> The UK and China are not comparable. China is the worlds most populous country (for now). The UK has a population of under 70m.
You say they are not comparable, and then compare them in a way that backs up the point you're trying to argue against. It _is_ two-faced of Apple to give China a pass here, undoubtably in large part due to the massive loss of sales were they not to comply and be removed by the Chinese regime.
> China is a totalitarian regime where even an imperfect freedom is preferable to no freedom at all.
If the Chinese gov't has the keys to unlock "private" conversations, how is this "imperfect freedom" in any way different from WeChat or other state-sanctioned messaging systems?
> The UK is a democratic country which should be upholding the right to privacy.
I mean sure, but Chinese people should have the same rights of privacy as anyone else. It's not suddenly less-bad because their government is totalitarian.
> If Apple weakens crypto for the UK, it affects people in other countries as well. iMessage is not exactly popular in the UK, so it is disproportionately used for transatlantic communication compared to WhatsApp. If Apple complies with the law, they are violating the privacy of users in the US as well.
How is this any different than what Apple currently does when an iMessage user outside China messages someone inside China? My understanding is that it acts precisely as you describe, but I could be wrong. And likewise, from what I understand iMessage is likewise unpopular in China so cross-country communications would potentially be a major source of iMessage activity as well? ( I don't see any statistics on this)