3 ms·

Everyone has a right to criticize China, it's a very disingenuous idea that you need a flawless past to levy criticism at an obviously bad actor. The CCP would

Everyone has a right to criticize China, it's a very disingenuous idea that you need a flawless past to levy criticism at an obviously bad actor. The CCP would love the advance that idea because it knows that practically no country, especially any country of importance, is perfectly innocent which I guess means no one can criticize anyone huh? Very convenient for China's abuses. The West continually makes mistakes and is held accountable by its liberal democracy. Even anti-BDS laws which are IMO as deserving of criticism and as anti-liberal as anything else, they are moderated by democratic institutions and democratic laws. Anti-BDS laws are controversial even in the US where it happens on the provincial level. It also receives parliamentary condemnation and oppositional lobbying across the West in the US and powerful US-allied countries like France and Germany. Practically all US anti-BDS bills at the Federal level were either symbolic or failed to pass. Israel is hardly untouchable, it's controversial to the point of partisanship in the US. And you'll have to elaborate on "targeting" by intelligence agencies. That's a pretty broad term. I'll tell you what China means when they "target" nonviolent foreign resident dissidents in Operation Foxhunt. They contact them to tell them that they have three choices: they can commit suicide, or they can return to China to be apprehended, or they can live knowing that any family they have in China will suffer violent consequences. This is a perfect example of how authoritarian sympathizers twist and equivocate common criticisms so they can construct a false equivalence between imperfections by liberal democracies with the much more severe abuses by autocratic regimes like China and Russia. Not only does scale matter, it also matters that liberal democracies have the capacity to change. The US in particular receives criticisms from allies and non-allies alike, its disastrous second Iraq war has weighed heavily on American democratic politics and its citizens influence new behavior like withdrawing from Afghanistan. China has the right to engage in such criticism as well, it does not have the right to deflect its own criticisms and it does not have the right to dismiss its criticisms without demonstrating a capacity to change as a totalitarian illiberal democracy.

nebula8804 5y ago
You are absolutely right in that everyone has a right to criticize China. They have done unspeakable things to groups like the uyghurs. As someone who is a minority, I understand full well how much I have it better in the US compared to a place like China. However that does not excuse the growing trend in the wrong direction of where the west is going. I've always thought that if anything will bring down the west, it is corruption or said in other terms: moving away from the values that made it great in the first place. Each generation has to fight to move the needle in the right direction a bit further. The civil rights generation fought to allow people like me to be able to type this here today. The "greatest generation" before them fought to even have a country for the civil rights generation to build upon. Time will tell if BLM or some other forthcoming movement was the trigger that we can look back to and see that it advanced the country forward. >The West continually makes mistakes and is held accountable by its liberal democracy. Even anti-BDS laws which are IMO as deserving of criticism and as anti-liberal as anything else, they are moderated by democratic institutions and democratic laws.Anti-BDS laws are controversial even in the US where it happens on the provincial level. It also receives parliamentary condemnation and oppositional lobbying across the West in the US and powerful US-allied countries like France and Germany. Practically all US anti-BDS bills at the Federal level were either symbolic or failed to pass. This is not entirely true. The way these laws are structured is that some state level group funded by supporters of Israel (sometimes using money funned from Israel themselves) push to have these clearly unconstitutional laws passed and then they remain on the books until there is a court case where the law gets tested. In the case of Abby Martin vs the state of Georgia, Ms.Martin prevailed and got the law struck down...until the same people who advanced the law had it amended to make it so that the amount of money that is required to trigger the law is now in the 6 figures. Now this requires another challenge. 35 states have laws on the books and there have been attempt after attempt to get a law at the federal level(as you mentioned). This is where any credibility of proper governance goes out the window. All these challenges required volunteer donations and resources to be expended to defeat them and even then there are people at all level of governance that will gladly toss aside any credibility that the US has in order to advance their interests. You see this in the states amending the laws instead of realizing that they are clearly unconstitutional and correcting their mistake. You see this in multiple congress people attempting to try at the federal level every few years. How is this a real Democracy? This is just an illusion of democracy and the reality is that whoever has unlimited funds (Israel and its supporters) will have their "free speech" heard while everyone else just needs to "try harder and better luck next time". >Israel is hardly untouchable, it's controversial to the point of partisanship in the US. While I wish I could share your optimism, this is not true at all. Take for example Ilhan Omar making a twitter comment about how Israel lobbies the US govt to pass pro-Israel agendas: A pretty obvious statement. It resulted in her almost being immediately stripped of her committee assignments(until AOC and her massive supporter base intervened). Contrast that with the Democratic party itself talking about how they want to treat Muslims as equals during election season but when push comes to shove, their election groups shut down the committee under their party wing that was made to advance Palestinian causes. Lets not forget about how Palestinian coverage is completely ignored or framed in a Pro-Israel spotlight in mainstream media. They only place to vent opposition that is left is the internet(ignoring the tactics Israel supporters use to get those people kicked off platforms). Let me repeat from my previous comment: This liberal democracy is on a sliding scale depending on the people and the timeframe. It is because of that, the credibility has been severely damaged and that makes the West's criticism of China very much like the pot calling the kettle black. If there was an honest attempt at moving forward then you can make an argument that the values are being held but that is not what is happening. >And you'll have to elaborate on "targeting" by intelligence agencies. That's a pretty broad term. I'll tell you what China means when they "target" nonviolent foreign resident dissidents in Operation Foxhunt. They contact them to tell them that they have three choices: they can commit suicide, or they can return to China to be apprehended, or they can live knowing that any family they have in China will suffer violent consequences. I'm referring to programs that Isaeli Intelligence agencies have formed involving a network of policing online and offline to quickly identify and neutralize any opposition before they have a chance to go viral. In the case of online policing, there are software applications that are developed by Israel's tech groups and associated organizations that allow people to be quickly alerted of any social media post or comment and to quickly go there and be a pro-israel defense. I don't keep track of the latest apps (I think act.IL is the newest?) In the case of offline tracking, there are sites like the canary mission that publicly document any opposition to Israel in order to dox those people and get their careers ruined. In order to be removed from the website, you must make a public pledge that you will no longer defame Israel and that you are sorry that you caused trouble for Israel. [1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act.IL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act.IL [2]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Mission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Mission [3]: https://canarymission.org/ex-canary https://canarymission.org/ex-canary <-- This will probably alert them of this post. >This is a perfect example of how authoritarian sympathizers twist and equivocate common criticisms so they can construct a false equivalence between imperfections by liberal democracies with the much more severe abuses by autocratic regimes like China and Russia. You speak from an enormous position of privilege. Ask anyone who has suffered at the hands of the US's actions about how they feel about this "false equivalence". I bet you this is partially what is also driving many countries to adopt the Belt and ROad initiative. You think these countries are that stupid that they will be easily conned by China? They know that they are going to owe China, its just for many of these poor countries that have historically at best been ignored by the west or worst, been abused by the West, going towards China has some possibility of improving their lot. That is the West's fault for missing a golden opportunity: again I believe this is because the west has been slowly abandoning its core principles over the years. >The US in particular receives criticisms from allies and non-allies alike, its disastrous second Iraq war has weighed heavily on American democratic politics and its citizens influence new behavior like withdrawing from Afghanistan. It honestly does not sound like you live in the US. Because I can tell you as someone who lives here: this is nonsense. The decision to withdraw was an easy political win to increase Biden's poll numbers after negotiations of his build back better bill were faltering and he failed to implement multiple other promises such as significantly reducing student loan debt, providing an expansion of health care and failing to do easy wins such as legalizing marijuana at the federal level. The people did ultimately support him but it was not something that was top of mind given that they were still suffering from the fallout of year two of COVID.
- themacguffinman 5y ago
  All of what you describe is the honest attempt at moving forward. I don't really know how you can describe intervention by massive Democrat supporter movements and consistently successful legal & congressional challenges at the highest levels of American governance as anything but an honest liberal democratic attempt at moving forward. You described media bias and media campaigns. Liberal democracy isn't a guarantee against bias nor does it ban organized campaigns against what you consider to be morally good, it's a guarantee that people can freely inform themselves and openly debate opposite point of views both privately and in their government. It is not the intelligence services that sanctions anti-Israel voices, it is the overwhelmingly pro-Israel sentiment amongst citizens that has only grown under an objectively free media, any cancelling effect is enacted by citizens and democratic institutions because free citizens agree with them. That one side is more dominant and likely better equipped does not categorically delegitimize American democracy. You describe financial advantage. Liberal democracy is vulnerable to such exploitation, but as your own accounts indicate, it has not categorically surrendered to autocratic edict. Why do you think the Afghanistan withdrawal was a "political win"? A political win means that withdrawing for Afghanistan is a popular move supported by the electorate. Why do you think it's popular? The second Iraq war has largely dampened any enthusiasm and support for any similar ME interventions. How do you square your recognition of a sliding scale of abuse & corruption with hyperbolic categorical claims that US governance lacks "any credibility" and is merely "an illusion"? You condemn the West for not being good enough to your satisfaction more than openly expansionist totalitarian regimes that mock the very principles by which you judge the West. What's your point exactly? Are you telling me that until the West improves to your satisfaction, no one in the West should call out China? It doesn't seem like even you believe that the West is as bad as China, yet for some reason you've divebombed into this thread with common domestic criticisms as if they are at all relevant to China's misbehavior. > You think these countries are that stupid that they will be easily conned by China? Yes. In fact, we know they have been conned. Pakistan, considered one of China's strategic allies, has been pressured by its immense Chinese debt to fork over exclusive port rights with predatory revenue shares. Sri-Lanka has done the same with its ports and land, Laos has done it with their entire national power grid, Tajikistan has done it with large tracts of strategic land as well as mining rights [1]. We also know that these are not benevolent aid loans because the loan rates are practically identical to private sector market-rate loans that extract higher rates the more dire the country's financial situation, which stands in contrast to typical infrastructure aid loans like those of Japan that have comparably very low rates for developing countries. Aside from rates, the terms are unusually onerous and asymmetric (even in the world of loans), banning unusual things like loan restructuring and explicitly spell out requirements for foreign policy alignment. These loan agreements also force the government to keep the terms or even the existence of the loan confidential, which prevents any democratic or public accountability for these national loans. These are sovereignty-ending concessions. It's a total non-sequitur to claim that historical oppression by the West means that their pivot to China is a rational decision. I can be sympathetic to their attitudes towards the West while pointing out that China is actively abusing them. [1] https://thehill.com/opinion/international/551337-chinas-debt-trap-diplomacy https://thehill.com/opinion/international/551337-chinas-debt...

nebula8804 5y ago

You are absolutely right in that everyone has a right to criticize China. They have done unspeakable things to groups like the uyghurs. As someone who is a minority, I understand full well how much I have it better in the US compared to a place like China. However that does not excuse the growing trend in the wrong direction of where the west is going. I've always thought that if anything will bring down the west, it is corruption or said in other terms: moving away from the values that made it great in the first place. Each generation has to fight to move the needle in the right direction a bit further. The civil rights generation fought to allow people like me to be able to type this here today. The "greatest generation" before them fought to even have a country for the civil rights generation to build upon. Time will tell if BLM or some other forthcoming movement was the trigger that we can look back to and see that it advanced the country forward. >The West continually makes mistakes and is held accountable by its liberal democracy. Even anti-BDS laws which are IMO as deserving of criticism and as anti-liberal as anything else, they are moderated by democratic institutions and democratic laws.Anti-BDS laws are controversial even in the US where it happens on the provincial level. It also receives parliamentary condemnation and oppositional lobbying across the West in the US and powerful US-allied countries like France and Germany. Practically all US anti-BDS bills at the Federal level were either symbolic or failed to pass. This is not entirely true. The way these laws are structured is that some state level group funded by supporters of Israel (sometimes using money funned from Israel themselves) push to have these clearly unconstitutional laws passed and then they remain on the books until there is a court case where the law gets tested. In the case of Abby Martin vs the state of Georgia, Ms.Martin prevailed and got the law struck down...until the same people who advanced the law had it amended to make it so that the amount of money that is required to trigger the law is now in the 6 figures. Now this requires another challenge. 35 states have laws on the books and there have been attempt after attempt to get a law at the federal level(as you mentioned). This is where any credibility of proper governance goes out the window. All these challenges required volunteer donations and resources to be expended to defeat them and even then there are people at all level of governance that will gladly toss aside any credibility that the US has in order to advance their interests. You see this in the states amending the laws instead of realizing that they are clearly unconstitutional and correcting their mistake. You see this in multiple congress people attempting to try at the federal level every few years. How is this a real Democracy? This is just an illusion of democracy and the reality is that whoever has unlimited funds (Israel and its supporters) will have their "free speech" heard while everyone else just needs to "try harder and better luck next time". >Israel is hardly untouchable, it's controversial to the point of partisanship in the US. While I wish I could share your optimism, this is not true at all. Take for example Ilhan Omar making a twitter comment about how Israel lobbies the US govt to pass pro-Israel agendas: A pretty obvious statement. It resulted in her almost being immediately stripped of her committee assignments(until AOC and her massive supporter base intervened). Contrast that with the Democratic party itself talking about how they want to treat Muslims as equals during election season but when push comes to shove, their election groups shut down the committee under their party wing that was made to advance Palestinian causes. Lets not forget about how Palestinian coverage is completely ignored or framed in a Pro-Israel spotlight in mainstream media. They only place to vent opposition that is left is the internet(ignoring the tactics Israel supporters use to get those people kicked off platforms). Let me repeat from my previous comment: This liberal democracy is on a sliding scale depending on the people and the timeframe. It is because of that, the credibility has been severely damaged and that makes the West's criticism of China very much like the pot calling the kettle black. If there was an honest attempt at moving forward then you can make an argument that the values are being held but that is not what is happening. >And you'll have to elaborate on "targeting" by intelligence agencies. That's a pretty broad term. I'll tell you what China means when they "target" nonviolent foreign resident dissidents in Operation Foxhunt. They contact them to tell them that they have three choices: they can commit suicide, or they can return to China to be apprehended, or they can live knowing that any family they have in China will suffer violent consequences. I'm referring to programs that Isaeli Intelligence agencies have formed involving a network of policing online and offline to quickly identify and neutralize any opposition before they have a chance to go viral. In the case of online policing, there are software applications that are developed by Israel's tech groups and associated organizations that allow people to be quickly alerted of any social media post or comment and to quickly go there and be a pro-israel defense. I don't keep track of the latest apps (I think act.IL is the newest?) In the case of offline tracking, there are sites like the canary mission that publicly document any opposition to Israel in order to dox those people and get their careers ruined. In order to be removed from the website, you must make a public pledge that you will no longer defame Israel and that you are sorry that you caused trouble for Israel. [1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act.IL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act.IL [2]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Mission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Mission [3]: https://canarymission.org/ex-canary https://canarymission.org/ex-canary <-- This will probably alert them of this post. >This is a perfect example of how authoritarian sympathizers twist and equivocate common criticisms so they can construct a false equivalence between imperfections by liberal democracies with the much more severe abuses by autocratic regimes like China and Russia. You speak from an enormous position of privilege. Ask anyone who has suffered at the hands of the US's actions about how they feel about this "false equivalence". I bet you this is partially what is also driving many countries to adopt the Belt and ROad initiative. You think these countries are that stupid that they will be easily conned by China? They know that they are going to owe China, its just for many of these poor countries that have historically at best been ignored by the west or worst, been abused by the West, going towards China has some possibility of improving their lot. That is the West's fault for missing a golden opportunity: again I believe this is because the west has been slowly abandoning its core principles over the years. >The US in particular receives criticisms from allies and non-allies alike, its disastrous second Iraq war has weighed heavily on American democratic politics and its citizens influence new behavior like withdrawing from Afghanistan. It honestly does not sound like you live in the US. Because I can tell you as someone who lives here: this is nonsense. The decision to withdraw was an easy political win to increase Biden's poll numbers after negotiations of his build back better bill were faltering and he failed to implement multiple other promises such as significantly reducing student loan debt, providing an expansion of health care and failing to do easy wins such as legalizing marijuana at the federal level. The people did ultimately support him but it was not something that was top of mind given that they were still suffering from the fallout of year two of COVID.

themacguffinman 5y ago
All of what you describe is the honest attempt at moving forward. I don't really know how you can describe intervention by massive Democrat supporter movements and consistently successful legal & congressional challenges at the highest levels of American governance as anything but an honest liberal democratic attempt at moving forward. You described media bias and media campaigns. Liberal democracy isn't a guarantee against bias nor does it ban organized campaigns against what you consider to be morally good, it's a guarantee that people can freely inform themselves and openly debate opposite point of views both privately and in their government. It is not the intelligence services that sanctions anti-Israel voices, it is the overwhelmingly pro-Israel sentiment amongst citizens that has only grown under an objectively free media, any cancelling effect is enacted by citizens and democratic institutions because free citizens agree with them. That one side is more dominant and likely better equipped does not categorically delegitimize American democracy. You describe financial advantage. Liberal democracy is vulnerable to such exploitation, but as your own accounts indicate, it has not categorically surrendered to autocratic edict. Why do you think the Afghanistan withdrawal was a "political win"? A political win means that withdrawing for Afghanistan is a popular move supported by the electorate. Why do you think it's popular? The second Iraq war has largely dampened any enthusiasm and support for any similar ME interventions. How do you square your recognition of a sliding scale of abuse & corruption with hyperbolic categorical claims that US governance lacks "any credibility" and is merely "an illusion"? You condemn the West for not being good enough to your satisfaction more than openly expansionist totalitarian regimes that mock the very principles by which you judge the West. What's your point exactly? Are you telling me that until the West improves to your satisfaction, no one in the West should call out China? It doesn't seem like even you believe that the West is as bad as China, yet for some reason you've divebombed into this thread with common domestic criticisms as if they are at all relevant to China's misbehavior. > You think these countries are that stupid that they will be easily conned by China? Yes. In fact, we know they have been conned. Pakistan, considered one of China's strategic allies, has been pressured by its immense Chinese debt to fork over exclusive port rights with predatory revenue shares. Sri-Lanka has done the same with its ports and land, Laos has done it with their entire national power grid, Tajikistan has done it with large tracts of strategic land as well as mining rights [1]. We also know that these are not benevolent aid loans because the loan rates are practically identical to private sector market-rate loans that extract higher rates the more dire the country's financial situation, which stands in contrast to typical infrastructure aid loans like those of Japan that have comparably very low rates for developing countries. Aside from rates, the terms are unusually onerous and asymmetric (even in the world of loans), banning unusual things like loan restructuring and explicitly spell out requirements for foreign policy alignment. These loan agreements also force the government to keep the terms or even the existence of the loan confidential, which prevents any democratic or public accountability for these national loans. These are sovereignty-ending concessions. It's a total non-sequitur to claim that historical oppression by the West means that their pivot to China is a rational decision. I can be sympathetic to their attitudes towards the West while pointing out that China is actively abusing them. [1] https://thehill.com/opinion/international/551337-chinas-debt-trap-diplomacy https://thehill.com/opinion/international/551337-chinas-debt...