4 ms·

What is the purpose or context of this thinking? To infantilise and absolve China?

darkwater 2y ago
To put the blame in the right place, perhaps? Obviously China (and its government) has its own responsibilities as well, but it all started with Western companies (and the Western lifestyle)
- c048 2y ago
  China said yes to all those things for Western money. They could've said no, they could've put in restrictions to lower their profits and improve conditions. Don't act like China is some poor puppy bullied around by the West.
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    >China said yes to all those things for Western money. They could've said no Terrible argument. If it's not gonna be China, it's gonna be Vietnam, or Bangladesh, or Pakistan, or Sri Lanka, or whoever the rich west will deem fit to host their dirty industries at the most rock bottom prices so they can make a profit. So again, is really all China's or $POOR_NATION fault, or the West's fault for constantly bidding the poor countries against each other in a race to the bottom in terms of human rights and environmental destruction for the sake of profit? Just blaming the poor countries claiming that "well, the poor countries should just say NO to hosting the west's dirty industry", is incredibly stupid and short sighted.
    - card_zero 2y ago
      So, in your mind, China's industry is really the West's? Also, China is poor? Just a poor passive obedient victim of the West's desires?
    - _djo_ 2y ago
      Do you really think that China would not have industrialised if not for Western companies? Nothing about China's history shows that that's remotely true. In fact, outsourcing was only possible because of the various industrial plans that China had put in place in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, all of which prioritised building equivalent capacity to what existed in the West and the USSR. Moreover, China was destroying its environment in the 1950s already, long before it even allowed real trade with the West. Let's treat countries as responsible actors in their own right, not as mere non-independent reactors to Western actions.
      - Rinzler89 2y ago
        >China was destroying its environment in the 1950s already To be fair, every country was destroying the environment, even in the west, well after the 1950's as well.
        _djo_ 2y ago
        Not quite to the same extent, or nearly as late. China's Four Pests campaign, for instance, ran from 1958 to 1962 and was ecologically disastrous. Meanwhile, in the US you already had strong conservationist movements starting up, leading to the creation of the EPA by 1970. While China finally adopted some environmental protections in 1979, it wasn't until the late 1980s/early 1990s that they could override industrial development in key situations
        no_exit 2y ago
        > Not quite to the same extent, or nearly as late. China's Four Pests campaign, for instance, ran from 1958 to 1962 and was ecologically disastrous. Operation Ranch Hand ran 1962-1972, so that's a pretty lazy snipe.
        _djo_ 2y ago
        I don’t see how the two are comparable. While Ranch Hand was indefensible and US leaders should have been prosecuted for it, the scale of it is minuscule compared to the ecological damage of the Four Pests campaign.
  - triceratops 2y ago
    You could say the same about Western countries. They could've said no, put in restrictions to lower their profits and improve their conditions. They are richer, so they're more capable of doing all those same things than a poor developing country like China used to be.
- liveoneggs 2y ago
  playing the blame game is a trap where the polluters win and breathing humans lose because all it does it cause stupid delays and distraction
EGreg 2y ago
To note that there are drivers of pollution around the world, which we could address right here at home too, or at least cooperate
c048 2y ago
The purpose of this is to absolve China of any and all responsibility, and put maximum blame with the West. Apparently the West is in complete control of China.
Miraltar 2y ago
You can blame China all you want and nothing will change but if western countries buy less of their junk they'll need to adapt somehow
silverquiet 2y ago
What is the purpose of any division? A molecule of CO2 is fundamentally identical regardless of its country of origin. It's a worldwide problem, and ultimately our inability to cooperate as one world will be the undoing of us.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

To put the blame in the right place, perhaps? Obviously China (and its government) has its own responsibilities as well, but it all started with Western companies (and the Western lifestyle)

c048 2y ago
China said yes to all those things for Western money. They could've said no, they could've put in restrictions to lower their profits and improve conditions. Don't act like China is some poor puppy bullied around by the West.
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >China said yes to all those things for Western money. They could've said no Terrible argument. If it's not gonna be China, it's gonna be Vietnam, or Bangladesh, or Pakistan, or Sri Lanka, or whoever the rich west will deem fit to host their dirty industries at the most rock bottom prices so they can make a profit. So again, is really all China's or $POOR_NATION fault, or the West's fault for constantly bidding the poor countries against each other in a race to the bottom in terms of human rights and environmental destruction for the sake of profit? Just blaming the poor countries claiming that "well, the poor countries should just say NO to hosting the west's dirty industry", is incredibly stupid and short sighted.
  - card_zero 2y ago
    So, in your mind, China's industry is really the West's? Also, China is poor? Just a poor passive obedient victim of the West's desires?
  - _djo_ 2y ago
    Do you really think that China would not have industrialised if not for Western companies? Nothing about China's history shows that that's remotely true. In fact, outsourcing was only possible because of the various industrial plans that China had put in place in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, all of which prioritised building equivalent capacity to what existed in the West and the USSR. Moreover, China was destroying its environment in the 1950s already, long before it even allowed real trade with the West. Let's treat countries as responsible actors in their own right, not as mere non-independent reactors to Western actions.
    - Rinzler89 2y ago
      >China was destroying its environment in the 1950s already To be fair, every country was destroying the environment, even in the west, well after the 1950's as well.
      - _djo_ 2y ago
        Not quite to the same extent, or nearly as late. China's Four Pests campaign, for instance, ran from 1958 to 1962 and was ecologically disastrous. Meanwhile, in the US you already had strong conservationist movements starting up, leading to the creation of the EPA by 1970. While China finally adopted some environmental protections in 1979, it wasn't until the late 1980s/early 1990s that they could override industrial development in key situations
        no_exit 2y ago
        > Not quite to the same extent, or nearly as late. China's Four Pests campaign, for instance, ran from 1958 to 1962 and was ecologically disastrous. Operation Ranch Hand ran 1962-1972, so that's a pretty lazy snipe.
        _djo_ 2y ago
        I don’t see how the two are comparable. While Ranch Hand was indefensible and US leaders should have been prosecuted for it, the scale of it is minuscule compared to the ecological damage of the Four Pests campaign.
- triceratops 2y ago
  You could say the same about Western countries. They could've said no, put in restrictions to lower their profits and improve their conditions. They are richer, so they're more capable of doing all those same things than a poor developing country like China used to be.
liveoneggs 2y ago
playing the blame game is a trap where the polluters win and breathing humans lose because all it does it cause stupid delays and distraction

EGreg 2y ago

To note that there are drivers of pollution around the world, which we could address right here at home too, or at least cooperate

c048 2y ago

The purpose of this is to absolve China of any and all responsibility, and put maximum blame with the West. Apparently the West is in complete control of China.

Miraltar 2y ago

You can blame China all you want and nothing will change but if western countries buy less of their junk they'll need to adapt somehow

silverquiet 2y ago

What is the purpose of any division? A molecule of CO2 is fundamentally identical regardless of its country of origin. It's a worldwide problem, and ultimately our inability to cooperate as one world will be the undoing of us.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]