these apps and actions, because in this example they are indeed bad and should be retaliated against.
null0pointer 6y ago
I will not deny the atrocities the US has committed and will undoubtedly continue to commit. Any nation with that level of power will end up doing the exact same thing in order to maintain that power. It’s no secret that China wants that power. However I’d much rather live in a world where the US has that power than China. I’m sure my personal bias play into it, being from a western (though not American) nation, but I’ll try to remain objective. - The US has at least a two party system. It’s not much, and is deeply flawed, but at least the governmental power is not completely unchecked. That and the government is ostensibly at the mercy of the people. Propaganda, disinformation, and manipulation aside, if a government does something egregious enough the people of the US still have the power to vote them out. The Chinese people do not have that power. Their government is much more top down and prescriptive. The only checking of power is the willingness of lower level people to enforce rules. - Freedom of Speech. Nobody is above criticism. Simple as that. Not being able to question the government is an awful situation to be in. Imagine a world where you could get extradited to China for saying something critical of the CCP online. I’ll remind you that the CCP jailed 8 doctors in Wuhan last year for raising the alarm about the coronavirus, saying they were spreading false rumours online. No thanks. - From an ideological standpoint the CCP seems to be be hellbent on reclaiming lost territory and retaliating against the evil west who have wronged them for so long. The US has no such motivation, being relatively young. Please don’t get me wrong. I think China is a beautiful country, having visited several times, and the Chinese people and culture are both wonderful. I just do not want to live in a CCP-centric world.

bagacrap 6y ago

I don't think the US is the same as China even if the US isn't perfect. The CCP actually commits genocide, takes political prisoners, and its justice system is a kangaroo court. Compare that to the US which spies on people and is taken to court for even attempting to kill a citizen who's become an enemy combatant in a warzone and has a justice system which often invalidates the actions of the legislative branch. Europe with GDPR does set its own rules for how American tech can operate and penalizes them heavily for perceived infractions. So that continent is taking the actions they want to take which is their right. Beyond that, there are more examples: Spain did effectively shut down Google News, and I don't remember any retaliation.

buran77 6y ago
Look at the wars the US continuously waged over the past decades and count the the deaths and destruction. You can rationalize it any way you want if it makes you feel better, you can pretend it's a fight for freedom on one side, and a fight for oppression on the other, you can say those school children were just combatants. But in the end it's the same on either side: those with power kill to maintain it. Some kill locally, some kill globally. On the other hand the examples you gave are absolutely minor and barely noteworthy. I referred decisions with global impact, not inconsequential things like Google News being affected in Spain. Intel never payed the fine the EU imposed for unfair practices close to a decade ago. Facebook and Google barely saw a blip due to GDPR since it was basically (and legally it seems) rolled into their ToS. The real consequential things are the public support the US demands from the EU for sanctions or wars. For political and economical issues that involve far more than you mentioned as a counterpoint. For countless human lives lost.
officeplant 6y ago
The US isn't the same, it's just worse as a whole over a longer period. What we've done to South America and the Middle East will impact those areas for decades more. We've got a lot of blood on our hands in the name of democracy, colonialism, and oil futures. Even more with how our soon to be ex-president pardons convicted war criminals on a whim.
trasz 6y ago
USA actually performs genocide; its prisons are full of people convinced for political (mostly racial) reasons, see the justification for war on drugs; and it’s courts can punish convinced murderer with a fee instead of proper sentence. Not mentioning crimes, which often end up with decorating the perpetrators.
adrian_b 6y ago
It would be nice if US would be taken to court for everything done, but that is very far from the truth. For example the US is guilty of criminal negligence during the invasion of Iraq, when an important part of the historical heritage of the entire humanity has been destroyed. It would have been extremely easy to avoid that, and there were ample efforts to warn the US political and military leaders to take appropriate actions, but all the warnings from competent people were ignored. A common thief or vandal who destroys one picture from a museum might rot in jail, but US presidents or generals who have destroyed historical artifacts far more valuable will never be punished in any way.

thunderbong 6y ago

A long time ago, in a 'Modesty Blaise' book, when Wille Garvin is incarcerated and the guard tries to cut a deal with him saying that he'll set him free - Garvin says "I already have my freedom, what you'll give me is liberty". I always think of this phrase whenever questions of freedom come up. And like you mention, all of us our free, but mostly our liberty is curtailed by external circumstances or by our own fears of retaliation.

marcinzm 6y ago

> But no, European countries can't realistically take too many measures, mostly under the threat of economic and political retaliation. They can also threaten economic and political retaliation. That's international politics and negotiation and diplomacy in a nutshell. It's a dirty game but the rules have been known for centuries. Europe isn't some tiny South American nation, it's a global power whose GDP rivals the US. That it's failed to successfully do this is the fault of Europe and no one else. Europe has failed to protect itself against US power and now you seem to be upset that the US wants to not fall into the same trap in terms of China?

buran77 6y ago
See, you're not actually contradicting me, just finding a justification for why the US is to the world what China is to its citizens. > They can also threaten economic and political retaliation. Sure but threats and negotiations work if you actually have the bigger gun and leverage. Given that the US is both the largest economy and military power this feels like a moot point. > Europe has failed to protect itself against US power Yes, just like Chinese citizens failed to protect themselves against their leadership. They aren't just a tiny South American nation, they are 1.3bn people who want freedom. That they failed to successfully do this is the fault of the people and no one else. But really, the fact the EU stood quietly next to the US while the US tightened its grip on the world is indeed a failure of the EU (Europe, given that this started happening long before the EU). They took the easy road of growing in someone else's shade, even if post WW2 it may have been the best or only thing Europe could have done. This doesn't change anything about my characterization of the US, it's just a tangent. I'm not saying what China is doing is ok because the US does it too. But just like OP, I pointed out the double standards obvious even here on HN. Whether it's mis- or dis-information, ignorance, hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance, or whatever else you may call it, the fact that people hold 2 completely different and opposing opinions on the same kind of action differentiated only by "us vs. them" is a massive failure of those people.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  >Sure but threats and negotiations work if you actually have the bigger gun and leverage. Given that the US is both the largest economy and military power this feels like a moot point. China's growing influence and Russia's influence on international politics clearly show that it's not about absolute power but how you apply it. Europe is large enough and powerful enough that the US can't invade it or cause massive economic damage without significantly hurting itself. Europe has massive leverage in negotiations and politics and diplomacy. It just fails to use it likely because it's not unified enough to fully and quickly apply it. Please stop blaming Europe's diplomatic failures on external factors. All that does is ensure that they will continue to happen because you won't blame the government that is actually at fault.

throwaway4good 6y ago

Maybe we should add to this that this is a unforceable ban (as the TikTok and WeChat bans demonstrate) probably mostly designed to annoy incoming Biden administration.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago

The best way to understand all this is that the US basically acquired Western European Empire in all but name after WWII. If you look at history, the US exercises about as much control of Western Europe as Rome did. Basically the areas were free to run their daily affairs but military matters went through Rome. Similar to now. The fiction lasted well throughout the Cold War but is starting to fray. It will be interesting to see what happens going forward.

stale2002 6y ago

Whataboutism is simply not a good justification for a country doing bad things. Go ahead and say that the US does bad things. But, regardless of that, we should still retaliate against China for doing bad things to us. And you bringing up even more bad things that the US has done is not relevant at all, to how we should definitely still stop China from doing bad things.

buran77 6y ago
It was a means to highlight the double standards many people (on HN included) hold, as OP also pointed out. Deciding whether atrocities get a free pass or not depending on the country doing it is just nationalism. Somehow considered those atrocities "necessary" due to some misguided Messiah complex is extremism. Others have done it in the past so we should know how to recognize it. You're judging nationalities instead of crimes, giving murder a free pass when you do it, punishing it when other nationalities do it. At some point you punish them simply because you already established they're bad. > we should still retaliate against China [...] we should definitely still stop China from doing bad things You can retaliate. Should implies an obligation. Since the narrative (yours included) is that you're punishing actions ("bad things") not nationality, not following up with retaliating against your own leadership for the same "bad things" or worse means having exactly that misguided Messiah complex (misguided because you don't understand the purpose of your own country's actions) as well as holding a healthy dose of double standards or hypocrisy. You live in a democracy, this is your will. The unspoken desire to enjoy and exert dominance, followed by the inevitable rationalization that gives it a morally acceptable varnish. As I said in my original comment on this thread: > If you cannot acknowledge this then you are certainly not prepared to have a discussion beyond "we're good, they're bad".
- stale2002 6y ago
  > Should implies an obligation. That is a weird phasing. By "should" I mean that it is a good thing to call out bad things that happen, such as in this case with these apps, and I am happy when the US retaliates against bad things, such as what is happening in this example. The reason being, that these apps are doing bad things that should be stopped. You have not contradicted this point. > established they're bad In this specific case though, regarding these app and the actions that they are taking, they are bad though! > You live in a democracy, this is your will. Ok. And bad things being punished in this specific example. Thats good. And misdirection to talk about something different does not overrule the fact that it is good in this specific example that these specific bad things are being punished/retaliated against. > gives it a morally acceptable varnish. Specifically in this example, it is morally accepted to punish these specific bad things that these apps are doing though. So there are no problem with retaliating against these apps and actions, because in this example they are indeed bad and should be retaliated against.

null0pointer 6y ago

I will not deny the atrocities the US has committed and will undoubtedly continue to commit. Any nation with that level of power will end up doing the exact same thing in order to maintain that power. It’s no secret that China wants that power. However I’d much rather live in a world where the US has that power than China. I’m sure my personal bias play into it, being from a western (though not American) nation, but I’ll try to remain objective. - The US has at least a two party system. It’s not much, and is deeply flawed, but at least the governmental power is not completely unchecked. That and the government is ostensibly at the mercy of the people. Propaganda, disinformation, and manipulation aside, if a government does something egregious enough the people of the US still have the power to vote them out. The Chinese people do not have that power. Their government is much more top down and prescriptive. The only checking of power is the willingness of lower level people to enforce rules. - Freedom of Speech. Nobody is above criticism. Simple as that. Not being able to question the government is an awful situation to be in. Imagine a world where you could get extradited to China for saying something critical of the CCP online. I’ll remind you that the CCP jailed 8 doctors in Wuhan last year for raising the alarm about the coronavirus, saying they were spreading false rumours online. No thanks. - From an ideological standpoint the CCP seems to be be hellbent on reclaiming lost territory and retaliating against the evil west who have wronged them for so long. The US has no such motivation, being relatively young. Please don’t get me wrong. I think China is a beautiful country, having visited several times, and the Chinese people and culture are both wonderful. I just do not want to live in a CCP-centric world.