(October 11th, 2019, 00:56)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: The protestors have been treated qualitatively better than those at Standing Rock, or the Yellow Vest protestors, or those in Moscow recently. It took only one day of protests at Kent State for police to kill 4 anti war protestors, but apparanrly a few live rounds being shot at aggressive protestors (they have the right to be aggressive, but that’s not what we’re talking about yet) is somehow horrific. While undoubtedly, China has the worlds eye on it and is therefore restrained, the US never holds itself to the same standards.
This is quite true. HK police are a customer of mine and I've been to the island many times. I have friends inside the force and outside. The situation there is quite complex...but they've shown a great deal of restraint. They love Hong Kong as much as the protesters do, and they are well aware what's at stake.
(October 11th, 2019, 00:56)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: Finally, although Hong Kong is being used in the West as a means of destabilizing China using a 150 year old formula, that should not make the intent of many of the protestors any less righteous.
Quote:The other way to change the equation would be for the US government to punish China for their interference in our internal affairs, until the pressure on companies like Blizzard gets removed. Last week I thought Hong Kong wasn't really my problem, but this week I want war. I suppose I could be talked into something smaller, like shipping a bunch of weapons to Hong Kong and that Muslim province and Tibet, anyone who wants to try a rebellion. Maybe just trade sanctions. But the idea that China wants to censor Americans speaking in America is deeply offensive to me. I want to make it clear to the Chinese government that attempting to censor us is a losing tactic, not worth attempting.
If the Chinese government is putting explicit pressure on companies then they're putting strings on access to their market. An appropriate response might be to limit Chinese companies' access to our markets. Jumping to war seems extreme.
(October 11th, 2019, 00:56)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: This is bordering on sinophobia to be frank. You’re calling Chinese citizens, human beings no different from me or you entirely brainwashed and irrelevant as if they don’t have thoughts of their own. Step back and think how this sounds. Perhaps you can’t, so let me put it to you this way:
I'm arguing the exact opposite. Just because they're willing to say, in public, what the government wants to hear, doesn't mean that they believe what they're saying. They just don't want to be punished. Force me to choose between saying something about Twitter and being punished, and I'll say what you want. Also, they aren't citizens: they can't vote or otherwise influence government - that's a large part of why I'm drawing a distinction between what the government wants us to hear and what the Chinese people actually believe.
TheBlackSword Wrote:If the Chinese government is putting explicit pressure on companies then they're putting strings on access to their market. An appropriate response might be to limit Chinese companies' access to our markets. Jumping to war seems extreme.
Yeah, after reflection I think you're right. They hit on a sacred value, but they only used money, and it couldn't have worked without Americans willing to respond to money. They didn't use bullets so we shouldn't either.
Maybe even instead of Chinese companies, it should be only Chinese companies with substantial government ownership, or alternately we should be putting the pressure on by limiting American companies' access to the Chinese market ourselves.
One of the original World of Warcraft developers was tweeting about Chinese influence in software development. I'll see if I can find the link to his Twitter, but he blamed western countries for ignoring the industry and letting China step in uncontested
(October 11th, 2019, 00:56)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: This is bordering on sinophobia to be frank. You’re calling Chinese citizens, human beings no different from me or you entirely brainwashed and irrelevant as if they don’t have thoughts of their own. Step back and think how this sounds. Perhaps you can’t, so let me put it to you this way:
I'm arguing the exact opposite. Just because they're willing to say, in public, what the government wants to hear, doesn't mean that they believe what they're saying. They just don't want to be punished. Force me to choose between saying something about Twitter and being punished, and I'll say what you want. Also, they aren't citizens: they can't vote or otherwise influence government - that's a large part of why I'm drawing a distinction between what the government wants us to hear and what the Chinese people actually believe.
If you say so. The subtext is still clear enough in my opinion.
In response to your point, it is ridiculous to assume the Chinese government is some monolith, or that it is totally nonreactive to what people say. This is true for almost any country, even those called "authoritarian", or "communist".
Look at what the author (biased, pro-entrepreneurial) says would happen in the US if workers went on a strike and took their company president hostage. They'd be crushed by the police, just as Reagan did, or just as the US did when bombing it's own citizens at the Battle of Blair Mountain. Striking rights still exist in China, and that constitutes a major element of freedom to organize. Although the author sees this as a positive, I certainly do not. Striking is the right to assembly embodied.
Next, even though the National People's Congress in China is generally a rubber-stamp body for major decisions, it does effect change on smaller scales and does exhibit policy debate, in its own way. (This academic article should help convince you: https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.10...8.11655787). It would be ridiculous to assert that it has absolutely no function and does nothing. I compare it to the imperial Roman senate. Although in matters of war or large projects it had little choice but to agree, it still provided for the selection of local administrators, managed certain mundane laws, etc. Moreover, the composition of the NPC includes a proportional representation from all of China's 55 ethnic groups.
Finally, talk about Tiananmen square. It was never as simple as a protest for "democracy", it was a spillover of internal party conflict about the future of China between Deng's faction, hardliners, and pro-capitalist reformers. The same thing is said about the cultural revolution, as being a struggle between Mao's faction, reformists, conservatives, or those like (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_P...7s_Commune). I can go much more into this but not feeling like typing up an essay.
Sure, they're not voting in elections, but people and their decisions have had and will have an impact on the future of china. Many CITIZENS are proud of their country which has elevated standards of living immeasurably compared to what their grandparents went through.
My goal in this is to stop you from thinking in black and white terms, not to shout "tu quoque". I'm not denying practically anything about China here, I'm pointing out the situation is more complex than you wish to believe.
"I know that Kilpatrick is a hell of a damned fool, but I want just that sort of man to command my cavalry on this expedition."
- William Tecumseh Sherman
Quote:On the topic of Hong Kong, I find the outrage about it strange. The protestors have been treated qualitatively better than those at Standing Rock, or the Yellow Vest protestors, or those in Moscow recently. It took only one day of protests at Kent State for police to kill 4 anti war protestors, but apparanrly a few live rounds being shot at aggressive protestors (they have the right to be aggressive, but that’s not what we’re talking about yet) is somehow horrific. While undoubtedly, China has the worlds eye on it and is therefore restrained, the US never holds itself to the same standards.
I can only speak for myself. I don't know much about the protests you are referencing, I know a little more than usual about the Hong Kong protests because I have a co-worker who grew up there, has family there and feels strongly about the situation. In any case, I think there are two differences here that don't apply to most situations:
Doing something about most injustices in the world requires some effort on my part, in this situation all I have to do is stop playing a game I like, it's not much to ask.
Here we have a western company actively condemning the protests and denying free speech, I haven't heard of a similar case that didn't get such a reaction.
(Separate reply from previous post, because this is a different topic).
Difference 1
Sit down and question yourself. Will not playing a game actually do anything? People in Hong Kong are/were protesting the extradition bill which would allow China to apply the same extrajudicial treatment to "dangerous elements".
(let's get this straight though, if you look from the perspective of China, they are brutally jailing those who are serious at posing a threat to their order, not just random people who say things against the government, tight censorship and removing key leaders that. Those who are likely to be under threat in Hong Kong are the western-educated protest leaders, religious leaders, free-thinking elements of the intelligentsia.
[spoiler]
(certain of these protest leaders, I should note, are serious threats because they are funded by the west. Look at the leaders of the Demosisto party, who have appeared in FReedom House (State Dept. linked think tank) photos and conventions, were educated at Yale and private universities in Hong Kong, etc.)
[/spoiler]
These protests have grown into much more than that, but the core issue is about regional autonomy and the wish of Hong Kongers to preserve their unique culture, political system, etc.
How will, even millions, boycotting Blizzard do absolutely anything. This comes down to how much you believe in consumer power. My opinion is that it is insignificant compared to strikes, boycotts, and worker militancy. So no, you aren't really doing anything to help the protestors of Hong Kong against an encroaching regime.
Difference 2
Ok, at Standing Rock, we had "western companies" in the oil and gas sector use the police to brutally suppress the thousands of Native Americans and associated protestors against a gas pipeline that effectively went through native lands. This pipeline and many like it has already had spills and permanent effects on the land.
Call this what you will, but I call it an infringement of rights in favor of corporate interests by a utterly corrupt and dysfunctional US government. Hundreds wounded, hundreds arrested, and this was a protest in the middle of absolute nowhere, not even a city.
The Problem with not Knowing.
You should know about those other protests. Let me list ongoing protests around the world that have had nearly as large an impact in the past year or so. I will compile this list off the top of my head of only those protests I recollect, and then you can search them on google, just to make the point that I don't have perfect information either, but it is your civic duty to know about these, and not just those that are beneficial in the eyes of the state department.
The Yellow Vest Movement. Has been going on for months and months and months in France and has had mirror movements in many other countries (with much lesser success). A reaction to president Macron's neoliberal reforms which sought to take away the rights people in France see as sacred. 35 hour work week, pensions, etc. Started initially as a protest against a hike on fuel prices or something similar.
Sudan - Had a general strike of over 90% of the country refusing to work due to a military coup attempt. Demonstrates how African countries are mobilizing against the destabilizing influences of neo-colonial junta states in the pocket of western companies or middle eastern (read saudi) influences.
Red for Ed - the largest mass strike movement in the US in decades. Teachers went out and secured demands. Closest to me personally.
Russian protest against pensions and the recent ones in Moscow. Represent the first sizeable opposition to Putin in the past 6 years or so. Not very promising yet, but his reputation has suffered a hit.
India general strike January 2019. Have to link because there is so little info on this, it was self-censored by western media due to the active role of the Indian Communist Party. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi...418064.cms
Anti-corruption protests in Haiti.
The ongoing strife in Venezuela, which is compounded by attempts at coup by the USA, de-legitimizing the demands of those protesting for actual demands.
"I know that Kilpatrick is a hell of a damned fool, but I want just that sort of man to command my cavalry on this expedition."
- William Tecumseh Sherman
The sheer amount of whataboutism in here is staggering. If you believe X is bad, that does not mean you think Y is okay/better/worse.
(October 11th, 2019, 10:37)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: How will, even millions, boycotting Blizzard do absolutely anything. This comes down to how much you believe in consumer power. My opinion is that it is insignificant compared to strikes, boycotts, and worker militancy. So no, you aren't really doing anything to help the protestors of Hong Kong against an encroaching regime.
I genuinely think you don't understand why most people are upset. It really doesn't have that much to do with Hong Kong and China's policy towards it. Nobody thinks they are helping Hong Kong by boycotting Blizzard.
People are upset that an American company are making what they believe to be repugnant moral compromises in pursuit of money at the behest of an authoritarian foreign government that’s doing what they believe to be especially terrible things. People are realizing this is a pretty scary door to open, and/or they are not willing to support a company that’s willing to make that kind of compromise. Hong Kong is just a convenient flashpoint for this because the Chinese government is being particularly thin-skinned about this specific thing in a very public way.
(October 11th, 2019, 11:11)scooter Wrote: The sheer amount of whataboutism in here is staggering. If you believe X is bad, that does not mean you think Y is okay/better/worse.
(October 11th, 2019, 10:37)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: How will, even millions, boycotting Blizzard do absolutely anything. This comes down to how much you believe in consumer power. My opinion is that it is insignificant compared to strikes, boycotts, and worker militancy. So no, you aren't really doing anything to help the protestors of Hong Kong against an encroaching regime.
I genuinely think you don't understand why most people are upset. It really doesn't have that much to do with Hong Kong and China's policy towards it. Nobody thinks they are helping Hong Kong by boycotting Blizzard.
People are upset that an American company are making what they believe to be repugnant moral compromises in pursuit of money at the behest of an authoritarian foreign government that’s doing what they believe to be especially terrible things. People are realizing this is a pretty scary door to open, and/or they are not willing to support a company that’s willing to make that kind of compromise. Hong Kong is just a convenient flashpoint for this because the Chinese government is being particularly thin-skinned about this specific thing in a very public way.
Clearly, the poster above did think so. And whataboutism is when you say something is ok or excusable because X does so too. I'm saying that most of this thread is blithely repeating cheap high school tropes about China, instead of actually engaging in well-founded criticism that doesn't rely on old sinophobic tropes. I'm not justifying China's actions, but explaining them. Excuses aren't explanations. You screaming WHATABOUTISM at the top of your lungs shows that you're not actually willing to engage with what I have to say.
Secondly, """"whataboutism"""" is a valid argument when it is used to point out hypocrisy. Let me give you an easy example based on what you just said.
People are in outrage about blizzard because it is collaborating with a shit regime and is complacent with terrible things.
Ok, so WHAT ABOUT the oil companies who work with the Saudi regime, or Exxon that still works with the tyrant Putin? You gonna stop buying oil? Saudi Arabia has stonings, brutally intervenes in neighobring countries, supports Islamic terror. Do people give any care about that?
Obviously, there should be as much outrage there. We need to sanction Saudi Arabia or at least stop funneling arms to them. Otherwise, we are hypocrites. Sadly, the world sees us as such already.
My point is that outrage about Blizzard is formed on the exact same grounds as other instances of corporate collusion with foreign bad actors. You clearly miss the point here. That doesn't mean this is the natural order of things, or that this is ok, but rather that NONE of these instances are ok. However, people seem to care about the ones that are convenient to care about. You should be asking yourself why Hong Kong gets thousands of times more attention than any of these other issues.
"I know that Kilpatrick is a hell of a damned fool, but I want just that sort of man to command my cavalry on this expedition."
- William Tecumseh Sherman
(October 11th, 2019, 11:28)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: You screaming WHATABOUTISM at the top of your lungs shows that you're not actually willing to engage with what I have to say.
If you want people to seriously engage with you, you really gotta cut this stuff out. I said the word once in a fairly calm sentence. You're injecting hysterics that aren't there and then getting mad about said hysterics in all caps. I'm genuinely trying to take you seriously and assume you aren't outright trolling, but if this isn't going to stop, I'll just add you to my ignore list and move on.
(October 11th, 2019, 11:28)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: Ok, so WHAT ABOUT the oil companies who work with the Saudi regime, or Exxon that still works with the tyrant Putin? You gonna stop buying oil? Saudi Arabia has stonings, brutally intervenes in neighobring countries, supports Islamic terror. Do people give any care about that?
Obviously, there should be as much outrage there. We need to sanction Saudi Arabia or at least stop funneling arms to them. Otherwise, we are hypocrites. Sadly, the world sees us as such already.
How do you know I'm not already supporting forms of boycott of my own against these things? Like the Blizzard thing, I can't do a LOT about it, but there's plenty of little things I can and may be doing. The Blizzard thing only came up because this is a gaming forum. You don't know anything about me or my preferences or things I support or don't support. You're just assuming them in an attempt to shift anger away from this thing because (I'm guessing) this is personal to you in some way.
(October 11th, 2019, 11:28)GeneralKilCavalry Wrote: My point is that outrage about Blizzard is formed on the exact same grounds as other instances of corporate collusion with foreign bad actors. You clearly miss the point here. That doesn't mean this is the natural order of things, or that this is ok, but rather that NONE of these instances are ok. However, people seem to care about the ones that are convenient to care about. You should be asking yourself why Hong Kong gets thousands of times more attention than any of these other issues.
People care more about things that directly affect them. This is how things will always be, right or wrong. It affects me that a service I use made in the country I live in may punish me or people I know about for having an expressed opinion that a foreign country doesn't like. This isn't even about anger. I'm not even that mad at this point. This incident and Blizzard's continued response to it just lowers the value of that service enough that it's no longer worth my time or money. If you care enough to rank such things, yes this is pretty low on the list of injustices that exist. It's not even the worst thing China is doing right now. It just happens to be the worst one that's video game related that I can also make a very very tiny impact on.
I don't see where you have disagreed with my two claims GKC.
You have not pointed to a similarly straightforward action I could have made for previous protests. You may claim the action is pointless, but I can still make it.
If someone in Hearthstone GM protested over the oil pipeline and Blizzard applied similarly draconian punishments to them, I would have the same response. (Of course I don't believe Blizzard would apply such punishments in that case, which is why I believe there is some outside pressure here).
You said you find the outrage in this case strange, compared to others. Do you believe I'm lying to you when I say these two points made the difference for me?
Quote:You should know about those other protests
I disagree. A lot of thing happen in the world everyday, both good and bad. I can't know about all them. I think I should try make the world a better place as I live in it. I don't think that means searching out every injustice, but if one intrudes into my life, forces me to pick a side, I should pick the right one.
