3 ms·

Shouldn't every country be barring people from leaving the country if they've been charged with a crime? At least if there's a good chance they will flee justic

Shouldn't every country be barring people from leaving the country if they've been charged with a crime? At least if there's a good chance they will flee justice. This seems like a side issue from the question of whether the charges are legitimate.

mothballed 5mo ago
It's extremely common even without a crime. US block or cancel people with extremely small child support debts (I think like $1000 which is a single missed payment for middle class person) and people with moderate tax debts (I think about $25,000) for instance from getting a passport.
skippyboxedhero 5mo ago
Yes, everyone country does this. You can be barred from travel in a wide range of other circumstances in many other countries. Every person has a nationalistic solipsism that renders them incapable of understanding events that occur outside of their own country. China and the US are two countries where this tends to be most severe, people outside these countries seem to believe they possess a profound and innate understanding of events there that renders them capable of offering a complete opinion (and, in reality, that opinion will almost always be entirely self-referential, 20% of the comments on this thread seem to be talking about the US). At a high-level, the characterization of China as a lawless dictatorship is undermined somewhat by the higher levels of crime in almost every other country. You will see this interpretation of China from people in the US who live in places where there are constant, visible signs of crime.
- glerk 5mo ago
  Just because the US also does this doesn’t make it right for China to do it and vice versa. Team coca-cola and team pepsi are both evil and illegitimate.
  - skippyboxedhero 5mo ago
    Every country does it. Doing it is a central function of having a government. The number of, presumably, left-wing people who advocate for the most extreme forms of libertarianism is truly incredible.
    - defrost 5mo ago
      Would that be lower or higher than the number of people who endlessly bang on about "lefties" and or "fascists", "nazis" et al. I myself find the numbers that engage in political reductionism and sophism to be truly incredible .. easily a double digit percentage of any population, actual billions in total globally. Wait, is that actually "incredible" though, or just merely "expected"?
    - glerk 5mo ago
      > Every country does it. Doing it is a central function of having a government. You are falling back on whataboutism. This is irrelevant. If we were having a similar debate in the middle ages, you would probably say something like: > Every church is burning witches and heretics at the stake. Doing it is a central function of having a church. The CCP has abducted these individuals and is preventing them from leaving the country. This is not ok. You can't justify this by saying "yeah, but they're the government, so it's their right to abduct whoever they want". A government is just a corporation with a bit more power than the others, not some sacred entity that sits above us.
      - Fricken 5mo ago
        >A government is just a corporation with a bit more power than the others, not some sacred entity that sits above us. Well yes, a government doesn't need to be sacred to sit above you, it need only have more power. It's legitimacy is conditional on maintaining a monopoly on violence.
        glerk 5mo ago
        If we’re going to descend into pedantry, my statement was normative, not descriptive, as in “I agree this is what a government does, I disagree this is what it _should_ do”. “Beneath me” is _my_ value judgement that I pass on this government and its appendages as in “it has been weighed in the balance and has been found unworthy”. That this government has more power than me doesn’t make it sit above me as a moral absolute, and it doesn’t magically give it legitimacy.
Invictus0 5mo ago
The Manus founders had already left China. They were called back and went willingly, because if you don't go back, then China disappears your family.
- intrasight 5mo ago
  Thanks for explaining why they would willingly return.
- threethirtytwo 5mo ago
  This is an exaggeration. But there are things China can do that are legal in the name of national security. I would say it’s just as extreme as what the US would do to Snowden if he came back.

mothballed 5mo ago

It's extremely common even without a crime. US block or cancel people with extremely small child support debts (I think like $1000 which is a single missed payment for middle class person) and people with moderate tax debts (I think about $25,000) for instance from getting a passport.

skippyboxedhero 5mo ago

Yes, everyone country does this. You can be barred from travel in a wide range of other circumstances in many other countries. Every person has a nationalistic solipsism that renders them incapable of understanding events that occur outside of their own country. China and the US are two countries where this tends to be most severe, people outside these countries seem to believe they possess a profound and innate understanding of events there that renders them capable of offering a complete opinion (and, in reality, that opinion will almost always be entirely self-referential, 20% of the comments on this thread seem to be talking about the US). At a high-level, the characterization of China as a lawless dictatorship is undermined somewhat by the higher levels of crime in almost every other country. You will see this interpretation of China from people in the US who live in places where there are constant, visible signs of crime.

glerk 5mo ago
Just because the US also does this doesn’t make it right for China to do it and vice versa. Team coca-cola and team pepsi are both evil and illegitimate.
- skippyboxedhero 5mo ago
  Every country does it. Doing it is a central function of having a government. The number of, presumably, left-wing people who advocate for the most extreme forms of libertarianism is truly incredible.
  - defrost 5mo ago
    Would that be lower or higher than the number of people who endlessly bang on about "lefties" and or "fascists", "nazis" et al. I myself find the numbers that engage in political reductionism and sophism to be truly incredible .. easily a double digit percentage of any population, actual billions in total globally. Wait, is that actually "incredible" though, or just merely "expected"?
  - glerk 5mo ago
    > Every country does it. Doing it is a central function of having a government. You are falling back on whataboutism. This is irrelevant. If we were having a similar debate in the middle ages, you would probably say something like: > Every church is burning witches and heretics at the stake. Doing it is a central function of having a church. The CCP has abducted these individuals and is preventing them from leaving the country. This is not ok. You can't justify this by saying "yeah, but they're the government, so it's their right to abduct whoever they want". A government is just a corporation with a bit more power than the others, not some sacred entity that sits above us.
    - Fricken 5mo ago
      >A government is just a corporation with a bit more power than the others, not some sacred entity that sits above us. Well yes, a government doesn't need to be sacred to sit above you, it need only have more power. It's legitimacy is conditional on maintaining a monopoly on violence.
      - glerk 5mo ago
        If we’re going to descend into pedantry, my statement was normative, not descriptive, as in “I agree this is what a government does, I disagree this is what it _should_ do”. “Beneath me” is _my_ value judgement that I pass on this government and its appendages as in “it has been weighed in the balance and has been found unworthy”. That this government has more power than me doesn’t make it sit above me as a moral absolute, and it doesn’t magically give it legitimacy.

Invictus0 5mo ago

The Manus founders had already left China. They were called back and went willingly, because if you don't go back, then China disappears your family.

intrasight 5mo ago
Thanks for explaining why they would willingly return.
threethirtytwo 5mo ago
This is an exaggeration. But there are things China can do that are legal in the name of national security. I would say it’s just as extreme as what the US would do to Snowden if he came back.