12 ms·

Why are you using Russia and China as examples of the bad guys here. They're not asking for global access to everyones data, the UK is. The UK are the bad guys.

throwaway48476 2y ago
DPRUK
outside1234 2y ago
He is just trying to show how it would feel if the shoe was on the other foot.
1234letshaveatw 2y ago
[flagged]
cbsks 2y ago
Because the UK is “on our side”. We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.
- Paradigma11 2y ago
  I dont think that is actually true in those cases. Relations with China were pretty cosy till they did a 180 around the second Bush administration and started all that Wolf Warrior diplomacy, 9 dotted line stuff, Hongkong crackdowns....... Regarding Russia, nobody really cared at all till it was absolutely impossible to ignore. Putin seems to think that he needs the west as an enemy to bolster his standing and power. Just remember after starting the full scale invasion he proudly declared "I hope I will now be heard" or something to that effect. In Russian mass media the imperial project has long been clear and accepted.
  - cbsks 2y ago
    It’s a reference to 1984 by George Orwell. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_geography_of_Nineteen_Eighty-Four https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_geography_of_Ninet...
    - Paradigma11 2y ago
      I know. I just dont think it fits particularly well with those cases.
      - toast0 2y ago
        I was pretty sure there was a flipflop in the book too, though. Where the narrator reported now being at war with whomever, and that they had always been at war with that party.
        eru 2y ago
        Yes, and the flip-flop happened within a few minutes.
      - devmor 2y ago
        But you just explained how it fits perfectly in your last comment. That’s literally the same thing that happens in the book.
        Paradigma11 2y ago
        Sure, but the parent comment was aimed at the western side and not at the Russians. The West did everything it could to ignore and deny Russians growing hostility because it would have been inconvenient and maybe it would go away somehow.
        lazide 2y ago
        That is pretty much ‘the plan’ since the 90’s. Delulu is the solulu.
  - autoexec 2y ago
    > Regarding Russia, nobody really cared at all till it was absolutely impossible to ignore. Regarding Russia, people have cared since the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. The fear of communism and concerns about Russia grew until the red scare in the 1920s, through the cold war, and continues to do this day. There has never been a single point in your life when "nobody really cared at all" about Russia. America's concerns over Russia died down a lot from what it was after the collapse of the USSR but never really went away. That said, if Putin hadn't been doing his best to fan the flames America would probably still be focused on the middle east as their new favorite boogeyman.
    - mr_toad 2y ago
      People were wary of Russia as an aggressive imperialist state both before and after Russia was communist. Fear of communism is almost an orthogonal issue, and it has more to do with fear of insurrection and revolution.
  - thaumasiotes 2y ago
    > Relations with China were pretty cosy till they did a 180 around the second Bush administration and started all that Wolf Warrior diplomacy, 9 dotted line stuff, Hongkong crackdowns....... No, relations with China were warm right up through the end of the Obama administration and into Trump's first term. That's why the first approach China took to the Biden administration was to hope for straightforward normalization of relations. China started issuing 10-year visas to Americans under Obama. The Wolf Warrior movies, after which the policy is named, started coming out in 2015.
    - wordofx 2y ago
      Relations were good until Xi took over.
      - thaumasiotes 2y ago
        You don't have the slightest clue what you're saying. He took over in 2012.
        wordofx 2y ago
        And everything went downhill from there.
        thaumasiotes 2y ago
        And then the ten-year visa agreement happened in 2014. Why are you commenting at all?
        wordofx 2y ago
        Because you said it started in 2015. It started in 2012.
        thaumasiotes 2y ago
        I said it started under Trump. You might or might not be aware that he became president in 2016. What do you think happened in 2012?
  - somenameforme 2y ago
    That's a... unique take. You might want to check out the Century of Humiliation. [1] The one thing you do have right is that "good relations" in contemporary times seem to translate into "completely subservient, even to point of a willingness to engaging in self detrimental behavior if demanded." What happened around the second Bush administration was that China no longer had to be subservient, because their economy started booming, and so they could stand up for their own basic interests. One of the very few things they've pushed for is relative autonomy alongside Taiwan, which is even part of an agreement we ostensibly agree to, while then working to undermine that relationship in every way possible. You are either subservient or an enemy. Hegemony in a nutshell. The same is largely true of Russia as well. Far from wanting the US as an enemy, Putin even inquired about joining NATO in the Clinton era. I'm sure there were some snickers about 'he doesn't get it, does he'? In fact the CIA initially felt Putin would be a terrible leader since he'd be unable to reign in Russia which was spiraling into chaos and mass criminality in the 90s. Their foresight there was about as accurate as usual. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation
    - Paradigma11 2y ago
      We are talking post 2000s here. What are you referring to with "completely subservient, even to point of a willingness to engaging in self detrimental behavior if demanded." ? The notion that China is somewhat entitled to dominate its neighbors because it had a bad run 1-2 centuries ago is a bit silly.
      - zabana 2y ago
        and who exactly are we to dictate what a 5000 years old country and civilisation gets to do when we literally fund the mass murder of an entire group of people because it's "God's Promise" ?
        wqaatwt 2y ago
        > what a 5000 years old country How is that relevant and how does that entitle to Taiwain? They started colonizing it at about the same time as the Dutch. > because it's "God's Promise" ? That’s not the reason.
sepositus 2y ago
Why did you assume the context was "bad guys?" It's a well-known fact that there's a lot of geopolitical tension between Russia/China and Western Europe. The comment is raising the point that by setting this precedent they are opening the doors for their geopolitical rivals to publicly do the same (we already know it happens through private state-sponsored cyber gangs).
koiueo 2y ago
Because russia is a bag guy? (Idk about China, but considering they support russia...) Have you been living under a rock?
- koiueo 2y ago
  I'll be explicit: russia is a terrorist state. Majority of russian population supports the unprovoked genocidal war it currently wages on Ukraine.
  - SlavikCA 2y ago
    Russia is no more terrorist state, than USA is. That was USA scorched Vietnam. That was USA killing civilians in Iraq and Afganistan. That was USA overthrowing foreign goverments, including Ukrainian... And then it preached to Russia on what to do with neighboring states...
    - koiueo 2y ago
      [flagged]
    - int_19h 2y ago
      USA did a lot of nasty things. But since WW2, it did not invade other countries with explicit intent to annex them and forcibly assimilate their population.
      - zimpenfish 2y ago
        > But since WW2, it did not invade other countries with explicit intent to annex them and forcibly assimilate their population. True but the current lunatic POTUS is essentially threatening that to 2 territories (Canada, Greenland), making noises towards part of a 3rd (Panama), and explicitly calling for ethnic cleansing in a 4th (Gaza). I think the USA's "we're not as bad as Russia" sheen is rapidly disappearing (which makes sense when you consider the two lunatics at the top are essentially considered to be Putin lackeys.)
reverendsteveii 2y ago
I read it as using Russia and China as the other guys, rather than the bad guys. The idea is to eliminate any pre-existing feelings of trust and illustrate the fact that once your data is held by anyone in the global intelligence community you should think of it as being held by everyone in the global intelligence community.
- MobiusHorizons 2y ago
  Whatever you think of their politics, they are authoritarian in structure. There are fewer restrictions on what those governments can do with the information. I’m not saying anyone should trust the UK government here, but it’s easier to see the risks in a country that doesn’t have to be accountable to the people or the legal system.
kabdib 2y ago
this is at best a disingenuous argument (russia and china would love to have access to that data. so would a lot of other governments)
Ray20 2y ago
>They're not asking for global access to everyones data, the UK is. They literally do.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
Because they are ruthless crazy murderers? Because they want to turn us into radioactive ash (basically every day on Russian state TV)?

throwaway48476 2y ago

DPRUK

outside1234 2y ago

He is just trying to show how it would feel if the shoe was on the other foot.

1234letshaveatw 2y ago

[flagged]

cbsks 2y ago

Because the UK is “on our side”. We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

Paradigma11 2y ago
I dont think that is actually true in those cases. Relations with China were pretty cosy till they did a 180 around the second Bush administration and started all that Wolf Warrior diplomacy, 9 dotted line stuff, Hongkong crackdowns....... Regarding Russia, nobody really cared at all till it was absolutely impossible to ignore. Putin seems to think that he needs the west as an enemy to bolster his standing and power. Just remember after starting the full scale invasion he proudly declared "I hope I will now be heard" or something to that effect. In Russian mass media the imperial project has long been clear and accepted.
- cbsks 2y ago
  It’s a reference to 1984 by George Orwell. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_geography_of_Nineteen_Eighty-Four https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_geography_of_Ninet...
  - Paradigma11 2y ago
    I know. I just dont think it fits particularly well with those cases.
    - toast0 2y ago
      I was pretty sure there was a flipflop in the book too, though. Where the narrator reported now being at war with whomever, and that they had always been at war with that party.
      - eru 2y ago
        Yes, and the flip-flop happened within a few minutes.
    - devmor 2y ago
      But you just explained how it fits perfectly in your last comment. That’s literally the same thing that happens in the book.
      - Paradigma11 2y ago
        Sure, but the parent comment was aimed at the western side and not at the Russians. The West did everything it could to ignore and deny Russians growing hostility because it would have been inconvenient and maybe it would go away somehow.
        lazide 2y ago
        That is pretty much ‘the plan’ since the 90’s. Delulu is the solulu.
- autoexec 2y ago
  > Regarding Russia, nobody really cared at all till it was absolutely impossible to ignore. Regarding Russia, people have cared since the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. The fear of communism and concerns about Russia grew until the red scare in the 1920s, through the cold war, and continues to do this day. There has never been a single point in your life when "nobody really cared at all" about Russia. America's concerns over Russia died down a lot from what it was after the collapse of the USSR but never really went away. That said, if Putin hadn't been doing his best to fan the flames America would probably still be focused on the middle east as their new favorite boogeyman.
  - mr_toad 2y ago
    People were wary of Russia as an aggressive imperialist state both before and after Russia was communist. Fear of communism is almost an orthogonal issue, and it has more to do with fear of insurrection and revolution.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  > Relations with China were pretty cosy till they did a 180 around the second Bush administration and started all that Wolf Warrior diplomacy, 9 dotted line stuff, Hongkong crackdowns....... No, relations with China were warm right up through the end of the Obama administration and into Trump's first term. That's why the first approach China took to the Biden administration was to hope for straightforward normalization of relations. China started issuing 10-year visas to Americans under Obama. The Wolf Warrior movies, after which the policy is named, started coming out in 2015.
  - wordofx 2y ago
    Relations were good until Xi took over.
    - thaumasiotes 2y ago
      You don't have the slightest clue what you're saying. He took over in 2012.
      - wordofx 2y ago
        And everything went downhill from there.
        thaumasiotes 2y ago
        And then the ten-year visa agreement happened in 2014. Why are you commenting at all?
        wordofx 2y ago
        Because you said it started in 2015. It started in 2012.
        thaumasiotes 2y ago
        I said it started under Trump. You might or might not be aware that he became president in 2016. What do you think happened in 2012?
- somenameforme 2y ago
  That's a... unique take. You might want to check out the Century of Humiliation. [1] The one thing you do have right is that "good relations" in contemporary times seem to translate into "completely subservient, even to point of a willingness to engaging in self detrimental behavior if demanded." What happened around the second Bush administration was that China no longer had to be subservient, because their economy started booming, and so they could stand up for their own basic interests. One of the very few things they've pushed for is relative autonomy alongside Taiwan, which is even part of an agreement we ostensibly agree to, while then working to undermine that relationship in every way possible. You are either subservient or an enemy. Hegemony in a nutshell. The same is largely true of Russia as well. Far from wanting the US as an enemy, Putin even inquired about joining NATO in the Clinton era. I'm sure there were some snickers about 'he doesn't get it, does he'? In fact the CIA initially felt Putin would be a terrible leader since he'd be unable to reign in Russia which was spiraling into chaos and mass criminality in the 90s. Their foresight there was about as accurate as usual. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation
  - Paradigma11 2y ago
    We are talking post 2000s here. What are you referring to with "completely subservient, even to point of a willingness to engaging in self detrimental behavior if demanded." ? The notion that China is somewhat entitled to dominate its neighbors because it had a bad run 1-2 centuries ago is a bit silly.
    - zabana 2y ago
      and who exactly are we to dictate what a 5000 years old country and civilisation gets to do when we literally fund the mass murder of an entire group of people because it's "God's Promise" ?
      - wqaatwt 2y ago
        > what a 5000 years old country How is that relevant and how does that entitle to Taiwain? They started colonizing it at about the same time as the Dutch. > because it's "God's Promise" ? That’s not the reason.

sepositus 2y ago

Why did you assume the context was "bad guys?" It's a well-known fact that there's a lot of geopolitical tension between Russia/China and Western Europe. The comment is raising the point that by setting this precedent they are opening the doors for their geopolitical rivals to publicly do the same (we already know it happens through private state-sponsored cyber gangs).

koiueo 2y ago

Because russia is a bag guy? (Idk about China, but considering they support russia...) Have you been living under a rock?

koiueo 2y ago
I'll be explicit: russia is a terrorist state. Majority of russian population supports the unprovoked genocidal war it currently wages on Ukraine.
- SlavikCA 2y ago
  Russia is no more terrorist state, than USA is. That was USA scorched Vietnam. That was USA killing civilians in Iraq and Afganistan. That was USA overthrowing foreign goverments, including Ukrainian... And then it preached to Russia on what to do with neighboring states...
  - koiueo 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - int_19h 2y ago
    USA did a lot of nasty things. But since WW2, it did not invade other countries with explicit intent to annex them and forcibly assimilate their population.
    - zimpenfish 2y ago
      > But since WW2, it did not invade other countries with explicit intent to annex them and forcibly assimilate their population. True but the current lunatic POTUS is essentially threatening that to 2 territories (Canada, Greenland), making noises towards part of a 3rd (Panama), and explicitly calling for ethnic cleansing in a 4th (Gaza). I think the USA's "we're not as bad as Russia" sheen is rapidly disappearing (which makes sense when you consider the two lunatics at the top are essentially considered to be Putin lackeys.)

reverendsteveii 2y ago

I read it as using Russia and China as the other guys, rather than the bad guys. The idea is to eliminate any pre-existing feelings of trust and illustrate the fact that once your data is held by anyone in the global intelligence community you should think of it as being held by everyone in the global intelligence community.

MobiusHorizons 2y ago
Whatever you think of their politics, they are authoritarian in structure. There are fewer restrictions on what those governments can do with the information. I’m not saying anyone should trust the UK government here, but it’s easier to see the risks in a country that doesn’t have to be accountable to the people or the legal system.

kabdib 2y ago

this is at best a disingenuous argument (russia and china would love to have access to that data. so would a lot of other governments)

Ray20 2y ago

>They're not asking for global access to everyones data, the UK is. They literally do.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago

Because they are ruthless crazy murderers? Because they want to turn us into radioactive ash (basically every day on Russian state TV)?