News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days by keiferski on Friday August 07, 2020 @09:11AM (#24081385)
I think this viewpoint is pretty one-dimensional and oversimplifies the complexity of geopolitics. The US is like any other country in that faces a constant struggle between its idealistic values and the realities of the world. To say that “the West doesn’t care about the human rights violations” is absurd, as if you could paint nearly a billion people (Europe plus US) with a single brush. The idea that by supporting one repressive state you forfeit your ability to critique other repressive states is also absurd. The world isn’t that simple.

To give you an example: in retrospect, keeping Saddam in power and not invading Iraq is considered a fairly reasonable opinion; i.e. even though we got rid of a dictator, the consequences were arguably worse.

The reality is that the West tends to not get involved politically if the state in question is insular enough to not affect other countries. This isn’t because they condone abuses in these countries, but because a long history of failed colonialism and wars has rendered the West extremely hesitant to get involved in any sort of ‘just’ war that isn’t provoked by the state in question (see Iraq and Kuwait for example.)

The contemporary populist rise of American hostility to China is also linked directly to offshoring jobs from the Rust Belt, so again, there are clearly groups of people who have issues with China that aren’t merely “crush the rising competitor.”

In any case I don’t disagree that the West has sunk democratic movements which were against its interests, but that to say all such attempts will be shut down is overly-simplistic.

Re:US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days by AsyncAwait on Friday August 07, 2020 @12:56PM (#24084052)
> To say that “the West doesn’t care about the human rights violations” is absurd, as if you could paint nearly a billion people (Europe plus US) with a single brush.

It should be pretty clear from the context that I am talking about western governments, not people.

Also, as an European, it doesn't look to me like we have much in terms of independent foreign policy.

> The idea that by supporting one repressive state you forfeit your ability to critique other repressive states is also absurd.

One? Please. We support plenty of other dictators all across the world. Or is Egypt's Sisi not a dictator? What about the UAE, Qatar etc.?

What about human rights violations by democratic countries? We don't seem to care much about illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

> in retrospect, keeping Saddam in power and not invading Iraq is considered a fairly reasonable opinion; i.e. even though we got rid of a dictator, the consequences were arguably worse

The assumption that the goal at the start was to get rid of a dictator because he was one is fairly well established to not be true. Basically a bunch of neocons who were bitter we didn't dispose Saddam in the FGW wanted to settle scores.

> The reality is that the West tends to not get involved politically if the state in question is insular enough to not affect other countries.

Really, what about the likes of Venezuela/Nicaragua?

> I don’t disagree that the West has sunk democratic movements which were against its interests, but that to say all such attempts will be shut down is overly-simplistic.

I hope you're right.

Re:US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days by zolosa on Friday August 07, 2020 @11:52AM (#24083212)
Let's talk about human rights There is an actual genocide going on in Yemen , and it's perpetuated by a Saudi dictator . The same dictator who dismembered an American journalist in foreign embassy.

Now Americans are selling weapons to the dictator to continue the genocide because human rights are selctive