[News] China protests over Zero-Covid policy

[Zeberdi]

duplicate

 

[The Clamp]

I just posted that link earlier

Ah, apologies. Makes no odds though, he won’t read it. He’s convinced he knows it all already. I’m sure Dr Manglebrains on YouTube has way more accurate data

 

[Swansman]

A big

… so we should hold our tongues when it comes to human rights abuses in present day China because of atrocities that have been carried out by the West in the past? TBH this sound like Sheikh Mohammed calling us hypocrites and who would have us shut up about their government‘s human rights record because it ignores all Qatar has achieved and because we don’t use the same standards of culpability - what a brilliant excuse for inaction and stultifying argument for change.


I can say what I like, he has me on ignore

First: carried out by the West in the past is flawed - it goes on today as well.

Second: it is difficult to demand that China improve human rights conditions when they've openly stated that they don't approve of the western definition of human rights, and that they are also unable - even if they wanted - to follow these definitions due to "the nature of the Chinese people" (don't remember exactly how Xi expressed it, but something like that). They've made a choice and it is difficult to argue that they should make another just because we want them to, similar to how I don't think we should change our society based on what the Chinese think the world should look like. Of course we can voice our opinion though.

I'm not saying, and haven't said, that the Chinese government is morally superior to those in the West (just that the difference is smaller than perceived). What I've said is that they have no doubt a more efficient and functional government than any of us could ever dream of, and that this de facto has helped hundreds of millions of people out of extreme poverty - which should be in their plus account, regardless of how we feel about their other policies and actions. There are things we could learn from the Chinese and there are things we should distance ourselves from as much as possible. But that it is a better (note: not more moral) governed country, which some disagreed with... I struggle to see the arguments for that.

Eventually the most likely development is that some of the things in Chinese society are going to be a bit more Western... while the West is going to be a lot more Chinese. As the old rule goes: when a civilisation meets a technologically superior civilisation, the former civilisation cease to exist. In due time, in the West we'll have pragmatic governments rather than "moral" ones. We'll have mass surveillance, opinion shaping and the same efficiency in oppressing dissidents as they have, because it has no disadvantages to those for whom it matters. And this is the main reason I think any development in China is interesting: our society will copy a lot of things from the Chinese, so it is interesting to see how they solve "problems" and what the consequences are from various actions and policies.

And no, you're not on ignore. I don't have anyone on ignore.

 

[The Clamp]

It’s hardly radical thinking to realise that Britain has committed historical atrocities and continues to put big business before its citizens. Not exactly genius level insight.

But to start a thread about how oppressive the Chinese are being, then when people agree, turn on them and say it’s the West that oppress and we are all sheep and morons for believing China is the problem? Now that’s almost genius in it’s idiocy

 

[Swansman]

It’s hardly radical thinking to realise that Britain has committed historical atrocities and continues to put big business before its citizens. Not exactly genius level insight.

But to start a thread about how oppressive the Chinese are being, then when people agree, turn on them and say it’s the West that oppress and we are all sheep and morons for believing China is the problem? Now that’s almost genius in it’s idiocy

Well, I thought perhaps it would be interesting to discuss potential impact and consequences, but should have predicted the "everyone who is not a western leader and not doing things exactly like we do in Europe is a moront tyrant" etc. type of tired tribal nonsense.

 

[The Clamp]

Well, I thought perhaps it would be interesting to discuss potential impact and consequences, but should have predicted the "everyone who is not a western leader and not doing things exactly like we do in Europe is a moront tyrant" etc. type of tired tribal nonsense.

There you go again. It’s categorically not true that anyone has said that. You have both sides of the argument going on in your own head, both inaccurate.

Just another instalment in your strange agenda.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

I can say what I like, he has me on ignore

It'll take more than being ignored by Swansman to make me reconsider my racist opinions.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Just logged back on to the thread after a bit of graft ……

 

[GT49er]

Just logged back on to the thread after a bit of graft ……

TBH, I'd recommend going back to do a bit more graft!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

A big

First: carried out by the West in the past is flawed - it goes on today as well.

Second: it is difficult to demand that China improve human rights conditions when they've openly stated that they don't approve of the western definition of human rights, and that they are also unable - even if they wanted - to follow these definitions due to "the nature of the Chinese people" (don't remember exactly how Xi expressed it, but something like that). They've made a choice and it is difficult to argue that they should make another just because we want them to, similar to how I don't think we should change our society based on what the Chinese think the world should look like. Of course we can voice our opinion though.

I'm not saying, and haven't said, that the Chinese government is morally superior to those in the West (just that the difference is smaller than perceived). What I've said is that they have no doubt a more efficient and functional government than any of us could ever dream of, and that this de facto has helped hundreds of millions of people out of extreme poverty - which should be in their plus account, regardless of how we feel about their other policies and actions. There are things we could learn from the Chinese and there are things we should distance ourselves from as much as possible. But that it is a better (note: not more moral) governed country, which some disagreed with... I struggle to see the arguments for that.

Eventually the most likely development is that some of the things in Chinese society are going to be a bit more Western... while the West is going to be a lot more Chinese. As the old rule goes: when a civilisation meets a technologically superior civilisation, the former civilisation cease to exist. In due time, in the West we'll have pragmatic governments rather than "moral" ones. We'll have mass surveillance, opinion shaping and the same efficiency in oppressing dissidents as they have, because it has no disadvantages to those for whom it matters. And this is the main reason I think any development in China is interesting: our society will copy a lot of things from the Chinese, so it is interesting to see how they solve "problems" and what the consequences are from various actions and policies.

And no, you're not on ignore. I don't have anyone on ignore.

I largely agree with you. My PhD supervisor (English) is married to a Chinese woman who had most of her family murdered by Mao and his followers (they had money). She escaped in the 1950s to HK then to England and managed to work (as a nurse initially) then do what every Chinese person who has lived in HK, if marooned on a desert Island, is supposed to be capable of doing: she created businesses and became very rich indeed). When I was a student I made the usual Anglocentric comments about China, the evil empire, executing dissidents, etc., and was greeted with withering contempt. My supervisor said 'go and travel, live in places, and start using that so called brain of yours before talking a load of ignorant f***ing shit' (I had a brilliant relationship with him, by the way, and still talk at least once a week - he's 84 now).

I didn't buy any of that, and continued with my rather black and white attitude. I guess...thathas changed over the years.

Curious fact here: despite the past murders, my supervisor's wife (and he) have been regular visitors to China over the last 40 years. One of their daughters lives in China most of the time, and has set up a business all by herself which is based in China. Her husband is English. They see Mao and his excesses as a temporary aberration, but accept that autocracy is the way of China, and it is this clarity of mindset that has made China perhaps the second most resilient institution humans have seen, after the Catholic Church.

Now, today, I would argue (without any expectation of contradiction) that in the UK we don't disappear our own citizens. I find it very unlikely that our secret service assassinates UK citizens on our own soil (*albeit, Blair did of course get the WMD guy executed). We Brits done all manner of bad things in the past, mostly to other people (such as encouraging the destruction of Paraguay by its neighbours at the end of the 19th century) and when we crossed the line more close to home and more recently, in Northern Ireland, by interning IRA members, and getting all tough with members of the public, it came back to bite us in the arse. I'm not criticizing what we did in NI, by the way, in case any former service people are reading this. It was what it was.

However, slowly we have developed new ideas, such as 'The Peace Process' in Northern Ireland, and indeed not depicting the Chinese as tiny devils who want to take over the world (see old Monty Python sketches, and read the hysteria and racism of the time). Attitudes and behaviours change. When peoples and nations change we can't keep on banging on about their past sins - and that includes English past sins.

But....because we are where we are (in the UK) today, I think we have a right to take a much harsher line with today's China than we have done. I disagree with your implication (whether meant or not, no doubt you will say not), that the massive increase in wealth and wellbeing of many in China somehow balances their human rights abuses of their own people. I think we can say, without fear of 'whataboutery' that this is not OK. Of course, we Brits have no power whatsoever to do anything about this, with this fact somewhat lost in the minds of those who still imagine that England struts the world stage as a significant power.

So, it is complicated. But I think you know that, and have presented the nuance fairly, even if you have got the usual pelters from people who may subconsciously resent your presence as a poster on NSC, no doubt with a long list of examples of why you are a pernicious twat. Confirmation bias is a seductive mistress....

*Er, actually, no he didn't

 

[Zeberdi]

Well, I thought perhaps it would be interesting to discuss potential impact and consequences,

Of course it would - But the ensuing arguments you introduced were completely unrelated to potential impacts and consequences !

A thread that opens with

” … You have to mess pretty hard with the Chinese for them to go out and protest and destroy testing booths and scream for freedom and shit.”

and asks

“ … what it could mean for Chinese political stability? “

is an invitation for a discussion ( most people would assume) on the nature and outcome of protesting ( in what is universally recognised as a Communist regime that has a recent history of ‘tolerating’ protest with machine fire and detainment camps.)

“Will be interesting to follow, pretty big thingie after all that could have consequences for all of us.”

I don’t think anyone would question that - absolutely yes, it would be interesting and could have consequences- China’s economy and political stability will always have global repercussions and influence.

Unfortunately your attempts to provoke interesting debate by playing devil’s advocate has resulted into you countering people’s rational arguments with increasingly irrational arguments of your own at times, backing yourself into a dialectic cul de sac, as it were and I imagine, prompting you to say a few things that are actually counter-intuitive to what you really believe. (At least one hopes so).

"should have predicted everyone who is not a western leader and not doing things exactly like we do in Europe is a moront tyrant" etc. type of tired tribal nonsense.

You know full well that nobody here has been spouting such culturally imperialistic opinions - saying so - especially when you do so in order to create an apologist position for the way China exercises control over its citizens - will not make your points any more convincing (at least to me) and may even undermine what valid points and arguments you have made.

 

[beorhthelm]

First: carried out by the West in the past is flawed - it goes on today as well.

Second: it is difficult to demand that China improve human rights conditions when they've openly stated that they don't approve of the western definition of human rights, and that they are also unable - even if they wanted - to follow these definitions due to "the nature of the Chinese people" (don't remember exactly how Xi expressed it, but something like that). They've made a choice and it is difficult to argue that they should make another just because we want them to, similar to how I don't think we should change our society based on what the Chinese think the world should look like. Of course we can voice our opinion though.

wait, so you're saying China doesnt have to conform to a standard simply because it doesnt agree with it? that should hold for the west then, they can pick and choose too. your arguement rests on pretty flimsy logic and moral grounds at this point, accusing one group of nations of bad action while another allowed free pass on the same, just because you prefer them. pretty sure someone pointed that out earlier.

 

[Zeberdi]

I disagree with your implication (whether meant or not, no doubt you will say not), that the massive increase in wealth and wellbeing of many in China somehow balances their human rights abuses of their own people. I think we can say, without fear of 'whataboutery' that this is not OK.

Which is exactly the issue that the ‘protesting’ outcome turns on - what will happen to the zero-covid protestors and how much larger will these already nationwide protests have to get before the Chinese Government crack down on protestors with assault rifles?

Edit - conversely will they become a protest with a wider agenda and call for greater democratic freedom as they did in Beijing

 

[Swansman]

wait, so you're saying China doesnt have to conform to a standard simply because it doesnt agree with it? that should hold for the west then, they can pick and choose too. your arguement rests on pretty flimsy logic and moral grounds at this point, accusing one group of nations of bad action while another allowed free pass on the same, just because you prefer them. pretty sure someone pointed that out earlier.

Yeah I'm giving them a "free pass" (in the sense that I accept it; I certainly don't like it) because they, unlike us, are not bragging about their great "human rights". They are pragmatic and it is working for them and it causes good things (they actually make things happen which often improves the life of the avg Chinese) and it causes bad things (they don't want disruption in their development so they don't really allow dissent at certain levels).

They are a sovereign country and don't have to conform to anything. Of course we could punish them and try to push them in another direction. The problem is that if we would, for instance, stop trading with China, the consequences for us will most likely be worse than it will be for them.

Reality:
- Western governments have no problems with China ignoring human rights issues. They have money and things and thats all our governments care about.
- Western people have no problems with China ignoring human rights issues. They're producing some fancy new remote control to the TV and plastic toys and shit and we feel we need that more than we need human rights in China, so we keep supporting their finances and ways of doing things.
- Chinese people seem to have very little problems with China ignoring human rights issues. Most of them get more money and better standards of living every year and are probably busy living their lives rather than yearning to safe the Uyghurs or to be able to critisise the state putting food on their tables. As we see with Covid protests now, they've always had a choice/potential (with potential dire consequences of course) to protest... they've just not been bothered enough.

The amount of people who give a shit about human rights in China appears to be the worst treated tenth or so of their population, some human rights organisations no one listens to, and Westerners who pretend to give a shit a couple of hours a year or so. So technically speaking - why would they have to change? They've not made any promises and very few really give a shit about what they do or don't do as long as that Made in China-tool is arriving cheaply and on time.

 

[The Clamp]

Yeah I'm giving them a "free pass" (in the sense that I accept it; I certainly don't like it) because they, unlike us, are not bragging about their great "human rights". They are pragmatic and it is working for them and it causes good things (they actually make things happen which often improves the life of the avg Chinese) and it causes bad things (they don't want disruption in their development so they don't really allow dissent at certain levels).

They are a sovereign country and don't have to conform to anything. Of course we could punish them and try to push them in another direction. The problem is that if we would, for instance, stop trading with China, the consequences for us will most likely be worse than it will be for them.

Reality:
- Western governments have no problems with China ignoring human rights issues. They have money and things and thats all our governments care about.
- Western people have no problems with China ignoring human rights issues. They're producing some fancy new remote control to the TV and plastic toys and shit and we feel we need that more than we need human rights in China, so we keep supporting their finances and ways of doing things.
- Chinese people seem to have very little problems with China ignoring human rights issues. Most of them get more money and better standards of living every year and are probably busy living their lives rather than yearning to safe the Uyghurs or to be able to critisise the state putting food on their tables. As we see with Covid protests now, they've always had a choice/potential (with potential dire consequences of course) to protest... they've just not been bothered enough.

The amount of people who give a shit about human rights in China appears to be the worst treated tenth or so of their population, some human rights organisations no one listens to, and Westerners who pretend to give a shit a couple of hours a year or so. So technically speaking - why would they have to change? They've not made any promises and very few really give a shit about what they do or don't do as long as that Made in China-tool is arriving cheaply and on time.

You are assuming a lot based on VERY little knowledge of China.

Chinese people are clearly not happy with human rights abuses in exchange for growth. As you claim they are.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Which is exactly the issue that the ‘protesting’ outcome turns on - what will happen to the zero-covid protestors and how much larger will these already nationwide protests have to get before the Chinese Government crack down on protestors with assault rifles?

Edit - conversely will they become a protest with a wider agenda and call for greater democratic freedom as they did in Beijing

Answer to the first part, the Chinese authorities are clear minded and having made a decision they will not back down.
But the party machine may decide Xi has f***ed up and force him out, as they have done with leaders (and aspirants) in the past. Shooting members of the public may serve a short term purpose, but it can't ever work long term, so it is either stop this lock down nonsense, or get rid of Xi. Interesting times...

Answer to the second part, there is no great desire for 'democracy' in China. It simply isn't a Chinese tradition. Looking across the world at the democratic election of the likes of Trump, Johnson, Berlusconi, Orbán, Bolsonaro and others, you can forgive the average Chinese for saying "Democracy? You're OK, mate. Oh, look over there! What's for dinner?".

 

[Swansman]

Which is exactly the issue that the ‘protesting’ outcome turns on - what will happen to the zero-covid protestors and how much larger will these already nationwide protests have to get before the Chinese Government crack down on protestors with assault rifles?

Edit - conversely will they become a protest with a wider agenda and call for greater democratic freedom as they did in Beijing

Best guess is that the Chinese government just back off and take a step away from the policy. They are a few years away from completing systems that would make any kind of revolution completely impossible (if you even think about dissent there will be a drone coming around to murder or at least threaten you into submission) and I don't think they're going to risk a civil war or something at this point. But remains to be seen of course.

 

[Swansman]

You are assuming a lot based on VERY little knowledge of China.

Chinese people are clearly not happy with human rights abuses in exchange for growth. As you claim they are.

I think I have pretty decent knowledge about China, certainly more than those just reading about it from a western narrative.

Current protests, as well as some former protests, show that the Chinese are willing to protest if they're too unhappy - yet we've seen very little large scale protest since the Eight Elders died off (taking their difficult-to-implement "idealism" with them, resulting in a more capitalistic society that was easier to accept/thrive in with or without human rights etc).

 

[The Clamp]

The idea that the rest of the world should turn a blind eye to the treatment of Uyghurs etc because they reckon the Chinese people aren’t fussed about democracy or human rights? Madness. Mad and inaccurate.

Did the Chinese government tell you that? “Oh don’t worry about them, they don’t want human rights and democracy, very pragmatic people you see”.

Mind boggling.

 

[The Clamp]

I think I have pretty decent knowledge about China, certainly more than those just reading about it from a western narrative.

Current protests, as well as some former protests, show that the Chinese are willing to protest if they're too unhappy - yet we've seen very little large scale protest since the Eight Elders died off (taking their difficult-to-implement "idealism" with them, resulting in a more capitalistic society that was easier to accept/thrive in with or without human rights etc).

I’m sure you do think you have decent knowledge of China. You think that about everything.

We’ve seen very little large scale protest in China because they shoot people who protest and drive tanks at them. Jesus wept.