Most active commenters
  • dang(6)
  • yungcoder(5)
  • spats1990(5)
  • (3)
  • scrollaway(3)
  • on_and_off(3)
  • dirtyid(3)
  • yumraj(3)

←back to thread

1456 points pulisse | 75 comments | | HN request time: 1.299s | source | bottom
1. yungcoder ◴[] No.21187453[source]
Between this and the NBA's capitulation to making the Rockets' GM retract his statements on Hong Kong, at what point does appeasement just become acceptance of China's behavior? Sure, from the individual business' perspective they don't want to risk alienating the Chinese government and losing the Chinese market, but if China sees that they can get their way by simply threatening foreign companies then it will just embolden them to push for more concessions down the road. Quite frankly this all stinks of 1930s European appeasement policy and we all know how that turned out.
replies(13): >>21187691 #>>21187697 #>>21187713 #>>21187714 #>>21187719 #>>21187761 #>>21187898 #>>21187927 #>>21188093 #>>21188535 #>>21188658 #>>21188814 #>>21189201 #
2. bigpumpkin ◴[] No.21187691[source]
Wow, did not hear about the Rockets thing until now. Thanks.

I am confused tho, as an NBA fan, should I support the Rockets now that the Chinese are boycotting it. Or should I boycott them cause they bowed down to Chinese pressure?

replies(2): >>21187778 #>>21187915 #
3. acangiano ◴[] No.21187697[source]
A recent South Park episode parodied this quite well.
replies(3): >>21187895 #>>21187904 #>>21188017 #
4. latch ◴[] No.21187713[source]
> Quite frankly this all stinks of 1930s European appeasement

You're comparing this to an official policy of appeasing German and Italy's annexation of territory (and various other violations of the treaty), in an era of raising fascism and communism? Really?

It's fine if you want to say that this is bad, worrisome or even evil, but lets call it what it is: the strong bully the weak. This is how the world works.

So far China has largely been about flexing its economic power. This seems completely reasonable; why shouldn't they negotiate hard? I agree it's terrifying for those in the region that they could flex their military..but that's what superpowers do.

replies(1): >>21187740 #
5. notzuck ◴[] No.21187714[source]
The appeasement policy was the right thing to do. The UK couldn't win a war in 1938 (no allies, no money, no air defence etc) and the bad taste of WW1 was still in peoples mouths.

The policy did fail because Hitler was going to go to war no matter what but that is only with 20/20 hindsight.

Appeasement wasn't the right policy, it was literally the only policy available to the UK at the time.

I agree that we need to take a hard line with China though, I can't see how this is going to end given their massive increase in military size and technology plus we are all so tied together financially that we could cripple each other long before a shot is fired.

My friends seem to think that war is the only way this will end and I've got a young son so I sincerely hope not.

replies(2): >>21187741 #>>21187956 #
6. spats1990 ◴[] No.21187719[source]
If you think 2019 China is that similar to 1930s Germany you should just come right out and say it, in my opinion. Let that argument stand on its merits.

If you didn't intend a parallel between 1930s Germany and 2019 China, there is, again in my opinion only, probably a better way of making your point.

replies(7): >>21187746 #>>21187747 #>>21187823 #>>21187866 #>>21187894 #>>21188933 #>>21188972 #
7. lacampbell ◴[] No.21187740[source]
Communist China has annexed territory. It also has a civilian death count much higher than that of Nazi Germany.

I often think that if Germany had won the war people today would be talking about how it wasn't pragmatic not to do business with the greater reich. "Sure they ethnically cleansed eastern europe but whataboutamerica?"

8. notzuck ◴[] No.21187741[source]
Thank you for the downvote. Much easier try to silence an opinion you don't like than leave a meaningful response. Why bother downvoting if you don't like what I said? This isn't reddit... or high school.

I just watched two history professors debate this very topic here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmyecSXOla8

A very interesting watch because unlike hit and run downvoters, I am interested in learning.

side note: I now don't know what I think - both arguments were very good.

replies(2): >>21187774 #>>21187817 #
9. newshorts ◴[] No.21187746[source]
Agreed I think it’s a little over blown to compare.

That said, the social credit system is oddly reminiscent as well.

replies(2): >>21187795 #>>21187800 #
10. ◴[] No.21187747[source]
11. Iv ◴[] No.21187761[source]
Courage is in short supply.
replies(2): >>21187890 #>>21188295 #
12. skavi ◴[] No.21187774{3}[source]
it's considered bad form to discuss votes. the link itself would have been enough
replies(1): >>21187828 #
13. b88d80170 ◴[] No.21187778[source]
People really don't care.
replies(1): >>21188788 #
14. ◴[] No.21187795{3}[source]
15. scrollaway ◴[] No.21187800{3}[source]
Is it really overblown? Think about it.

It's not like Nazi germany only had followers because they were being mind-controlled. They were slow-boiling the frog back then as well and those who didn't want to notice could easily justify everything.

Well, sure, nazi germany ran concentration camps, keeping hundreds of thousands prisoner based on ethnicity and religion. It's not like China is doing that after all…

… right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps

(Asking again: What's overblown about GP's comparison?)

replies(1): >>21188129 #
16. humanrebar ◴[] No.21187817{3}[source]
I didn't downvote, but "peace in our time" isn't the same as "let's buy a few years and then get some Nazis". It's also extreme Monday morning quarterbacking.

And it's plausible that anything short of Churchillian intransigence would have lost that war. Even a "smarter" craftiness could have failed.

replies(1): >>21187877 #
17. DuskStar ◴[] No.21187823[source]
Yeah, absolutely no parallels there. A rising military and economic power surrounded by historic enemies now weaker than them, complete with a governmental system that concentrates power in one man at the very top, a philosophy of racial superiority, governmental discrimination based on race and religion, and a growing concentration camp system... I don't know how anyone could ever think that pre-war Germany and today's China could at all be similar.
replies(1): >>21188521 #
18. colechristensen ◴[] No.21187866[source]
What exactly would you need to happen that hasn't been done in order to draw that parallel short of a swastika on their flag?

I think 2019 China is pretty damn close to 1939 Germany, the only thing required to push it over the edge is a looming economic collapse.

19. DuskStar ◴[] No.21187877{4}[source]
Thought experiment - if you're Chamberlain, and want to postpone the war with Germany for a few more years while you build an army - what exactly do you say in a speech? "We're currently too weak to fight, but we'll get there" is not the sort of thing that I would expect to result in postponing war.
20. thelittleone ◴[] No.21187890[source]
Not in Hong Kong it seems, where protestors are well within the reach of the PRC.
21. yungcoder ◴[] No.21187894[source]
Assuming you argue in good faith, how about this:

1. Germany annexed the Rhineland, Sudetenland, and Austria using the justification of unifying German-speaking peoples under a single banner. The Chinese line for Hong Kong and Taiwan is the same -- you look Chinese, you are Chinese and to say otherwise is treason and will get you labeled an American lap-dog. I can tell you this firsthand as a Chinese-American and if you need a more concrete example, just look at how the Chinese treated Gary Locke.

2. Revenge for the perceived humiliation of Versailles was a core driving factor for the rise of Nazism in post-Weimar Germany. If you can give me another explanation for the state of Chinese-Japanese relations, I will eat my words.

3. Go on any Chinese social media site and the amount of nationalist rhetoric you'll find is quite disturbing. Having pride in your country is one thing, to insist on your national, racial, and cultural supremacy is another.

4. Google what's going on in Xinjiang and tell me that doesn't stink of something.

Maybe I'm wrong and just being an alarmist, and it would certainly be in the best interest for the world if I were, but ask yourself -- what are the stakes this time if I'm not?

replies(3): >>21187987 #>>21188318 #>>21189209 #
22. davidkuhta ◴[] No.21187895[source]
Tegridy
23. everdev ◴[] No.21187898[source]
> at what point does appeasement just become acceptance of China's behavior?

This seems to be US policy since Nixon's visit to China. The difference is now we're just more open about it.

replies(2): >>21188275 #>>21188735 #
24. Mountain_Skies ◴[] No.21187904[source]
And as a result South Park has been banned in China.
25. Mountain_Skies ◴[] No.21187915[source]
The (new) ABA has lots of teams you could support. Lots and lots of teams. If you have some extra cash, you could probably even have your own ABA team.
26. TheSpiceIsLife ◴[] No.21187927[source]
At some point we have to accept that if the Chinese were coming over the hill with nothing but chopsticks we’d still lose.

When that happens you don’t want to be on the PRC’s most wanted list.

replies(2): >>21187979 #>>21188066 #
27. yungcoder ◴[] No.21187956[source]
Well even if having the resources of the largest colonial empire in history wasn't enough to allow the UK to win a war in 1938, what about in 1933? 1934? 1935-37? When the Germans seized the Rhineland in '36 they could have been easily steamrolled by a French-British alliance and that would have been the end of Nazi Germany then and there. Nazi Germany was only able to become the juggernaut it was because of the years of appeasement leading up to that point and I think we can agree by the time they became an apparent threat it was already too late. What I'm saying is if the parallel holds with China today, we are barreling towards 1938 at alarming speed and this time I don't think the world can afford to be wrong again.
28. dforrestwilson ◴[] No.21187979[source]
If this were in any way true then China would have conquered the entire world long ago.

No military or nation is invincible including China or the U.S.

29. spats1990 ◴[] No.21187987{3}[source]
1. Germany was preparing for outright war throughout the 1930s. Conscription was introduced in 1935.Is China seriously planning to militarily annex Taiwan? Leaving aside propaganda etc.

2. This point appears to be about how unfair historical treatment can lead to fascism. Are you saying that the people of China are headed in this direction?

3. I'll defer to your judgement as I presume you read mandarin/canto, but I don't see a big difference from western social networks there, except for probably in terms of number of users (larger userbase) . I can read Korean fairly well and see those kinds of nationalist comments on Korean social media sites as well (funnily enough, they also aren't fans of Japan at the moment. )

4. I know what's happening there and am a little hurt you'd assume I'd get into a discussion like this without knowing. Human rights abuses are bad. That seems like the most one can say without getting accused of whataboutism. Are there gas chambers in those camps? (edit:clarification below)

>Maybe I'm wrong and just being an alarmist

Maybe you're right and I'm just trying to hope for the best.

My original post on this thread came mostly from shock as I was raised on the internet era where it was considered a faux pas to do blithe Nazi comparisons. so I was mildly astounded to see that the top voted comment in here boiled down to "China is Weimar/Nazi Germany."

replies(4): >>21188009 #>>21188190 #>>21188341 #>>21188595 #
30. scrollaway ◴[] No.21188009{4}[source]
> Are there gas chambers in those camps?

What on earth does it change whether there's gas chambers in there? If you're trying to claim they're not 1940s nazi germany, just say they don't speak german and be done with it.

If you're aware of what's happening over there then you are aware of the torture, yes?

replies(1): >>21188023 #
31. on_and_off ◴[] No.21188017[source]
It felt weird to see such a good episode from South Park after how much they have lost touch with reality at some point.

Well .. subjectively I did not find it very funny so maybe not an all time high episode, but the critic was absolutely on point and something that very few people are talking about.

China has a lot of control on what can be included in a hollywood movie.

Propaganda is not exactly new ... after all the US army also has a lot of control when they give support to a movie and demand that they are portrayed favorably but this time it is from one country to another.

replies(1): >>21188568 #
32. spats1990 ◴[] No.21188023{5}[source]
sorry, on mobile and could have phrased that better. Does the outright extermination of the Uyghurs appear to be the PRC's ultimate goal?
replies(3): >>21188089 #>>21188141 #>>21188198 #
33. on_and_off ◴[] No.21188033{5}[source]
Agreed. I wish that HN would force people to write a comment explaining why they are downvoting.
replies(1): >>21189005 #
34. spats1990 ◴[] No.21188066[source]
>nothing but chopsticks

The Yellow Peril/Asian horde trope. Charming.

replies(1): >>21189909 #
35. scrollaway ◴[] No.21188089{6}[source]
Uh… yes?
replies(1): >>21188421 #
36. RavlaAlvar ◴[] No.21188093[source]
I can totally imagine the world which China could control the west through exerting pressure on these giant companies.
replies(3): >>21188109 #>>21188412 #>>21188871 #
37. ◴[] No.21188109[source]
38. dirtyid ◴[] No.21188129{4}[source]
>Is it really overblown? Think about it.

The problem is people in the west can only "think about it" in western lens which leads to readily accessible Godwin's Law. Chinese mental schema is not preoccupied with Hitler, most Chinese aren't familiar with Nazi death camps and the ones that are, don't attribute any particular significance to them because China is a 5000 year old country with a long legacy of extermination but also integration (i.e. manchu, mongol rulers got subsumed into broader Chinese culture).

Anyway, these are "vocational training camps" because ostensibly that's their goal - forced integration into society not elimination. Yes many people died under disastrous CPC policies, but in terms of genocide and extermination, the victims of CPC purges are constrained and not ethnically targeted. Compared to say FaLunGong pratitionres. CPC isn't aiming to eliminate and entire Chinese minority, 1 one of 55 officially recognized by the constitution, if only because they have to change the constitution to 54 after to reflect it and that would look bad for Xi domestically.

To contextualize what's happening in Xinjiang, it's useful to think of US melting pot analogy combined with brutal indigenous residential schools that are conceptually based around integration. Because that is literally the inspiration behind it. Yes, awkward golf clap for US inspiring Nazi and Chinese concentration camps.

Here's a brief write up of the politics behind the scene:

China is unofficially moving towards a 2nd generation MingZu (minority/ethnic) policy. The original ethnic policy was based around Soviet oblasts, autonomous regions with extra freedoms, i.e. tax break, family planning exceptions, affirmative action. These perks designed to ingratiate ethnic minorities to Chinese rule have not maintained serenity, post 2009 violent uprisings in Tibet and XinJiang which has led some thinkers to believe that ethnic autonomy and local identity has backfired. One of the extreme but prominent thinker was important at United Work. Forgot whom. Supposedly Xi pushed back on the idea initially. But the ground campaign happening now speaks for itself despite no official policy shift or changes in article 4 of the constitution (minority rights).

The new MingZu policy emphasized national unity, instead of local identity. The new focus is on GuoZu (State race), abandon individual identity to one national identity. HanYu (Han language) / PuTongHua (common language) has been renamed to GuoYu (national language) in official documentation. In response to Uyghur intellectuals / upper class teaching Uyghur languages to their kids, promotion of ethnic languages has (supposedly) been internally elevated to great evil status after extremist, separatism, terrorism. Increasing Han migration to autonomous regions to promote ethnic mingling. New restrictions on religion that will likely touch all religions.

Ironically, the proponents drew inspiration from US melting pot analogy that aims to treat everyone equally and eventual integration. Contrasting to the current 'salad bowl' approach - citing the division seen in extreme multiculturalism (European Islamic enclaves I think) as a point of failure. There's a lot going on: equalizing - read: repressing - legally "privileged" minorities back to equality status of the average Han without acknowledging other structural privileges of being Han in a Han dominated culture. Something, something, intersectionality.

Edit: As always, I have to clarify that I do not endorse what is happening in XinJiang. I think CPC is capable of doing better without committing mistakes the west already learned. My prediction is something like the cultural revolution / cultural genocide that will last years and a few generations from now if the situation stabilizes the CPC will express some remorse and platitudes for past mistakes under different leadership (sounds familiar as a Canadian). The difference is XinJiang will be better off compared to the prognosis in the west because China has the infrastructure capability to uplift XinJiang living standards. Contrast to the shithole reserves without plumbing and dependent on water boiling in Canada.

My biggest concern is that the CPC will probably pull it off, and the model for rapid integration will be exported around the world. Why do you think authoritarian muslim countries support China? The western narrative is Chinese $$$, but I think rulers of these countries are waiting on the sidelines trying (and secretly hoping) that the XinJiang experiment will work - you can easily swap out desecularizing with secularizing. Also see how sentiment towards muslim immigrants are shifting in Europe to see another possible future application. It wouldn't be the same of course, but vocation training center with European characteristics is more than plausible to me.

Edit2: To add, one of the fundamental characteristics about Chinese growth/rejuvenation whatever is doing big things fast. Integration is something that takes generations to cultivate, but of course China going to try to rush it. It worked in industrial widgets, it worked in academic papers, it's crazy to think it will work on hearts and mind, but who knows, maybe it will. Xi himself is a product of work camps. He's a believer.

replies(2): >>21188332 #>>21188870 #
39. x220 ◴[] No.21188141{6}[source]
You assume that a regime that does exterminate an ethnicity makes it appear from the outset as their ultimate goal. Historians of the Holocaust rigorously debate whether the Nazis intended from the start to exterminate all Jews worldwide. There's no straightforward answer.

If you want to know where the threat of genocide exists, you don't look merely at rhetoric. Genocide happens across several discrete stages. It usually starts with popular sentiments such as "you are not like us, you are not one of us", proceeds to "you may not live among us", then ultimately ends in "you may not live". China is at the step immediately before extermination. The number one predictor of extermination isn't rhetoric, it's ghettoization and internment.

40. yumraj ◴[] No.21188190{4}[source]
> 1. Germany was preparing for outright war throughout the 1930s. Conscription was introduced in 1935.Is China seriously planning to militarily annex Taiwan? Leaving aside propaganda etc.

China is one of those rare countries in today's world which has border conflicts with each and every of its neighbors and is openly ignoring international norms. On top of that I don't think that it is investing heavily in military just for show.

replies(2): >>21188388 #>>21188985 #
41. Causality1 ◴[] No.21188275[source]
Someday we may regard those "achievements" as the worst strategic mistake by any sitting US president.
replies(2): >>21188678 #>>21188855 #
42. tempa1111333 ◴[] No.21188318{3}[source]
> Go on any Chinese social media site and the amount of nationalist rhetoric you'll find is quite disturbing

Thank you for pointing this out. The amount of nationalistic remark from some HN commenters is also quite disturbing.

Denial, ad hominem, and cynicism seems to be their strategy. Most China submissions that they don’t like suddenly forum slide like crazy by triggering the flame war detector; downvoting anything they don’t want to hear without merit.

replies(1): >>21188980 #
43. wbl ◴[] No.21188332{5}[source]
Muslim countries were much more secular before the 1980s. The is no such thing as the reforming Arab autocrat.
replies(1): >>21188346 #
44. mola ◴[] No.21188341{4}[source]
This always happens, someone compare X to Nazi Germany, he means it's similar in points Y, and then everybody says but X doesn't have gas chambers or X doesn't want to kill all jews.

I'm pretty sure OP meant that it's similar because it's a dictatorship, it is very aggressive internationally, it uses propoganda against its own civilians like no other country, right now with a very strong air of nationalism and "the world is against us", it isn't shy about killing opposition, it built a huge army. The powers at be in the west (today's powers are large international corporations) are intent on appeasing China.

Do I think China is 1930s Germany? No, you can only get in the same river once. Is this parallel interesting? Yes

45. dirtyid ◴[] No.21188346{6}[source]
My insinuation is Arab autocracts are quiet on the issue because they will find the techniques useful.
46. spats1990 ◴[] No.21188388{5}[source]
South Korea has a... border conflict with its northern neighour, a territorial conflict with Japan, and a massive and well armed military given its size.

>openly ignoring international norms.

Could you explain a bit more about what this means exactly? If you are talking about international law, plenty of world powers ignore it when it suits them.

replies(1): >>21188567 #
47. ospider ◴[] No.21188412[source]
This is what the west is doing to China now.
48. whoevercares ◴[] No.21188421{7}[source]
As someone else said, force integration is the goal. Chinese culture rarely need to eliminate anything, it just absorb them
49. xenihn ◴[] No.21188521{3}[source]
I am expecting that Japan and South Korea are going to be permitted to clandestinely nuclearize.
50. pnako ◴[] No.21188535[source]
It's not the job of Apple, the NBA or the Coca Cola Company to conduct foreign policy.

It's a political issue. As far as I can tell, the sitting US President has, at least, identified the issue.

51. yumraj ◴[] No.21188567{6}[source]
For example the arbitrary nine-dash line and China's claim over other countries's territories. China's even lost the case against Philippines [0], but has chosen to ignore it.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippines_v._China

52. foota ◴[] No.21188568{3}[source]
"but this time it is from one country to another"

Isn't Hollywood the same?

replies(1): >>21188977 #
53. yungcoder ◴[] No.21188595{4}[source]
1. China and Taiwan have had several skirmishes since the PRC came into being in 1949 -- there just haven't been any in recent times since China doesn't want to risk American intervention or accidentally hitting a US Navy ship in the Taiwan Strait. The status quo is China effectively allows Taiwan to function autonomously so long as they don't claim outright sovereignty, which is when China starts flexing the warhammer. The current government in Taiwan has floated the idea of declaring independence far more openly than in the past which combined with Trump's wishy-washiness on alliances raises the risk that China might try something, even if not outright invasion.

2. Japan committed some horrific atrocities they have yet to atone for and Shinzo Abe is certainly not helping the situation with his nationalist rhetoric either, but China is chomping at the bit to justify a conflict with Japan (see the Diaoyu/Senkaku island situation). I take it you're familiar with Korean history and current events, so it's effectively the whole comfort women dispute x10.

3. What the rest of the world sees of Chinese social media is likely a filtered version, and some platforms like Tik Tok straight up have different versions for China/the rest of the world. Who knows, perhaps the excessive rhetoric there is just users trying to buff up their social credit score, but the fact that there are different versions for Chinese users and external users feeds the divide (probably by design).

4. Nobody can know the full extent of what goes on there given how deep Chinese surveillance runs, but we can draw a negative inference from that itself. Why does Xinjiang need special surveillance programs and restricted access even beyond the measures already imposed in the rest of China?

I get the comparisons can be a touchy subject but I think the world ought to have its moment of reckoning with China sooner rather than later, since later might turn out to be too late.

54. TedHarr ◴[] No.21188658[source]
Hong Kong has been a part of China since 1997. Funny that you compared it to the appeasement policy.
55. yumraj ◴[] No.21188678{3}[source]
Someday? I think we already do.
56. Analemma_ ◴[] No.21188735[source]
I think this is as much a "business thing" as a "US policy" thing, and it's been going on much longer than the Nixon administration. IBM sold Nazi Germany the tabulators that powered the Holocaust, Chiquita (then United Fruit) ran slave plantations well into the 50's, et cetera.

Don't expect corporations to stand up for what's right, especially overseas; you're always going to be disappointed.

57. tjpnz ◴[] No.21188788{3}[source]
And until people do corporations will continue to enact censorship on behalf of the CCP.
58. hamilyon2 ◴[] No.21188814[source]
As far as I remember, Germany in 30-s was underdog, deprived of colonies, territories, with failing economy and zero weight in international relations.

China is actual, undisputed world leader. They don't tolerate other nations telling them what to do on their land, and like economical expansion to neighbor states. They can afford it.

I don't see parallels.

replies(1): >>21189011 #
59. lainga ◴[] No.21188855{3}[source]
It wasn't a one-and-done deal between Kissinger and Mao on the first visit. While I think it's fair to assess the US's 1972-(2016? 2017?) policy toward China as regrettable overall, blame must also be put on the Carter (giving the PRC a waiver on the Jackson-Vanik amendment, 1980), Reagan (continuing those waivers), Bush Sr. (rejecting repeated Congressional motions to end that waiver after Tiananmen Square, 1989 and every year of the '90s), and Clinton (permanent normal trade relations, 2000) administrations. Successive administrations seemed to be fairly consistent on keeping China's access to US and world markets intact.
60. jjcc ◴[] No.21188870{5}[source]
Great insight although some information is missing like why the MingZu policy changed. At least you mentioned the old MingZu policy which most western journalists hide intentionally or unintentionally to match their narrative based on their beliefs. The real issue is quite complicated and might not be clear after decades.
replies(1): >>21189136 #
61. SyneRyder ◴[] No.21188871[source]
China is already doing this. They threatened Qantas, Delta and other airlines that they would ban their aircraft from Chinese airspace unless their websites were changed to show Taiwan as part of China. They also blocked the Marriott website in China when Marriott included Taiwan as a separate country in a customer questionnaire.

[1] https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/qant...

62. natalyarostova ◴[] No.21188933[source]
Most people only know a few historical events, so the ww2 Germany one makes frequent appearances since it's one of the few most people know. Obviously is a horrible historical analogy for anyone mildly historically literate.
63. dang ◴[] No.21188972[source]
Please don't take HN threads further into nationalistic flamewar. That's the last thing we need here.

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

64. on_and_off ◴[] No.21188977{4}[source]
I am not sure I follow ?
replies(1): >>21199351 #
65. dang ◴[] No.21188980{4}[source]
This is the kind of off-topic accusation that both sides hurl at each other, to the precise extent that they feel passionately about the subject, and in clear violation of the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. It's toxic and information-free. Please don't.
66. DiogenesKynikos ◴[] No.21188985{5}[source]
> China is one of those rare countries in today's world which has border conflicts with each and every of its neighbors

Many countries have territorial disputes. India has territorial disputes with China and Pakistan. Japan has territorial disputes with Russia, South Korea and China (and Taiwan, if you count them as a country). Basically every country bordering the South China Sea has territorial disputes with every other country bordering the sea.

Yet China hasn't fought a war since 1979, which is something that gets lost in all these discussions. It doesn't fit with the China = expansionist Nazi Germany narrative, I guess.

> is openly ignoring international norms

There's a very good case to be made that China respects international norms much more than the United States does. The US has repeatedly violated the most important post-WWII international norm - the ban on aggressive war. For citizens of the country that invaded Iraq without provocation and caused the deaths of a million people there, it's a bit rich to go on and on about China not respecting international norms.

> I don't think that it is investing heavily in military just for show.

Definitely not for show. They're afraid of the United States military, which is funded to the tune of $700 billion/year. China spends a tiny fraction of that on its military. Even as a fraction of GDP, China's military spending is small compared to that of the US.

67. dang ◴[] No.21189005{6}[source]
Alas, that would generate more petty bickering about downvotes. Heaps more.
68. scythe ◴[] No.21189011[source]
Germany in the prewar period had the second-largest domestic economy in the world:

http://www.zuljan.info/articles/0302wwiigdp.html

China is still second in the world by nominal GDP, although they're closer to us now than Germany was then.

69. dirtyid ◴[] No.21189136{6}[source]
Policy change was in response to violent 2008 Tibetan and 2009 Ürümqi / Uyghur riots (~200 deaths). The blame was placed on then relatively unfiltered western social networking sites which solidified ethic identity that was nominally accepted under old MingZu policy. In the case of Uyghurs, easy dissemination of foreign Islamic texts led to pockets of radicalization (Turkistan Islamic Party) turned violent extremism. Incidentally post riot was when Facebook and twitter was blocked. Western narrative was information control, but additional domestic rationale was to prevent escalation of violence since the riots targeted Han Chinese, and Han nationalists (who hated minority affirmative action privileges - we truthfully are cut from same cloth) were calling for violent retaliation. Basically, the CPC wanted to filter the internet to prevent race wars.

Twitter and Facebook took the moral high road only to be confronted with the same problems now and converging onto the same solutions. Anyway these incidents led Chinese thinkers to reexamine the ethnic policy based around oblast multiculturalism + carrots which was suppose to produce stability but ended up challenging serenity. Now the policy is forced integration via work camps. Somewhat tried and true. Chen QuanGuo was appointed Party Secretary of Tibet, he began security policies that enabled Tibet to see some of the highest GDP growth in the country. He was moved to Xinjiang a 5 years later to replicate his work, expanded the security architecture into the camps (however people want to label it) and increased anti-terrorism efforts. There's been no attacks since his reign, many before. Got promoted to political bureau member for his work.

MingZu policy change is not well known, mostly information disseminated between China scholars. TBH most western reporting on China is naive because western news room simply don't have sufficient assets covering China which is already a very difficult reporting environment. It doesn't help that foreign desks are full of white dudes who can't speak the language. Regardless, since the subject is justifiably mass human rights abuse, I think people don't really care about nuance even why something is happening, just that it is. Which is fair, you can't expect much on Chinese reporting when folks exposure to Chinese affairs outside of MSM are two youtubers playing the clickbait game. It's a ridiculous state of affairs.

I don't know about future timeline, Xinjiang is 7x larger than Tibet which took 5 years and is still ongoing. CPC probably hoping to do a reeducation "lite" policy in HK via CPC textbooks. They blame the current protests on a generation raised by British civics textbooks. I think the summation is, we focused too much on 2 systems instead of 1 country. Salad Bowl instead of melting pot.

70. dang ◴[] No.21189201[source]
You Godwinned up a huge flamewar with this. That's seriously not cool—political and nationalistic flamewar with Nazi overtones is a failure here. We'd appreciate it if you'd please read the site guidelines and take this one to heart:

"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."

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

replies(1): >>21191311 #
71. dang ◴[] No.21189209{3}[source]
Please stop and don't do this again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21189201

72. TheSpiceIsLife ◴[] No.21189909{3}[source]
Hmmm, I didn't mean it like that.

Coulda been any nation with 1.3+ billion, with their stereotypical eating utensils.

73. yungcoder ◴[] No.21191311[source]
So stating an opinion with valid comparisons is simply just flaming now, eh? Good to know the concept of "genuinely new" is up to you and you alone to decide.
replies(1): >>21194648 #
74. dang ◴[] No.21194648{3}[source]
It's just that it's my job to make these calls. In doing so, I look at the effects a comment has. In this case we got a dismal flamewar.

It looks like you've been creating accounts for the purpose of nationalistic/political battle. That's against the site guidelines, and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of which side you're for or against. A lot of the time, we don't even look at which side an account is for or against—it isn't necessary, and we don't care.

Creating accounts to break the site guidelines with well eventually get your main account banned as well, so please don't.

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

75. foota ◴[] No.21199351{5}[source]
You said, with regards to China influencing things in the US: "Propaganda is not exactly new ... after all the US army also has a lot of control when they give support to a movie and demand that they are portrayed favorably but [this time it is from one country to another]"

I'm pointing out though that the influence the US has through Hollywood is effectively global, and therefore also "from one country to another".