You may only hate the government, but you should be aware that many of those who seem to be on your side criticising the CPC do in fact hate everything Chinese. They think that not only the government, but all Chinese people are untrustworthy; that all Chinese companies are mere fronts for the government that should not be allowed to operate abroad; that Chinese people should be banned from Twitter/Facebook/Wikipedia/GitHub because they're brainwashed anyway and their viewpoints therefore invalid; and that their livelihoods don't matter because they stole American jobs.
I don't think a majority thinks like that, but these viewpoints are certainly present on HN. (Not as strong in this thread, but enough to be noticable in general.) So when someone complains about hate for China, don't think they mean your opinions, but be aware that the complaint is quite justified.
> You may only hate the government...
Hate is actually not a very good word to describe the situation, IMHO. I only used it because the GP did, but I quoted and questioned the choice. If I had to describe it, I would say it's moral disapproval coupled with a recognition of incompatible goals that requires some kind of response.
> You may only hate the government, but you should be aware that many of those who seem to be on your side criticising the CPC do in fact hate everything Chinese.
I find that a bit hard to square with the support of Chinese things by the same group, like the Tiananmen Square and Hong Kong protests (for instance). I don't doubt that there exist people who are racist against Chinese people, but I think the overlap with HN is small, and definitely small enough that it's a derail to bring up on a vague prompt like in the parent of this subthread.
I can only guess, but it could be explained by mentally categorizing Uyghurs, Hong Kongers and even Tiananmen protesters as "not Chinese." I don't think it's so much racism as a binary "us vs. them" classification system that expresses itself as the opinion that "the Chinese" should be punished for oppressing <some group> by implementing <some policy>, where <some policy> is not specific to oppressors and would also affect <some group>. I'm sure it's often just said in the heat of the moment and not to be taken literally, but it still poisons the discourse.
> it's a derail to bring up on a vague prompt like in the parent of this subthread.
Agreed, but since the thread was already derailed I decided to respond anyway.
That could be in some cases, though what you're describing sounds more like a government leaders/enforcers vs. liberals/oppressed minorities classification (which also leaves a big gray area). The people sympathize and feel allied to the latter group, so the "us" includes a lot of Chinese people, so it's not so much Chinese vs not-Chinese.
I think I've seen similar comments, but I usually interpreted it as a mess of lazy or imprecise language, because often the complaints could only apply to a narrow group even though the person is using some broad term like "China" or "Chinese."
I fear not everyone realizes that on an intuitive level. People see a bunch of vocal Chinese nationalists repeating government propaganda and get the impression that this is representative of the average Chinese person, leading them to demand that Chinese users be banned from social media, or Chinese students have their visas denied, or whatever measure would solve the issue at hand while simultaneously excluding the Chinese part of "us."
It's maybe a question of defaults, where the knowledge that something is Chinese leads to the suspicion that it must be bad, unless some redeeming quality (such as being anti-government) can be found.
If TikTok is banned by the US because of the actions of the Chinese government, then we are no better than the Chinese government who have banned countless "American" apps, as if apps should even have a nationality in the first place.
If someone punches you (bans your apps, bans your companies from operating and acquiring companies in their country) and you then punch them back (ban their companies from acquiring companies in your country) you are not the same as them.
The order matters and they started it.
There is no need to harm the second child-- you have to deal solely with the person who threw the first punch in a legal, rational, and fair way.
It's totally okay for both America and China to ban whatever foreign stuff they want, though, and both of them have very good reasons to do so.
I agree. But watch what happens when you post something bad about an influential person on an American app. The feds pay attention to you more and lean harder on you. The end outcome is the same.
>Ban foreign content
How can we live in a world where it's ok for any government to decide what you can and can't see
What makes you think there isn't? There's outrage about that kind of thing all the time.
> If TikTok is banned by the US because of the actions of the Chinese government
Where in the article does it say that TikTok could be banned in the US?
> If TikTok is banned by the US because of the actions of the Chinese government, then we are no better than the Chinese government who have banned countless "American" apps, as if apps should even have a nationality in the first place.
Honestly, I believe you're kinda confused and looking at things too shallowly. Sort of like insisting we condemn someone who killed defending a child from murder the same as we'd condemn someone who committed murder, because they both killed a human being. Identical actions can be rightly judged very differently based on circumstances. The PRC bans American apps because (among other things) its authoritarian ruling oligarchy fears that Western ideas like constitutional democracy and human rights could threaten their power, if taken up by the Chinese people. If the US bans Chinese apps (or disinformation outlets like Russia Today), it will likely be because it values those same ideas and fears losing them.
> please do not act as if your statements about Chinese nationals
I think it's misleading to bring up the Chinese people in this way: the "hate," if it can even be called that, is for the Chinese government and the CCP. The real or imagined influence of the CCP over Chinese companies is causing the latter to be viewed with greater suspicion.
The Chinese people/Chinese nationals as a group aren't being viewed as antagonists (though unfortunate abbreviations like using "the Chinese" for "the Chinese government" do confuse things sometimes). If anything, I'd bet most people who are critical of the CPP, etc. would see the Chinese people sympathetically as closer to victims than anything else.