←back to thread

Huawei 5G kit must be removed from UK by 2027

(www.bbc.com)
293 points doener | 3 comments | 14 Jul 20 12:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.197s | source
Show context
room271 ◴[14 Jul 20 12:32 UTC] No.23831071[source]▶
This kind of thing is going to play out a lot over the next few years. It's a tough question: how to marry globalisation with the political realities. When China was very poor, it didn't really matter, or perhaps the assumption was that China would liberalise more quickly than it has. But China, while increasingly mature economically, has not developed proper civil society, human rights, freedom of expression, democracy, and so on. Let us hope they do so as quickly as possible, not least for the sake of the Chinese people themselves. And let us work to improve our example and unity too in countries where we do have these things, however imperfectly.
replies(8): >>23831103 #>>23831210 #>>23831233 #>>23831363 #>>23831375 #>>23831513 #>>23831600 #>>23833329 #
mytailorisrich ◴[14 Jul 20 12:36 UTC] No.23831103[source]▶
Whether China liberalise is a red herring.

This is a geopolitical clash of power. It's not about respective political regimes, it's about relative power and influence. If China liberalises tomorrow none of the fundamental issues will change and China will still be a threat to the US. The only thing that will change is that the US will have to find something else in order to label China 'evil'.

replies(3): >>23831147 #>>23831158 #>>23831160 #
jaekash ◴[14 Jul 20 12:41 UTC] No.23831160[source]▶
> If China liberalises tomorrow none of the fundamental issues will change and China will still be a threat to the US. The only thing that will change is that the US will have to find something else in order to label China 'evil'.

Cite please. And won't the best way to debunk the "propaganda" be to just liberalize right? So ... everybody is waiting and has been waiting for decades, China should stop making excuses and get on with it.

replies(1): >>23836539 #
sudosysgen ◴[14 Jul 20 19:25 UTC] No.23836539[source]▶
The US destroyed Iranian democracy and replaced it by the Shah, a brutal autocratic leader whose abuse of power and violation of human rights led to the rise of the current far-right Islamic theocracy : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...

The US destroyed Bolivia, replacing an elected government that was legally found to be allowed to run, with a far-right nationalist military-backed junta that refuses to hold elections : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Bolivian_political_crisis

The US installed a brutal dictator in Chile, with the coup killing the legitimately elected president and overthrowing the liberal democracy, replacing it with dictatorship : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende

No, it is entirely clear to anyone in the world that the US will destroy your country and kill you if you oppose, no matter how liberal it is, if it suits their geopolitical interests.

replies(2): >>23837765 #>>23840196 #
1. adventured ◴[14 Jul 20 20:57 UTC] No.23837765[source]▶
> The US destroyed Iranian democracy and replaced it by the Shah

Iran had no democracy. Mosaddegh was appointed Prime Minister by the Shah, he was not democratically elected by the people of Iran. The Majlis that nominated him were a collection of feudal lords that dominated Iranian politics, they were not democratically elected by the people of Iran, they co-ruled Iran as a feudal kingdom.

If Iran were a democracy the Shah wouldn't have been appointing the Prime Minister.

It has been 40 years, and just look at Iran today: zero human rights. You're going to try to blame the US for four decades of theocratic dictatorship? Laughable. The timer on that excuse has long since expired. Iran is responsible for the condition of Iran today, and the people that installed the theocracy are solely responsible for that too.

> The US destroyed Bolivia, replacing an elected government

That's an entirely false, invented claim. Which is why you didn't even try to support it.

replies(2): >>23838211 #>>23839725 #
2. sudosysgen ◴[14 Jul 20 21:32 UTC] No.23838211[source]▶
> Iran had no democracy. Mosaddegh was appointed Prime Minister by the Shah, he was not democratically elected by the people of Iran. The Majlis that nominated him were a collection of feudal lords that dominated Iranian politics, they were not democratically elected by the people of Iran, they co-ruled Iran as a feudal kingdom.

The Majles was literally an elected body. Yes, he was appointed by the Shah after being nominated by the parliament. That's how constitutional monarchies work. Justin Trudeau also was elected by a parliament and then appointed by the Queen.

The fact that a lot of the people in the Iranian parliament had feudal land is completely orthogonal here. They were still elected. A lot of the people in the US Congress are also incredibly wealthy.

Mossadegh was elected fair and square. He was overthrown and replaced by a puppet when he went against Western interests.

As for Bolivia, Morales was a legitimate, elected president of Bolivia. Under US pressure and support, the OAS fabricated evidence that the election was illegitimate, and the US backed a millitary coup. It was a coup orchestrated and following the interests of the US. Here is my source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/02/the-oa...

All of that information is also in the link I provided.

3. allarm ◴[15 Jul 20 00:13 UTC] No.23839725[source]▶
> Iran had no democracy

Oh, it’s totally fine then.