14 ms·

I am so tired of China being used to stoke American jingoism, of politicians making a contest of who is really 'tough on China' and, most horrifyingly, of seein

by pxc 4y ago

I am so tired of China being used to stoke American jingoism, of politicians making a contest of who is really 'tough on China' and, most horrifyingly, of seeing other USians online practically salivate as they fantasize about a war with China. It's some cold war boogieman horseshit. And it's depressing to watch here on Hacker News, too, any comments that question the beating of those war drums go dead. Yesterday I heard someone bemoan the supposed lack of patriotism today, and wish we could be 'united' like we were after 9/11. You know, that time we rushed headlong into two useless forever wars that ended hundreds of thousands of human lives and brutally disrupted millions more. The time we saw Sikhs assaulted in the streets for daring to sort of look like Muslims in the eyes of uncultured hicks. And when the entire media apparatus, 'left' and 'right' rallied to pump out war propaganda for years and years. Disgusting and depressing. And it's where I fear we're headed every time I see China in US headlines anymore.

stcroixx 4y ago
[flagged]
- pokepim 4y ago
  [dead]
- unity1001 4y ago
  > their continued atrocities Before it comes to China's alleged atrocities that every single Muslim country's parliamentarians and diplomants say they dont exist: Have you yet persecuted and jailed those who murdered 1 million in Iraq?
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    America voted for a president who said he would, but then reneged on that promise. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-... Fuck you Obama!
    - unity1001 4y ago
      Well. If the Americans at least showed the actual war criminals in their midst same rencor that they are exhibiting against concocted/alleged war criminals abroad, things could change. But they aren't. They aren't even using harsh language against them. Instead, they are directing all their ire and harshest words always against "others' crimes"...
      - LarryMullins 4y ago
        Few people have harsher words for American politicians than Americans themselves. Hating whoever the POTUS is has always been a lot more popular than hating China.
        unity1001 4y ago
        > Few people have harsher words for American politicians than Americans themselves If they do, we aren't seeing it anywhere online. They always rant about others. And the few anti-war left and right that remain are so few that you dont even know that they exist unless you actually seek them out and follow them.
        LarryMullins 4y ago
        You and I must be using different internets.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - ARandomerDude 4y ago
      …either that, or he got into office, saw some actual intelligence and realized his utopian views were not grounded in reality. Then he did the responsible thing and didn’t keep an unethical promise. I didn’t really care for Obama but he did the right thing on that item, in my opinion.
      - 4y ago
  - dang 4y ago
    Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar—especially not ideological or nationalistic flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - unity1001 4y ago
      But why is the parent comment not flagged and collapsed then?
      - dang 4y ago
        I believe all the parent comments in this chain are flagged and collapsed. Even if they weren't though, we need you to follow the rules whether others are following them are not, so pointing to what other people did isn't a good way to respond to moderation. (Moderation is inevitably inconsistent, btw, because we don't see everything.)
        unity1001 4y ago
        It wasnt flagged and collapsed before, but after I flagged it after your initial comment, it seems to have been. I guess we have to actively report such stuff then. In any case its great that objectivity is being observed while moderating.
- thrwawy74 4y ago
  Would you define communism?
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar—especially not ideological or nationalistic flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Dalewyn 4y ago
While I agree that using China as our 21st century boogieman is very tiresome, the fact of the matter is China is not a friend of the west.
- scotty79 4y ago
  So? The west is not a friend of China as well. And US has downright militant rethoric agains China.
  - eganist 4y ago
    > US has downright militant rethoric in defense of the independent nation of Taiwan* Fixed that for you.
    - scotty79 4y ago
      Remind me which independent nations US unilaterally defended with militant rhetoric and to what effect?
      - eganist 4y ago
        > Remind me which independent nations US unilaterally defended with militant rhetoric and to what effect? Sure. Taiwan, anyone in NATO, South Korea, etc. The effect thus far has been that none of these nations have been invaded. --- Scotty79, I'm already checked out of this conversation; it's unlikely to be productive for anyone.
        scotty79 4y ago
        Yeah. Me too. It never was productive.
  - WillPostForFood 4y ago
    The US and Europe brought China into the WTO, gave it most favored nations trading status, transferred trillions in technology, and financed the modernization of the country. Pretty good friends, IMO. But it is not been reciprocated, and is now going bad. The crushing of the democracy movement in Hong Kong was a wake up call as to the intentions of China going forward.
unity1001 4y ago
> You know, that time we rushed headlong into two useless forever wars Don't say it like that. Say it like as it is: "... rushed headlong into murdering 1 million people to rob their oil". Because that's what it was. And until people start calling it as it is, this kind of thing will keep repeating. ... And yeah, recently the US Congress arranged $500 million to anti-China propaganda, so you will see a LOT more of such smear/fear stories and a LOT of people going along with those even as they claim to have opposed the Iraq War back in the day... https://prospect.org/politics/congress-proposes-500-million-for-negative-news-coverage-of-china/ https://prospect.org/politics/congress-proposes-500-million-... (I love how such criticism still gets downvoted merely 20 years after Iraq War - its almost as if the Americans !like! to get deceived into murdering people for their oil and stuff)
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jasmer 4y ago
  The US didn't get any of the Iraqi Oil. Ironically, it was Europe and China who benefitted in that regard. Also notably, the US 5th fleet defends freedom of navigation in the Gulf, which is mostly about Oil, and China is the #1 recipient of Oil! Funny, that.
  - mardifoufs 4y ago
    I'm sure those million dead people in iraq are glad the fifth fleet is protecting trade or that America didn't actually directly steal their oil. The same goes for the countless lives and futures ruined for the people still living with the consequences of the Gulf War. This is absurd and sounds exactly like a chinese nationalist rhetoric about what Mao did in the great leap forward. Hey, millions died, but think of how stable/prosperous everything was after that! Plus, our side had good intentions*. Two sides of the same coin. (By the way, the US profits immensly from a stable gulf trade. Oil doesn't have to be exported to the US for america to profit from trade in the area. It's a commodity, and stable trade means stable prices internationally, which is extremely important to american interests. China might profit, too, but it's even more essential to American hegemony, which I agree can have its upsides)
BurningFrog 4y ago
Since China is the major rival as a global superpower in the medium to long term, it has to be taken seriously as a threat. Of course jingoistic idiots will do what they do. But there is a kernel of unavoidable truth there.
- james4k 4y ago
  It is unavoidable in that we have a world order where 5% of the world population maintains a dominance which can only wither away if the rest of the world is allowed to develop.
  - drblastoff 4y ago
    You think the rest of the world has not developed? Have you been out in the world?
    - james4k 4y ago
      My point is the world will develop whether or not that is in the interest of those in power. I'm just going to assume you're not trying to say the world is evenly developed.
      - BurningFrog 4y ago
        If the world was ever evenly developed, it was when it was completely developed.
        james4k 4y ago
        I'm sorry, but I don't understand the point you're both trying to make.
        BurningFrog 4y ago
        Sorry, I meant un-developed the second time.
yohanshi 4y ago
As a taiwanese who lurks on hacker news for many years but when I saw this post I had to make an account. You are dead wrong, China is an enemy of the free world, pure and simple. South Koreans and Ukrainians would agree with me here. Especially since China has declared no limit friendship with russia
- hfbff 4y ago
  From your point of view, I can see how China is bad and the USA is good. But ask someone whose country got invaded by the USA or whose bloody dictator got supported by the USA. Over here in Latinamerica we still remember the horrible things that the USA did. It seems to me (but I could have a false perception) that China is a horrible bully in their corner of the world (nine dash line and, of course their will to invade Taiwan), but their foreign policy is order of magnitude less intrusive (i.e. they don't invade or topple countries on the other side of the world).
  - Salgat 4y ago
    Every major country has their faults, but the US definitely has a larger surface area for these faults as the only superpower left. On the other hand, as the only superpower left, we're fortunate the US exists as a stabilizing factor for world peace, rather than colonizing the rest of the world like every superpower before it.
    - wyldfire 4y ago
      > rather than colonizing the rest of the world like every superpower before it. I guess the colonialism has eased up in the last half-century or so. But the US definitely did our fair share. EDIT maybe my fellow USians don't see them that way but they definitely were colonized - Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Guam, American Samoa, Hawaii.
      - User23 4y ago
        I'm given to understand that the Marshall Islands, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico are all free to choose to end their association with the USA anytime they like. What "colonies" does the USA have exactly?
scottmcleod 4y ago
[flagged]
retrac 4y ago
Assuming this is all due to America is, with apologies, typical American jingoism, that assumes the world revolves around Washington. Read some material from the Chinese side. The CPC sees itself in a life and death struggle with liberal capitalism as (allegedly) championed by the EU and USA. One or the other will triumph. The two orders are fundamentally incompatible. A new cold war is here, whether the Americans want it or not. > Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Communist Party of the Soviet Union fall to pieces? An important reason is that in the ideological domain, competition is fierce! To completely repudiate the historical experience of the Soviet Union, to repudiate the history of the CPSU, to repudiate Lenin, to repudiate Stalin was to wreck chaos in Soviet ideology and engage in historical nihilism. It caused Party organizations at all levels to have barely any function whatsoever. It robbed the Party of its leadership of the military. In the end the CPSU—as great a Party as it was—scattered like a flock of frightened beasts! The Soviet Union—as great a country as it was—shattered into a dozen pieces. This is a lesson from the past! This excerpt is from a speech by Xi Jinping given at his inauguration as General Secretary in 2013. What would you say it implies about how he sees the USA?
- sandworm101 4y ago
  Except that china and Russia are now the capitalism champions. Money can buy anything there, specifically military and political power. America's constant fallback to elections and the will of the people in a way makes it the more socialist society. The masses still matter in America. The will of the masses means nothing in china and russia.
- indymike 4y ago
  > The CPC sees itself in a life and death struggle with liberal capitalism as (allegedly) championed by the EU and USA. One or the other will triumph. The two orders are fundamentally incompatible. A new cold war is here, whether the Americans want it or not. I'm pretty sure the CPC has one enemy: losing control of China. That is the ultimate bogeyman, and when you view China (or Russia) from that point of view, you can understand them much better. > What would you say it implies about how he sees the USA? A potential cause of losing control.
sandworm101 4y ago
It is only boogieman talk, until that boogieman is real. Sending balloons i to the airspace of other countries makes china's intention undeniable: they do not care for any rules-based international system. They believe simply that might makes right. They are a bully. The US just made its counterpoint very clear in the only manner that a bully understands. That balloon will no doubt be cut up and put on display, airing any secrets it might contain, to expose the lie that this was anything other than a surveillance device.
- hfbff 4y ago
  Are you saying that the US does believe in a rules-based international system? Let's count the number of countries the USA has invaded vs China...and the government topples with the help of the USA vs China
  - sandworm101 4y ago
    Yes. Most every one of those invasions was preceded by international diplomacy and coalition building. China/Russia dont care for the UN or building consensus with allies. They are willing to just go on the word of a supreme leader. We might not like the outcomes, but the US does accept that the international stage is governed by rules. That is why a country like canada feels no threat from the US wheras every country bordering China/Russia lives under threat.
    - pigsty 4y ago
      I don’t think people in central and South America, Vietnam, the Middle East, and so on were happy when diplomacy and coalitions were built against them to instate dictatorships and/or kill millions. America satisfies its allies. Those Allies are happy to be the enemies of China and Russia for financial benefits and some border protection . Who, despite your comment, do build consensus with their allies and they’re content with being enemies of the US also in exchange for financial benefits and border protection. All 3 countries have their own spheres of influence and all 3 project themselves to be heroes while one of the others is a villain at all times. The OP is right here—jingoism on HN because of a balloon is something beyond what is normal here.
ajross 4y ago
> politicians making a contest of who is really 'tough on China' I know you're deliberately wording this to avoid a partisan angle, but I genuinely think that it's hurting your point here. There is no "contest" at play here. There are no "both sides". All this rhetoric is coming from one side of the aisle. And I agree it's bad, and hurtful, and quite frankly probably doing more to help the Chinese position on the world stage than hurt it. But it's also not something that's going to be fixed by stopping a "contest". Either the republicans decide to be grownups or they don't. The democrats can't fix that. Edit, because two responses have misunderstood this. This isn't about "being" tough on China, or about reasonably considering China as a threat to be countered. That is bipartisan, and despite the rhetoric something close to a default position among US elites. It's the partisan nonsense that ignores this clear consensus and tries to claim the Biden response is "soft" or whatever that's harmful. Again, if I were Xi and wanted to throw a bomb into US politics for my own benefit, I might very well provoke something like this.
- rendang 4y ago
  On the contrary, Biden has been very tough on China, and what about Pelosi's Taiwan visit, maybe the most significant provocation in the bilateral relationship in the past decade
- christophilus 4y ago
  I know a few died in the wool democrats who absolutely think China is a threat to be taken seriously. This is a bipartisan issue. Republicans are more boisterous in their approach, but if a Democrat is in power when China moves on Taiwan, the US response will be nearly identical to that of a Republican administration. I’d put a heavy bet on that.
sebzim4500 4y ago
I recall very similar comments a year ago talking about how there was no way that Putin would attempt to invade Ukraine and it was just American jingoism.
- chii 4y ago
  While that's true, i think crimea and the associated warm water port (sevastopol) is of strategic value. After the crimean invasion, the mainland of ukraine has cut off the water canal, which meant that the peninsular needs to be constantly supported by the russian mainland. It's not quite sustainable in the long term for russia to do that. The land bridge is their "solution". I don't see taiwan as similarly strategic to china. It's more politically motivated - that taiwan has turned into a democracy that is pro-west, right on their door step, instead of "returning". On the other hand, an invasion of taiwan is something that can be used to quell domestic problems...
  - InTheArena 4y ago
    The Russians could have (and indeed should have) just taken Donetsk and Luhansk and protected the waterway if that was their goal. Their goal was (and is) not that. Their goal was the destruction of Ukraine as a country, and it's forced reunification with Russia as a foundational step in the re-emergence of a Russian empire. If you read Chinese defense arguments about Taiwan, they basically make the same hypothesis. Control of Taiwan forces the strategic sublimation of Japan and Korea, and re-establishes a Chinese empire. Dictators don't come up with new ideas.
  - mlindner 4y ago
    The "solution" was to not invade Crimea in the first place, forcing Ukraine's hand followed by a second invasion of Ukrainian territory in the west. You're conveniently forgetting that Crimea was not the only territory invaded by Russia.
  - zopa 4y ago
    > While that's true, i think crimea and the associated warm water port (sevastopol) is of strategic value. Russia already had naval basing rights is Sevastopol, before the invasion of Crimea. I don’t think the strategic explanations hold up.
snickerbockers 4y ago
jeez, all they did was blow up a balloon near myrtle beach. is that really comparable to invading iraq and afghanistan?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
galacticaactual 4y ago
[flagged]
- dang 4y ago
  You can't do this here, and we ban accounts that post like this, so please don't do it again. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Note these: "When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names." "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data."
lizardking 4y ago
Accusations of jingoism on HN are detached from reality.
thrwawy74 4y ago
I think a group of people kind of ruins the outward image of every country. Is there validity to the Chinese gov doing nefarious things? Are they running concentration camps, infiltrating American companies, and expanding their sea borders to expand their territory? Yes. There's absolutely something to be feared and apply steady opposition to. However, it's all far and away from our shores, and to the public at large it feels very disconnected from our day-to-day reality. Dismissing it is a way to relieve the stress that a persistent threat exists, but it will still be there. I think the best thing the gov could do is give us awareness of these things, in an objective way, so we can stay informed. I do not see the fearmongering you see, but I'm sure I could find it on Facebook and Twitter if I looked. And then.. the things our gov does to other countries to spy and maintain intelligence is a bogeyman for others. We are a threat, as China is a threat. I wonder if we have any stray weather balloons floating over China that we don't hear about in our media.
mc32 4y ago
I think you're only examining one side of the story. Live in China for some time and see how they look at the rest of the world and people. And look at how we treat other current threats on the world stage at the moment. We do not make a special case for China --if anything the US has wishfully thought that if we treat them like a democracy they'll become a democracy and that has proven incorrect.
- SantalBlush 4y ago
  US foreign policy is not about spreading democracy. That's a bedtime story told to young Americans who don't know any better. The US is fine working with dictators; it's when those dictators stop playing ball or are ousted that we suddenly want to spread democracy. Noriega, Hussein and the Shah are easy examples.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    And the idea that america props up dictators or topples regimes because “it wants their oil” is a bedtime story for jaded American teenagers who don’t know any better. If that was true American foreign policy would look a lot different (and wouldn’t be such a money sink). Where’s all that Iraqi oil money again? U.S. foreign policy is aimed at maintaining stability and facilitating liberal capitalist democracy. We don’t regard popular movements that are communist or theocratic as “democracy” so we’re willing to support dictators to forestall that. But at the same time our foreign policy is fundamentally ideological in nature.
    - SantalBlush 4y ago
      >And the idea that america props up dictators or topples regimes because “it wants their oil” It would be more productive if you addressed my comment, and not some comment you just made up. As for this: >U.S. foreign policy is aimed at maintaining stability and facilitating liberal capitalist democracy I believe that you believe this. But I'm not treating it as an axiom, so you'll have to give evidence for it.
      - 4y ago
jasmer 4y ago
[flagged]
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
loxias 4y ago
As an American who has worked in tech for the last two decades, including interacting with Chinese subcontractors numerous times I say you are 100% wrong. #1. THEY'RE STEALING FROM US. Constantly. #2. Look at how they treat their own people. #3. Look at how they treat their neighbors.
mlindner 4y ago
While you're correct that 9/11 caused issues I think you're conflating things incorrectly here. I don't see anti-China policies being used to justify crack downs on freedoms like was done after 9/11. Perhaps that's coming, but we should be concerned about that when it happens. We absolutely however need to be careful about what China is trying to do by basically bifricating the world into authoritarian and democratic world orders. It's absolutely their stated goal to create a bi-polar world and thus re-create cold war conditions.
mise_en_place 4y ago
“The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”
onetimeusename 4y ago
So do you have any hard evidence one way or another about what happened in this incident? FWIW, I personally haven't noticed any jingoism at all. Also your use of a racial slur here with unrelated reference is probably not appropriate.
InTheArena 4y ago
China just very successfully overflew the continental us with a military payload, and now knows, unequivocally that F-22's can operate at 60k feet. Both have significant propaganda and military value. There is a reason we learned in the cold war that overflights have to be governed by treaty. It led to the near destruction of the world. China, apparently, just deliberately American Airspace. In the above post, you could substitute the word China with Germany and Cold War with World War I, and this quote could have been written verbatim by the American First coalition - who had good points going into World War II, but missed the big picture. At some point you have to defend independent countries, stand up for human rights, etc. China's actions show no respect for any of its neighbors. Their government persecutes people based on ethnic and religious beliefs. They feel that the entire world is out to get them, but they refuse to respect democratic norms that they agreed to with the United Nations. They refuse the most basic levels of transparency. Leaving critics to fill in the gaps on questions such as genocide and the pandemic. Anyone who points out that fact is immediately branded a sinophile. Meanwhile China is propping up Russia by buying it's exports at a time the Russians are committing genocide in Ukraine. Even what few democratic norms that existed have been wiped away and is being replaced by a cult of personality. May I humbly submit that you are concerned about tensions coming from the wrong country? If china agrees to respect its neighbors, follow human rights standards, and respect toleration of people who do not worship at the church of the Party, the friction will disappear. Ironically, America was strongly pro-china going into World War II shortly after that. It's not a stretch to see that resume. However, their literate makes it very clear that they view China as the one true civilized state and that Europe and America must be humiliated and destroyed for china to regain its rightful place at the center of the world.
- acdha 4y ago
  > China just very successfully overflew the continental us with a military payload, and now knows, unequivocally that F-22's can operate at 60k feet. This is something they already knew, even if their sole intelligence gathering exercise was opening Wikipedia, which lists the service ceiling at 65k feet. Since they reportedly got the plans for several advanced aircraft via espionage, I’m quite skeptical that this got them any significant new intelligence. (I should note that I consider the Chinese government reprehensible from a civil rights perspective - perhaps this could be a PR stunt or trying to test U.S. response times, but I highly doubt it got them any useful technical data.)
ineedasername 4y ago
China is not simply rolled out as a boogeyman. Apart from any of their ambitions, at minimum the worlds reliance on them for various resources and manufacturing capacity almost exclusively has, in the last 2.5 years, been revealed as an extreme flaw and risk to global economic stability when that resource and manufacturing pipeline is disrupted. That is, at a bare minimum, a serious problem that will take years to solve. Now, bringing geopolitics back into things, China as a government does not have geopolitical goals that aligne with those of the western world. Without even placing value judgements on those goals, this fact alone is serious enough to warrant extreme caution in dealing with the Chinese government. Whether Western powers do bad things or China does bad things or both do or who is worse— those things are irrelevant on this point. The goals of each are incompatible and this will unavoidably cause each side(s) to come into conflict with each other. These all leave aside any value judgements on government styles, human rights, etc. The issues above are all basic and fundamental problems and differences that should cause the west to be extremely cautious and skeptical of the surface appearance of any actions taken by the Chinese government. They are similarly wise to be cautious and skeptical on their side. This is simply the basic state of geopolitics, and acting in accordance with this state of affairs is not jingoism. What we should hope for is to continue to work toward finding common ground at least in so far as the conflicts remain political, economic, etc. and not violent or militaristic. But you can’t engage in that sort of relationship if you keep your eyes closed to the true nature of, and differences between, the goals and values of the various players involved here.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- chasil 4y ago
  It would be very interesting to see the Ukraine situation replicate in Xinjiang in a few decades. History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
- SergeAx 4y ago
  Which exactly China geopolitical goals not aligned with the West do you mean? Where are they declared?
syngrog66 4y ago
Americans is the plural term for citizens of the USA. not USians
darkteflon 4y ago
On the flipside, I’m tired that we can’t get two comments into these threads without someone implying that anyone concerned about the threat of China under Xi is a simpleton under the influence of US politicians and media. You can both be sceptical of the bullshit and also concerned about what’s happened to China under Xi. These aren’t mutually exclusive beliefs. If you’ve spent any time watching China over the past two decades you’ve seen a hugely troubling transformation. Ask any resident of a state with an interest in the South China Sea.
daguava 4y ago
[flagged]
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  You can't even throw aerial devices over /friendly/ states without people taking that insanely seriously. Intentionally entering sovereign space without prior notice and mutual agreement is a big no-no.
IAmGraydon 4y ago
[flagged]
daguava 4y ago
[flagged]
daguava 4y ago
[flagged]
- dang 4y ago
  We've banned this account for egregiously (and frequently) violating the site guidelines. You can't post like this here, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
roamerz 4y ago
I cringe at the thought of war with anyone as well. How else though would you deal with an authoritarian non democratic country who wants nothing more than world domination? It started with Hong Kong and next in their sights is Taiwan. People like Xi Jinping only understand strength and view diplomacy as a tool to bide time until the are militarily strong enough to ensure victory. I feel for the citizens that pay the price of war. My non expert opinion only.
georgeecollins 4y ago
Did you come to this view after watching a lot of TikTok? (for the literal net = a joke!)
shrimp_emoji 4y ago
Who else feels the lonely anguish of being simultaneously anti-Chinese dictatorship AND very sympathetic of the parent post and thus saddened and alienated by posters of either extreme?
ssnistfajen 4y ago
The two Indian engineers who were murdered in Kansas in 2017, as Donald Trump's populist rhetoric began to climb after the election, was a damning proof that stoking jingoism harms innocent people first. Those gleefully cheering for extremely divisive rhetoric, based on misinfo and hyperbole, will be directly complicit in future tragedies caused by this.
rmk 4y ago
The world has enjoyed a Pax Americana, and if the continuance of that means being 'tough on China', then that is a price that must be paid. What is this American Jingoism you are talking about? America has thrown open its doors to international trade with China, welcomes their students, visitors, businesspeople and immigrants in the hundreds of thousands, even millions, every year, and places very few restrictions on Chinese ownership of American firms. No nation has extended such favorable terms to another, particularly one with a diametrically opposed political system, for so long. All this while China brazenly steals intellectual property, builds and militarizes the South China Sea in open defiance of the UNCLOS, indulges in chicanery and deception to hide its handling of a deadly pandemic that has killed more Americans than all wars that America has fought in combined, rapidly builds up its navy and its fishing fleet to intimidate and coerce American allies and openly collaborates with America's geopolitical rivals, including dangerous megalomaniacs threatening the annihilation of America, such as Kim Jong-Un, Vladimir Putin, and the Ayatollahs of Iran, even to the extent of practically funding and otherwise propping them up. It's a miracle Americans have shown such forbearance for so long, really. Jingoism indeed!
ssnistfajen 4y ago
Based on how many replies are directly attacking you or repeating propagandic lines, the jingoism mind virus is already here and the infection is deep. I salute you for the courage to speak out against the overwhelming pro-conflict campaign, but I am afraid we are past the point to reverse course.
dang 4y ago
Can you please make your substantive points without going into fulmination or flamewar? Of course these are provocative topics and strong feelings are both natural and inevitable, but that makes it more important, not less, to stick to the rules. From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."

by pxc 4y ago

stcroixx 4y ago

[flagged]

pokepim 4y ago
[dead]
unity1001 4y ago
> their continued atrocities Before it comes to China's alleged atrocities that every single Muslim country's parliamentarians and diplomants say they dont exist: Have you yet persecuted and jailed those who murdered 1 million in Iraq?
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  America voted for a president who said he would, but then reneged on that promise. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-... Fuck you Obama!
  - unity1001 4y ago
    Well. If the Americans at least showed the actual war criminals in their midst same rencor that they are exhibiting against concocted/alleged war criminals abroad, things could change. But they aren't. They aren't even using harsh language against them. Instead, they are directing all their ire and harshest words always against "others' crimes"...
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      Few people have harsher words for American politicians than Americans themselves. Hating whoever the POTUS is has always been a lot more popular than hating China.
      - unity1001 4y ago
        > Few people have harsher words for American politicians than Americans themselves If they do, we aren't seeing it anywhere online. They always rant about others. And the few anti-war left and right that remain are so few that you dont even know that they exist unless you actually seek them out and follow them.
        LarryMullins 4y ago
        You and I must be using different internets.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - ARandomerDude 4y ago
    …either that, or he got into office, saw some actual intelligence and realized his utopian views were not grounded in reality. Then he did the responsible thing and didn’t keep an unethical promise. I didn’t really care for Obama but he did the right thing on that item, in my opinion.
    - 4y ago
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar—especially not ideological or nationalistic flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - unity1001 4y ago
    But why is the parent comment not flagged and collapsed then?
    - dang 4y ago
      I believe all the parent comments in this chain are flagged and collapsed. Even if they weren't though, we need you to follow the rules whether others are following them are not, so pointing to what other people did isn't a good way to respond to moderation. (Moderation is inevitably inconsistent, btw, because we don't see everything.)
      - unity1001 4y ago
        It wasnt flagged and collapsed before, but after I flagged it after your initial comment, it seems to have been. I guess we have to actively report such stuff then. In any case its great that objectivity is being observed while moderating.
thrwawy74 4y ago
Would you define communism?
dang 4y ago
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar—especially not ideological or nationalistic flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Dalewyn 4y ago

While I agree that using China as our 21st century boogieman is very tiresome, the fact of the matter is China is not a friend of the west.

scotty79 4y ago
So? The west is not a friend of China as well. And US has downright militant rethoric agains China.
- eganist 4y ago
  > US has downright militant rethoric in defense of the independent nation of Taiwan* Fixed that for you.
  - scotty79 4y ago
    Remind me which independent nations US unilaterally defended with militant rhetoric and to what effect?
    - eganist 4y ago
      > Remind me which independent nations US unilaterally defended with militant rhetoric and to what effect? Sure. Taiwan, anyone in NATO, South Korea, etc. The effect thus far has been that none of these nations have been invaded. --- Scotty79, I'm already checked out of this conversation; it's unlikely to be productive for anyone.
      - scotty79 4y ago
        Yeah. Me too. It never was productive.
- WillPostForFood 4y ago
  The US and Europe brought China into the WTO, gave it most favored nations trading status, transferred trillions in technology, and financed the modernization of the country. Pretty good friends, IMO. But it is not been reciprocated, and is now going bad. The crushing of the democracy movement in Hong Kong was a wake up call as to the intentions of China going forward.

unity1001 4y ago

> You know, that time we rushed headlong into two useless forever wars Don't say it like that. Say it like as it is: "... rushed headlong into murdering 1 million people to rob their oil". Because that's what it was. And until people start calling it as it is, this kind of thing will keep repeating. ... And yeah, recently the US Congress arranged $500 million to anti-China propaganda, so you will see a LOT more of such smear/fear stories and a LOT of people going along with those even as they claim to have opposed the Iraq War back in the day... https://prospect.org/politics/congress-proposes-500-million-for-negative-news-coverage-of-china/ https://prospect.org/politics/congress-proposes-500-million-... (I love how such criticism still gets downvoted merely 20 years after Iraq War - its almost as if the Americans !like! to get deceived into murdering people for their oil and stuff)

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jasmer 4y ago
The US didn't get any of the Iraqi Oil. Ironically, it was Europe and China who benefitted in that regard. Also notably, the US 5th fleet defends freedom of navigation in the Gulf, which is mostly about Oil, and China is the #1 recipient of Oil! Funny, that.
- mardifoufs 4y ago
  I'm sure those million dead people in iraq are glad the fifth fleet is protecting trade or that America didn't actually directly steal their oil. The same goes for the countless lives and futures ruined for the people still living with the consequences of the Gulf War. This is absurd and sounds exactly like a chinese nationalist rhetoric about what Mao did in the great leap forward. Hey, millions died, but think of how stable/prosperous everything was after that! Plus, our side had good intentions*. Two sides of the same coin. (By the way, the US profits immensly from a stable gulf trade. Oil doesn't have to be exported to the US for america to profit from trade in the area. It's a commodity, and stable trade means stable prices internationally, which is extremely important to american interests. China might profit, too, but it's even more essential to American hegemony, which I agree can have its upsides)

BurningFrog 4y ago

Since China is the major rival as a global superpower in the medium to long term, it has to be taken seriously as a threat. Of course jingoistic idiots will do what they do. But there is a kernel of unavoidable truth there.

james4k 4y ago
It is unavoidable in that we have a world order where 5% of the world population maintains a dominance which can only wither away if the rest of the world is allowed to develop.
- drblastoff 4y ago
  You think the rest of the world has not developed? Have you been out in the world?
  - james4k 4y ago
    My point is the world will develop whether or not that is in the interest of those in power. I'm just going to assume you're not trying to say the world is evenly developed.
    - BurningFrog 4y ago
      If the world was ever evenly developed, it was when it was completely developed.
      - james4k 4y ago
        I'm sorry, but I don't understand the point you're both trying to make.
        BurningFrog 4y ago
        Sorry, I meant un-developed the second time.

yohanshi 4y ago

As a taiwanese who lurks on hacker news for many years but when I saw this post I had to make an account. You are dead wrong, China is an enemy of the free world, pure and simple. South Koreans and Ukrainians would agree with me here. Especially since China has declared no limit friendship with russia

hfbff 4y ago
From your point of view, I can see how China is bad and the USA is good. But ask someone whose country got invaded by the USA or whose bloody dictator got supported by the USA. Over here in Latinamerica we still remember the horrible things that the USA did. It seems to me (but I could have a false perception) that China is a horrible bully in their corner of the world (nine dash line and, of course their will to invade Taiwan), but their foreign policy is order of magnitude less intrusive (i.e. they don't invade or topple countries on the other side of the world).
- Salgat 4y ago
  Every major country has their faults, but the US definitely has a larger surface area for these faults as the only superpower left. On the other hand, as the only superpower left, we're fortunate the US exists as a stabilizing factor for world peace, rather than colonizing the rest of the world like every superpower before it.
  - wyldfire 4y ago
    > rather than colonizing the rest of the world like every superpower before it. I guess the colonialism has eased up in the last half-century or so. But the US definitely did our fair share. EDIT maybe my fellow USians don't see them that way but they definitely were colonized - Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Guam, American Samoa, Hawaii.
    - User23 4y ago
      I'm given to understand that the Marshall Islands, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico are all free to choose to end their association with the USA anytime they like. What "colonies" does the USA have exactly?

scottmcleod 4y ago

[flagged]

retrac 4y ago

Assuming this is all due to America is, with apologies, typical American jingoism, that assumes the world revolves around Washington. Read some material from the Chinese side. The CPC sees itself in a life and death struggle with liberal capitalism as (allegedly) championed by the EU and USA. One or the other will triumph. The two orders are fundamentally incompatible. A new cold war is here, whether the Americans want it or not. > Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Communist Party of the Soviet Union fall to pieces? An important reason is that in the ideological domain, competition is fierce! To completely repudiate the historical experience of the Soviet Union, to repudiate the history of the CPSU, to repudiate Lenin, to repudiate Stalin was to wreck chaos in Soviet ideology and engage in historical nihilism. It caused Party organizations at all levels to have barely any function whatsoever. It robbed the Party of its leadership of the military. In the end the CPSU—as great a Party as it was—scattered like a flock of frightened beasts! The Soviet Union—as great a country as it was—shattered into a dozen pieces. This is a lesson from the past! This excerpt is from a speech by Xi Jinping given at his inauguration as General Secretary in 2013. What would you say it implies about how he sees the USA?

sandworm101 4y ago
Except that china and Russia are now the capitalism champions. Money can buy anything there, specifically military and political power. America's constant fallback to elections and the will of the people in a way makes it the more socialist society. The masses still matter in America. The will of the masses means nothing in china and russia.
indymike 4y ago
> The CPC sees itself in a life and death struggle with liberal capitalism as (allegedly) championed by the EU and USA. One or the other will triumph. The two orders are fundamentally incompatible. A new cold war is here, whether the Americans want it or not. I'm pretty sure the CPC has one enemy: losing control of China. That is the ultimate bogeyman, and when you view China (or Russia) from that point of view, you can understand them much better. > What would you say it implies about how he sees the USA? A potential cause of losing control.

sandworm101 4y ago

It is only boogieman talk, until that boogieman is real. Sending balloons i to the airspace of other countries makes china's intention undeniable: they do not care for any rules-based international system. They believe simply that might makes right. They are a bully. The US just made its counterpoint very clear in the only manner that a bully understands. That balloon will no doubt be cut up and put on display, airing any secrets it might contain, to expose the lie that this was anything other than a surveillance device.

hfbff 4y ago
Are you saying that the US does believe in a rules-based international system? Let's count the number of countries the USA has invaded vs China...and the government topples with the help of the USA vs China
- sandworm101 4y ago
  Yes. Most every one of those invasions was preceded by international diplomacy and coalition building. China/Russia dont care for the UN or building consensus with allies. They are willing to just go on the word of a supreme leader. We might not like the outcomes, but the US does accept that the international stage is governed by rules. That is why a country like canada feels no threat from the US wheras every country bordering China/Russia lives under threat.
  - pigsty 4y ago
    I don’t think people in central and South America, Vietnam, the Middle East, and so on were happy when diplomacy and coalitions were built against them to instate dictatorships and/or kill millions. America satisfies its allies. Those Allies are happy to be the enemies of China and Russia for financial benefits and some border protection . Who, despite your comment, do build consensus with their allies and they’re content with being enemies of the US also in exchange for financial benefits and border protection. All 3 countries have their own spheres of influence and all 3 project themselves to be heroes while one of the others is a villain at all times. The OP is right here—jingoism on HN because of a balloon is something beyond what is normal here.

ajross 4y ago

> politicians making a contest of who is really 'tough on China' I know you're deliberately wording this to avoid a partisan angle, but I genuinely think that it's hurting your point here. There is no "contest" at play here. There are no "both sides". All this rhetoric is coming from one side of the aisle. And I agree it's bad, and hurtful, and quite frankly probably doing more to help the Chinese position on the world stage than hurt it. But it's also not something that's going to be fixed by stopping a "contest". Either the republicans decide to be grownups or they don't. The democrats can't fix that. Edit, because two responses have misunderstood this. This isn't about "being" tough on China, or about reasonably considering China as a threat to be countered. That is bipartisan, and despite the rhetoric something close to a default position among US elites. It's the partisan nonsense that ignores this clear consensus and tries to claim the Biden response is "soft" or whatever that's harmful. Again, if I were Xi and wanted to throw a bomb into US politics for my own benefit, I might very well provoke something like this.

rendang 4y ago
On the contrary, Biden has been very tough on China, and what about Pelosi's Taiwan visit, maybe the most significant provocation in the bilateral relationship in the past decade
christophilus 4y ago
I know a few died in the wool democrats who absolutely think China is a threat to be taken seriously. This is a bipartisan issue. Republicans are more boisterous in their approach, but if a Democrat is in power when China moves on Taiwan, the US response will be nearly identical to that of a Republican administration. I’d put a heavy bet on that.

sebzim4500 4y ago

I recall very similar comments a year ago talking about how there was no way that Putin would attempt to invade Ukraine and it was just American jingoism.

chii 4y ago
While that's true, i think crimea and the associated warm water port (sevastopol) is of strategic value. After the crimean invasion, the mainland of ukraine has cut off the water canal, which meant that the peninsular needs to be constantly supported by the russian mainland. It's not quite sustainable in the long term for russia to do that. The land bridge is their "solution". I don't see taiwan as similarly strategic to china. It's more politically motivated - that taiwan has turned into a democracy that is pro-west, right on their door step, instead of "returning". On the other hand, an invasion of taiwan is something that can be used to quell domestic problems...
- InTheArena 4y ago
  The Russians could have (and indeed should have) just taken Donetsk and Luhansk and protected the waterway if that was their goal. Their goal was (and is) not that. Their goal was the destruction of Ukraine as a country, and it's forced reunification with Russia as a foundational step in the re-emergence of a Russian empire. If you read Chinese defense arguments about Taiwan, they basically make the same hypothesis. Control of Taiwan forces the strategic sublimation of Japan and Korea, and re-establishes a Chinese empire. Dictators don't come up with new ideas.
- mlindner 4y ago
  The "solution" was to not invade Crimea in the first place, forcing Ukraine's hand followed by a second invasion of Ukrainian territory in the west. You're conveniently forgetting that Crimea was not the only territory invaded by Russia.
- zopa 4y ago
  > While that's true, i think crimea and the associated warm water port (sevastopol) is of strategic value. Russia already had naval basing rights is Sevastopol, before the invasion of Crimea. I don’t think the strategic explanations hold up.

snickerbockers 4y ago

jeez, all they did was blow up a balloon near myrtle beach. is that really comparable to invading iraq and afghanistan?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

galacticaactual 4y ago

[flagged]

dang 4y ago
You can't do this here, and we ban accounts that post like this, so please don't do it again. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Note these: "When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names." "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data."

lizardking 4y ago

Accusations of jingoism on HN are detached from reality.

thrwawy74 4y ago

I think a group of people kind of ruins the outward image of every country. Is there validity to the Chinese gov doing nefarious things? Are they running concentration camps, infiltrating American companies, and expanding their sea borders to expand their territory? Yes. There's absolutely something to be feared and apply steady opposition to. However, it's all far and away from our shores, and to the public at large it feels very disconnected from our day-to-day reality. Dismissing it is a way to relieve the stress that a persistent threat exists, but it will still be there. I think the best thing the gov could do is give us awareness of these things, in an objective way, so we can stay informed. I do not see the fearmongering you see, but I'm sure I could find it on Facebook and Twitter if I looked. And then.. the things our gov does to other countries to spy and maintain intelligence is a bogeyman for others. We are a threat, as China is a threat. I wonder if we have any stray weather balloons floating over China that we don't hear about in our media.

mc32 4y ago

I think you're only examining one side of the story. Live in China for some time and see how they look at the rest of the world and people. And look at how we treat other current threats on the world stage at the moment. We do not make a special case for China --if anything the US has wishfully thought that if we treat them like a democracy they'll become a democracy and that has proven incorrect.

SantalBlush 4y ago
US foreign policy is not about spreading democracy. That's a bedtime story told to young Americans who don't know any better. The US is fine working with dictators; it's when those dictators stop playing ball or are ousted that we suddenly want to spread democracy. Noriega, Hussein and the Shah are easy examples.
- rayiner 4y ago
  And the idea that america props up dictators or topples regimes because “it wants their oil” is a bedtime story for jaded American teenagers who don’t know any better. If that was true American foreign policy would look a lot different (and wouldn’t be such a money sink). Where’s all that Iraqi oil money again? U.S. foreign policy is aimed at maintaining stability and facilitating liberal capitalist democracy. We don’t regard popular movements that are communist or theocratic as “democracy” so we’re willing to support dictators to forestall that. But at the same time our foreign policy is fundamentally ideological in nature.
  - SantalBlush 4y ago
    >And the idea that america props up dictators or topples regimes because “it wants their oil” It would be more productive if you addressed my comment, and not some comment you just made up. As for this: >U.S. foreign policy is aimed at maintaining stability and facilitating liberal capitalist democracy I believe that you believe this. But I'm not treating it as an axiom, so you'll have to give evidence for it.
    - 4y ago

jasmer 4y ago

[flagged]

dang 4y ago
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

loxias 4y ago

As an American who has worked in tech for the last two decades, including interacting with Chinese subcontractors numerous times I say you are 100% wrong. #1. THEY'RE STEALING FROM US. Constantly. #2. Look at how they treat their own people. #3. Look at how they treat their neighbors.

mlindner 4y ago

While you're correct that 9/11 caused issues I think you're conflating things incorrectly here. I don't see anti-China policies being used to justify crack downs on freedoms like was done after 9/11. Perhaps that's coming, but we should be concerned about that when it happens. We absolutely however need to be careful about what China is trying to do by basically bifricating the world into authoritarian and democratic world orders. It's absolutely their stated goal to create a bi-polar world and thus re-create cold war conditions.

mise_en_place 4y ago

“The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”

onetimeusename 4y ago

So do you have any hard evidence one way or another about what happened in this incident? FWIW, I personally haven't noticed any jingoism at all. Also your use of a racial slur here with unrelated reference is probably not appropriate.

InTheArena 4y ago

China just very successfully overflew the continental us with a military payload, and now knows, unequivocally that F-22's can operate at 60k feet. Both have significant propaganda and military value. There is a reason we learned in the cold war that overflights have to be governed by treaty. It led to the near destruction of the world. China, apparently, just deliberately American Airspace. In the above post, you could substitute the word China with Germany and Cold War with World War I, and this quote could have been written verbatim by the American First coalition - who had good points going into World War II, but missed the big picture. At some point you have to defend independent countries, stand up for human rights, etc. China's actions show no respect for any of its neighbors. Their government persecutes people based on ethnic and religious beliefs. They feel that the entire world is out to get them, but they refuse to respect democratic norms that they agreed to with the United Nations. They refuse the most basic levels of transparency. Leaving critics to fill in the gaps on questions such as genocide and the pandemic. Anyone who points out that fact is immediately branded a sinophile. Meanwhile China is propping up Russia by buying it's exports at a time the Russians are committing genocide in Ukraine. Even what few democratic norms that existed have been wiped away and is being replaced by a cult of personality. May I humbly submit that you are concerned about tensions coming from the wrong country? If china agrees to respect its neighbors, follow human rights standards, and respect toleration of people who do not worship at the church of the Party, the friction will disappear. Ironically, America was strongly pro-china going into World War II shortly after that. It's not a stretch to see that resume. However, their literate makes it very clear that they view China as the one true civilized state and that Europe and America must be humiliated and destroyed for china to regain its rightful place at the center of the world.

acdha 4y ago
> China just very successfully overflew the continental us with a military payload, and now knows, unequivocally that F-22's can operate at 60k feet. This is something they already knew, even if their sole intelligence gathering exercise was opening Wikipedia, which lists the service ceiling at 65k feet. Since they reportedly got the plans for several advanced aircraft via espionage, I’m quite skeptical that this got them any significant new intelligence. (I should note that I consider the Chinese government reprehensible from a civil rights perspective - perhaps this could be a PR stunt or trying to test U.S. response times, but I highly doubt it got them any useful technical data.)

ineedasername 4y ago

China is not simply rolled out as a boogeyman. Apart from any of their ambitions, at minimum the worlds reliance on them for various resources and manufacturing capacity almost exclusively has, in the last 2.5 years, been revealed as an extreme flaw and risk to global economic stability when that resource and manufacturing pipeline is disrupted. That is, at a bare minimum, a serious problem that will take years to solve. Now, bringing geopolitics back into things, China as a government does not have geopolitical goals that aligne with those of the western world. Without even placing value judgements on those goals, this fact alone is serious enough to warrant extreme caution in dealing with the Chinese government. Whether Western powers do bad things or China does bad things or both do or who is worse— those things are irrelevant on this point. The goals of each are incompatible and this will unavoidably cause each side(s) to come into conflict with each other. These all leave aside any value judgements on government styles, human rights, etc. The issues above are all basic and fundamental problems and differences that should cause the west to be extremely cautious and skeptical of the surface appearance of any actions taken by the Chinese government. They are similarly wise to be cautious and skeptical on their side. This is simply the basic state of geopolitics, and acting in accordance with this state of affairs is not jingoism. What we should hope for is to continue to work toward finding common ground at least in so far as the conflicts remain political, economic, etc. and not violent or militaristic. But you can’t engage in that sort of relationship if you keep your eyes closed to the true nature of, and differences between, the goals and values of the various players involved here.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
chasil 4y ago
It would be very interesting to see the Ukraine situation replicate in Xinjiang in a few decades. History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
SergeAx 4y ago
Which exactly China geopolitical goals not aligned with the West do you mean? Where are they declared?

syngrog66 4y ago

Americans is the plural term for citizens of the USA. not USians

darkteflon 4y ago

On the flipside, I’m tired that we can’t get two comments into these threads without someone implying that anyone concerned about the threat of China under Xi is a simpleton under the influence of US politicians and media. You can both be sceptical of the bullshit and also concerned about what’s happened to China under Xi. These aren’t mutually exclusive beliefs. If you’ve spent any time watching China over the past two decades you’ve seen a hugely troubling transformation. Ask any resident of a state with an interest in the South China Sea.

daguava 4y ago

[flagged]

Dalewyn 4y ago
You can't even throw aerial devices over /friendly/ states without people taking that insanely seriously. Intentionally entering sovereign space without prior notice and mutual agreement is a big no-no.

IAmGraydon 4y ago

[flagged]

daguava 4y ago

[flagged]

daguava 4y ago

[flagged]

dang 4y ago
We've banned this account for egregiously (and frequently) violating the site guidelines. You can't post like this here, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

roamerz 4y ago

I cringe at the thought of war with anyone as well. How else though would you deal with an authoritarian non democratic country who wants nothing more than world domination? It started with Hong Kong and next in their sights is Taiwan. People like Xi Jinping only understand strength and view diplomacy as a tool to bide time until the are militarily strong enough to ensure victory. I feel for the citizens that pay the price of war. My non expert opinion only.

georgeecollins 4y ago

Did you come to this view after watching a lot of TikTok? (for the literal net = a joke!)

shrimp_emoji 4y ago

Who else feels the lonely anguish of being simultaneously anti-Chinese dictatorship AND very sympathetic of the parent post and thus saddened and alienated by posters of either extreme?

ssnistfajen 4y ago

The two Indian engineers who were murdered in Kansas in 2017, as Donald Trump's populist rhetoric began to climb after the election, was a damning proof that stoking jingoism harms innocent people first. Those gleefully cheering for extremely divisive rhetoric, based on misinfo and hyperbole, will be directly complicit in future tragedies caused by this.

rmk 4y ago

The world has enjoyed a Pax Americana, and if the continuance of that means being 'tough on China', then that is a price that must be paid. What is this American Jingoism you are talking about? America has thrown open its doors to international trade with China, welcomes their students, visitors, businesspeople and immigrants in the hundreds of thousands, even millions, every year, and places very few restrictions on Chinese ownership of American firms. No nation has extended such favorable terms to another, particularly one with a diametrically opposed political system, for so long. All this while China brazenly steals intellectual property, builds and militarizes the South China Sea in open defiance of the UNCLOS, indulges in chicanery and deception to hide its handling of a deadly pandemic that has killed more Americans than all wars that America has fought in combined, rapidly builds up its navy and its fishing fleet to intimidate and coerce American allies and openly collaborates with America's geopolitical rivals, including dangerous megalomaniacs threatening the annihilation of America, such as Kim Jong-Un, Vladimir Putin, and the Ayatollahs of Iran, even to the extent of practically funding and otherwise propping them up. It's a miracle Americans have shown such forbearance for so long, really. Jingoism indeed!

ssnistfajen 4y ago

Based on how many replies are directly attacking you or repeating propagandic lines, the jingoism mind virus is already here and the infection is deep. I salute you for the courage to speak out against the overwhelming pro-conflict campaign, but I am afraid we are past the point to reverse course.

dang 4y ago

Can you please make your substantive points without going into fulmination or flamewar? Of course these are provocative topics and strong feelings are both natural and inevitable, but that makes it more important, not less, to stick to the rules. From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."