5 ms·

Why were the Soviet Union's people finally fed up with it? The poor standard of living was surely a part of that. By the same reasoning, trade with China helps

Why were the Soviet Union's people finally fed up with it? The poor standard of living was surely a part of that. By the same reasoning, trade with China helps sustain the CCP.

hutzlibu 6y ago
Poor standard of living, no freedom, constantly being lied to - and being aware of it and having finally the courage to do something about. Because other people had the courage first. Thats how it came down. Chinas populations is increasing their standard of living. So you think the outside world has to cripple their economy so the chinese people turn against their rulers? How would you feel about that, if you would live in china just trying to pass by - and have your income halfed because of foreign powers? Would you believe the foreign powers words that they did so because of human rights?
- leereeves 6y ago
  Boycotts, disinvestment, and sanctions is how civil rights movements are fought. Of course the Chinese people won't know why other countries are pulling away, because their government won't allow that information to reach them and will blame foreign enemies instead, but blaming foreign powers only works for a limited time. And what better strategy would you suggest? What we shouldn't do is overlook abuses in other nations simply because our own nations are imperfect.
  - hutzlibu 6y ago
    "Boycotts, disinvestment, and sanctions is how civil rights movements are fought." How about: leading by good example? There are plenty of chinese people outside of the great firewall regulary going back. So that information would get in.
    - leereeves 6y ago
      Why not both? We can (and should) lead by good example while also actively opposing human rights abuses in China.
      - hutzlibu 6y ago
        Yeah, but since the US is NOT leading by shiny good example and continues to be allied with really bad examples like saudi arabia - the rest of the world views it all as just power struggle between china and US - which it mostly is.
        leereeves 6y ago
        Perhaps our government should cut ties with both Saudi Arabia and China. I (and I think most people opposed to the CCP's recent actions) would support that. Of course realpolitik keeps us supporting the Saudis, but one morally wrong choice doesn't justify another morally wrong choice.
        dang 6y ago
        It looks like your account has been using HN primarily for political/ideological/national battle. This is against the site guidelines: please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. We ban the sort of account that does this, because it destroys the curious conversation that HN is supposed to exist for. More explanation if desired: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=primarily%20test%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=political%20overlap%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
        hutzlibu 6y ago
        I don't think my account was using HN primarily for "political/ideological/national battle", but this was indeed such a debate. Still, can you help me finding out, where exactly I was destroying curious debate here? Because in my opinion, I was trying in honesty to actually have a rational, curious debate about the implications of a trade embargo against china. Without attacking persons, just by arguments supported by citations. Maybe a bit too snarky at times, but I don't see, how that would validate a ban, but it is your site and your decision.
  - Veen 6y ago
    > Boycotts, disinvestment, and sanctions is how civil rights movements are fought. Boycotting a billion-strong nation is not the same as boycotting Amazon because you don't like its labor policies. China is a technically advanced millennia-old civilization with a huge army, vast geography, and a nationalistic population. If anything, boycotts and sanctions will increase nationalist feeling in China and create an unstable and dangerous situation. The U.S. and Europe do not have the economic leverage to take down the second biggest economy in the world without destroying themselves in the process. Furthermore, as liberals never seem to learn, despite the disaster of Iraq, if you did succeed in instigating a "regime change" in China, the result is likely to be immediate destabilization of the whole region and a horrendous civil war with massive loss of life. It will not magically transform China into a happy democracy.
    - throwaway3699 6y ago
      Even if China doesn't turn into a happy democracy, I will sleep better at night knowing I'm not involved.

Why were the Soviet Union's people finally fed up with it? The poor standard of living was surely a part of that. By the same reasoning, trade with China helps sustain the CCP.

hutzlibu 6y ago

Poor standard of living, no freedom, constantly being lied to - and being aware of it and having finally the courage to do something about. Because other people had the courage first. Thats how it came down. Chinas populations is increasing their standard of living. So you think the outside world has to cripple their economy so the chinese people turn against their rulers? How would you feel about that, if you would live in china just trying to pass by - and have your income halfed because of foreign powers? Would you believe the foreign powers words that they did so because of human rights?

leereeves 6y ago
Boycotts, disinvestment, and sanctions is how civil rights movements are fought. Of course the Chinese people won't know why other countries are pulling away, because their government won't allow that information to reach them and will blame foreign enemies instead, but blaming foreign powers only works for a limited time. And what better strategy would you suggest? What we shouldn't do is overlook abuses in other nations simply because our own nations are imperfect.
- hutzlibu 6y ago
  "Boycotts, disinvestment, and sanctions is how civil rights movements are fought." How about: leading by good example? There are plenty of chinese people outside of the great firewall regulary going back. So that information would get in.
  - leereeves 6y ago
    Why not both? We can (and should) lead by good example while also actively opposing human rights abuses in China.
    - hutzlibu 6y ago
      Yeah, but since the US is NOT leading by shiny good example and continues to be allied with really bad examples like saudi arabia - the rest of the world views it all as just power struggle between china and US - which it mostly is.
      - leereeves 6y ago
        Perhaps our government should cut ties with both Saudi Arabia and China. I (and I think most people opposed to the CCP's recent actions) would support that. Of course realpolitik keeps us supporting the Saudis, but one morally wrong choice doesn't justify another morally wrong choice.
      - dang 6y ago
        It looks like your account has been using HN primarily for political/ideological/national battle. This is against the site guidelines: please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. We ban the sort of account that does this, because it destroys the curious conversation that HN is supposed to exist for. More explanation if desired: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=primarily%20test%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=political%20overlap%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
        hutzlibu 6y ago
        I don't think my account was using HN primarily for "political/ideological/national battle", but this was indeed such a debate. Still, can you help me finding out, where exactly I was destroying curious debate here? Because in my opinion, I was trying in honesty to actually have a rational, curious debate about the implications of a trade embargo against china. Without attacking persons, just by arguments supported by citations. Maybe a bit too snarky at times, but I don't see, how that would validate a ban, but it is your site and your decision.
- Veen 6y ago
  > Boycotts, disinvestment, and sanctions is how civil rights movements are fought. Boycotting a billion-strong nation is not the same as boycotting Amazon because you don't like its labor policies. China is a technically advanced millennia-old civilization with a huge army, vast geography, and a nationalistic population. If anything, boycotts and sanctions will increase nationalist feeling in China and create an unstable and dangerous situation. The U.S. and Europe do not have the economic leverage to take down the second biggest economy in the world without destroying themselves in the process. Furthermore, as liberals never seem to learn, despite the disaster of Iraq, if you did succeed in instigating a "regime change" in China, the result is likely to be immediate destabilization of the whole region and a horrendous civil war with massive loss of life. It will not magically transform China into a happy democracy.
  - throwaway3699 6y ago
    Even if China doesn't turn into a happy democracy, I will sleep better at night knowing I'm not involved.