Hacker News Reader

Comment by sebmellen | Hacker News Reader

> In the 50-second video, Ma, dressed in a navy pullover, spoke directly to the camera from a room with grey marble walls and a striped carpet. It was not clear from the video or the Tianmu News article where he was speaking from.

Uh, resurfacing from a fancy prison cell, perhaps? Can anyone find the video?

EDIT: Here's the raw video: https://twitter.com/globaltimesnews/status/13517514568277196....

If you watch his eye movements, it looks like he's reading from a script.

View on HN

How much more mental gymnastics do we need? I think it's time to accept that he WASN'T jailed rather than trying to forcefully shoehorn the facts into a 'but China still bad' narrative.

The HN commentary went from 'Jack Ma is a national security threat' to 'Jack Ma is a poor victim of the CCP will will never be seen again' to 'this is fake, he is still jailed'. If he shows up someone else in person next time, will people say that the CCP staged that too? It's getting too ridiculous.

Cyrus Janssen, an expat who has worked in China for 12 years, blogged about this. I think he has a much more accurate view of what happened. Jack Ma was laying low, not jailed. And the rrason why his comments pissed off people is because the phase of development China is now in, rather than a generic "thou shall not criticize the party" https://cyrusjanssen.substack.com/p/trump-free-speech-and-wh...

In contrast to China's reputation here in the west, the govt actually DOES listen to criticism. Yes they censor at the same time. Calling for violence and overthrow of the govt is not allowed. But at the same time they do listen, and for the past 20 years they've continuously reformed policy based on citizen's criticism on social media, or those submitted via official channels. The key is to be constructive, and to criticize policy rather than people.

This also applies to this latest incident. Yes it bugged a lot of people in the government, but at the same time they're really looking into the actual criticism made and whether there's a need for reform.

I am from China and I have family in China.

So... where's multi-billionaire Xiao Jianhua? After being abducted from the Four Seasons in Hong Kong by the CCP, he popped up to explain he was seeking medical treatment on the mainland (haha) three years ago, and nobody's heard from him since. Also laying low? Or do you think he's discovered a new love of mining rare earth minerals in Xinjiang?

C'mon now, this isn't exactly some big exoneration one way or the other, is it? This happens from time to time. We both know there's a list of famous and semi-famous people as long as your arm you haven't heard from in a while.

Where's Fan Bingbing? Where's the former head of Interpol, Meng Hongwei? [2] Think they too have discovered a sudden need for mainland medical treatment -- or do you think it's more likely they may have discovered a passion for mining minerals also?

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/world/asia/xiao-jianhua-c...

[2] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-06/the-people-who-china-...

Also Gui Minhai, Chen Qiushi, the 12 HK residents, countless protestors...surely China has a tolerant government according to this guy.

And where's Chen Qiushi -- or any of the other journalists who covered the draconian coronavirus measures taken in China, who suddenly disappeared a year ago?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-54277439

Fan Bingbing has made multiple public appearances.

Also, Dr. Shi Zhengli (石正丽) the famous Wuhan lab researcher has not seen for while, except for some "jack ma" style video interview.

I read his comments, and have studied Chinese and China for years. While he took a pretty slight risk, (it seems) he only criticized other business owners and potential regulatory ideas. Honestly, his comments were so mild that you'd probably regularly hear similar stuff _coming from the regulators themselves_ in most other countries (developed or no).

I'm not sure where on HN you found the sentiment Jack Ma was considered a national security threat. I think you're painting a picture here that is very bizarre, and not supplying the context necessary to understand why.

> I'm not sure where on HN you found the sentiment Jack Ma was considered a national security threat.

During the HN submission about Ant's IPO, before it was halted. For example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24910410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24906771

One of those was flagged, so it's pretty clearly "not-HN". The other says it's a state-run business (which, I mean, lots of people disagreed with that). That's miles away from saying something is a security threat [edit: it's worth saying, for those not clicking the link, he compares it to Saudi Aramco, which is, I mean, I've never heard that IPO described as a security threat either, so there's not really even any implications I can detect]. Nowhere in there is the narrative you're describing.

As I understand it he's been out of the public eye since October, after making comments critical of the Chinese government, and now the government is making noise about nationalizing his company. I agree that's not conclusive proof that the government has done something to him, but speculating that they have hardly seems like "mental gymnastics".

Anyone who is living in China, citizen or expat, is going to toe the party line (literally) since the consequences for not doing so these days can be severe.

We’ve been through this before with other business people or defrocked public officials: Jack Ma is currently having a peaceful relaxing vacation at one of the party’s many secure resorts (Chinese have memes too). Whether he comes out of this like Fan Binbin or not isn’t anything we will know until it happens.

First, it's "toe the line."

Second, you're essentially saying that if the other person lives in China it doesn't matter what they say. Think about that for a second, and also about whether or not it really matters where they live if you've put some critical thought into their arguments. Granted some of what he says is subjective, but for something like this that's all you can really get. But if you've already decided the enemy must be wrong then there's no point discussing anything.

Third, the OP you were replying to said he lived in China, but according to his Twitter he's not living in China. So does that meet your standards of considering his opinions?

> Anyone who is living in China, citizen or expat

Neither myself, nor Cyrus Janssen, are currently living in China. This is my genuine opinion, believe it or not. Nobody forces me, nobody pays me. I thought people are supposed to be "against the CCP but support the Chinese people". Is your support limited to Chinese people who are against the CCP? Why do you not reflect for a while on why someone like me, who has grown up with western culture and has independently investigated China, is not as anti-China as you are? Why is it hard to accept that maybe some of of core assumptions you have about China is wrong?

And no, you don't go to jail for not toeing the party line. That's not how it works. They censor you if your views are stirring up social unrest or calling for overthrow. But they don't force you to say things they want.

At least, that's the case for average citizen. I suppose if you're a high-level business executive with many ties to the government, then things become more complex. But that's not very different from the west, is it? If you piss off a government customer, you won't be jailed, but do you think they'd be happy to continue doing business with you?

Just a note — there is basically zero chance that Jeff Bezos would face any sort of governmental action if he "pissed off a guy in a government department," however influential that person may be. AWS just blocked Parler, and I'm sure our current president — arguably the most powerful man on Earth (until tomorrow) — was not very happy with that.

We don't see Jeff Bezos in hiding for doing that, nor would he have to go into hiding for anything far less.

I don't say this to accuse you (@dang trying not to flamewar) — do you not see that this argument is a little disingenuous? If you don't, I'd love to hear your thinking on why.

Well, I'd just have to respectfully disagree then. As someone who runs my own company, I know better than to pick a quarrel with my customers, even if I don't agree with those customers on a political or whatever level.

It's not at all strange to have multiple factions in an organizations who are after multiple vendors, as tool for an internal power war. Maybe if I piss off the guy who chose me as vendor, then his rivals will use that fact against him.

My point is, social relations are complex. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence.

>My point is, social relations are complex. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence.

In general it does mean freedom from legal consequences and government interference, with few exceptions.

Is that really good enough? Why is freedom from government interference all you care about?

It's not all that I care about, but the government has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. I have recourse to that force if another private entity harms me. Who do I have recourse to if the government harms me?

I consider freedom of speech a baseline, and I think it's one of the only things the US Constitution got right.

> And no, you don't go to jail for not toeing the party line. That's not how it works.

No you don’t. But you might find your work visa renewal denied. Things can get inconvenient really quickly, as a foreigner you don’t want to be a grass mud horse while in China, river crab is the only way to go.

> If you're Jeff Bezos and you piss off the guy in a government department...

Then Jeff Bezos sues the government, which is exactly what happened.

> No you don’t. But you might find your work visa renewal denied.

Daniel Dumbrill, a vlogger in China, literally criticized the Guangzhou government for its negligent behavior against African workers. I did the same. We did this more than a year ago and we're both still fine.

> Then Jeff Bezos sues the government, which is exactly what happened.

You missed the point. You can't sue the government into continuing to do business with you.

Just because it doesn’t happen to you doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, or that it could happen. If you have a 60k/month job, you can’t really take the risk that your visa won’t be renewed.

> You missed the point. You can't sue the government into continuing to do business with you.

No, of course you can, and that is what Amazon is doing.

> You can't sue the government into continuing to do business with you.

You can do that actually.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/22/amazon-files-suit-protesting...

https://www.onmsft.com/news/corrected-evaluation-flaw-may-fa...

It’s “toe the line.”

Fixed.

It's extremely unlikely that the founder and CEO of a $600B publicly traded company would completely disappear for several months on his own initiative. A short interview or a couple of emails would have dispelled all speculation that he was detained without agitating the Chinese government.

He is not the CEO. I don't think he holds any official title since late 2019.

Given China's history to staging videos / forging evidence / faking suicides for oppositions [1][2], I'd say this is a valid concern.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gui_Minhai#Release_from_PSB_cu...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causeway_Bay_Books

Thanks. I've been on HN for more than a decade and this thread is just mind-boggling to read. Whatever people think is indicated by the facts of Jack Ma's case, it should be reconciled with the China's established history of abductions and disappearances, the reality of which are not disputed.

> rather than trying to forcefully shoehorn the facts into a 'but China still bad' narrative.

And it is bad. The country run by a freaking communist party, if somebody didn't notice. And we are not even mentioning gulag, and hookers.

> In contrast to China's reputation here in the west, the govt actually DOES listen to criticism.

Because it is afraid of it?

> The key is to be constructive, and to criticize policy rather than people.

And follow the example of thousands of Chinese rural petitioners "constructively" sent to gulags.

> Calling for violence and overthrow of the govt is not allowed.

But how else would people stage a revolution against Beijing?

Look, if you don't believe me, at least believe in Kishore Mahbubani, ex-Singapore diplomat and ex-UN Security Council head. He's spoken extensively about this in his book "Has China Won?" and can corroborate what I said.

In the past 40 years, the freedoms of Chinese people have exploded. People could not choose what to wear, where to work, what to eat, where to live. Now they can. Millions travel world-wide every year, and all of them return home. Why would they do that if China is as bad as you say?

As for "a revolution against Beijing": prof. Mahbubani says that there are actually hundreds of protests in China every year. But those people aren't protesting against the central government: they're trying to get the central government's attention, to help them with their grievances. The central government is very popular. According to a poll by Harvard, who collected data over a 15 year period through anonymous in-person interviews, support for the central government has increased in this 15 year period. In 2016 (last year of the study), it was at an all-time high: 96% of respondents said they're satisfied or very satisfied with the central government.

What makes you believe you are more right than prof. Mahbubani and Harvard?

> and all of them return home. Why would they do that if China is as bad as you say?

Because getting a Visa that lets you stay abroad is actually really hard

This. We've seen this in East Germany. Sure they gave you a visa, they let you out. Your family stayed. To make sure you come back. Some people screwed over their family. Most people played along and came back.

Are you saying East Germany was awesome and things should have stayed as they were?

China is not east Germany.

Heck today's China is not the 70s China.

I'm more afraid of going to the US, where any Chinese person can be labeled a 'CCP spy' for no reason.

A bad party that is improving is still bad.

That's tautologically true of course. What is far less clear cut is whether it's preferable for someone (and their children) to stay in a country with a bad regime that's improving or in one with a good regime that's deteriorating. It depends on many factors (levels of goodness/badness, rate of improvement/deterioration, persistence and stability of trends, how one is personally affected by goodness/badness/improvements/deterioration).

To make it more concrete, there are people (granted, overwhelmingly ethnically Had Chinese fluent in the language) who voluntarily choose to reside in China over the US or EU, and I don't think they are irrational about it.

So what are the better choices? Do you think that if someone were to liquidate the CCP top members, plunging the country into chaos, that the Chinese would be better off?

It's easy to say "X is bad" when you don't have to care about practical consequences, like whether there are better alternatives, why we're in a suboptimal situation in the first place, and how to get to a better place.

> Do you think that if someone were to liquidate the CCP top members, plunging the country into chaos, that the Chinese would be better off?

Yes, very much so.

Your presumption is that if CPCs rule, whose rule is a chaos itself, disappears, there will be more chaos?

We are talking about immediate ruinous effects for the majority of Chinese every day communists stay in power.

The moment it stops, lawless land repossessions instantaneously stop, house confiscations stop, fake cases, and expropriations against entrepreneurs stop.

> It's easy to say "X is bad" when you don't have to care about practical consequences

Practical consequences of letting communists to stay in power are millions left destitute every year after their land, property, and businesses are stolen.

>sent to gulags

The GULAG was a specific USSR agency and their camps. You can't just call any prison system you personally don't like GULAG.

For all I know most things I know about China could be wrong - I'm certain that a lot of it is (seeing our media uncritically reporting the Adrian Zenz stuff has been mindblowing), but how could I possibly know whether something is true when there is so much disinfo going around? Like, what gives you the confidence that you're not just being fed propaganda yourself?

Quite naive so. The thinking that one can at least understand the rationale of not killing a hen laying golden eggs has no place in China.

The reality is exact the opposite, and elites routinely keeping shooting the country, and themselves in the foot. Why should they care?

Any ranked party member half way the ladder already has enough privileges to swim in lard for the rest of his life.

I was pretty much there when Shenzhen govt bulldozed close to 10000 factories in between 2009, and 2012 for universiade vanities. That was one third of regions industry! One third

That was single most economically suicidal move I've seen any government do, and that was right after the global financial crisis.

That made a double digit dip in country's exports, and industrial output, so big it was.

You may love China but CCP is not China.

You think that if the KMT had won, that China would have been better off? Do you have any idea how corrupt the KMT was? The CCP won for a reason.

CCP is mainland China. According to a poll by Harvard, who collected data over a 15 year period through anonymous in-person interviews, support for the central government has increased in this 15 year period. In 2016 (last year of the study), it was at an all-time high: 96% of respondents said they're satisfied or very satisfied with the central government.

That doesn't mean I "love the CCP". But is there any other party out there who actually advances the interests of Chinese civilization?

This is an important distinction.

China is awesome. The CCP sucks.

I'm not sure if, or how, one should engage with an apologist for a tiranical, genocidal, dictatorial regime.

I'll tell you how: by being open to the notion that maybe "tiranical, genocidal and dictatorial" are false. And that Chinese people have different values, which are equally valid, but that are nevertheless not forced upon you.

If you actually want to discuss this, I'd be happy to. But I need to know whether you are genuine, or whether you merely mean to diss me.

accept that the tiranical, genocidal, dictatorial regime is appreciated by many in china.

He could be running a wonky business financially, and a victim of something else.

This is exactly what iranian people told me: they are democratic country. AND in the very same sentence they concluded that they can ban messaging apps if government want to.

Those are not necessarily mutually exclusive

I just want to say I support your views, which are obviously true to anyone remotely knowledgeable about China. Although that is apparently a rarity.

> How much more mental gymnastics do we need?

The only mental gymnastics I see are in the post I am replying to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide

I think that from their several actions that China/CCP is not the best example of democracy and criticism acceptance

So no I don't buy the retoric of misunderstood China

> I am from China and I have family in China.

So you're not behind the great firewall and don't need to contend with official internet censorship.

Please don't post flamewar comments to HN. We've had to ask you this many times. Nationalistic flamewar is particularly unwelcome here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Sorry about this Dang, the line is blurry on some topics and sometimes we get carried over and go outside the topic of the conversation.

> It has been perfectly clear with the Chinese negligence around Covid

Urgh, let me tell you some facts.

On February 1 2020, I travelled from China (not Wuhan) back to the Netherlands, having aborted my holiday early. Wuhan was in lockdown for a week at that point, and my flight to the Netherlands was the very last one I could get. At that point, the WHO also declared global emergency.

I arrived in Germany and the Netherlands. What happened in the airports? No temperature checks or other checks. Nobody who took note of my name for contact tracing. Nothing.

Back in the Netherlands, I called the CDC: can I get tested? Reply: no, not even if I pay for it myself. I ask: do I need to quarantine myself? Reply: nope.

I didn't trust that. Chinese media has been raging for weeks about how infectious and dangerous it was, and that it could be spread asymptomatically. So I voluntarily quarantined myself and my family for 2 weeks. Turned out I wasn't infected.

Up until March or April or so, I saw on tv and newspapers and how multiple western governments called covid just a flu, that we're "well prepared", even criticizing the lockdown in Wuhan as a human rights violation.

You want to talk negligence? Okay, China could have done a better job, but let's say they were earlier by 2 weeks and reported to WHO mid-Dec rather than late-Dec. Would that have changed anything when for months the west totally dismissed the virus as being dangerous, and gleed at China's misfortune?

> and how they treated the doctors that sounded the alarm

Li Wenliang was not jailed. He was reprimanded by the police, and could go back to work the next day. He wasn't the first one: the first doctor who said something was Jiang Jixian, whose work led to the WHO escalation on Dec 31, 1 day after Li Wenliang said something. The Chinese court later ruled that the police's treatment of Li Wenliang was unjustified. The police then apologized.

See also: "Some whistleblowers are more equal than others" https://www.mango-press.com/some-whistleblowers-are-more-equ...

> the HK issue and with the Uighur concentration camps

These are whole different, and rather complicated topics. I could go into them, but I need to know from you: do you actually want to discuss, or is this meant as a diss to me?

> So you're not behind the great firewall huh? Reminds me of Chinese agents bullying Chinese students in Canada to not badmouth the government

So what? I don't "bully" others for disagreeing with me about China, I talk to them. If you ask me whether those students should bully, then I'd say no: they should discuss. That's something they need to learn.

But the same applies to a great many people in the west, who despite being raised in a free society, prefer to cancel rather than talk.

Still, that doesn't mean that those students' support for China is not genuine or legit.

You raise an important point. We see a lot of criticism of China on Covid despite them being at the forefront of the battlefield. On the other hand, large parts of the world reacted at a snail pace despite having a WHO warning. If we were to follow the same yardstick as China, the rest of the world won’t do well on it.

I don't think it matters that he's reading off of a script. Imagine Bezos in the same situation, do you honestly think he wouldn't delegate the responsibility of speechwriting to his team of publicists?

If none of us heard from Bezos for months and the resurfacing video appeared to be him reading off a script, there would be questions. The optics would be off.

The optics are meant to be off. That he received some kind of detention and punishment by the ccp is meant to be obvious (but they cannot admit to it so it’s just heavily implied)

When was the last time you heard from Bezos in a public appearance?

Fair point, but his speech also seems forced, and the location is quite strange.

If Bezos or Gates were to give an address like this, they'd have a great camera setup in their fancy home office with good lighting.

For reference, take a look at Gates appearing on the Daily Show: https://youtube.com/watch?v=iyFT8qXcOrM.

Ma looks the opposite here.

Also, look at his hands while he's talking. Doesn't seem like the hand gestures of a person feeling safe and confident in the moment of filming.

Huh, that's on pseudoscience territory.

At this point you're just applying your cultural bias.

Compared to Jack Ma's usual public image (see below), a frumpy pullover and a dingy room does seem rather odd.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=jack+ma&iax=images&ia=images

Yes but he was comparing to how Bezos and Musk appear.

Everyone is not how they normally appear because of the pandemic, and Ma addresses the reason why he's just video taping himself in a room because of this. Stop armchair speculating.

The odd outbreak aside (and Shijiazhuang is nowhere near Hangzhou), lockdowns are long over in China, there's no need for Ma to cower in a basement.

That said, I actually agree with you that the "hurr durr CCP torture cell" comments are overblown. It's entirely plausible that he's keeping a low profile for a while, if likely in response to some rather heavy-handed advice.

My problem is the OP is trying to insinuate things based off pure speculation, cultural bias, and irrelevant details. He may as well have said that there was an excess of red pixels in the video and that means it must be reflections off of communist symbolism in the room.

So yes we are in agreement that the OP's comment is adds no substance to the conversation and is pure "hurr durr CCP torture cell" that just furthers the stereotypes of China.

No, we're not in agreement on that. It's clear that Ma's dress & appearance in the video was distinctly at odds with his own usual profile, no need for any stereotypes or comparisons to other people.

> distinctly at odds with his own usual profile

This is a picture from today.

https://x0.ifengimg.com/ucms/2021_04/C5A7B512BF72106A6497177...

Same event from 2019.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/09/10/world/10alibaba/m...

He upgraded from sweatpants to khakis. I think people are over reading the situation. All the usual factors that gets someone disappeared is not present with Ma's current faux pas.

Yes but he (OP) was specifically comparing to how Bezos and Musk appear and insinuating that someone from the Chinese culture must present themselves in the same way or there must be foul play.

Just to clarify, I'm not really in a position to analyze the meaning behind his current attire and choice of background relative to his past, so I'll take your word on your analysis of that.

It's about the status of people in the video and the general expectation of public of how they usually presented themselves. People of this caliber usually comes up with carefully craft image, along with good production. It's the same no matter where you live or born.

The Bezos and Gates example is just that, and example of famous people that we familiar with and that's it.

Chill man. Not everything is about race.

Your assertion doesn't even apply in Western culture, let alone generalization across cultures you probably know nothing about.

Most people would consider Elon to be eccentric, Paul Graham to not look like traditional VC, and these superficial aspects are frankly irrelevant. So why is it ok to use that to insinuate stereotypes and hand-wavy assertions of malfeasance.

Perhaps for you there is no consequence, but much like calling the coronavirus the "China virus", you're doing cultural damage by spreading negative stereotypes via fabricated or insinuated purely speculative assertions. The stereotype here is that China is associated with as some dystopian backwards society that has done no favors for its citizenry, which may or may not be true, but is definitely not defended by any objective evidence presented by the OP.

To flip the scenario, imagine if some random people from China commented about how the US elections seems like there was rampant fraud, without much supporting evidence. By lending credence to something without any concrete evidence you give it some air of legitimacy. When you do so by purely speculating on non-important things you've entered the realm of purely pushing an agenda with no substance.

> The stereotype here is that China is associated with as some dystopian backwards society that has done no favors for its citizenry

I think people are mostly just trying to figure out what is going on with one of the richest/most powerful people in the world. There's not a lot of evidence to go on, so any scrap is potentially relevant. In your view, what are the best theories for his behavior?

And this isn't just an academic or social exercise; Alibaba jumped billions due to this appearance.

OP is taking scraps and extrapolating completely out of proportion. I am simply pointing out his extrapolation is out of proportion. Just because there is a lack of info doesn't mean you should make up random things and give them credence.

Curious how so?

Assuming the standards of appearance for public figures are based on specific people from America of specific ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

I mean if I video conferenced with you right now you'd probably speculate I've been coopted by Communist powers because simply because my background isn't up to your standards (it'd be of a water heater and radon pipes since I'm in the basement).

Ok, but I didn't say that because he's Chinese, rather because he's a person of power and a multi-billionaire, and I was comparing him to other such people (not specifically Americans).

It may be unintentional, but you ultimately did end up comparing his appearance to the standard of two other people that happened not to be Chinese, but also using this as the premise for a theory of foul play. What if his appearance ends up having nothing to do with it? Then it ends up just being insulting, especially if culturally his appearance is considered normal.

Nothing to do with his appearance, but with his surroundings and things like his video quality. It's also just one observation of a number of very odd things — the oddest thing being that a multibillionaire has reappeared after 3 months of disappearance without making a mention of it! Especially after such widespread speculation, if there were nothing going on, you'd think he'd care to comment "hi everyone, I've just been on vacation," or something innocuous like that.

With all due respect, you are presumably also not the multibillionaire CEO of one of the world's largest Internet companies.

If I saw Zuck, Satya or Sundar do a video conference looking like they're chained to the radiator in somebody's basement, I'd also be kinda concerned. (At least for the latter two. Zuck, maybe not so much.)

With all due respect if we judged people by their appearances we'd have discredited Paul Graham long ago for eschewing the traditional VC outfit.

The OP's comments about the appearance of the video is completely irrelevant and merely serving to throw speculative shade. For what it's worth, something probably did happen but his choice of webcam + background probably has nothing to do with it, but rampant speculation and false information is how we lead to the capital riots.

While the idea of gulags and "re-education camps" pervade Western perceptions of Chinese life, the reality is that conformity and centralized government is probably more dull than you think.

What is up with the pen in his hand and his thumb movement? Any ideas?

Thanks for digging up that video.

Telling that the Global Times (CPC-affiliated media) refers to him as the "former executive chairman of #Alibaba", and that he's making the video from some "rural teacher-themed social welfare event".

This isn't what normally happens to billionaire corporate executives, unless they've been convicted of violating the law.

Good point — the whole matter really is quite strange, whatever one believes about China/the CPC aside. It does seem there's an established pipeline for this sort of "deplatforming" that the CPC has gotten very adept at pushing high-status people through.

Kill the chicken to scare the monkey.

It's less strange than time tested.

Check this link out. Its the video from the Global Times Twitter Feed.

https://www.scmp.com/tech/big-tech/article/3118454/alibaba-f...

Thank you for that. The direct link to the tweet is https://twitter.com/globaltimesnews/status/13517514568277196.... That does appear to be the best quality video available.

Looks like it could be some form of house arrest.

Most CEOs will read from a PR script at opening ceremonies for events and conferences. Apparently - as mentioned in the article and clarified in other comments here - it was a PR moment in a charitable event he’s been doing for a while.

No need to make it up to be more eerie than it is

Jesus, somehow, this looks terrifying.

That video looks strange to me - either it is a green screen or it has some compression artefacts that I have not seen before (or perhaps something else).

But it was alright, everything was alright, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.

Isn’t it, “he loved the party?” Great line to end the story either way.

I don't know if Ma is quite at that point yet... Maybe they've put him through a short stint in Room 101.

You know I was thinking the same it’s more room 101 as well but the look in his eyes as pointed out by the parent comment.

Yeah dude. The Chinese are so technologically advanced, that they built an AI robot that looks exactly like the real Jack Ma.

The real Jack Ma is getting his kidneys harvested right now, because apparently, that’s what the CCP does to their own citizens (according to western media).

They literally do harvest organs from their own citizens. That's not up for dispute. See https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-china-rights-idUS....

FLG affiliated china tribunal / ETAC is propaganda on par with epochetimes / qanon in terms of credibility. They launder their claims via US NGOs to MSM - turducken of creating misinformation. Prior to current China/FVEY spat, formal government level investigations by AU/US have found FLG sponsored reports to be non-credible.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120205064042/http://www.usemba...

https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4b6fe16df.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20090620050738/http://www.americ...

At this time, Chinese political structure was _thoroughly_ infiltrated by CIA assets. There's also orthogonal indicators like amount of immuno-suppressant drugs in Chinese market cannot support a vast shadow organ harvesting system like FLG claims. There's a reason no credible institutions without FLG sponsorship have ever endorsed these findings. Including Mike Pompeo, at the urging for US lawmakers no less, who got drunk on FLG/epochtime coolaid. There's a special tier of ridiculous claims when even Pompeo can't spin it against China. FLG organ harvesting / vivisection has always been atrocity porn for useful idiots. It shouldn't be surprising these narratives are finally gaining traction during a period where media landscape is generating loads of them, when epochetimes is the #1 news paper on the appstore.

I say this as someone with several FLG family members who was prosecuted in China, they are delusional cultists. Everything is peaceful and good intensions until they convince themselves not to seek medical advice and dies from completely preventable illnesses.

Uh, should they be prosecuted or persecuted for holding cultist views or not seeking medical treatment? I don't think so, maybe you do. If so, we have irreconcilable differences...

Also — I didn't know the Epoch Times was the #1 newspaper in the App Store. I'm definitely not on that side of the political spectrum, if that's your worry. My concerns about China come more from a progressive perspective. That said, I do think the treatment of Falun Gong in China is atrocious, and I have some Falun Gong friends/acquaintances in the Netherlands (perhaps a bias).

Organ harvesting is a real problem in China, whether on a small scale (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55097424) or large scale (read through this article and souces https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_...).

You can find repression is immoral without wholesale endorsing fake narratives from questionable sources. I have very nice friends who are antivax, does not mean I endorse their views from infowars. FLG is no different. They're the one dissident group where human right lawyers in China, who risk their necks for a variety of causes, still could not corroborate their fantastic claims. Sometimes friends/acquaintances/family believe fake things, which is even less wild if said belief stems from being in a cult.

Black market organ trading is real problem but also stop gap solution in China, a country with abysmally low organ donation rates that's improving since reforms. Reference per capita transplant rate, China is 1/4 of west, however large the market, it isn't enough to provide even parity availability, not to mention large numbers goes towards transplant tourism for western customers who never seem to get appropriate denouncement from FLG despite their massive discourse power. It takes two to tango.

At the end of the day, there are irreconcilable priorities and moral calculus due to differences in culture and development. CN transplant system is moving in the right direction - FLG didn't convince west to stop getting transplants in China, CCP had to legislate against when the time was right. Things improve incrementally, otherwise FLG would need to resurrect long debunked accusations to suit their agenda.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com