Doing business with a fascist state or in a fascist state is deplorable. The message should be loud and clear. China today shares many parallels with Germany in the 1930s. There needs to be open frank opposition because embarrassing them is the only way to stop them until the US is willing to park an aircraft carrier group in HK waters.
I'm afraid a single carrier battle group wouldn't be much of a deterrent these days. The US no longer has naval overmatch in that region. Barring any gross incompetence on PLA-N's part, or the US having highly classified tricks up its sleeve, USN would need several fleets to achieve anything but a pyrrhic victory in such a conflict.[0]
I otherwise completely agree with your sentiments, and living in a world where what amounts to essentially a fascist state having military supremacy—even if only limited in scope and regional for now—is quite chilling.
[0] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/china-ar...
I’m sure they can stop some of it but eventually they’ll just run out of supplies.
I think the only way to do something like that is by going all-in.
The motivation appears to have been different, fighting terrorism and finding WMDs versus societal control and religious intolerance.
The majority, though certainly not all, of the people killed were combatants rather than civilians.
While the invasion was sold on the basis of terrorism and WMD, that was mostly bullshit. I mean, the US originally supported Saddam Hussein because he opposed communists supported by Russia. And it used Iraq in a proxy war against Iran, is also supported by Russia.
Basically, the US invaded Iraq because it had to invade somewhere after the 9/11 attacks. Saudi Arabia was the obvious suspect, given their funding of fundamentalist Islam generally, and Al-Qaeda specifically. Plus the fact that most of the attackers were Saudi.
But that was unworkable, for many reasons. Afghanistan was the other obvious target, but everyone knew that it would be a morass. Given Russia's experience, for example. Or Britain's, back in the day. Plus the fact that most of it had already been pounded into sand.
So Iraq was the perfect target. With lots of juicy stuff to destroy. And an ineffectual military.
Another goal was demonstrating US military hardware. Advertising, to increase sales.
I guess you're implying that certain bad things are happening in China. Do you really live in China and see those things happen, or just hear about them from the media?
And is it possible that some of the media in US are inhonest? Just as there're inhonest media in China.
I'm not fighting you on this topic; just don't understand why there's so much hatred towards our country.
Why don't you travel to Xinjiang and do some investigating. If the camps there are really fabricated by the US media, surely the government won't mind you traveling around and filming the suspected sites?
>just don't understand why there's so much hatred towards our country.
I don't hate you or the other people of your country. I'd love to visit someday and relearn some of the Mandarin I learned in college. However, I do hate what your government is doing to the people of Xinjiang. Why wouldn't I be upset about this?
It's distrust of your government.
There is an enormous amount of respect and fascination with China and its history, culture and people. Your current government is wasting that.
China was going in a positive direction until Xi Jinping.
https://chinatribunal.com/who-we-are/
“The Tribunal’s members are certain - unanimously, and sure beyond reasonable doubt - that in China forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience has been practiced for a substantial period of time involving a very substantial number of victims.”
Brits, Americans, an Iranian, a Malaysian. Are these people making it up?
Virtue signaling absolutely works with China. "Losing face" is a big part of their culture and if important business partners start dropping off like flies and calling out their atrocities, they will take notice. Just look at how much of a fuss that NBA manager's tweet made.
>What about Saudi arabia? Should silicon valley and traditional media give up the billions in Saudi investment?
Yes.
The above message allows everyone to save face while getting the job done. YC doesn't need to say anything beyond this.
Causing PRC to lose face is the only way to stop them outside a war which nobody wants. If American companies started cutting ties and explicitly calling out their behavior it would make a real difference.
2. ??? (Does not include war.)
3. New Chinese government takes control.
I don't think anyone knows how to do what you want. Just because a problem is important doesn't mean it has a solution.
Step 2b: hopefully we avoid WWIII
But though there's a lot of pressure to choose your side, I doubt every country will do so. If forced they might choose China?
The majority of the US and Soviet population was better off with the iron curtain than without in real terms. The US median hourly wage only surpassed that of 1968 in the last 3 years.
So, even moderate global sanctions will have a massive impact with both affluent class and the labor class revolting.
However, remember, oil embargo drove Japan to WW-2, I'm sure China will react similarly unless that internal revolt happens first. Too difficult to predict.
Even the elites want out... i'm not sure the system wouldn't eat itself before then.
However, China will react to economic loss. As such pulling out of China, surely and quietly, is the best approach.
>While I completely agree with you, YC is a private organization and not a political
If you agree that doing business with a fascist state is deplorable, it doesn't stop being deplorable just because you're a private company.
However, I was simply noting that it is not a requirement for private organizations.
The message is obvious that companies are afraid of angering the Chinese government by speaking ill of it as they commit increasing atrocities because that could potentially eat into their profit margins. Profit over people.
But of course the way Hong Kong was originally acquired at the point of a gun bolsters the moral/ethical case for both the legal handover and non-intervention.
I'm not sure I'd advocate it, but I see the potential argument: It's better to let users see YC's independent decision to not conduct business in China, even with vague reasoning, as there's no realistic narrative that would put China in a great light.
The alternative is to be completely censored. If the intent is to spread a message within, I would think an uncensored message is better than no message at all.
> park an aircraft carrier group in HK waters.
This is called invasion.
What is your incentive in supporting an invasion?
Isolationism and appeasement post-WWI leading to the next, disastrous world war which could have been avoided or significantly diminished with early intervention.
Stay the f* out!
The fact is this is just a leverage US is holding on to to win the trade war.
Human rights have been the excuse the US used to wage war against multiple middle east countries in the past 30 years, eventually for its own benefit, and causing huge sufferings to people in these countries.
No one can say no to 'supporting human rights', but you'd be naive to think the US cares about human rights more than it does about benefiting itself and inflicting suffering on other countries.
Also, maybe it's turning out that building the wall is not that profitable after all.
All of the data I transmit are recorded, for the agencies to go through them, if not now, then later, when they figured out how.
People who don't obey the leftist narrative are cancelled, have their jobs terminated, and so on.
China has always been independent. They pride themselves on that. Taking away investment money isn't going to influence them.
If you want to influence somebody, first you understand them, then you build a friendship and rapport with them, and then you influence them. Turning off the phone does the opposite.