We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11529941 and marked it off-topic.

Does not in fact hunt down communists... today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism#Laws_and_arrests

See also Guantanamo Bay, Internment Camps, Lynching, etc.

It may not be the same today, but to think the US isn't above doing terrible things to those they are afraid of is to lose sight of our history.

It's shitty what is being done, but saying "Nope, we don't do that, but ignore the fact that we did it less than 100 years ago" isn't the greatest of moral arguments. Maybe better arguments, and better actions are in order.

The Chinese government has noted that Falun Gong is an active threat to their society and have strict laws.

Half the world has strange laws. Some places drugs can get you killed. Should a US drug-dog training company be sued for leading to the death of drug users?

Edit: What if it was a system to hunt down cults that the US has attacked, like those at Waco. Or that other countries don't tolerate, like Scientology?

That's possible because US tort law recognizes international laws to which the US is a signatory: if you commit a tort against someone, and the manner in which you do it violates an international law we recognize, the US quite sensibly recognizes the resulting tort claim.

Second: the US should prosecute this sort of thing, because otherwise the US will allow itself to become a haven for companies building technology to assist in "crimes against humanity". We have a spotty enough history with this as it stands. And, in the case of China, our local companies have enormous financial incentives to participate in this stuff.

I think it's clear that the state in the US and China go about this task differently, and fundamentally I think it's because in the US the state recognizes rights but in China the state bestows rights.

For example, even though religious liberty is a recognized right enshrined in the constitution, it can, and is, overridden on occasion if the state has a "legitimate public concern."

In China, there is no need to dance around the issue of liberty or define what constitutes "legitimate public concern." The state can, and does, simply act.

But more practically, in the US you usually have some recourse that is built into the system of governance.

The US separates the state's powers (executive, legislative, and judicial) to allow for some recourse. So, if the executive branch makes a decision to override religious liberty in favor of what it deems to be "legitimate public concern," it has to defend its interpretation and balance of the competing rights claims in (at least) 1) the court (defending its interpretation of a law or use of executive order) and 2) the public square (else the next election cycle can oust the current party).

China, on the other hand, doesn't need to consult its citizens or worry too much about their opinion (unless it acts so egregiously that it causes violent revolt). There are no liberties unless the state gives them to you, so unwarranted imprisonment, torture, and summary execution are all permitted. Guantanamo Bay style prison/camps are the norm and the public has no recourse.

Edit: I apologize, I'm incorrect in this entire thread and didn't understand how this was happening. My fault for not reading and thinking it was the US filling charges.

Though perhaps China can just claim Falun Gong is a terrorist group and Cisco should be in the clear then. In the end, helping governments go after dangerous cults seems like something that should be legal.