The Need to Bash China
(continued from previous Wall of Text)
What's the evidence that Tibetans and Uighurs today are any worse off than they were before 1970? or any worse off than the average Africans today? or most other poor populations? Haitians? Vietnamese? Cambodians? Bangladeshis?
Back before China trade. Maybe change the exact year. At some point back there we began a significant increase in trade with China. And all the economies improved as a result of that increased trade, both in China and the West. Where's the evidence that conditions for Uighurs and Tibetans got worse since then because of that increased trade? How is trading with them to blame, or how did this trade somehow cause those populations to suffer some setback different than before? making them worse off than they would have been otherwise?
You're measuring it all in economics. I'm looking at the repression.
"repression" where? only in China? There's no other repression anywhere to look at? Is the U.S. supposed to impose punishments or sanctions onto everyone in the world guilty of some "repression"? Where is there not "repression" going on? What country is not on this bad-guy list? You're not explaining why China uniquely needs to be sanctioned because of "repression" going on. Why do you have to keep giving these phony excuses for the China-bashing? Or are you saying we should also have similar trade sanctions against most other countries, which also practice repression? e.g., against all poor countries?
3) "Evidence": I love mountains (even though I won't consider climbing anything that's not just a walk-up), Tibet is a place I would like to visit. I'm sure my wife would go for some of the ancient temples, also. (She likes ancient buildings that are still in good shape -- even though obviously they are renovated to approximate what they were like back then.) At the time of year we typically visit a trip to Tibet is unlikely to be permitted. Even when trips are permitted
an escort is required for pretty much everything other than Lhasa. That's making sure the truth doesn't get out.
Whatever this horrible "truth" is -- crimes against Tibetans etc. -- what does it have to do with trade with the U.S. or other western countries? How is this trading to blame for it? How is this evil magically cured by means of boycotts and embargoes and punitive trade barriers?
We don't know.
If we don't know that trade causes the "repression" or any other harm, then why do we need to penalize China trade? Even if there are some bad things happening in China, why is that a reason to penalize China trade?
The point is the government goes to considerable effort to ensure visitors do not get to talk to many of the locals.
And how do trade sanctions cure this? You mean the sanctions cause China to reduce this anti-visitors practice? So if we increase the hostilities and reduce the contact with them, that makes China open up more and welcome visitors to allow more talking to the locals? Where have trade sanctions accomplished this in the past? Where has a country been made more open to visitors as a result of boycotting and punishing that country?
The existence of such escorts makes it pretty clear there's stuff they feel they need to hide. (Note that this is different than what Nepal has recently done with mandating local guides for hikers. That's a combination of a tax and that they don't like the bad publicity when people go where they shouldn't and die. It's shielding people from the wilderness, not shielding them from the locals.)
More trade with a country serves to
increase the openness, increase the contact with the outside, expose both populations to more knowledge of those from other cultures than their own. If anything happened that cut off contact and information, it could not have been an increase in trade with the West. As more trade is encouraged, there's also increased business and profits for both the populations. This encourages incentives to increasing the information and knowledge to locals and outsiders. Blaming those who invest and expand their business to new markets, hating them for wanting to make more profit, is not based on a concern to improve people's lives, but on hating the capitalists per se, and scapegoating them because of ideological prejudice.
The problem is you are mixing up business contact with social contact. China wants the former but seeks to minimize the latter.
So then, the U.S. should impose sanctions and boycotts against any country in the world where there's less "social contact"? so that by punishing all U.S. consumers (less access to foreign imports) we cause there be more social contact with countries? so we should launch a sanctions-boycotts-embargoes crusade against any country where there's less social contact?
But in addition to "social contact" there are many kinds of cultural peculiarities or differences from one country to another. Religious differences could cause inhibitions by them, fear of contact with outsiders, conflicting values, fear that their own traditions are threatened. There are strange practices or customs in many countries, as a result of their sensitivities about religion and culture and tradition.
More social contact is the new religion?
So we should boycott all countries which are sensitive and put limits on social contact with outsiders? Is that going to make either country better? to retaliate against them because they think differently about something? because they don't agree with our understanding about social contact? Why should our differing perceptions about social contact require that we threaten them with
trade sanctions or other punishments to pressure them to change their beliefs or customs? Why should this mean punishment of our own consumers who might want to do transactions with dealers in that country? How does this hostility toward another culture do anything to improve the social contact or other conditions in that country, or ours? What is the reason for this hate against another country where they differ from us in some way?
In Tibet to the point you need a political escort.
And you imagine punishing China with economic sanctions will cause them to eliminate this requirement? How do you suppose moralistic preaching at them and punishing them is going to make them repent, change their ways, and adopt our values instead? More likely it will prompt them to reduce the contact even more, ban the contact altogether instead of allowing it with the escort.
And anyway, are the political escort requirements really enforced rigidly throughout all of Tibet? It is the norm for artificial requirements in a society to get lax enforcement or be overlooked much of the time. Why isn't it good to maintain trade contact as far as it is allowed and promote more contact where there are openings, or where more contact becomes possible? What is the point of punishing everyone by restricting the contact even more, in retaliation against them because of some restrictions they have? If they're willing to have some limited trade, what's wrong with trading, even if there are some of these conditions they require which differ from our customs? Assuming it's evil to restrict the contact, how is this cured by increasing the restriction even more?
Uyghur country is bad enough it's recommended not to go -- even before . . .
Not a good place to go? So you're saying every place in the world that's not a good place "to go" should be boycotted and embargoed by the U.S., and consumers punished by having to pay punitive tariffs on anything produced there? Why are you having difficulty giving serious reasons to penalize China trade? or penalize anything produced by Uyghurs? It's "recommended not to go" there, so therefore anything produced there has to be boycotted? How "bad" is "bad enough"? Does that mean anything produced there and shipped to WalMart is going to explode when the consumer takes it home? is it booby-trapped? is a Uyghur corpse going to fall out of the box? What is this artificial hate we're supposed to have against anything Chinese? or anything produced in the Uyghur territory?
. . . even before the State department put China at travel advisory level 3.
"travel advisory level"? Is this what consumers are supposed to care about when they shop at WalMart? the "travel advisory level" for the place where the product was made? Do they need this information printed on the product label? along with the ingredients, the calories, etc.?
For you to pretend that somehow this is why China trade is bad for us only shows further how deeply imbedded the China hate is. Obviously you hate China and are desperate to find an excuse why American consumers must be separated from anything Chinese -- which is something foul or diseased or taboo, or -- or whatever it is, this alien threat must be banned, for some reason you can't express. All you know is that you hate this Chinese thing and must crusade against it no matter what, and you must contrive some rationale for this hate, no matter how nutty -- such as saying the travel advisory level went up and so anything Chinese must be a threat.
We must get the "travel advisory level" up higher?
Since you can't come up with anything that makes sense, the real explanation must be the economics of the cheap labor and competition which China poses to so many American workers, and this fact of life only shows the reality of the
law of supply-and-demand, and thus the decreasing value of many American workers, mostly in manufacturing, whose real value -- market value and real contribution to the economy -- has decreased. This shows why a demagogue like President Biden makes a fool of himself parading with the striking workers, pandering to them, lying to them by telling them their value is higher than they're being paid, when in reality we all know
their value is decreasing. The number of these less valuable workers is large -- a minority of the workforce, but a large minority -- so they are a strong voting bloc, plus also there is much pity toward them, from many who are not directly threatened by the foreign competition but who know some of the uncompetitive ones whose jobs are threatened by the hated competitors, and so we're all supposed to rally together lock-step in hatred toward anything Chinese, or anything foreign.
Is it unpatriotic to buy that Chinese-made "CRAP"?
And so we have much hateful anti-Chinese rhetoric in the culture, saying all the stuff produced in China is "crap" -- this word is used frequently by the China-bashers, and they invent lies or exaggerations to denigrate anything made in China, or also anything foreign, as other competitors are also hated, though China is the most conspicuous. (We had similar hate against the Japanese producers back in the 1990s.)
Since no one can coherently explain this China-bashing, or make sense of it, we have to look at the real facts of life, e.g., the real economy, and recognize the reality which the China-bashers cannot face up to, as you're not but are coming up with nonsense about the "travel advisory level" as though this proves some Chinese threat to us. Just because there are cultural differences between us and the Chinese, or there's some anti-Western bias there, cannot explain this hate. There are plenty of bad things happening there, and other places too. It doesn't make sense to erect trade barriers and boycotts against any country where something bad is happening. Should we boycott all Latin America, all Africa, all poor countries anywhere? there's bad things happening in all those places.
Why not stop the phoniness and acknowledge the real source of the hate: Those who do the same work at lower price are condemned as scum -- those paid higher have an inherent impulsive hate against anyone offering a lower price for the same service. This hate is just as bad as racism, just as bad as anti-Semitism and homophobia and the worst bigotry or prejudice ever. Those more desperate and willing to do it for less are completely innocent of any wrong and yet are targeted by the higher-paid as vile inferior forms of life, nasty vermin, dregs of society to be eradicated as a threat. This is why so many American workers, and those who feel sorry for them, hate and revile the Chinese workers as scum. Which is the real explanation for the China-bashing.
If that's not the explanation for the China hate, then what is the explanation? You're not giving any answer to this.
4) Evidence: The security procedures for visiting Uyghur territory are too intrusive for my taste -- and as a foreigner they aren't nearly as onerous as for the locals. Again, why the precautions if they aren't hiding anything?
So we need boycotts and embargoes and sanctions against anyone in the world who is "hiding" something? How does that make anyone better off? or reduce their instinct to hide something? Is this punishment of them going to change them, or expose/thwart some insidious Conspiracy going on there which threatens our survival?
In general, more trading between cultures leads to increased knowledge between them, and improved interactions and reduction of the barriers. The pro-democracy movement in China was partly inspired by the increased trade with the West, happening when "precautions" against people, suppressing human rights was the worst ever.
You're still mixing up business with social.
These are not two black-and-white distinct categories.
You're still not answering what purpose is served by punishing other countries according to some differences between our values and theirs, or between their social or business practices and ours. You're not answering why China alone needs to be punished even though there are bad social and business practices throughout the world, in many countries. What is the obsession with China, as the only evil entity in the world needing to be punished? or the most evil, needing the most punishment?
If I were to visit I would assume my hardware was compromised.
Whatever this refers to, how is it somehow corrected by imposing boycotts, embargoes, sanctions onto trade going on there? Is anything suspicious going on made 10 times worse because it's happening in China? What if it's in India instead? Hasn't India done some underhanded insidious acts against Sikhs? If you visit some Sikh friends in India, should you assume the government there spies on you, hacks your devices, infects your computer with malware? The government of India hates the Sikhs, conspires against them and even murders some of them.
If you don't understand what I mean you don't understand the problem.
It's clear what you really mean, though you're not honest enough to say it forthrightly. You hate the dirty rotten Chinese scum workers because they do the same job for less, and that makes them scum in your eyes. That's the "problem."
If you can't explain your hate China problem, you can't expect someone else to understand it, except maybe those who also are programmed to have the same hate.
You're pretending the U.S. has to single out China as an evil-doer in a special category and are not explaining why. If you can't explain it, then you also don't understand it. You can't expect others to understand your hate or feelings about something you yourself can't explain. Just because you fear someone hacked your computer is not a reason for you to want commerce between people to be banned or disrupted. That cannot explain your China-bashing.
Maybe those taking their device into China should get informed on those risks, and take precautions (as they probably do anyway). If all you're saying is that they should receive those advisories, then that's just voluntary choices for each person to make, which doesn't require any mandatory sanctions or punishments against those trading or buying something Chinese.
basic principle:
Live and let live. Trade and let trade.
You're giving no reason why anyone's voluntary trade with China should be curtailed, such as with embargoes and sanctions and boycotts imposed by the government against something Chinese-made. Such economic sanctions refer to INvoluntary
coercive restrictions on humans engaging in beneficial trade, where they make their own personal individual choices. It's this individual choice which should not be interfered with, because such freedom means increased production for everyone's benefit, in both countries. It ought not be so difficult to understand this point.
It seems rather that the simple understanding is obstructed by the anti-Chinese prejudice which seeks an excuse to punish China only, because it's the largest nation and 2nd largest GDP nation = 2nd biggest competitor to the U.S., with lots of cheap labor = bad guy Evil Empire Us-vs-Them Enemy we must hate and scapegoat because of our primitive instinct to hate the closest competitor. This is the unhealthy kind of competition which says we must destroy the competitor (by any means) rather than try to win by outperforming the other player.
I would assume that my phone and computer would forever be open to snooping by Chinese State Security. If you're a big enough fish (say, Fortune 100) you figure that for all of China. (They normally have dedicated hardware for taking to China. Use that, put on it only what you actually need and never deal with sensitive stuff. The machines are wiped when you get back but even then are not to be trusted.) As a little fish I wouldn't expect that from visiting China in general but I would expect it from visiting Uyghur territory.
By giving only trivia like this you're really just admitting that the China-bashing is wrong, and that there's no real need for the trade barriers or boycotts or sanctions -- or it's really the
hate toward the scum Chinese low-cost labor.
Obviously there's no argument here for trade penalties against China (or "Uyghur territory"), other than the deep impulsive hate against China because of its cheap labor. Obviously there are many ways private individuals or businesses can take precautions when in China. No doubt they already take many precautions in many countries depending on what they think the risks are.
But no one is giving any reason for trade sanctions on China, or "bringing back the factories" from there, or restrictions on companies doing business there, which restrictions benefit only the uncompetitive at the expense of all consumers who must pay higher prices because of it.
Obviously anyone is free privately to boycott China, as a personal choice. But there's nothing patriotic about it, and nothing of economic benefit to the U.S. This hate is a primitive superstition only -- i.e., superstition and paranoia against our nearest competitor. I.e. as economic nationalists, our primitive instinct is to hate and scapegoat this competitor. And today many wage-earners need a scapegoat to blame for their decreasing value in the marketplace, as they are becoming more and more replaceable by new technology and by cheap labor.
Since many workers cannot bear to hear this true explanation why their value has decreased, they need a scapegoat like China, or foreign competition generally, also immigrants and other symbols (including "greedy" capitalists and employers) -- which various excuses are offered to them by demagogues wanting to stampede them together to "take back" their status and entitlements they're slowly losing as their real value in the competitive marketplace continues to decline.
(this Wall of Text to be continued)
