5 ms·

You're factually wrong. Neither of the parent comments are calling for race discrimination - you're pulling that out of thin air in an attempt to incite conflic

by fouric 5y ago

You're factually wrong. Neither of the parent comments are calling for race discrimination - you're pulling that out of thin air in an attempt to incite conflict, or silence their legitimate points that you don't agree with. Go ahead, prove me wrong - quote the sentences that explicitly call for racism.

DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
Discriminating against people because they're of Chinese ancestry is racist. I'm surprised that this is a claim that you feel requires further justification.
- fouric 5y ago
  You not only failed to "quote the sentences that explicitly call for racism" that I asked you to (while continuing to baselessly assert your original claim), but you also inserted more emotional manipulation ("I'm surprised that this is a claim that you feel requires further justification.") in your response and you used a strawman argument (claiming that I had asserted that "Discriminating against people because they're of Chinese ancestry is racist." was false, when in reality I did no such thing, as I was asserting that there was no discrimination based on ancestry in the first place). It's clear that you're not arguing in good faith and, as I said originally, just trying to stir up conflict using race as a cover. Future HN readers, take note of these tactics as a way that bad actors will try to avoid answering your questions or try to manipulate you (or others). Furthermore, unlike the parent, I'll actually cite sections from the two comments under consideration, and show how they're not suggesting racism. From the topmost comment: > I fully expect that at some point the United States will deem those born in mainland China, regardless of current citizenship, to be a security risk Note the italicized section "those born in mainland China", which is, tautologically, not the same as race/ethnicity. You can be American, French, Indian, or Canadian born in China and this condition would still apply to you - or Chinese born in America, and this condition would not. Moreover, beyond the wording being sound, the logic is sound - those born in mainland China are a security risk because of the citizenship issues mentioned in the rest of the comment. From the comment that replies to that: > secret programs won’t hire you if your parents are born in mainland China. I found it reasonable, because the CCP will definitely take your remaining family members in China as hostages to make you do things Again note the italicized section: "if your parents are born in mainland China". This still has nothing to do with race - your parents could be British, Indian, American, Japanese, or whatever, and the sentence (and the general idea behind it) still apply. The part about "the CCP will definitely take your remaining family members in China as hostages to make you do things" is also sound - there's many instances of this exact thing happening, with Operation Foxhunt[1][2] coming to mind. [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-08/fbi-chief-says-china-uses-threats-to-coerce-overseas-critics/12433208 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-08/fbi-chief-says-china-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fox_Hunt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fox_Hunt
  - DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
    You're bending over backwards to excuse what is quite clearly racial discrimination. Discrimination against people born in mainland China is apparently fine because they're a security risk - perhaps they're suspected of disloyalty. Discrimination against people whose parents were born in China is apparently fine, because they might have family who could theoretically be taken hostage. If you follow this logic, discrimination against anyone with familial relations in China is fine. That essentially means discrimination against all Chinese Americans is fine - but of course, this is completely kosher and not in any way racist. This is the same logic used to justify the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII, to accuse Irish Americans of disloyalty (because of the Vatican), and the same argument used by antisemites to argue that Jewish Americans are disloyal (because of Israel). > your parents could be British, Indian, American, Japanese, or whatever But those aren't the ethnic groups being targeted in the US right now. If there were widespread paranoia about India, just as there now is about China, and if there were calls to discriminate against anyone with Indian relatives, then I would also be alarmed about that. > just trying to stir up conflict using race as a cover. Not in the slightest. I'm genuinely alarmed by how far attitudes in the US have changed since Trump came into office. Hostility towards and paranoia about China have reached levels I never would have imagined possible, and that is now putting Chinese Americans at risk in the US (not to mention the fact that it's increasing the likelihood of war between China and the US). Just to give one example: the FBI has a major initiative that focuses on ethnic Chinese academics in the US. It was launched under Trump, but it continues under Biden. There have already been several disturbing cases, including that of Anming Hu,[1] a Canadian citizen born in China, who taught at the University of Tennessee. The FBI first tried to pressure him into spying on China, and after he refused, tried to investigate him for espionage, told his university he was a spy (leading to him being fired), and harassed him and his son for over a year. When the FBI found there was no evidence whatsoever that he was a spy, they charged him with whatever they could dig up - in this case, failure to disclose some minor honorarium. The guy's entire life has been turned upside down and he's been branded a spy in the public mind, all because some overambitious FBI agent wanted to find a Chinese spy and started trying to dig up dirt about the first Chinese academic he could find. That's where this kind of thinking leads to. 1. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/27/1027350/anming-hu-china-initiative-research-espionage-spying/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/27/1027350/anming-h...

by fouric 5y ago

DiogenesKynikos 5y ago

Discriminating against people because they're of Chinese ancestry is racist. I'm surprised that this is a claim that you feel requires further justification.

fouric 5y ago
You not only failed to "quote the sentences that explicitly call for racism" that I asked you to (while continuing to baselessly assert your original claim), but you also inserted more emotional manipulation ("I'm surprised that this is a claim that you feel requires further justification.") in your response and you used a strawman argument (claiming that I had asserted that "Discriminating against people because they're of Chinese ancestry is racist." was false, when in reality I did no such thing, as I was asserting that there was no discrimination based on ancestry in the first place). It's clear that you're not arguing in good faith and, as I said originally, just trying to stir up conflict using race as a cover. Future HN readers, take note of these tactics as a way that bad actors will try to avoid answering your questions or try to manipulate you (or others). Furthermore, unlike the parent, I'll actually cite sections from the two comments under consideration, and show how they're not suggesting racism. From the topmost comment: > I fully expect that at some point the United States will deem those born in mainland China, regardless of current citizenship, to be a security risk Note the italicized section "those born in mainland China", which is, tautologically, not the same as race/ethnicity. You can be American, French, Indian, or Canadian born in China and this condition would still apply to you - or Chinese born in America, and this condition would not. Moreover, beyond the wording being sound, the logic is sound - those born in mainland China are a security risk because of the citizenship issues mentioned in the rest of the comment. From the comment that replies to that: > secret programs won’t hire you if your parents are born in mainland China. I found it reasonable, because the CCP will definitely take your remaining family members in China as hostages to make you do things Again note the italicized section: "if your parents are born in mainland China". This still has nothing to do with race - your parents could be British, Indian, American, Japanese, or whatever, and the sentence (and the general idea behind it) still apply. The part about "the CCP will definitely take your remaining family members in China as hostages to make you do things" is also sound - there's many instances of this exact thing happening, with Operation Foxhunt[1][2] coming to mind. [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-08/fbi-chief-says-china-uses-threats-to-coerce-overseas-critics/12433208 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-08/fbi-chief-says-china-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fox_Hunt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fox_Hunt
- DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
  You're bending over backwards to excuse what is quite clearly racial discrimination. Discrimination against people born in mainland China is apparently fine because they're a security risk - perhaps they're suspected of disloyalty. Discrimination against people whose parents were born in China is apparently fine, because they might have family who could theoretically be taken hostage. If you follow this logic, discrimination against anyone with familial relations in China is fine. That essentially means discrimination against all Chinese Americans is fine - but of course, this is completely kosher and not in any way racist. This is the same logic used to justify the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII, to accuse Irish Americans of disloyalty (because of the Vatican), and the same argument used by antisemites to argue that Jewish Americans are disloyal (because of Israel). > your parents could be British, Indian, American, Japanese, or whatever But those aren't the ethnic groups being targeted in the US right now. If there were widespread paranoia about India, just as there now is about China, and if there were calls to discriminate against anyone with Indian relatives, then I would also be alarmed about that. > just trying to stir up conflict using race as a cover. Not in the slightest. I'm genuinely alarmed by how far attitudes in the US have changed since Trump came into office. Hostility towards and paranoia about China have reached levels I never would have imagined possible, and that is now putting Chinese Americans at risk in the US (not to mention the fact that it's increasing the likelihood of war between China and the US). Just to give one example: the FBI has a major initiative that focuses on ethnic Chinese academics in the US. It was launched under Trump, but it continues under Biden. There have already been several disturbing cases, including that of Anming Hu,[1] a Canadian citizen born in China, who taught at the University of Tennessee. The FBI first tried to pressure him into spying on China, and after he refused, tried to investigate him for espionage, told his university he was a spy (leading to him being fired), and harassed him and his son for over a year. When the FBI found there was no evidence whatsoever that he was a spy, they charged him with whatever they could dig up - in this case, failure to disclose some minor honorarium. The guy's entire life has been turned upside down and he's been branded a spy in the public mind, all because some overambitious FBI agent wanted to find a Chinese spy and started trying to dig up dirt about the first Chinese academic he could find. That's where this kind of thinking leads to. 1. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/27/1027350/anming-hu-china-initiative-research-espionage-spying/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/27/1027350/anming-h...