I agree that I see a lot of Chinese apologism in the form of "this is the Chinese way" here.

I wouldn't say that the comments are necessarily pro-China though, but rather just explaining that it is a different culture and things are done in a different way.

I do think it's a bullshit cop out though. I think that it's ignorant at best and racist at worst when people make comments here along the lines of "Chinese people like authoritarian societies and couldn't function in a democracy", usually justified by saying that China has been an authoritarian society since day 0. Europe, until recently, was a continent ruled by autocrats (whether in the form of kings, presidents, or emperors).

There are plenty of Chinese democracy activists, and I'm yet to meet a Chinese immigrant who has any love for the CCP and the Chinese government.

It's a popular argument that "Asian values" legitimise China's approach. But it appears to be wrong:

> Findings from our multinational survey suggest no obvious relationship between Asian values and support for freedom of expression at the country level. At the individual level, the data suggest a positive relationship between Asian values and support for freedom of expression when Asian values are treated as a single concept.

http://as.ucpress.edu/content/58/3/535

Moreover, the existence of Taiwan, a progressive, wealthy liberal democracy full of Chinese people, would disprove that claim too.

> I'm yet to meet a Chinese immigrant who has any love for the CCP and the Chinese government.

Plenty here, hence why China uses them to keep an eye on the migrants who don't... ...and to influence politics.

Would an immigrant Be an immigrant if they held love for the CCP and the Chinese Government?

I migrated from New Zealand to Australia, yet I like the current ruling coalition and government in New Zealand and dislike the Australian ruling coalition and government.

There are reasons to migrate beyond politics.

Because people are complicated and do things for complicated reasons.

There are a lot of reasons that people move to different countries, aside from feelings about the government they're moving away from.

There's been a lot of discussion recently about Chinese influence or interference in Australia, and much of that is through Chinese people living in Australia. For example, Chau Chak Wing is a Chinese-Australian billionaire with ties to the Chinese Communist Party, is one of Australia's top political donors, and is the unindicted co-conspirator in a bribery case involving the former president of the UN general assembly.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/political-donor-chau...

Edit: In today's news, more controversy around another Chinese billionaire with permanent residence in Australia and how he's getting involved in Australian politics for the benefit of the CCP https://www.smh.com.au/politics/western-australia/wyatt-s-al...

Chinese influence has been going on a long time.

I'm not sure whether politicians are aware and think they're immune. Or unaware and naive.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-10-28/news/mn-55837_1_busin...

I think what we call the skill of "analysis" is to divide an abstract object into a set of its containing elements, and then differentiate those elements and treat each element for its own different case.

China is one such abstract object...It's never about pro-china or anti-china -- after all it is a society of 1 billion individuals who are all differentiable from each other (and we have to differentiate a random chinese people from their government)...if we find a certain aspect of China appealing and potentially benecial to our own society, then why not just "like" that aspect and learn from them?

In the last few decades of the 5th century BC, Sparta and Athens fought a war with each other, which Athens had lost...but this did not prevent Plato (who was an Athenian) from praising certain aspects of Spartan society.

And also didn't prevent us (a couple thousand years later) from lumping them all together as "ancient Greece". Distance from the components, in time or space, lets us paint the set as homogeneous.

I was just doing a categorical mapping, which you might call it analogy...

How is that "lumping" relevant to the current discussion initiated by King-Aaron?

I certainly don't disagree. I do think that your point is possibly lost on a lot of people that are drawing these sorts of comparisons though...

sorry...analogy quite often can cause confusions...I will try to make more intuitive and relevant ones in the future...

It's just that the current situation between China and the U.S. bears a lot of similarities as that between Peloponnesian League (led by Sparta) and Athenian Empire during the Peloponnesian War. At the time, Sparta was an oligarchic society and Athens was a democratic one. Thucydides considered the cause of the war was because Sparta was worried about the rise of Athens could threaten its own way of life, and Athens wanted to spread democracy to other city states. There seemed to be no intrinsic conflict between the two states...the problem was that they did not trust each other, only because they were different. I personally feel this situation is quite like the current situation between US and China...There is no intrinsic conflict; they just don't trust each other (sometime even a bit phobic of each other), only because they are different...

And then didn't he die from ingesting hemlock?

>And then didn't he die from ingesting hemlock?

No. He probably died in his sleep.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#Death

You're probably thinking of Socrates, who deliberately killed himself by eating hemlock.

fwiw the tweet is by the author of the linked article

If you study the grammar on a lot of these posts, all over the internet even, you may come to the conclusion that the posters are government plants or Chinese CCP zealots.

I wouldn't rule out a massive propoganda campaign; HN, mainstream news article comments, suspicious Quora "questions" about China with manipulative "answers", Confucius Institutes!..

It would be nice if someone could come up with an algorithm that automatically tell which posts are astroturfing, just like fakespot.com But apparently this would be much more difficult than the algorithm used by fakespot, and seem to be less domain specific...

But at least, perhaps, we could do some information clustering, as comments written by independent individuals are more likely to have greater variances -- and quite often, difference is what makes an individual human so valuable...

Call it Pravda.

Musk is game for it.

Not even just comments on news articles.

I've read plenty of news articles that view China and their foreign policy with suspiciously rose tinted glasses. Especially around the One Belt One Road initiative.

The Chinese have an active propaganda machine for decades which tells all Chinese people the world is out to get them. They have completely internalized that. This makes them defensive and nationalistic so they can defend whatever the state does to them.

I try to be careful and separate 'Chinese' from 'China's Communist Party'.

Yeah it's barbaric what the Chinese do to spies. Next thing you know they'll be waterboarding prisoners or holding people without trial for a decade. Good thing we're superior westerners, huh?

Most of the comments are not pro China but highlight the brazen hypocrisy of getting worked out about China in the face of all encompassing surveillance currently run by the NSA, GCHQ and Google, Facebook and others which is a far bigger and ongoing threat to democracy and citizens here. China's actions are limited to China.

There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies or protests against the NSA. This forum itself has its fair share of apologists for surveillance capitalism. So where are the protests in front of Google and Facebooks campuses and in Washington?

So if people don't care about these issues at home how can they care about them in China? This is simply not credible or serious.

China's actions don't impact people here, your governments and companies here do. In the absence of any mainstream activism, just singling out China for outrage and anger is duplicitous and comes across as motivated more by politics than any genuine concern for the issues or people impacted.

And using human rights for cheap points ultimately trivializes it and risks bad actors who have no interest in human rights pushing their own agenda. So better for the Chinese to fix their country, there are 1.3 billion of them, and for us to fix ours.

Out of curiosity, how do you think traitors providing potentially critical intelligence to one of the most dangerous agencies of a powerful and aggressive unfriendly foreign power should be treated, when there is literally zero doubt as to their guilt?

And to be clear, I'm not condoning this action but I'm also not so quick condemn it. I'm genuinely uncertain if I somehow were the Chinese government what my decision would be, but I think you are quite certain -- and it's sparked my curiosity.

So you are not condemning:

- death penalty - death penalty for relatives of criminals - death penalty for pregnant relatives

I'd love to know what country you live in and if you would condone laws that allow this.

"We kill people based on metadata": https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2014/05/10/we-kill-people-base...

Admittedly that only applies to non-US nationals outside the US, but the CIA and American overseas military operations have relied for years on executing people (and their wives, children, neighbours, wedding guests, and first responders) with missiles.

This is a false equivalency, and your language seems to be intentionally politicized to provoke an emotional response rather than a rational one. It reeks of "whataboutism."

You argument is comparing the actions of the US military against a foreign enemy - and their associates - to the actions of the Chinese internal security against their own people. Are you saying the Chinese are at war with their own people?

Don't forget the part where they carry the sentence in front of civilians.

Is silently making people disappear really that much better?

Spies are people that turn against their own country, often for little more than a payoff, and participate in activities that can and have resulted in the death, torture, and worse of countless individuals. For instance Augusto Pinochet, as just one example among many, was the direct and orchestrated product of a CIA "regime change" -- an activity that at it's most fundamental level relies on traitors. Spying is taking a position of trust and using it to intentionally hurt, potentially severely, immense numbers of people - for what is often a token payoff.

We can even see that in this exact case. Earlier this year, there were reports that this issue was not caused by a technological issue but by various spies. One, former CIA agent Jerry Chun Shing Lee [1], allegedly gave away the names of these CIA spies to the Chinese for $25,000. It's ironic that the CIA spies faced death, and probably worse, because of other spies - but that is the very essence of what spies do. Cause death and suffering, generally for small amounts of money. It's despicable.

[1] - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ex-cia-officer-jerry-ch...

What does that have to do with my assertion?

Are you saying it is fine to execute relatives of spies?

And do you know what a straw man is? The reason I ignored suggestion of the wife being executed in my response is likely the same reason that the author's assertion was cut from the piece. Its based on one source referencing exactly one individual. This not only substantially increases the probability of this being a lie (consider: traitorous spies have, by definition, already shown an interest in hurting their nation and the people of it for money, and are willing to lie, cheat, and steal to achieve that end), but provides 0 information on what happened and why - which leaves the reader, you in this case, left to fill in the gaps with the most heinous story imaginable.

You were implicitly stating you oppose the execution of spies. And that is certainly your right. At the same time, I think many people do not consider what traitorous spies actually are and do. I'm also generally against the death penalty, but not unconditionally - traitorous espionage would certainly be near the top of the shortlist of things that I think fully justify execution.

Interestingly, the parent comments that you are replying to are directly discussing the execution of the relatives.

> but I think you are quite certain

Quite the contrary, not sure how this conclusion was drawn.

I just feel that "execution of them and their family broadcast to the entire staff" isn't really a value that is typically held in high esteem.

I think executing the pregnant wife of said traitors is a bit barbaric and in the long run barbaric regimes have tended to be less stable compared to countries/regimes which have treated traitors in a more civilized manner (due process, not executing their relatives etc).

I'm just surprised they didn't try to make them double agents or at least feed them false information. It seems like a rash judgement to suddenly eliminate 30+ people who you know are spies.

There's an incentive to do it all at once, or as rapidly as possible. If you try to recruit them, you run the risk of them reporting this and suddenly the other 29 spies are exfiltrated.

> It seems like a rash judgement to suddenly eliminate 30+ people who you know are spies.

It isn't a rash judgement if the CCP is so confident of their counter-intelligence program, that they evaluate the effort of neutralizing with disinfo or turning those 30+ is not worth their trouble and informational value. Considering the scale and depth of surveillance they employ within China, and continued heavy investment into more, I wouldn't want to off-hand rule out that possibility.