5 ms·

> Does the US today recognize the Japanese internment as a moral crime? Yes. Not only is it recognized as a moral crime, but the US government passed a law to

> Does the US today recognize the Japanese internment as a moral crime? Yes. Not only is it recognized as a moral crime, but the US government passed a law to give restitution to interned people. Does that clean the slate? No. Does that make it ok? No, of course not. The point is not that the US is perfect or even good. The point is that the US system allows open discussion, criticism, protest, legislating, etc. It has built-in mechanisms to improve itself which it has done and continues to do. China has none of that.

trasz 5y ago
The point is that you forget all the inconvenient facts - from American national guard murdering students in broad daylight, without any kind of punishment afterwards, to secret military kangaroo courts - and build your arguments on plain ignorance ("China has none of that").
- joshuahedlund 5y ago
  In the US, we can acknowledge those "inconvenient facts", freely discuss them, educate people about them, push for accountability for those who did them and to change policies so that they do not happen again.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    And then, quite often, the police at various levels of government infiltrate the groups seeking accountability, engage in provocations to discredit them publicly and frame them for unrelated crimes for which they are prosecuted and punished, and actively coordinate with and/or passively use non-enforcement to enable opposed non-police groups to carry out violence against their members. (Of course, we can then acknowledge those inconvenient facts, educate people about them, and push for accountability, if we are willing to start the cycle over again.) Is the US government less effectively repressive of dissent than the PRC? Sure. But it still does tend to violently repress dissent, especially when that is about conduct of policing or war.
  - trasz 5y ago
    Nice theory, doesn't work. Weed was made illegal to suppress ethnic minorities and war protesters, 50 years later that law is still serving the same purpose. Meanwhile US lawmakers are busy denying voting rights to those same minorities, and making it illegal to teach inconvenient parts of american history.
- clucas 5y ago
  It's silly to bring up Kent State in a discussion comparing openness to criticism between the US and China. Kent State is well documented, it's taught in school. Tiananmen Square (government troops murdering protesting students) is actively supressed in China. Yes, the US has done bad things. And some of those bad things have been forgotten. But if you want to find out about them... the government is not going to prevent you from doing so. China is much worse in that regard.
  - trasz 5y ago
    Tienanmen Square is taught in Chinese schools as well. There's a key difference however: people responsible for Tienanmen were punished, with Prime Minister spending the rest of his life in house arrest. Those responsible for Kent State didn't. And that's a common pattern with "bad things" happening in US.

trasz 5y ago

The point is that you forget all the inconvenient facts - from American national guard murdering students in broad daylight, without any kind of punishment afterwards, to secret military kangaroo courts - and build your arguments on plain ignorance ("China has none of that").

joshuahedlund 5y ago
In the US, we can acknowledge those "inconvenient facts", freely discuss them, educate people about them, push for accountability for those who did them and to change policies so that they do not happen again.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  And then, quite often, the police at various levels of government infiltrate the groups seeking accountability, engage in provocations to discredit them publicly and frame them for unrelated crimes for which they are prosecuted and punished, and actively coordinate with and/or passively use non-enforcement to enable opposed non-police groups to carry out violence against their members. (Of course, we can then acknowledge those inconvenient facts, educate people about them, and push for accountability, if we are willing to start the cycle over again.) Is the US government less effectively repressive of dissent than the PRC? Sure. But it still does tend to violently repress dissent, especially when that is about conduct of policing or war.
- trasz 5y ago
  Nice theory, doesn't work. Weed was made illegal to suppress ethnic minorities and war protesters, 50 years later that law is still serving the same purpose. Meanwhile US lawmakers are busy denying voting rights to those same minorities, and making it illegal to teach inconvenient parts of american history.
clucas 5y ago
It's silly to bring up Kent State in a discussion comparing openness to criticism between the US and China. Kent State is well documented, it's taught in school. Tiananmen Square (government troops murdering protesting students) is actively supressed in China. Yes, the US has done bad things. And some of those bad things have been forgotten. But if you want to find out about them... the government is not going to prevent you from doing so. China is much worse in that regard.
- trasz 5y ago
  Tienanmen Square is taught in Chinese schools as well. There's a key difference however: people responsible for Tienanmen were punished, with Prime Minister spending the rest of his life in house arrest. Those responsible for Kent State didn't. And that's a common pattern with "bad things" happening in US.