4 ms·

> Is the right to life no longer a human right? Ah yes, China, comes to the top of the list when I think of protectors of human life. One-child policies, weld

> Is the right to life no longer a human right? Ah yes, China, comes to the top of the list when I think of protectors of human life. One-child policies, welding people into their apartment buildings, corralling them into COSTCOs [1] like they're farm animals being loaded into a semi-truck. Such benevolence. > Or have a lot of us so internalized anti-China propaganda that we're no longer able to think logically? Nah, more likely you have been drinking the pro-China propaganda like a 7-11 Big Gulp. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Costco/comments/xgvlm6/video_of_people_fleeing_shanghai_costco_lockdown/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Costco/comments/xgvlm6/video_of_peo...

whimsicalism 4y ago
The fact remains that if US policies were implemented in China, it would mean the tacit acceptance of killing 4-5 million people.
- free652 4y ago
  a) we don't know exactly what would happen if China implemented US policies. So that's not a fact, thats a hypothesis. b) China lies all the time. That's a fact. May be 5 million died from covid there. who knows. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation_by_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation_by_Chi...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - d_graeme 4y ago
    It's actually 50 million dead, not 5 million. And some experts even say, that possibly up to 200 million Chinese have died from covid so far. All those repeated lockdowns and city-wide mass tests are just being done for the 'lolz'. P.S. I wore my tin-foil hat while posting the above. It's pretty similar to the one you're wearing.
- CommunityPoster 4y ago
  It's not a fact, come on. Many countries that didn't choose to lock down their population did better. Actually, since vitamin D deficiency is a risk factor, it may have increased deaths and decreased the overall health of the population.
  - protoc 4y ago
    you gonna gamble millions of lives?
d_graeme 4y ago
So between a country that implements extremely restrictive (some would say 'heartlessly' restrictive) policies in order to safeguard the lives of their vulnerable elderly population, and another country (the 'land of the free') which is so 'free' it allows 1 million+ of its citizens to die, and whose politicians have shown on multiple occasions that they care more about saving the country's economy than saving the lives of their citizens? Which would you say is a 'protector of Human life' as opposed to a 'protector of the economy'. I would tell you to stop drinking the kool-aid, but it would be a waste of effort. Rational arguments won't work against emotion-driven beliefs and delusions (China - Those Evil Communists. 'West' - Lands of the Free and Birthplace of Freedom and All that is Good).

whimsicalism 4y ago

The fact remains that if US policies were implemented in China, it would mean the tacit acceptance of killing 4-5 million people.

free652 4y ago
a) we don't know exactly what would happen if China implemented US policies. So that's not a fact, thats a hypothesis. b) China lies all the time. That's a fact. May be 5 million died from covid there. who knows. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation_by_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation_by_Chi...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- d_graeme 4y ago
  It's actually 50 million dead, not 5 million. And some experts even say, that possibly up to 200 million Chinese have died from covid so far. All those repeated lockdowns and city-wide mass tests are just being done for the 'lolz'. P.S. I wore my tin-foil hat while posting the above. It's pretty similar to the one you're wearing.
CommunityPoster 4y ago
It's not a fact, come on. Many countries that didn't choose to lock down their population did better. Actually, since vitamin D deficiency is a risk factor, it may have increased deaths and decreased the overall health of the population.
- protoc 4y ago
  you gonna gamble millions of lives?

d_graeme 4y ago

So between a country that implements extremely restrictive (some would say 'heartlessly' restrictive) policies in order to safeguard the lives of their vulnerable elderly population, and another country (the 'land of the free') which is so 'free' it allows 1 million+ of its citizens to die, and whose politicians have shown on multiple occasions that they care more about saving the country's economy than saving the lives of their citizens? Which would you say is a 'protector of Human life' as opposed to a 'protector of the economy'. I would tell you to stop drinking the kool-aid, but it would be a waste of effort. Rational arguments won't work against emotion-driven beliefs and delusions (China - Those Evil Communists. 'West' - Lands of the Free and Birthplace of Freedom and All that is Good).