4 ms·

Do we have to look so far as to dig up shady organizations that few know about? We have much more obvious ones like Disney or the NBA or the rest of Hollywood p

Do we have to look so far as to dig up shady organizations that few know about? We have much more obvious ones like Disney or the NBA or the rest of Hollywood playing a clearer role in patronizing and legitimizing the actions of the CCP. This isn’t just executives either - celebrities like LeBron James who claim to be “progressive” are the first to turn a blind eye and follow the CCP PR playbook.

ashwagary 5y ago
The Big Business of Iraq WMD denial...it seems 20 years is long enough to forget a lesson about the US & European defense industry and the "human rights" research they fund.
adharmad 5y ago
And more recently Chamath Palihapitiya.
- mthoms 5y ago
  I've not yet heard this allegation, do you have a relevant link? Edit: found it, never mind. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/01/chamath-palihapitiya-has-deep-business-ties-to-china.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/01/chamath-palihapitiya...
  - AussieWog93 5y ago
    Honestly, that quote just sounds like Chamath being Chamath.
theobeers 5y ago
Keep in mind, this story is also about the hypocrisy and deeply compromised status of some activist groups that claim to be on the anti-imperialist left. It's not the same as corporations' cynically doing what they think is necessary to maintain access to the Chinese market.
- heartbeats 5y ago
  There's no contradiction here. It's obvious that when the U.S. criticizes Chinese behavior, they do it in furtherance of some goal. Since power is a zero-sum game, assuming that it is happening, it follows then that stopping it would be beneficial to the U.S. and thus harmful for China. (If you're saying it isn't happening, then obviously China can't do anything to stop it, but at that point you're dealing with reverse conspiracy theories) Now, why should China do such a thing, that will (from first principles) only harm it? It's possible to arrive at such conclusions, but only from the perspective of what is best for the U.S., not China. The debate over the Uyghurs is actually just one large state trying to get the leg up on the other. People mustn't allow themselves to be used as pawns in a cynical game between others.
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Is power really a zero-sum game? Launching the nukes would be bad for whoever they blew up, but bad for whoever launched them, too, particularly if whoever they launched them at launched their own. If the US were to release all the wrongly-convicted brown-skinned people, would that be good for China and bad for the US? Maybe it would be good for the US not to incarcerate innocent people who could be living productive, meaningful lives. They might even buy more Chinese factory output. And, likewise, if China stopped abusing its Uyghur citizens, that would certainly be good for that segment of Chinese society, and arguably for the rest. There must be plenty of Han who are (or would be if they knew) troubled by China's abuses, and maybe wonder if they're next. But it's hard to see how that would benefit the US. The fact is, neither China nor the US is monolithic. Anything that changes has winners and losers within each country. Private prisons would hate losing their massively profitable inmates. States would welcome the drop in drain on their budgets (provided their contracts with the private prisons did not mean it would incur penalties and cost them even more).
    - drekk 5y ago
      I know the US is wrongly convicting its ethnic minorities. I don't have such proof with China. I live in the country that lied about WMDs and incubator babies in Kuwait. The one that considered bombing civilians in Miami to blame on Castro. The US was doing counter terrorism in the region with the CPC until a few years ago, when vocational training and community investment were seen as better deradicalization strategies by the Chinese government. I think it's comical that US citizens are taking US state department sides given how our "nation building" panned out in the Middle East. We have more prisoners overall than China and they make around 50 cents an hour for menial labor. Why aren't there trade sanctions on Idaho golden potatoes, but anything involving Xinjiang? Not one Muslim-majority country has accused China of abusing Uyghur populations, the "international community" here means NATO. I got called a "genocide denier" too for questioning the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the word means nothing at this point. We're aiding and abetting a genocide in Yemen, my taxes go to that, I care about it way more than the US talking about "alleged human rights abuses". Like we haven't heard that one before. At some point it becomes the boy who cried wolf. What, are we going to bring democracy to Uyghurs via a proxy war that creates a new ethnostate through a militant religious zealot minority? And it's going to work this time? At some point I figure people would learn but they seem all too content to repeat the same foreign policies that come back to haunt us
0xdeadb00f 5y ago
Google, don't forget they make an entirely separate chrome fork that adheres to the CCP's wishes and serve a completely different Google to Chinese citizens.

ashwagary 5y ago

The Big Business of Iraq WMD denial...it seems 20 years is long enough to forget a lesson about the US & European defense industry and the "human rights" research they fund.

adharmad 5y ago

And more recently Chamath Palihapitiya.

mthoms 5y ago
I've not yet heard this allegation, do you have a relevant link? Edit: found it, never mind. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/01/chamath-palihapitiya-has-deep-business-ties-to-china.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/01/chamath-palihapitiya...
- AussieWog93 5y ago
  Honestly, that quote just sounds like Chamath being Chamath.

theobeers 5y ago

Keep in mind, this story is also about the hypocrisy and deeply compromised status of some activist groups that claim to be on the anti-imperialist left. It's not the same as corporations' cynically doing what they think is necessary to maintain access to the Chinese market.

heartbeats 5y ago
There's no contradiction here. It's obvious that when the U.S. criticizes Chinese behavior, they do it in furtherance of some goal. Since power is a zero-sum game, assuming that it is happening, it follows then that stopping it would be beneficial to the U.S. and thus harmful for China. (If you're saying it isn't happening, then obviously China can't do anything to stop it, but at that point you're dealing with reverse conspiracy theories) Now, why should China do such a thing, that will (from first principles) only harm it? It's possible to arrive at such conclusions, but only from the perspective of what is best for the U.S., not China. The debate over the Uyghurs is actually just one large state trying to get the leg up on the other. People mustn't allow themselves to be used as pawns in a cynical game between others.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Is power really a zero-sum game? Launching the nukes would be bad for whoever they blew up, but bad for whoever launched them, too, particularly if whoever they launched them at launched their own. If the US were to release all the wrongly-convicted brown-skinned people, would that be good for China and bad for the US? Maybe it would be good for the US not to incarcerate innocent people who could be living productive, meaningful lives. They might even buy more Chinese factory output. And, likewise, if China stopped abusing its Uyghur citizens, that would certainly be good for that segment of Chinese society, and arguably for the rest. There must be plenty of Han who are (or would be if they knew) troubled by China's abuses, and maybe wonder if they're next. But it's hard to see how that would benefit the US. The fact is, neither China nor the US is monolithic. Anything that changes has winners and losers within each country. Private prisons would hate losing their massively profitable inmates. States would welcome the drop in drain on their budgets (provided their contracts with the private prisons did not mean it would incur penalties and cost them even more).
  - drekk 5y ago
    I know the US is wrongly convicting its ethnic minorities. I don't have such proof with China. I live in the country that lied about WMDs and incubator babies in Kuwait. The one that considered bombing civilians in Miami to blame on Castro. The US was doing counter terrorism in the region with the CPC until a few years ago, when vocational training and community investment were seen as better deradicalization strategies by the Chinese government. I think it's comical that US citizens are taking US state department sides given how our "nation building" panned out in the Middle East. We have more prisoners overall than China and they make around 50 cents an hour for menial labor. Why aren't there trade sanctions on Idaho golden potatoes, but anything involving Xinjiang? Not one Muslim-majority country has accused China of abusing Uyghur populations, the "international community" here means NATO. I got called a "genocide denier" too for questioning the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the word means nothing at this point. We're aiding and abetting a genocide in Yemen, my taxes go to that, I care about it way more than the US talking about "alleged human rights abuses". Like we haven't heard that one before. At some point it becomes the boy who cried wolf. What, are we going to bring democracy to Uyghurs via a proxy war that creates a new ethnostate through a militant religious zealot minority? And it's going to work this time? At some point I figure people would learn but they seem all too content to repeat the same foreign policies that come back to haunt us

0xdeadb00f 5y ago

Google, don't forget they make an entirely separate chrome fork that adheres to the CCP's wishes and serve a completely different Google to Chinese citizens.