3 ms·

I haven't downvoted you but there are a couple of problems here. > How can anyone doing business with China look the other way on Xinjiang simply by saying "ou

by DasIch 6y ago

I haven't downvoted you but there are a couple of problems here. > How can anyone doing business with China look the other way on Xinjiang simply by saying "our factory isn't there". In many industries not doing business with China is synonymous with not doing business. Many supply chains go through China, this is not something you can easily change. Additionally capitalism incentives companies to focus on profit over ethics. You can't expect companies to act against that. That's why regulation is important to limit what companies can do to what is acceptable. Your expectation here is just not realistic. > Every one of us buying goods made in China is enabling their behaviour by showing that we would rather make more money or would rather have cheaper electronics and plastic crap than standing up for the human rights of the people in Xinjiang who are the focus of the CCPs genocide. Placing blame on consumers is extremely problematic because it assumes people can make a choice here. That is not a reasonable assumption. Consumers probably don't have the necessary information about the product (and supply chain!), so they can't make an informed decision not to buy a product on this basis. Even if they had this information, they also may not have the financial means to afford making a choice on that basis. We have effective mechanisms to define and enforce rules, it involves governments taking action through creating and enforcing laws. Putting blame on consumers ultimately shifts responsibility away from people who could do something meaningful about the problem to people who cannot. > As a Canadian I wish our Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would more directly speak out against China's poor behaviour and offer some temporary support for businesses that would be impacted. Trudeau merely speaking out against China, also wouldn't help. Sanctions might help and Canada is actually one of several countries that has created sanctions over the treatment of Uighurs. I'm sure this is not your intention but effectively you're arguing for actions that have no chance of actually solving the problem. This is also a common political strategy by neoliberals who are opposed to government intervention on ideological grounds. So one might be inclined, to think that you pretend to be offended because it's unacceptable not to but don't really want it solved either.

slashdot2008 6y ago
Thanks for the insightful reply. The pandemic has highlighted the fragility of global supply chains and the downside of being dependent on others for critical goods. They are cheap when they are plentiful but they become unobtainable when they are desperately needed. That, China's beligerent diplomats, and their decision to ignore the Hong Kong treaty will hopefully be the impetus to reduce reliance on China's supply chains by developing and supporting other sources even if they are more expensive. Perhaps even local sources given that friendly faces seem to be able to to turn on you once they have some leverage, and it is difficult to re-start an industry once that know-how is lost forever. As the son of an economics professor I never thought I would argue for subsidies for uncompetitive natioanlized industry but it turns out there is some additional benefit other than the goods produced on a given day. Politicians need support for hardships they may bring upon us, such as reduced profits, more expensive goods, and subsidies for local industry, that may be the result of sanctions and moral high ground. I think "vote with your wallet" campaigns and boycotts can be a good indicator to politicians that their voters have the stomach for the sanctions, just like a demonstration or march in support of the Uighurs would. Even ineffective measures that show your support for a cause, such as wrapping a t-shirt around your face to avoid spreading covid-19 particles that are the same size as asbestos fibres and can sail right through, sends a message that you are willing to make some sacrifice for the greater good at the cost of some personal discomfort. I support goverment intervention, but I think the government needs to see they have the will of the voters behind them. Thanks again for your thoughts!

by DasIch 6y ago

slashdot2008 6y ago

Thanks for the insightful reply. The pandemic has highlighted the fragility of global supply chains and the downside of being dependent on others for critical goods. They are cheap when they are plentiful but they become unobtainable when they are desperately needed. That, China's beligerent diplomats, and their decision to ignore the Hong Kong treaty will hopefully be the impetus to reduce reliance on China's supply chains by developing and supporting other sources even if they are more expensive. Perhaps even local sources given that friendly faces seem to be able to to turn on you once they have some leverage, and it is difficult to re-start an industry once that know-how is lost forever. As the son of an economics professor I never thought I would argue for subsidies for uncompetitive natioanlized industry but it turns out there is some additional benefit other than the goods produced on a given day. Politicians need support for hardships they may bring upon us, such as reduced profits, more expensive goods, and subsidies for local industry, that may be the result of sanctions and moral high ground. I think "vote with your wallet" campaigns and boycotts can be a good indicator to politicians that their voters have the stomach for the sanctions, just like a demonstration or march in support of the Uighurs would. Even ineffective measures that show your support for a cause, such as wrapping a t-shirt around your face to avoid spreading covid-19 particles that are the same size as asbestos fibres and can sail right through, sends a message that you are willing to make some sacrifice for the greater good at the cost of some personal discomfort. I support goverment intervention, but I think the government needs to see they have the will of the voters behind them. Thanks again for your thoughts!