This notion that everyone skeptical of western defense contractor funded claims is paid by China is a sad evolution of the close minded rebuttals that existed during the Iraq WMD period.
There is no counter to this false claim online which is why it is unfortunately effective in shutting down discourse.
I guess we are stupid enough to walk into a potential war the same way we were scammed into one not too long ago. We already forgot the lessons as a population.
> This notion that everyone skeptical of western defense contractor funded claims is paid by China …
I don’t see anyone saying anything about skepticism or ‘everyone’. I see pasabagi criticizing xtian’s specific comments and approach.
> I guess we are stupid enough to walk into a potential war the same way we were scammed into one not too long ago. We already forgot the lessons as a population.
Yes, getting scammed into a war with China would be bad. Assuming any negative comment about China to be an attempt to scam us into a war also seems like a mistake.
>I see pasabagi criticizing xtian’s specific comments and approach.
I see him implying that the comments/observations are not in good faith and that he might be paid for taking the positions he takes. This seems completely unnecessary and quite rude.
>Assuming any negative comment about China to be an attempt to scam us into a war also seems like a mistake.
You may not recognize the increased sinophobia in the west but it is part of a well funded centralized effort to demonize and increase the potential for kinetic warfare between western countries and China. The fact that HN acts like an echo chamber for state approved anti-Chinese perspectives doesn't help matters.
A close reading of sino-western historic/economic relations results in a very different perspective than the one which is promoted in western MSM by corrupted organizations.
Since your account has been using HN primarily (exclusively?) for ideological battle, I've banned it. We ban such accounts because they destroy the curious, thoughtful conversation this site is supposed to exist for. Regardless of what you happen to be battling for or against, that's not allowed here. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with.
> You may not recognize the increased sinophobia in the west but it is part of a well funded centralized effort to demonize and increase the potential for kinetic warfare between western countries and China.
Is it? It’s clearly geopolitical, but the claim that it’s intended to lead to kinetic warfare seems like something you don’t have evidence for.
The fact that so much of it is funded by defence contractors isn't a clue? Google ["Xinjiang" "ASPI"] for examples.
Or maybe the massive buildup of missiles and warplanes around China could be a clues? We are now at a stage where geopolitical hostility with China has a good chance of turning kinetic if exacerbated, and there is funding from exactly the parties that would stand to benefit from that, so I don't see how this lacks evidence.
> Or maybe the massive buildup of missiles and warplanes around China could be a clues?
If there is such a buildup (evidence?), it seems like a natural response to check China’s increasing overtures towards Taiwan, a key strategic ally.
There is no evidence that anyone wants a kinetic war for its own sake or that any development in that direction is ‘just’ a product of the defense industry.
China is involved in geopolitics and just as much as the US.
What’s curious here is not the invocation of well known bad acts by the US.
It’s the presentation of China as a benign victim who has no geopolitical ambitions, oppressive behavior, or political repression.
>I personally think the GFW is a good thing, for now, that other developing countries may have an interest in copying. Free flowing mass communication in nations without fully developed public (security) services can be a disaster... the conflicts (and even genocides) that arose from poorer countries adopting FB come to mind.
>If given a choice, as a person that lives 99% of the time in the US, would you rather have a US device that is backdoored by the NSA/CIA or a Chinese device that is backdoored by the Chinese government? I personally think the latter is preferable. Not sure why anyone buys US made equipment post Snowden/Assange.
>Quite an analogy with an assumption that "speech" is the only thing Jack Ma could have done wrong....
>I do find it interesting that the idea of a foreign country dropping covid in China is not even considered.
>Students of history will find it much more believable that a western country infected the Chinese with covid-19.
>Does each US/EU/German/Japanese person have more right to pollute than a Chinese person? I think not.
>If Julian Assange leaked Chinese intelligence/war-crime-evidence he would be at home raising his kids right now.
>Also notice what's going on in Palestine isn't called genocide because its not convenient for these "civil nations", even though what Israel is doing is more genocidal and violent than anything that has happened in Western China to Uighurs.
>I've only seen unsubstantiated nonsense from MSM when it comes to this topic...wild extrapolations that ignore the real terrorism problem in western China.
>Reeks of double standards being set by western nations to suppress China's economy. At this point, any manufactured excuse will get adopted and mainstreamed.
>The difference is that the largest trading nation on the planet just created a system for 0 fee transactions that can expand to global usage quite easily (I believe wepay/alipay were mostly intended for domestic use).
>The average Chinese citizen is less free thanks to these covert/overt foreign interventions.
>Dictators aside, the Chinese are considered fairer trading partners than most (possibly all) western countries. ~1000 years of African history makes this point very clear.
>Both Churchill and Roosevelt had planned to continue supplying Japan so they could destroy China, the supplies were cutoff without their knowledge.
>One would expect the more assertive to openly/unapologetically defend their history and decisions of leaders like Mao. Thanks to tremendous western propaganda that's probably a red flag (no pun intended) for most immigration agents.
>I expect the fact that this virus emerged in Wuhan during the World Military Games makes the Chinese very cautious about allowing in 'investigators' from countries that potentially deployed this biological weapon.
>The West just literally got done murdering a few million innocent Muslim civilians in Yemen, Iraq, Syria,etc... and now thinks it has the authority to lecture China about "proper" deradicalization techniques, it's quite comical really...
>US/UK were bombing these Uighur extremists/separatists just a few years ago. Now they are seen as useful pawns in the trade/economic war with China, so the genocide narrative gets mainstreamed by the usual suspects (the same ones that tried to hide the fact that we (US/UK) were arming/training/funding ISIS and visiting Uighur/Turk terrorists in Syria).
>Taiwan's strength is being right next to one of the largest economies in human history. Put Taiwan in Northern Europe or for that matter anywhere else in the world and its future prospects would be reduced drastically.
>>As said, money inside China is not yours, ask a guy Ma. Now we may say, digital money of China is not yours as well, just the ccp.
>Are dollars really yours inside the sanction happy dollar system?
I genuinely don't necessarily think you or the other poster are "paid shills" or anything like that. (I didn't see pasabagi making such an accusation in their initial post, either, but I agree it was probably implied.)
I'd put a higher probability to you and they just being Chinese nationals or related to people who are, just as many American nationals may blindly defend the US government. Or if not, that you simply support them for other reasons.
The point isn't ostensible shilling or bad faith: it's that you're both extremely agenda-driven, biased, and suspect to motivated reasoning in almost every comment; and the vast majority of comments are about the Chinese government (plus Bitcoin, in your case); and you both have a lot of comments. I'd say the same if instead you were full-time apologists for the US government or any other government.
Also, I'd turn this question back on you:
>If given a choice, as a person that lives 99% of the time in the US, would you rather have a US device that is backdoored by the NSA/CIA or a Chinese device that is backdoored by the Chinese government? I personally think the latter is preferable.
If given a choice between being someone who lives 99% of the time in the US and has a US device backdoored by the NSA/CIA vs. someone who lives 99% of the time in China and has a Chinese device backdoored by the Chinese government, which would you choose?
You haven't represented that account's commenting history accurately, and the site guidelines ask you specifically not to post like this. It's nasty and extremely tedious.
If you're worried about abuse, the guidelines ask you to email hn@ycombinator.com so we can look into it. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules from now on.
I'm not worried about abuse and have no reason to believe any is occurring in this or the other poster's case, as I wrote. If I suspected actual attempted "influence" activity etc. I definitely would've reported it instead of posting about it. I also find it unfair and unsubstantiated that other posters are accusing either of them of being supposed "shills" or "agents".
I was just kind of taken aback by the nature of their comment history and reacted emotionally, in part because of the radical defense of what I see as the Chinese government's inhumane and genocidal policy towards Uighurs. And as I wrote, if it were extremely jingoistic support of the US government and intelligence community, or QAnon narratives or something, I think I would view it similarly; though I probably wouldn't have reacted as emotionally, since my impetus was the response to the treatment of that group.
I disagree that I haven't represented their commenting history accurately. The majority of their posts appear to be either of that nature or about Bitcoin, with the plurality being of that nature. I also included a link to their comments for anyone else to verify, and I quoted each of their posts in full to ensure no context was missing. (However, I should've qualified "almost every comment" as "almost every political comment".)
I understand it violates the rules and is nasty and tedious, though. I apologize and will refrain in the future.
I am a natural born US citizen of primarily German descent. I have zero connection to China, any Chinese institutions, or any Chinese nationals. I asked this extremely aggressive zepto person what proof they would accept of that, and I got downvoted with no response. Are we just making up stories about anyone who disagrees with us now? How do we know all of the anti-China people in this thread have no connection to the US state department or intelligence apparatus?
Your account has existed for 10 years so I'm not going to ban you outright just now, but the fact that you're using HN primarily (exclusively?) for nationalistic and ideological flamewar is a serious abuse of the site. We ban accounts that do this, regardless of what they're battling for or against. If you want to keep posting to HN, we need you to seriously recalibrate how you're doing it, and reorient to the intended use of the site, as described here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
The users foolishly accusing you of being a communist agent are also breaking the rules. That's not relevant to the fact that you're abusing HN.
Actually, I would have a lot more sympathy if you did have a personal connection to China. HN's Chinese users (and those with other connections, such as their family background or couple relationship or work history) are under extreme pressure in these threads, because the forum is majority Western, aligned with Western media and geopolitical views, and a subset of the majority users have the kind of adamancy (and even aggression) that can only come from ignorance. That's a serious problem—users of Chinese background have even been hounded off this site, just for sincerely trying to represent their own viewpoint. I've even been personally accused of being Chinese (as if that were somehow an insult) just for trying to bring more respect into these threads. If you or anyone is interested, you can see some of that moderation history at these links:
None of that applies to your case, though, if I'm reading your comments correctly, because you seem to be posting strictly out of ideological battle. That's, unfortunately, much cheaper and more destructive behavior. We don't allow it here, because the purpose of the site is curious conversation in which people relate to and learn from each other. Smiting enemies is precisely the opposite spirit of that.
I know what it feels like to hold a minority ideological viewpoint too (having been in that situation many times)—it comes with a feeling of righteousness and resentment that causes one to lash out and feel justified in treating others disrespectfully because, after all, one's cause is right and the truth is more important. Unfortunately this syndrome is poison to the sort of internet forum we're trying for here. Regardless of how right you are (or feel you are), or how important the truths you bring are (or you feel they are), we're going to ban you if you continue this way. We have no choice but to do that, in order to try to preserve HN for its intended purpose. Moreover, it makes little difference how right you are or what truths you're bringing, if this is the way you're going about it, because people don't listen when they're being blasted.
I think the response to your claims about who you are is likely to be because it’s neither verifiable, nor relevant to your arguments here. It’s what you are saying that people are responding to. Not your nationality.
> I asked this extremely aggressive zepto person
I’m curious if you can quote anything in support of your description of me as ‘aggressive’.
Also, you have made it clear that you are an activist who is against many US actions, but what makes you think anyone here is “anti-China?’”.
Most people in the thread seem to regard both the criticisms of the US and, the China’s oppression of the Uighurs as credible.
It’s seemed pretty relevant to a lot of people in this thread. Your general tone is aggressive. I’m curious if you can quote anywhere where I’ve made it clear I’m an activist. That’s not how I think of myself. I’m posting on a computer programmer forum.
The kinds of claims you consider normal about China are in fact anti-China to anyone who’s bothered to learn a little bit about their system and how people there feel about it.
The US removed this organization’s terrorist designation and is now promoting them as the voice of the oppressed Uyhgur people. I’m not trying to draw any equivalence.
Please, let's not equate the IRA with international islamiste terrorists operating in multiple countries and associated with Al Qaeda.
The argument is that the US changing its mind on terrorists just because they are Uyghurs after bombing them shows that there is foul play involved and that the US government does not act in good faith on the matter, but instead is weaponizing the Xinjiang issue for geopolitical gain and distorting the truth to do so.
They were considered terrorists, then at some point during the Syrian regime change project, imported Uyghur fighters became useful allies to the US along with Al Nusra, Al Qaeda and ISIS.
US is also currently rehabilitating an Al Qaeda militant's image to make him the 'Juan Guaido' of Syria...
How is it relevant? They are Uyghurs, and this terrorist group does operate in China too. The fact that this year they stopped being terrorists according to the US does smell like bullshit.
Certainly, the US didn't bomb them for their ethnicity. That doesn't make the statement factually incorrect, the flip-flopping there smells like bullshit and that's what GP was alluding to if we are reading the comment in good faith.
>Bitcoin cannot succeed past a certain level because then it competes with the USD and becomes a threat.
It already is a threat to the USD and the game theory ensures anyone fighting against Bitcoin loses in the long run.
If the US wants to lose miners/nodes, large holders, and fintech innovation to other more free countries, they should take the view that you are sharing, but they will also lose the future in the process.
>Do you seriously believe that the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989 were backed by the CIA?
Western intelligence generally rush to protect their assets, or at least they used to...
These regime change attempts have been ongoing for about a century, opium/heroin dealers/criminals and their western partners/suppliers didn't like getting shutdown by the Chinese government, primarily Mao.
When people ask, "Why is China a Surveillance State?", this is why...
Was the primary driver of the Tiananmen Square protest caused by the CIA? Every credible source I’ve found indicates that the CIA was trying to figure out what was going on, but not initiating the protest.
>Was the primary driver of the Tiananmen Square protest caused by the CIA?
You are saying that if a CIA regime change pattern is detected and the CIA doesn't publicly disclose its covert/overt operations (even as it does expected post-op cleanup), it probably didn't happen? Quite interesting to maintain a permanent state of denial when history says the opposite is more appropriate...
After looking at timeline of CIA destabilization operations (using NGOs, rebel groups, terrorists, etc...) around the world and the constant funding of protests and extremism in China/Tibet/HK... Anyone that can do elementary level pattern recognition can see this for what it is...
This regime change operation extends to the repeated HK protests (many participants are paid to attend) and Xinjiang extremism (participants funded, armed, and trained by the CIA and their partners in Turkey/Syria/Iraq).
There were multiple countries citizens rising up against socialism in 1989. How many of them were orchestrated by the CIA? From what I have read, only Poland had a direct CIA link.
Another pattern could be that socialist governments repress their citizens by denying freedom
of press, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. These citizens hope such freedoms are returned through democratic reform.
I suspect it’s more than just the evil CIA which is advocating for democracy.
The evidence for uighur genocide by the CCP far outstrips what you have here. Uighur participation in CIA action doesn't automatically invalidate the fact that there is a genocide playing out, the same as implied CIA activity in the tiananmen protests doesn't invalidate the civilian's actions or complaints, and it certainly doesn't justify the PLA turning its weapons on its own citizens, any more than the united States' decision to drone strike an American citizen for terrorist group ties can be justified.
This "Marketplace of ideas" is run by English speakers, in our case, and completely ignores the idea that we or our allies may have been involved in a biological attack on China. Very convenient, in my opinion, since history says NATO countries are the most likely to deploy biological weapons.
It's very unlikely anyone was doing any research on directly using SARS-CoV2 as a weapon. It kills or maims too low a percentage of people to have tactical value, and it's too difficult to contain. (The most effective weapons severely handicap their victims and allow them to live into old age, taking fighters off the field, and turning them into long-term liabilities and living reminders for anyone who might think about fighting you in the future.)
I'm not saying SARS-CoV2 leaked from a lab, but if it did, it was probably more of a basic science/weapons background research rather than an engineered weapon itself. You might want to add some SARS-CoV2 characteristics to a bioweapon, but you'd want to start out with something with greater morbidity and more easily quarantined as a starting point for a weapon.
North Carolina lab was shipping covid around the world. Wouldn't be surprised if the lab in Fort Detrick was doing similar research.
You seem to assume a bio-weapon has to cause mass death to be effective and meet the deployer's objectives...you are wrong in the case of economic attacks.
> You seem to assume a bio-weapon has to cause mass death to be effective and meet the deployer's objectives...you are wrong in the case of economic attacks.
> The most effective weapons severely handicap their victims and allow them to live into old age, taking fighters off the field, and turning them into long-term liabilities and living reminders for anyone who might think about fighting you in the future
I do not believe that covid was intentionally designed and released as a bio weapon.
The number of people with long COVID symptoms is a tiny tiny fraction of those exposed to SARS-CoV2. If it's a designed feature of SARS-CoV2, it's very poorly implemented, unless it's actually very specifically targeting some as-of-yet unidentified demographic. (This seems very unlikely.)
Why should I believe this is any more real than "chronic lyme"? There are a whole lot of hypochondriacs out there; something proponents of "long covid" and "chronic lyme" never seem willing to acknowledge.
The groups promoting both of these organize and operate the same way, and make similar claims. Huge lists of nonspecific generic symptoms and facebook groups full of uncritical believers mutually reinforcing each others' beliefs (parallel to the well understood phenomena of "support groups" which promote eating disorders and create social feedback loops for reinforcing/worsening body dismorphia.)
>I do not believe that covid was intentionally designed and released as a bio weapon.
History says you are wrong to discount NATO countries (I include Japan as an unofficial member) using bio-weapons. They have a long history of deploying and supporting deployments of these kinds of weapons against military and economic foes.
Ridiculous to think that it was deployed by NATO because NATO countries were affected by it just as much if not more. That would be the most idiotic weapon used ever. It literally makes no sense.
Sorry, but the idea of NATO deploying the most idiotic weapon imaginable on the entire world vs. the idea of an accidental escape from a lab are NOT equally plausible at all. In fact, this entire article goes thru evidence that it was not NATO because of all of the internal investigations and such.
What you are suggesting is tin foil hat conspiracy theory crazy.
I disagree, NATO countries (including Japan) have benefited from sabotaging/disrupting Chinese trade for more than a century. They know what they stand to gain by making China the "virus spreader/origin" of the world.
The Fauci emails in March 2020 that described the exact components of the virus with subject 'coronavirus bio-weapon production method' hints at the actual purpose of this release.
> The Fauci emails in March 2020 that described the exact components of the virus ...
which is a complete lie. The email does NOT describe the components of the virus at all. You clearly are lacking in any sort of biochemical background as this is obvious. Do you actually fact check anything you are posting?
If given a choice, as a person that lives 99% of the time in the US, would you rather have a US device that is backdoored by the NSA/CIA or a Chinese device that is backdoored by the Chinese government?
I personally think the latter is preferable. Not sure why anyone buys US made equipment post Snowden/Assange.
There may be fake fans but unpopular opinion, I'm one of the real non-Chinese fans.
Many of their posts point out tremendous hypocrisy in the west's interactions with developing countries. As a citizen of the west, these criticisms are valid.
>This is ironic because enlightenment ideals would have assumed opening economic ties with China should have led to democratic ideals in China, but that didn’t pan out.
The idea that the west opened up with the goal of treating the Chinese equally, is on the surface true, but in reality misleading.... There is a lot of covert/overt activity that is primarily meant to result in regime change, something that I expect would be a negative outcome for the poorer people in China at this stage in development.
Many in the west are prescribing that a country forget the recent past and take the actions of its major foreign adversaries (read mass criminals that voluntarily positioned themselves that way) as good faith... I don't think they have the luxury of doing that.
The leaders are in power to do what's most beneficial for their population (domestic hyper-development) while avoiding an outcome that rhymes with 'century of opium'...serving western interests is a very low priority, as it should be.
This is the century of 'Don't trust, only verify' and I too feel the employed cautious approach is a requirement.
"The leaders are in power to do what's most beneficial for their population (domestic hyper-development) "
Their goal is 'Neo Han Imperial China', a 'Global Power' / 'Centre of the Earth' and to make most states in their direct influence (including Japan) vassals or lesser powers, which they view as their 'normal' place in history.
They'll literally grab massive swaths of what the rest of the world regards as either international waters or domestic territory of other nations, and declare them as sovereign - right as everyone watches. Nobody will do anything about it as the maps are redrawn along with history.
At the same time, they'll declare 'something something aboriginals in USA' while they put 100's of thousands people in jail on the basis of their ethnicity (Uighurs), move millions of Han into Tibet to secure control, and use every means to force Taiwan to fall just like Hong Kong.
And that's without any discussion of internal controls.
Authoritarianism aside, there is some degree of legitimacy in their own governance, after all, it's their own, however - the spillover effects are real and their ambitions lie far outside their borders.
There are multiple ways to characterize every point you are making.
China has a long history of being the victim of foreign attacks using these routes, everything you mention is a defensive strategy to protect trade, borders, and the population from international attacks. The sabre rattling in the west doesn't help but only accelerates the push in this direction.
Han global supremacy sounds like a projection of western history rather than a reality. Reconnecting trade routes and rebuilding infrastructure in the destroyed empires of Asian history has many positive outcomes for the whole region. I don't we can wave away the feelings of billions of people pulled out of poverty by Chinese economic action.
>'something something aboriginals in USA'
I don't think we should compare the genocide/robbery of ~100 million natives in the Americas to the Uyghur/Turkic extremism/terrorism/separatism issue in Western China being solved without a military conflict. The brand of Islam (Saudi Wahabism) they now practice and the military training they received from ISIS/AlQ in US controlled parts of Syria/Iraq was/is part of a US strategy to destabilize China for the purpose of regime change. To now call it 'Xinjiang/Uyghur genocide' as many do, rather than a US intelligence led operation to disrupt trade/infrastructure expansion into western Asia is a dishonest characterization.
Aboriginals died mostly by disease, and then over the span of 100's of years, most of it pre-Enlightenment, compare to Qing Dynasty policies and wars at your leisure.
This kind of bad moral relativism is at the heart of Chinese logic and it just doesn't hold up.
Thankfully the US holds the 5th Fleet in the Gulf and ensure trade, mostly Oil is free for everyone including China who are by far the greatest recipients of Oil. The same thing for Suez, Panama Canal, Red sea and other parts of the world. The peace between Egypt and Isreal is pinned down by the US otherwise.
Given a choice between having China take your land/sea, or, having the US patrol it so that either sovereignty is protected - or international waters are kept open - which deal do you think nations will take? Even with having to put up with an ugly US diplomatic corps now and again, everyone will take Option B, it's perennially going to be better than Option A.
There's no excuse for doing what's going on in Xinjiang, and arguably Tibet as well, not in 21st century.
Disease was purposely spread in the Americas as part of a biological warfare operation (the quotes from military leaders are easy to find)...
> “I will try to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets that may fall in their hands, taking care however not to get the disease myself. As it is a pity to appose good men against them, I wish we could make use of the Spaniards’ method, and hunt them with English dogs, supported by Rangers and some light horse, who would, I think, effectively extirpate or remove that vermin.” — Col. Henry Bouquet, 13 July, 1763
> ”You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians by means of Blankets, as well as to try every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Exorable Race. I should be very glad your scheme for hunting them down by Dogs could take effect, but England is at too great a distance to think of that at present.” — Gen. Jeffery Amherst, 16 July 1763
...Which is part of the reason I believe covid may have been dropped in China by our allies. We have a long history of doing this to our economic competitors, China does not.
China also doesn't have a history of sending regime change operatives into countries, completely decimating them and killing millions of innocent foreign civilians. We follow this pattern almost every decade. The idea that the Chinese are a threat at your border and the US are not, is comical (as we see in the case of Xinjiang).
You seem to know nothing about Xinjiang other than what you are fed through media by CIA assets (Zenz, NED, Radio Free Asia). US/Turkey assisted extremists are being branded genocide victims to stop the belt and road project, unfortunately the ISIS/AlQ trained ones are also given Turkish passports and exported to other places in the world with the aid of and under the blind eye of the US.
The US killed the most innocent Muslim civilians in the past 2 decades and you really believe they care about the Muslims in Xinjiang? If the US was actually interested in stopping Uyghur extremism, you would see a large % of the population dead, instead we get 0 mass murder and the Chinese training civilians so economic prosperity leaves little room for extremism...
~3+ million dead innocent Iraqi/Syrian/Yemeni civilians would rather have had the Chinese approach than a guaranteed death sentence from the US, I expect.
Its hard to have an anti-corruption movement without the side effect of consolidating power. Hopefully the US will soon have an anti-corruption movement (long overdue), so the world can see an example of how one can be properly executed.
There is no counter to this false claim online which is why it is unfortunately effective in shutting down discourse.
I guess we are stupid enough to walk into a potential war the same way we were scammed into one not too long ago. We already forgot the lessons as a population.