3 ms·
the "international community" is dominated by an affluent western minority that had no qualms about pillaging the rest of the world for centuries with no regard
by bllguo 5y ago
the "international community" is dominated by an affluent western minority that had no qualms about pillaging the rest of the world for centuries with no regards for human rights. _This_ is the Chinese - no, the foreign - perspective. If we think it's not useful to consider then so be it, we'll be locked in cold war for the foreseeable future. Personally I think there are more productive methods than hypocritical grandstanding.
- wangii 5y agodon't understand why it's down voted. seems to be a valid argument. care to clarify?
- another_story 5y agoLooking back at what other countries did centuries before is a weak argument for justifying what one does today. The “international community” includes more than a western minority when it comes to the issue of Hong Kong.
- wangii 5y agoyes, basically the argument against 'whataboutism'. however I have a hard time to process the idea of 'follow what I told you, not what I have done' attitude.
- torstenvl 5y agoThe affluent Western minority is led by an anti-colonial rebellion whose record on this issue, while nowhere near perfect or even an absolute good, is the best of any major power in the history of humanity. When China says "You know what, China? No. We will not break our own agreement. How could you even suggest that? Hong Kong is sovereign" (as the United States recently did in McGirt v. Oklahoma), then we can talk about whataboutism. Until then, that kind of argument is utterly unconvincing.
- bllguo 5y agoSure is easy to give ourselves a good grade when we're also the judges. Shall we discuss track records of interference in external affairs? How many foreign regimes have we toppled in comparison? Always disappointing to see such vitriolic rebuttals to the mere idea of considering a Chinese perspective.
- torstenvl 5y agoI am very aware of the multitude of Chinese perspectives. I just happen to find your apologetics for Han fascism not to be one of the worthwhile ones. The very fact that you don't consider Cantonese who want to be free to be a "Chinese perspective" belies the perverse dishonesty and racism of your entire worldview. It's frankly quite rank to defend Beijing's interference in Hong Kong by insisting that, somehow, it's Westerners who aren't respecting others' rights to live by their own worldviews.
- another_story 5y agoThe issue is its not a Chinese perspective, it's the CCP perspective. The Hong Kong narrative inside the mainland is heavily guided by the media in China. You average Chinese person either has no opinion or just repeats the Party line, because they don't know much else.
- UIZealot 5y ago> When China says "You know what, China? No. We will not break our own agreement. How could you even suggest that? Hong Kong is sovereign" What on earth are you on? Ever heard of "one country, two systems"? One country? Oh wait, you're gonna tell me the "one country" refers to Hong Kong, aren't you?