But I am wondering why you are framing it like its no bid deal. How much does China share with the US?
There is a history of IP theft, and its not for the betterment of mankind it's self interest. You could point fingers but then the whole world goes blind.
Nationalism is blindness, better to be patriotic but not blind.
They manufacture all the American goods for cheap, to benefit themselves but to say there is no partnership is not honest.
>How much does China share with the US?
They use manpower, for IP they ignore the IP laws usually, so if you mean sciences, there are frequent collaborations.
>There is a history of IP theft
The US did not enforce IP laws until they had a sizable amount to use as leverage, I see China doing the same.
>and its not for the betterment of mankind it's self interest.
Self interest does not have to be a zero sum game. Oil baron enriched themselves and also provided cheap oil.
Outsourcing labor to China has diminished the US so much. It is like the Heroin of economics for Americans.
Whose fault is that? China's for taking the deal?
Have you also spent most of last year accusing George Floyd protesters of downplaying the importance of paying for cigarettes?
Yes. The betterment of the human race is an unintended consequence. Real but.
> The NIH and the FBI are targeting ethnic Chinese scientists, including U.S. citizens, searching for a cancer cure. Here’s the first account of what happened to Xifeng Wu.
> Her resignation, and the departures in recent months of three other top Chinese American scientists from Houston-based MD Anderson, stem from a Trump administration drive to counter Chinese influence at U.S. research institutions. The aim is to stanch China’s well-documented and costly theft of U.S. innovation and know-how. The collateral effect, however, is to stymie basic science, the foundational research that underlies new medical treatments. Everything is commodified in the economic cold war with China, including the struggle to find a cure for cancer.
> Ways of working that have long been encouraged by the NIH and many research institutions, particularly MD Anderson, are now quasi-criminalized, with FBI agents reading private emails, stopping Chinese scientists at airports, and visiting people’s homes to ask about their loyalty.
Like in above case where the person is being entangled into an IRS tax evasion case, these people are being ethnically targeted, questions, harassed, their constitutional rights being trampled upon.
It's not also anywhere near as clear cut in self interest as you say. Even within China, Chinese companies aren't given that much IP protection.
In the end 1.4 billion people are better off for it. I struggle to see how mankind isn't better off for it.
Also, China is pretty different in that the PLA allows their researchers to publish a lot of research that gives away their capabilities in sensitive domains like EW and submarine warfare. I'm not sure they would react massively to something that doesn't even entail any information leaking.
Can you tell me more or what to look for? I just remember an Israel stole some classified stuff and was sent to prison, an ally stealing secrets but I thought it was a rare occurrence.
What is the US response? I don't even know.
>increasing threats of sanctions
So threats, no real sanctions, not that the steel sanctions did anything, somehow Vietnam started selling us all their steel after we sanction China for other reasons.
What happened? Nobody will be discouraged by such a short term sentence, and be emboldened by its opportunity cost.
Was it really stealing?
The British pretty much did nothing to stop it nor protected their IP. They certainly didn't strongly enforce it.
Contrast that with Chinese theft; as soon as counterfeit products or patent infringing ones make it to US soil they are promptly seized and destroyed if found to be infringing the laws.
I think publishers in the young United States, having no copyright laws on sheet music, blatantly copied sheet music from British publishers. However, I'm not able to find a source on that.
Did he? There's no evidence for that.
To me, it sounds like a smart Harvard grad just figured out a few missing pieces required to get textile manufacturing going. Wasn't his first time doing industrial processes at scale either: he successfully ran a distillery before that.
It's also interesting to remember that it happened at a time England was in open war against the United States. It's not really the same right now with Chinese companies trying to get into the US market and vice versa. Both countries claim to be allied but there's a clear disregard for the laws of one particular country!
Maybe a better analogy to what Francis Lowell did would be operation paperclip. The US did steal technology from Germany at the end of the war [0].
You forgot that last part. China's trade dealings are outright hostile. China's overlooking slave-wages, and suicides tied to working conditions or lack thereof.
China must be considered /by all/ to be an enemy of the rest of the globe.
This is not saying that the Chinese populace are enemies, but the Chinese Government, which controls the populace, is most definitely so.
This is a mostly western view since westerners engaged in a zero sum conflict with the oldest super power on the planet to gain temporary economic advantages for the last 100 years or so... most of the world doesn't agree with that view of China even with the $ billions ($trillions?) of anti-Chinese propaganda spending by the west.
America as the world police/bully and China leverages itself by being slightly better. The US should offer a better deal than China can, its better than bombing the shit out of people, scaring them with weapons, and having them hate us for killing their countrymen or family.
And don't even think about saying it is not forcing them, because I have lived in two such countries in Central America where Taiwan was a hefty money donor.
From a realpolitik standpoint, you can choose a small island that makes mostly advanced microchips or a large country that makes everything. Are you going to say they didn't make a rational choice in allies?
And if you don't see that as human rights problem, consider you're wasting your finite intelligence resources on dead ends and so you're not finding the traditional spies that's just some dude that's been bribed.
On a more general note:
Your style of argument is really tired. Who is going to commit wrongdoing on the part of the Chinese government if not mostly Chinese people? You can always try to reframe the issue as one of discrimination, since most of the offenders are bound to be Chinese. It’s pointless.
It's also clear that ethnically Chinese people have been specifically targeted.
Anming Hu is a Canadian citizen born in China, who was a professor at the University of Tennessee. The FBI got him fired before he even went to trial by telling the University he was a spy. In the end, all the FBI actually had on him was that he hadn't reported a small speaking fee on an official form. It wasn't even obvious if reporting the fee was necessary. The whole thing turned out to be a racially motivated fishing expedition by some local FBI agent, and Hu was acquitted. But the FBI majorly screwed up his life and career and smeared him in public first.
A lot of the cases have turned out to be like this. See Gang Chen's case at MIT. That one is almost Kafkaesque, when you read the charges and then read the background.
0. https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-09-16/why-trump-...
Can that not also be leveraged against the US, and how others feel about it? America is the world's bully or policeman.
>IMO it is the closest thing to pure evil in this world next to the DPRK.
Check out Eritrea, commonly called the North Korea of Africa. They will extort foreign family members for money so they don't kill their family in Eritrea. I know a programmer in Australia, sends lots of money back money to a country he hates so they don’t kill his family. China doesn’t even do that. Of course the US also double taxes. ;)
According to who? The Chinese govt?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/12/chinese-uyghur...
>”Genocide" means a systematic attempt to physically destroy an ethnic or religious group. The 3-child policy in China (which applies to the Han majority as well) does not even come close to being anything like an attempt to physically eliminate the Uyghur people.
There is no basis for your claim that the forced sterilization/abortions of the Uyghur people occurs at similar rates within the Chinese majority, or that it is merely an enforcement of the three child policy.
All of the sterilization / birth control claims are sourced to Chinese government data. That's the best data available.
Given the large economic investment in Xinjiang (which is part of China's attempt to decrease dissent) and the very visible improvements in living standards there, it makes sense that life expectancy is increasing.
> There is no basis for your claim that the forced sterilization/abortions of the Uyghur people occurs at similar rates within the Chinese majority
Up until a few years ago, forced sterilization / abortion was something that basically only the Han majority was subject to. The Uyghurs were exempted from the 1-child policy, just like most ethnic minorities.
Over the last few years, China has loosened the policy, so families can now have 3 children, but it has started applying it to ethnic minorities as well.
> There is no basis for your claim [...] that it is merely an enforcement of the three child policy.
No basis? There's no basis for believing otherwise. If you pay attention to the reporting, the horror stories are mostly about people who have had more children than the policy allows. You can very legitimately oppose China's 3-child policy, but calling it "genocide" is obvious hyperbole.
"Genocide" is an extremely serious accusation. It means an attempt to physically annihilate a people. It evokes images of death camps and crematoria. Yet you're now arguing about whether or not the Uyghurs might be subject to harsher enforcement of the 3-child policy or not. That's not genocide. The word should not become a cheap rhetorical tool.
“Documents from 2019 reveal plans for a campaign of mass female sterilization … Xinjiang planned to subject at least 80 percent of women of childbearing age in the rural southern four minority prefectures to intrusive birth prevention surgeries (IUDs or sterilizations), with actual shares likely being much higher.”
https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/future-perfect/22311356/chi...
I will not be responding further.
The UN Genocide Convention is very clear about what is and is not genocide. There's no possible way to construe a situation like this, in which the population and life expectancy of the group is increasing, as genocide. In fact, describing it as genocide sounds like propaganda.
If the Chinese government were trying to physically annihilate the Uyghurs, which is what the very serious word "genocide" means, it would be obvious. We would not be discussing whether or not the 3-child limit was being more aggressively enforced on Uyghurs. We would be discussing mass death.
I don't need the CCP to tell me that "genocide" implies mass killing and physical annihilation of a people. I'm perfectly capable of seeing that the word "genocide" is being misused in a highly manipulative way in the political discussion nowadays, and of pushing back against that.
> What's plaguing American academia, and America at large, is China's influence and bribes.
What is plaguing the US in money is not bribes but appeasement to the Chinese market like Hollywood superhero movies, Apple kowtowing, and newpapers refusing to critique it in a truthful way. Academia is more plagued by internal politics, publish or die, p hacking, and a desire not to be canceled. China supports sciences and people who don't have funding for their interests do not have laboratories that can support their kind of interests. The US needs to fund STEM better.
This is very different from policies that attempt to control the entire world, from the US, the USSR and some European powers. By and large China doesn't care what you do in your own country, unlike the USA.
Also, Tibetan Buddhism is VERY FAR from the "most peaceful faith on the planet". The reason why the Chinese were able to take Tibet so easily is because the Buddhist elite were incredibly brutal with the majority of the population, with widespread slavery and massacres. They were absolutely hated. It doesn't justify their seizure but we don't have to whitewash one of the most horrific political systems for it.
These are common CCP talking points, in fact primarily devolving from Chinese sources, which seek to turn Tibet into a nation in need of saving by debasing it into barbarism. Whatever half-invented, invented or factual casus belli the invaders invoked, half a million Tibetans were marched last year into work camps by CCP occupiers. [1]
In terms of historical accuracy, I stand by my claim: the Islamic and Christian faiths each hold a history of violence that squarely puts Buddhism at the top for peace. I do not deny the violence by the Buddhist Brigade and other factions proclaiming Buddhist faiths in Sri Lanka and Burma happening today but on the historical whole, no major faith comes closer.
[1] https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/china-forces-500-000-tibet...
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_Territori...
Tibet was a much poorer place that was mostly serfs.slaves before China invaded. They lived in worst conditions. It is only in pop culture is is a religion of peace.
https://medium.com/illumination-curated/the-truth-about-tibe...
Unfortunately I would advise you to learn more about Tibet's dark history. I used to think that Buddhists were all peaceful until they justified rape, killing, theft and other genocidal actions towards the Rohingya. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_genocide
Religions can be good, but they can also make good people do evil things. There is not a religion I know that has never had been used for evil. Do not group relidions, see people as individuals.
>sword rattling for Taiwan
They do not want to destroy it, they want to capture its infrastructure. The weather will force China to take it over in basically 2 weeks or withdraw due to the weather too treacherous.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/25/taiwan-can-win-a-war-wi...
> Yes, the Taiwanese Army projects that it can only hold off its enemy for two weeks after the landing—but the PLA also believes that if it cannot defeat the Taiwanese forces in under two weeks, it will lose the war! Yes, the disparity between the military budgets on both sides of the strait is large, and growing—but the Taiwanese do not need parity to deter Chinese aggression. All they need is the freedom to purchase the sort of arms that make invasion unthinkable. If that political battle can be resolved in the halls of Washington, the party will not have the power to threaten battle on the shores of Taiwan.
I'm afraid the only pop culture at work to justify a violent takeover is the one invented by the CCP. No one denies the violence perpetrated by Buddhist-affiliated factions in Burma and Sri Lanka.
> Religions can be good, but they can also make good people do evil things.
There is one greater evil at work here, that of political atheism, which, when summing up the terrors of other atheist parties throughout time lead to the greatest human death toll committed by other humans in all of human history. I'm speaking of the Great Leap Forward, the Holodomor, and the Nazi Holocaust.
Here in China (Im an imigrant), what matters is the forced march to progress at all cost, even human rights, under the guidance of the glorious leader Xi. Nobody in the party or the population gives a flying fuck about invading countries and all international propaganda is made not to submit to China as an individual but to repeat the glorious mission statement for the party internal work when speaking only about China. I disagree with the party's method because they forget that we ll pay the price of the crunch once the middle class is emancipated and need to start being politically responsible: as long as we ask monkeys to program computers we wont expand so we need to accept having free citizens or to not progress.
However the US truly aim at facilitating the expansion of its companies via cultural assimilation, MUCH more than what China does now (it could come later ofc), and entire countries are transformed via soft propaganda (movies and such) to adapt and start consuming american products that wouldnt matter otherwise. It's better than the Camps in Xinjian, but the camps are IN Xinjian, not in Normandy where I grew up under american influence.
So meh, balance. Both should compete until the end of time so they leave us alone.
For the most part global citizens choose to watch Netflix and Disney and listen to Lil Wayne.
Different story with internment camps.
Put another way, Americans listen to K-pop and watch Parasite because it’s good and they want to.
>Put another way, Americans listen to K-pop and watch Parasite because it's good and they want to.
People listen to kpop because its played everywhere, its recommended in playlists, others play it, not because its good or they want to.
No? Nobody does.
> People listen to kpop because its played everywhere, its recommended in playlists, others play it, not because its good or they want to.
So everyone is recommending this music to their friends and playing it... but they don't think it's good.
Something here doesn't add up.
The algorithms are suggesting it. Is pop music good if radios play it all the time?
That is not clear to me.
AFAICT they want the respect due to a super power.
>> That is not clear to me. @worik
>>> The “dispute” regarding the construction of 11 Chinese buildings on the Nepali side of the territory in Humla came to the fore after Indian newspapers reported Chinese encroachment in June 2020...
>>> The most recent skirmish - on 20 January - left troops on both sides injured. It took place along the border in India's Sikkim state, which is sandwiched between Bhutan and Nepal. The year 2020 was particularly violent. The June clash in the Galwan Valley - fought with sticks and clubs, not guns - was the first fatal confrontation between the two sides since 1975. India acknowledged its deaths. China did not comment on reports it also suffered fatalities.
>>> Malaysia has said it has summoned China’s ambassador to protest against the “presence and activities” of Chinese vessels in Kuala Lumpur’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the South China Sea off the island of Borneo. Chinese vessels, including a survey boat, were operating off the coasts of the Malaysian states of Sabah and Sarawak in contravention of 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement late on Monday.
>>> China's growing economic footprint in Ukraine may already be producing geopolitical consequences that put the country at odds with core European priorities. Zelensky decided earlier this year to withdraw Ukraine's condemnation of Chinese government crimes against the Uighurs of Xinjiang, in what bore all the hallmarks of a quid pro quo to ensure deliveries of Chinese Covid-19 vaccines.
... these are just tidbits of the overall overarching theme of China dominating everyone everywhere in everything. These and other incidents seem to put the lie to the phrase: 'That is not clear to me.'
Either you're the least informed citizen in your country, you don't /ever/ read news, or you're outright lying. None of those are good options.
In any case, just the tiniest bit of searching would reveal China's hostile intent world-wide. To state otherwise is to be willfully ignorant.