4 ms·

You’re making the preposterous assertion that all countries’ politicians are equally corrupt. That needs some extraordinary data to support.

by merman 3y ago

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
Didn't say equal. Just that all 'large' human organizations tend towards corruption. Churches, Governments, Academia. Hierarchies form, incentives drift over time and become mismatched with original intent. The proof is in history, look at Church abuse, Inquisition, look at grade fixing, admissions scandals, look at Volkswagen tweaking emissions, look at CEO's lying to promote products. Our entire society is based on the ebb and flow of some kind of corruption, or ebb-flow of Law. Even today, in America, half the population think that the laws themselves are corrupt and should be broken. Judges aren't trusted. So who is corrupt if you don't have any foundation to judge anything against? I'm totally against China taking Taiwan, but from a 'certain point of view', they have point. It was a part of China before the war, and the mainland 'won'. So they think of it as unification. Again. I am totally against China taking Taiwan. Just think it is bit more nuanced. Actually, think we are agreeing.
- merman 3y ago
  If there’s no need to ‘single out’ China then there’s no need to ‘single out’ doping in cycling, and no need to ‘single out’ this one particular Stanford President researcher, etc. The objective of your comment, that I am pointing out, is that you are hand-waving corruption in Chinese politics away by saying “but what about…”
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    I agree with that. If we hand-wave away all cases, then we never tamp them down. Corruption would continue to grow. So, we should call out all cases. Even if there are so many cases to cause one to become tired of the fight. Maybe I was just reacting that in todays world the lines have blurred enough that it is sometimes hard to tell if you are fighting corruption, or if you have become the corruption. From different points of view both these are correct: "The US experienced a Coup attempt by a president that then did not suffer any consequences for his un-constitutional actions" or "The President, fighting for the American Way against the corrupt deep state government attempted to bypass a fake election to continue his quest to root out evil? "

You’re making the preposterous assertion that all countries’ politicians are equally corrupt. That needs some extraordinary data to support.

by merman 3y ago

You’re making the preposterous assertion that all countries’ politicians are equally corrupt. That needs some extraordinary data to support.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago

Didn't say equal. Just that all 'large' human organizations tend towards corruption. Churches, Governments, Academia. Hierarchies form, incentives drift over time and become mismatched with original intent. The proof is in history, look at Church abuse, Inquisition, look at grade fixing, admissions scandals, look at Volkswagen tweaking emissions, look at CEO's lying to promote products. Our entire society is based on the ebb and flow of some kind of corruption, or ebb-flow of Law. Even today, in America, half the population think that the laws themselves are corrupt and should be broken. Judges aren't trusted. So who is corrupt if you don't have any foundation to judge anything against? I'm totally against China taking Taiwan, but from a 'certain point of view', they have point. It was a part of China before the war, and the mainland 'won'. So they think of it as unification. Again. I am totally against China taking Taiwan. Just think it is bit more nuanced. Actually, think we are agreeing.

merman 3y ago
If there’s no need to ‘single out’ China then there’s no need to ‘single out’ doping in cycling, and no need to ‘single out’ this one particular Stanford President researcher, etc. The objective of your comment, that I am pointing out, is that you are hand-waving corruption in Chinese politics away by saying “but what about…”
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  I agree with that. If we hand-wave away all cases, then we never tamp them down. Corruption would continue to grow. So, we should call out all cases. Even if there are so many cases to cause one to become tired of the fight. Maybe I was just reacting that in todays world the lines have blurred enough that it is sometimes hard to tell if you are fighting corruption, or if you have become the corruption. From different points of view both these are correct: "The US experienced a Coup attempt by a president that then did not suffer any consequences for his un-constitutional actions" or "The President, fighting for the American Way against the corrupt deep state government attempted to bypass a fake election to continue his quest to root out evil? "