________________________________________________________________________________
Both Billie Jean King, the founder of WTA, and Novak Djokovic support WTA’s announcement [1].
“I applaud Steve Simon and the WTA leadership for taking a strong stand on defending human rights in China and around the world,” said Billie Jean King. “The WTA is on the right side of history in supporting our players. This is another reason why women’s tennis is the leader in women’s sports.”
Novak Djokovic, World No 1 and cofounder of the Professional Tennis Players Association, said he fully supported the WTA’s stance, and everyone including the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) and the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) was “asking for clarity on what is going on”.
“We don’t have enough information and I think it’s a very bold, very courageous stance from WTA,” he told reporters.
[1]:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/dec/01/wta-suspends-t...
Joe Pompliano thinks the WTA will lose 1/3 of their revenue [2].
[2]:
https://twitter.com/JoePompliano/status/1466142522628059144
They might also gain NEW fans and revenue from people impressed and intrigued by this bold move.
I have zero interest in sports of any kind, but this has made me wonder if there’s some way I can support this.
Is it just me or I don't see the correlation between WTA and human rights? Do they have a horse in this race?
Wow! Compare this to Hollywood, always telling us how to think and behave but otherwise happy to turn a blind eye on Uighyrs etc if they can sell a few more tickets.
If forced to chose a location to do business, I have a feeling Hollywood would opt to pack up and relocate to China.
Their leaders don’t see anything other than the number of humans they can get in front of their movies, and 1.4 billion people is a whole lot more than 300ish million.
They are going to lose 1/3 of revenue. Now NBA and Xohn Xhina on the other hand.
The difference is that that the WTA actually has leverage on China because China loses legitimacy in sports from this decision. No Chinese woman can ever be the best tennis player anymore. The NBA and John Cena actually have negative leverage on China. Both are purely American exports, so getting them banned in China only serves to widen the trade imbalance. China would love to find an excuse to do so.
The NBA has orders of magnitude _more_ leverage than women's tennis. There's a serious number of NBA fans in China who would be pissed if it were banned.
> No Chinese woman can ever be the best tennis player anymore.
China already struggles mightily in both men's and women's tennis. They don't have any player in men's or women's that cracks the top 100.
It's a good thing you can pirate the NBA or use a VPN. Less committed fans will simply accept that China just censor the NBA for telling "lies." You can't pirate your way into hosting a international tournament.
Would Blizzard and the IOC be closer to the WTA here, in that their are also hosting tournaments and events?
That's closer, but I don't think that's quite the same. Esports seems to serve more so as marketing for videogames. The CCP is trying to discourage its population from playing videogames, so they doubt that they care if they lose out on American ones. Also, esports don't have nearly the prestige of physical sports at the moment, though that could change in the future.
> China already struggles mightily in both men's and women's tennis. They don't have any player in men's or women's that cracks the top 100.
bizarre thing to say given the story is literally about a former WTA #1 Chinese female doubles tennis player.
In terms of leverage on China, I think Apple has a lot, since they employ a lot in China. Although the next question is, can they afford (of the order of) 1/3 of their revenue?
It's revenue already lost. No tournament was happening since October 2020 already. Source:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamzagoria/2020/07/23/wta-to-c...
Then when China eases Covid restrictions they'll quietly add China back to the schedule like nothing happened.
Unfortunately, "China" holds grudges (in quotes, because I suspect it might not even be the government, but different officials wanting to appear as good citizens to the government, and definitely not Chinese people), so it won't be that easy: Simon will likely need to step down (though he's kinda being diplomatic in only "wanting answers", not putting particular blame on anyone, but he's still pretty adamant).
Witness NBA-Houston Rockets case which caused Houston Rockets games to be blacked out for 15 months even though Morey moved on from Houston late in 2020 after tweeting in support of Hong Kong protests early in the year.
What did CCTV do? Ban 76ers NBA games who are the current employer for Morey.
I'm not interested in tennis at all but I admit feeling an urge to find some way to support tennis.
It would be great if the internet could somehow make this a fantastic decision for WTA.
Ideas?
Absolutely. I’m in. I am hopeful viewership goes up.
Maybe some artistic soul could make a great meme with NBA stars and Winnie the Pooh on one side and WTA on the other and the text:
TIL: tennis balls are bigger than basket balls.
I know there are quite a few here who also hang on other parts of the internet and who knows how to generate memes.
Anyone up for the challenge?
Kudos! As oblivious bystander and no real tennis-knowledge apart from how the game is played, how much pressure will this put on China? How much weight does WTA carry? It will no doubt cause some media coverage no matter the outcome.
I don't see the chinesse people raising against CCP for this. Not even if the olympics are cancelled.
It's well-known that CCP leaders are untouchable in China just like Kim is untouchable in NK.
On the other hand if you look a bit to our politics, how affected was Trump by the rape/harrasment accusations? Certainly a big part of population would still vote for him even if the rape would be recorded.
I don't defend China or CCP but we should put things in perspective.
The most disturbing issue in China I believe is the censorship and persecution of the victims.
> censorship and persecution of the victims.
Having her "disappeared" by the government is a step far beyond what usually happens in the West, but suppression of the victims in some way is still an extremely big problem and is what the whole "#metoo" movement was about.
> I don't see the chinesse people raising against CCP for this.
There doesn't need to be a popular riseup. Zhang Gaoli's enemies in the CCP now have some ammunition they can use to convince the people in the CCP who don't give a shit about Zhang Whoever that it's best to get rid of him. Then it's all up to how many true allies he has. (Probably not many, as a has-been.)
I've seen a lot of reporting on Peng Shuai's public appearances or lack thereof, but little on Zhang Gaoli's whereabouts. My guess is that he's under house arrest while the party leadership decides how to deal with him.
No CCP leader is untouchable; they're all reliant on the support of their allies to remain in power. If that support ever runs out, they quickly find themselves stripped of all titles, at the wrong end of a corruption investigation and risk getting executed in the end.
In theory, that could be true. It could even be that China is doing due diligence and trying to avoid tarnishing a reputation of an individual before enough evidence is collected: he's probably lost the support even if everything that happened was deemed "consensual" (not sure if you've read the original message from Peng, but there was a description of an encounter where his wife was in a room next door: I can't imagine that being considered commendable in any way).
But they would probably mention that because this has become such a hot topic: "investigations into Peng's accusations are ongoing" should not be such a hard thing to mutter out.
But even if they did do something proper yet invisible, the obvious pressure on Peng to withdraw her claims and act as if nothing happened are alarming. As is the attempt to rewrite history of the case. They did not even make her say something like "I was under duress/drunk/whatever" or "somebody else stole my phone and wrote that": there is obviously some respect for her public stature, but the main concern is with "health of the nation". By making it all a lie.
Here's a bit of evidence for the last statements, and it doesn't even include Gao Gang and Bo Xilai as major targets (though it does mention the latter):
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/7/2/in-its-100-years-who...
> On the other hand if you look a bit to our politics, how affected was Trump by the rape/harrasment accusations?
Biden would be a better example. Biden made a point to market himself as a feminist and someone who "believes women [accusers]." Trump did not.
Trump was a bit of a special case, for whatever reason. No other presidential candidacy would have made it thirty seconds beyond the "Grab 'em by the pussy" scandal.
You mean like Clinton/Lewinsky case? I mean sure, being more eloquent and better mannered is all the difference.
No, _consent_ makes all the difference. But thanks for playing.
And did you mean the same Clinton/Lewinsky that killed his political career? Meanwhile Trump 2024..
He served his full second term, afaik, even after admitting to lying to the Supreme Court. Trump still has another go if he ever wins it (I doubt it, though).
There's plenty of political work after his presidency too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton#Post-presidency_(...
Seems like in the West we allow ourselves has a lot of "special cases". Maybe too many to bring to mind.
It will probably turn into a non-event in China. As long as other entertainment is available, this is likely to be nothing but a blip.
People do not rise for entertainment, but only when they are seriously affected in their lives. Or when unfairness accumulates enough that they had enough — this will happen at some point in China, if they don't tone it down. But protesting today (and in the past) is a form of luxury: those most in need to protest their treatment usually have the smallest possibility of effectively running one (they are in a constant race to survive).
It's no accident that even throughout history, many protests and revolutions were led/supported by someone from the "elite" (rich, well-educated, plenty of spare time).
> Or when unfairness accumulates enough that they had enough — this will happen at some point in China, if they don't tone it down.
CCP has built a dissent management stack all the way from early indoctrination to continuous surveillance to Tiananmen style intervention/massacre if the need ever arises. Dissent will be crushed before it becomes a movement.
We're looking at one of the greatest threats to our freedom ever; this time they have nukes, reliable delivery mechanisms and a flourishing economy (which the Soviets lacked).
I have trust in the human race that they will reach a boiling point, and no mechanism can stop that from spiralling out — it's been like that throughout the history. I don't see nukes as of any use (nuking their own dissenting population would surely trigger a civil war: nobody will take that) — nukes are mostly there to deter external invaders (as soon as you use them, that deterring value is gone)!
Their economy is mostly based on inequality between the West and the rest (and internally, between poor regions and cities): as they are quickly catching up in salaries and standard of living, it will level off (sure, their domestic market is huge as well and gives them another few years or a decade).
I'd instead say that media-manipulation based on scientific exploration of the human mind and behaviour is a bigger threat to our freedom: we won't even know that we've lost it. Still, even in that case, I am sure enough people will see what's going on, and will be able to convince others of the bad sides of it.
Nah, it's clear eusocial species are more fit. Soon comrades in China will engineer a better human, incapable of dissent, working tirelessly for the glory of the Party. This man will rapidly outcompete the silly mono-animal organisms and nation-state slime molds and usher in a great era of eternal harmony.
LOL — thanks for a lighter spin on the discussion!
> as they are quickly catching up in salaries and standard of living, it will level off (sure, their domestic market is huge as well and gives them another few years or a decade).
Extremely naive. There are plenty of dirt rich countries, countries way more well off than USA which are still completely totalitarian.
Which countries would that be? I can only see Qatar when compared by median at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_pe...
, but when we switch to ranking by "mean" wealth, even that changes.
Basically, none of that convinces me that Chinese economy will continue to see exponential growth as their salaries get closer to Western salaries, and that it will not run into stagnation at that point. This was just a retort to a claim that China will continue to have prospering economy in foreseeable future which allows them to be more formidable and threatening to our freedom.
I am totally not an expert though, but country wealth (esp not those countries driven by natural resource exports) is not a good indicator of future economic performance: sure, it allows a country to pivot and prepare for the change better.
The prosperity of Chinese economy is much at mercy of Japanese, Koreans, and Taiwanese, not Americans, not even remotely, even if USA will go for a financial nuclear option of denying access to its bank system.
If you look at median incomes, UAE, and Saudis are of course ones with higher per capital income, but you see plenty of other quite prosperous nations in the club. When oil was above $100, and Russians were swimming in USDs, they were even less proclived to go to the streets.
Suharto, Marcos, and a few Latin American dictators equally had their best years when relative prosperity kept populace pliant, even if there was an apparent stagnation.
Popular revolts really only happen at the furthest extremes of the spectrum of prosperity, or rapid movement in it. Even just "not dying from hunger" level of prosperity is enough for dictatorships to survive with ease.
I agree with you for the most part, so I am not exactly sure what are we arguing? :)
FWIW, I did not make an argument that economic prosperity or equalisation will bring them to streets at all, but that:
1. Their current "flourishing economy" is not a _reason_ to consider China as "one of the greatest threats of our freedom ever", and
2. How "flourishing" Chinese economy is will change relatively quickly (say in the next 10-30 years) as their median salaries approach those of who they export most to (if that's Japan, Korea or Taiwan, then their salaries instead of US ones).
I would even say that this situation with WTA shows that 1 is exactly not the case: people in charge of large organisations (like Simon) have learned from how eg. NBA handled the case and the flak in the media they received, so now they are being more protective of democratic values (or maybe their image, but regardless) instead of their business interests.
FTR, this was part of the comment I was replying to where economy is highlighted as a big contributor to them being a great threat to "our freedom":
> We're looking at one of the greatest threats to our freedom ever; this time they have nukes, reliable delivery mechanisms and a flourishing economy (which the Soviets lacked).
The better question is how much pressure does it put on other organisations when it comes to bowing to China? Or any other rich, not-so-democratic country like Saudi or Qatar, or...
Because now the WTA, by no means a small sports organisation, did what the IOC, FIFA, NBA, film studios,... didn't have the courage to do. And these orgs now don't have any excuse of doing nothing about those human rights abuses.
>And these orgs now don't have any excuse of doing nothing about those human rights abuses.
Money still exists. Real WTA test is to see if they continue suspension once post covid PRC opens up. PRC already cancelled WTA events prior to suspension, likely past 2022 pending on how covid pans out. Short term this is cost free marketting WTA. IOC, FIFA, NBA, film studios still has costs, and they still choose China.
China will ignore it and start their own tennis authority, inviting all of the belt-and-road nations to partake. In a way we're seeing the birth of a new "Warsaw Pact vs NATO" kind of thing.
Step 1: Scrub Weibo from any mentioning of WTA, or women tennis in general.
Step 2: Withdraw all Chinese tennis players. Complain how WTA decision is hurting sport and this issue should not be politicized.
Step 3: Ban broadcasting of all women tennis tournaments.
Step 4: Massive disinformation campaign against WTA.
Step 5: Push the other organizations that are under CCP's thumb to pressure WTA to back off.
Kudos to them.
This takes some serious balls and I tip my hat to the organization! Let's see what China does to force them to reconsider
Maybe recognized that women are not objects to be used and abused by people with money and authority.
This is sadly something you find everywhere in this world, but at least, in some countries, women can hope to get the justice to investigate fairly.
Being a woman in this world is not easy.
That's definitely true for women around the world (including in China).
But while "silencing" is happening throughout the world for victims of sexual crimes (and we should work to stop this), what's happening to Peng is probably unrelated to the type of crime, but rather about who the perpetrator was (a highly-ranked CCP official).
She'd likely see the same fate if she talked about witnessing him do any other crime: it's most telling that not even World-known public figures like Peng can be considered safe from such intimidation.
Reaction to a scandal is one of those things where you really see the difference between a democracy, imperfect as it might be, and a tyrannical regime. In democracy, scandal brings disgrace and resignations; the office-holder has demonstrated to be morally unfit and lost his right to lead. In tyranny, you get silence and threats; the boss rules _because he is the boss_, not because of any moral superiority recognised by the population.
I didn't see any of that happen when Trump was in power or is that an aberration.
There was an official impeachment process. It didn't complete, but it was started iirc; I expect that, had Trump won another mandate on an even slighter majority, we would have heard much more about it. Also there were a lot of active reactions, official and unofficial, which were widely reported (civil servants withdrawing information, leaking all sorts of stories to the press, scrambling to correct his actions, etc etc).
Scandals can be survived even in democracy, for sure (Dick Cheney shot a man, Ted Kennedy killed a woman, etc etc), but the accused has to work hard for it. And you could say Trump didn't really survive them, since he was voted out at the first chance.
Try it if anyone other than trump. He is quite unusual. But any others.
The communist is on the other hand … could she be the exception not coming out as the bad ladies to apology, to be suicide or what.
Women also have advantages in some other regards. I think it overall evens out.
As a Chinese-American residing in the US, I really have to smile when white people think they can "stick it" to China. Westerners, in particular white people, are threatened by Asian faces gaining power in the Far East, and so they demonize my country and countrymen and make up ridiculous stories about how much of a scary Orwellian hellhole China is. And of course they indulge in their white savior narrative and try to portray themselves as sooo much better than China. They are not so noble. If Westerners think they can keep goading my country one day they just might regret it. I used to think that China should continue being pacifist (not waging war) but I think it is now necessary given the rising hostility from the USA and other white/white-adjacent nations that are threatened by Chinese/Asian dominance. Given the rising tensions I wonder if the party leadership should just say "f it" and do a rapid reunification Taiwan as soon as possible and risk the economic damage. They have the nukes, afterall.
I’m not white and I don’t believe it’s right that a woman should be politically silenced for speaking out about sexual abuse she encountered.
Perhaps not everything is about ‘sticking it’ to your homeland.
agreed. it's wild how fast a potential operative jumps on this thread and gets hostile about people being upset over human rights violations.
human rights are not supposed to be just a "westerner" thing, it's human rights not western rights.
no person should be treated as subhuman. all people deserve a chance at being free no matter what nation they live in.
and if a organization decides they don't want to support a country because of human rights violations, then good. i support that organization for being on the right side of history.
I support Human Rights, but our problem then becomes the Power/Violence required to enforce those Human Rights.
We're so fucked in this Clown Timeline(tm)
Actually no evidence she has been silenced.
You I'm sure do not want to 'stick it' to China, but you are perhaps unwittingly playing your little part in that process.
Ironic also how the comment yours above has been censored for not towing the Western line.
There is, in fact, evidence that she has been silenced.
> do a rapid reunification Taiwan as soon as possible and risk the economic damage
Did you mean to say "hostile takeover of an independent nation"? China hasn't controlled Taiwan in recent history.
Taiwan is not recognized as an independent nation by the U.S.
>Taiwan is not recognized as an independent nation by the U.S.
While that _might_ have some relevance in the US, I'd be more inclined to ask the Taiwanese if they are an independent nation. AFAIK, they believe so.
Should the Taiwanese be subject to the whims of the US? Or of the CCP, for that matter? I think not.
Taiwan claims that _it is_ China. So its territorial claims encompass all of existing mainland China and actually bits of India and other countries as well. They claim the CCP has been too soft on maintaining Chinese territorial sovereignty. So ironically the Government in Taiwan is actually more expansionist than the Government on the mainland.
Before your comment is nuked, I'm genuinely curious: if you have so much animosity against (white) Westerners and consider China "my country" (as opposed to the US where your comment makes clear you merely _reside_ even though you claim to be a Chinese-_American_), why aren't you living in China and contributing to the glorious revitalization of the country that is taking place?
It seems odd that you'd chose to live in a place where you're isolated from your countrymen and aren't ensconced in the strength of the not-scary, not-Orwellian, not-hellhole country that you clearly identify most with.
Ahh, a baby wumao hatchling coming out of the couqoon. Watch as it spreads it's delicate wings and commit rhetoric and logical fallacies. Notice how it argues a different topic, uses misdirection, threats and insults. A fine specimen indeed.
We've banned that account for trolling, but breaking the site this guidelines egregiously is definitely not cool and will get an account banned as well. Fortunately it doesn't look like you have a history of doing that, but please don't do it again!
If you wouldn't mind reviewing
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
Good, fuck China and everything about it. It has a boot on the colloquial throat of the entire world vis a vi their economic influence (oh noes, what about the monies, we cant laugh about pooh) and it’s high time people start realizing China is playing the capitalism game far better than its progenitors - and ultimately its not even about the money, its about ideology and life styles. I encourage all business owners on this board to blacklist all Chinese nationals and refuse to deal with any companies or subsidiaries with links to China.
Hey now, no need to be racist/xenophobic about it.
The Chinese government is a terrible regime that commits many atrocities. But China has more than a billion people, most of whom do nothing morally wrong beside being complicit to the regime's crimes by inaction. And as we've seen time and again, that's just what regular people do and will do, as long as their lives aren't getting worse ( e.g. Nazi Germany). Most people don't want to risk their lives for noble causes.
Blacklisting any Chinese national and company will only sharpen an us vs them divide, which helps the CCP because they paint any criticism of them as criticism of China. Furthermore, most businesses owners on this boards are probably in the US, who has a less than stellar human rights record and supports many regimes with even worse ones. Why pick out China specifically and not Israel or Saudi Arabia? They're all different degrees of terrible. Yes, action against one is still better than no action against any one, but i wonder, why China and not the Saudis? Or Israel, the boycot movement against which is specifically disenfranchised in the US? If the only reason is that they're getting too rich and starting to give the US as a global power a run for their money, your priorities are _weird_. Anything else, you do you and boycott the one(s) you want, but don't forget the rest.
In any case, no need for outright racial hatred of a whole nation.
"In any case, no need for outright racial hatred of a whole nation."
Ooof, so many levels of paradoxicality. It's like words have no meaning these days.
- "In any case"? like ANY case? (bit pedantic but still)
- "no need", we are discussing the need
(- Israel and Saudis and most of the World DOES need to be boycotted (big fan of the Prime Directive))
- "racial", using something that has a problematic definition to describe a billion people that would NOT be the same race with any definition of the word
- "hatred" ?, I agree that "to blacklist all Chinese nationals and refuse to deal" is drastic and voluntarily discriminatory, but that is the point. Hatred would be calling for their death, or at least a minimum amount of direct physical harm.
In the end, the USA had and still has an ongoing embargo against Cuba (yes,yes it IS more complicated than that, but we don't call it hatred).
"Most people don't want to risk their lives for noble causes", now THAT is a line of reasoning we can work on.
- Why don't they?
- Does that affect their perception of reality?
- Does that affect their social relations and information sharing?
Then let us skip from the Yang to the Ying, and then go on about our days.
We are oblivious to most of the automatic/subconscious moral reasoning our brain does, the Ghost Not, so we're kinda fucked if no Genius Philosopher/Messiah/Fusion Tech/Aliens come out soon.
This isn’t about racism or xenophobia. This about collectively applying pressure on China, and, more importantly, standing by your ideals. We don’t conduct business with corrupt organizations, and by definition any Chinese company is an organization that is tightly tied to one of worst, scariest regimes that the world ever saw.
And remember - it’s never “just business”, not unless you’re a completely corrupt psychopath.
The person i'm responding to literally said, and i'm quoting:
> Good, fuck China and everything about it.
That's pretty much racism and/or xenophobia.
Fuck all Chinese people right? They shouldn't able to bring food to the table, they shouldn't live right?
Here is my perspective as a Chinese national. I agree the peng shuai case is terrible and I support WTA actions. But I also realize how much Chinese government's actions have transformed people's lives in the country for much much better.
I wonder if you have knowledge of the culture, history and the perspectives from the Chinese side. Have you ever seen a video of Chinese people 1930s, learn about what the society was like back then? For the average Chinese, you are a peasant, you slave at the fields for the rest of your life. You will not learn to read, only the elites learn how to read. If you are a women, your best bet is to arrange marry to a rich family, your foot is most likely bounded, you will be a housewife, you will give birth to kids, and you will give birth to boys, if you can't, you will be seen as a failure by the family you marry into. Did I mention the rich and elite men will have multiple wives and mistresses? Women going out to work? Having money? No way. Parents want boys not girls. But you can't blame them, there is no social status for women back then.
My grandma was a typical women from the 1930s, farmer, arrange marriage, never taught in reading and writing because there was no need, foot bound. After the ccp and PRC was formed, the local party branch gathered all the women in her village and taught them how to read, how to farm like men, how to work in factories like men, how to tell their husband to fuck off and how to fight them if they beat them. The ccp propaganda that people outside of the country are "disgusted" by were telling people women can hold half the sky, women can do anything men can do. Women are equal to men. Marriage require consent of two the man and the woman, and only themselves have the right to make the decision. And men having multiple wives were made illegal, and under ground practice were heavily sanctioned.
Women's social status today in China is massively different. Some guys I know say girls are so lucky, because guys are suppose to serve the girl, guys should earn most of the money in the home, husband should hand all the money to the wife, should never pick a quarrel with wife, etc.
SCMP reported that China has two-thirds of top women billionaires. Chinese females also do very well in sports. In Tokyo Olympics 38 golden were won by women vs 13 by men.
And of course I know the difficulty still facing women today. Sexual assaults, verbal harassments, discrimination in some work places, domestic harassments and violence. The good thing is these issues are being talked about in the media and on the internet. Very frequently you hear about court cases involving women and justice being served. I do believe they are getting better.
I think one of the biggest reason for the change in women's status is Chinese government's education system requires boys and girls to attend 9 years of education. And in school, the vast majority of girls are taught to be the same as guys (sure, I know some teachers do discriminate against girls, but on average). At least in my up bring in China, girls generally do better than guys in school, and my teachers taught to us to respect each other. Almost all girls I grew up with are now working as professionals, none had to drop out of school, or married off and became housewives, all very independent. Most of my guy friends are very respectful of women, I believe owning to correct values and world view established when one is young.
And there are so much more about china. It's complex and multi-faceted
China has a different political system. The political system has done bad things, but also a lot of good things. Poverty alleviation, my dad side came from a poor village, for the past 20 years, I witnessed how much that village transformed. Ability for people to feed themselves, housing, jobs, education, healthcare, safety. A lot of Chinese people won't say this, but it is true that they are direct results of government's actions. People say China has no democracy, but the government is acting on people's demands and giving them their demands.
I want to make a plea with you, forget about political systems for a second, on a personal level, I believe people are more alike than they are different. Chinese people believe in freedom, justice, fairness, rights and the power to make demands and have them be acted upon and becoming the reality. I and many others believe in value of work, creation, and personal effort. I believe there is no free lunch. I believe socialism is not about a disrespect of personal property, it is about the society offering or making an effort in offering equal opportunities to everyone, and attempt to make an leveled playing field.
I also believe in freedom and freedom of expression. Although I have to say I believe freedom is not without limits. Conflict arise when one's freedom conflict with the freedom and wellbeing of the others. In these scenarios, I generally support sacrificing some personal freedom if it means there will be clear benefit for a collective wellbeing. You could have a different ideals, but I am happy to talk about why I think this way and listen to your perspective.
I also want to say the vast majority of news about China is extremely biased and a lot of them are absolutely false. They are about making people hate China, destroy relationships and make people going to war with China. By the looks of it they are doing an excellent job.
One last plea, Japanese in North America were targeted during ww2 due to the war. Nowadays, it feels like Chinese nationals are being treated the same. The issue is not about standing up to particular issue. The issue is about labeling an entire group of people and saying they are evil or against my way of life and my ideals, and thus they should be eliminated, without realizing it's people, humans, on the receiving end of punishment, attacks and destruction. And I think the vast majority of Chinese people and also Chinese government has said this, we don't want to export our ideology, our model. And we want to respect the ideals and values of every other country. We believe its fine for different countries to have different approaches and different takes on various ideals, and they should be able to coexist. We never wanted to replace or change western beliefs.
>A lot of Chinese people won't say this, but it is true that they are direct results of government's actions.
What's true is that the government claims is to be. But there's very much a case to be made that China caught up _in spite of the government_ rather than thanks to it.
>People say China has no democracy, but the government is acting on people's demands and giving them their demands.
They give just enough to quite people down and keep stealing in peace. The Chinese government structure, especially at the provincial and county level, is by all accounts corrupt as shit.
On your last point about respecting ideals and values of other countries, I will note the punitive, heavy handed China’s reaction to Australia’s request for investigation on Covid-19. And the list of demands from the Chinese embassy in Australia, including control on the freedom of the press. Using your opening statement Australians according to China should not be able to bring food to the table…they should die.
For the rest of your argument, I can say you read too smart to not see the gaps in there. “Bread and circuses” as the Romans said. And I am even someone who appreciates socialist ideals, but maybe that’s why I am also not impressed by the story. You went way back in 30s when many western countries’ populations were not that different to what you described.
It wasn't a good-faith request for a scientific investigation. Australia's Prime Minister demanded that investigators with powers like "weapons inspectors" be sent into China, and the Australian government was promoting the lab-leak conspiracy theory in the background. If Morrison just wanted a scientific investigation, publicly declaring that China should be given the Iraqi-WMD-inspection treatment would not be the way to go.
This was at the same time that Trump switched from praising China's CoVID-19 response to bashing the country and blaming it for the uncontrolled outbreak in the US.
It was also around the same time that China reopened, after having virtually eliminated viral transmission, just to give some perspective.
The lab leak was a conspiracy theory back then, not anymore is my understanding based on scientific consensus, just a less probable explanation. Regardless, punitive measures are punitive and demands for culling freedom of press are not aligned with respecting the culture of other countries. What that has to do with reopening or Trump’s positions is not clear. Apparently inspectors did eventually go with a lighter treatment and rights and they did not end up with any results. Would they get results if inspections were carried out earlier with more powers? Don’t know, maybe yes maybe no. Not a fan of Morrison’s approach of punching above his weight, but that does not make it an excuse especially in the context of the argument I am responding to, which was that people should not be targeting the Chinese population for the sins of their leadership. I agree with the statement itself, it is hypocritical though unless you also disagree with China’s foreign policy decisions, which the GP did not as per his closing statement.
The lab-leak theory has never had any significant support in the scientific community, and over time, every new piece of evidence has even more heavily favored the scientific consensus that SARS-CoV-2 emerged naturally. For example, French researchers have discovered a virus circulating in bats in Laos that is closer to SARS-CoV-2 than anything the Wuhan Institute of Virology had. That alone is basically a 100% refutation of the conspiracy theories about the lab.
> What that has to do with reopening or Trump’s positions is not clear
Australia is a US ally, and has increasingly aligned itself with the US' more aggressive position towards China over the last few years. It's not a coincidence that Trump and Morrison began attacking China over coronavirus at the same time.
> Apparently inspectors did eventually go with a lighter treatment and rights and they did not end up with any results.
The WHO team put together one of the most informative reports yet on the origins on SARS-CoV-2. The actual contents of their report were almost completely ignored in US media, though, which was intensely focused on pushing the lab-leak theory and disappointed that the WHO report found it extremely unlikely. If you watch the press conference announcing the results, it's almost comical how the US journalists were completely uninterested in anything the researchers were saying and kept asking about the lab.
I feel like you miss the key argument and context here, I.e. impact of government decisions on population. I am assuming you are of the opinion that this is a non issue, and I am fine with any opinion, as long as it is applied consistently. In this context, you cannot issue pleas for people on the one side and blame countries on the other.
I don't this this is a symmetric relationship. Since Trump can't into office, the US has taken an extremely aggressive stance towards China and has sought to intensify the conflict over a whole range of areas (initiating the trade war, making wild accusations of genocide, moving towards recognition of Taiwan, pushing conspiracy theories about CoVID-19), while China has tried to avoid escalation and has almost never gone beyond reciprocal actions. Australia has aligned itself fully with the US in most of these actions, leading the charge against Huawei, funding a prominent think tank that churns out anti-Chinese propaganda, pushing the lab-leak conspiracy theory, inserting itself into disputes in the South China Sea, etc.
I think there's a clear aggressor in this situation. The US believes that China is a threat to the unipolar order that has prevailed since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and has embarked on a confrontational policy towards China. Australia, caught between its military ally and its top economic partner, has decided to throw itself entirely behind its military ally.
Thank you, we agree not on opinions, but on concepts. That was my argument even if not perfectly articulated, I,e. That this is what you call above a symmetric relationship, and unfortunately humanitarian pleas will take the back seat from both sides and also there will be reluctance to find common ground, I.e. I cannot deny I view your individual positions as extremely disagreeable, that’s a sign of directionality.
> I also want to say the vast majority of news about China is extremely biased and a lot of them are absolutely false.
The majority of news from China about the west is biased and absolutely false. More often than not the west gives China the benefit of the doubt.
Look at the seasonal flu, we know China does not report deaths as 'died of X bought on by Influenza', they are 'died of X'. As a result China's seasonal flu statistics are crazy low. In 2016 it was reported they had 56 deaths, 2017 had 41 deaths, and 144 in 2018. In comparison the US had 23,000, 38,000, and 52,000.
Knowing that they report COVID the same way we know that China's numbers for COVID are more or less a lie.
> Poverty alleviation
Local governments and village leaders have a system to seek money from the central government to be distributed. However there's been reports over the years of families being allocated a fraction of the money and forced to sign the forms declaring they recieved the money, while the money is kept by the distributor.
So alot of rural area's people still live in poverty, but on paper they aren't. So you have to take the governments word with a grain of salt.
> The issue is about labeling an entire group of people and saying they are evil or against my way of life and my ideals
Most people who say they hate China, don't hate china, they hate the CCP.
Taiwan managed to do that as well, so your point is moot. I agree that early Kuomintang was probably as worse as Mao's CCP, but most of that has changed. They now have another party at the helm, unlike Singapore and also a woman as president. How many chairwomen did the CCP have? Zero.
As someone who's been at the receiving end of "applying pressure" (sanctions and bombing), it effectively did nothing to harm those in power, but instead only made innocent people suffer even more.
"Ideals" are not a constant, and each and everyone has their own. There are values we should strive to protect, but disenfranchising whole nation for the minority (not that long ago, USA had a minority government when it comes to popular vote) is exactly the wrong thing to do. There were plenty of businesses that didn't want to work with Trump-supporting companies throughout the world, but none of them went and said we shouldn't work with anyone from the USA.
What is this moral relativism? If you want to live in a world where disappearing people for speaking up, heavy handed state censorship and social credit score are all common practices - I suggest you buy one way ticket to China. It’s easy to talk all of this “liberal” bs while sipping your latte at your local Starbucks, but when it comes down to it you know very well what is right and what is wrong: you make the distinction daily (eg by not immigrating to China)
As a Chinese national, social credit score has it is talked about in the west is basically fake news by international media. There is a credit score system, and it similar in practice and intention to US's credit score. The intent is it is used to judge someone credit worth when it comes to borrowing money (credit cards, loans etc). Your credit history, payment history on loans (credit card, mortgage, and now online loans) goes into it. And in some provinces, whether hydro, water, civil penalties paid on time goes into. There were cases where some government branches tried to put controversial things into it, for example, if you donated blood that will add to your credit score. But people voiced disapproval and the government stopped doing it. So yes, in China, people definitely is able to talk about government policies and voice disapproval for them. And government do listen. There is no such thing as singing praise for the government, or ccp, or xi and you get social credit score added, and you will be disappeared if you say bad things at the government. I regularly criticize government's policies online and my account is still alive.
You may have missed the _nuance_ between wanting to live in a state like China, and not boycotting all business with people from China.
In fact, people in China will likely reach the boiling point sooner if their economic "advantage" of lower salaries and cheaper production are brought to a level of their Western counterparts faster (which means, doing business with Chinese people).
Boycotting will do nothing to help them. Accepting them and letting them experience the benefits of a freer society will introduce more dissenting voices.
As for what world we live in, it's pretty much like that even in modern democracies (other than disappearing people, but they usually end up self-censoring or committing suicide themselves when the pressure from media is too high).
The social credit score (as most Westerners think of it) is a complete myth.
One of the top American experts on Chinese law, at Yale university, calls most Western reporting on the subject "social credit fan fiction."
There are various"social credit" systems in China, but the average person does not interact with them. They mostly exist to regulate _businesses_.
Individuals in China do not have a social credit score, and basically the only way to actually fall afoul of any social credit system is to break an existing law, and then fail to comply with a court order. Then, you might end up being barred from flying or buying a train ticket. But the idea that there's a number attached to every Chinese person that is constantly going up or down based on how they post online is just complete fiction.
As for "moral relativism," we really should not get into a petty, nationalist match about which country is worse than the other. The US has its own fair share of (arguably way worse) atrocities to answer for (see the entire Middle East over the last 20 years).
> you might end up being barred from flying or buying a train ticket
I see. So essentially like an international terrorist on the US no fly list, just for regular people. Like maybe exposing a government official for sexual harassement, getting charged with _spreading rumors_ and failing to comply with _being dissapeared_?
This interpretation seems to be extremely in bad faith.
Instead, to me it sounds like a fugitive from law that now can't travel easily.
> just for regular people
No, for people who, for example, are convicted of a crime by a court of law and ordered to pay a fine, but refuse to do so. The system is actually much more mundane than people in the West imagine, and it affects a tiny sliver of the population (many times smaller than the fraction of people in the US who are in prison, for example).
And again, the social credit systems in China are mainly about _business regulation_. If a business fails one type of inspection with one government agency, that information will be shared with other government agencies, which will then scrutinize that business more carefully. The idea was to focus regulatory scrutiny on companies that have a pattern of violations, and to lessen the regulatory burden on other companies.
Now they should suspend tournaments in USA for the atrocities that the US administration has done on civilians and innocents in Afghanistan.
In this matter, I see very little nuance and perspicacity from WTA when dealing with people of a different culture both politically and otherwise.
In general WTA setting out terms to nation state is a very absurd situation. If the situation was reversed, American government would care zero bit to appear accountable to any foreign or international organisation.
But what is surprising is how WTAs take on this matter is taken as is without necessary skepticism. It is rather clear that WTA don't have first hand information on the subject to take a considered judgement.
Rather than make a blanket statement that people should be skeptical, can you provide a concrete reason why one should be skeptical in this case? I think most people here believe that victims of sexual assault should be able to come forward without fear of retribution. I’m curious what your counter argument is.
The thing is WTA is claiming to speak at the behest of someone with whom they don't have direct contact. In certain aspects what WTA is doing is crossing boundaries of fair behaviour. Imagine if it was a similar allegation made by an American player, would the WTA would go guns blazing if they didn't have direct communication with the individual.
Where there is a need for circumspection, and for nuance , WTA has jumped into the fray speaking of absolutes.
Has WTA made good faith attempts like despatching its delegates to China and understand first hand the situation?
Frankly if you examine the available details, WTA only has a flimsy argument.
And also imagine what could happen next. It could be very much possible for the Chinese to organise a video call for example with Boris Johnson, in which Peng will castigate WTA for invading her privacy, and not respecting her need to stay away from public gaze, etc..
If so then what will WTA do?
The WTA has made numerous attempts to contact Peng, and notified the government that the WTA would pull out of China unless they could talk to her and be assured of her freedom. If your argument is predicated on the WTA not making an effort to contact Peng, then you’re misinformed and just wrong.
Have they made a determined and good faith attempt to do so? Sending out emails and social media call outs isn't that serious of an effort. Can't WTA afford to send somebody to China and see for themselves? Have they made an attempt at that?
WTA seems to be looking for reasons to burn bridges, rather.
Point is WTA needs to make abundantly clear the steps they have taken of their own accord to address their concerns rather than focusing mostly on casting aspersions.
>Have they made a determined and good faith attempt to do so? Sending out emails and social media call outs isn't that serious of an effort
Her handlers had her do a video call with the IOC president, to placate international demands while only letting her contact someone who has a financial interest in sweeping this under the rug.
The proof-of-life issued by the Chinese government also shows that they're aware of these concerns.