Strong Rhetoric on China

[Woofers and Tweeters]

2 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

That's not really on point. 

You said that we were allies in WWII, that is where your point was and that I responded to. We can talk about since WWII, too.  

[Jeff Matthews]

Anyway, this topic is of interest to me because we have a significant Chinese population in Katy, where I live.  I have befriended a number of Chinese as a result, and these issues personally affect them and their families and friends back home.  They are quite helpless, and it's kind of heart-wrenching to personally witness its effects, which are so far-reaching.  China is intimidating their family members back home to coerce Chinese living here in the US to disclose to Chinese authorities their internet account data, including their social media passwords and all sorts of information.  

[Woofers and Tweeters]

10 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Given the size of our economy, while that sum is large, I'd consider it a mere tithe if that's the cost of restoring human rights there.

I might be wrong, but I will bet that elected officials do not care about human rights, unless it will cost votes .  Big money makers do not care, regardless. 

[Travis In Austin]

27 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Not quite sure what you two mean by that.  In WWII, we were allies.  China actually suspended its own civil war to join the allies against Japan.  After the war ended, they resumed their civil war.  The communists won.  The capitalists fled to Taiwan.  

I agree with all of that, but that omits two critical periods in where we currently are in US-Sino relations: the first critical period, from '49 to '72, and the second critical period, from '72 to present.

 

What is the issue(s) you wish to raise with the video?

 

Economic, trade war? The current overall relationship between US and China?  How we got here.  The reporting on China's tactics?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jeff Matthews]

1 minute ago, dwilawyer said:

I agree with all of that, but that omits two critical periods in where we currently are in US-Sino relations: the first critical period, from '49 to '72, and the second critical period, from '72 to present.

 

What is the issue(s) you wish to raise with the video?

 

Economic, trade war? The current overall relationship between US and China?  How we got here.  The reporting on China's tactics?

 

Serious human rights violations over there, whether we should care, what we should do, and the risks we should be willing to take.

[Travis In Austin]

13 minutes ago, Woofers and Tweeters said:

I might be wrong, but I will bet that elected officials do not care about human rights, unless it will cost votes .  Big money makers do not care, regardless. 

The US, UN, and pretty much everyone else, has been negotiating human rights with China since 1972.  

 

But when would human rights in China cost votes to a Congressman in the US?  

 

I agree that the level of priority that human rights is given as part of a negotiation  can fluctuate greatly.  

[oldtimer]

7 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

But when would human rights in China cost votes to a Congressman in the US?

when it costs their constituents their jobs.  Interesting how it always circles back to the same thing, isn't it?

[windashine]

would a one word answer that starts with an "I" be appropriate ?

[Travis In Austin]

42 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Anyway, this topic is of interest to me because we have a significant Chinese population in Katy, where I live.  I have befriended a number of Chinese as a result, and these issues personally affect them and their families and friends back home.  They are quite helpless, and it's kind of heart-wrenching to personally witness its effects, which are so far-reaching.  China is intimidating their family members back home to coerce Chinese living here in the US to disclose to Chinese authorities their internet account data, including their social media passwords and all sorts of information.  

There is a large community in Austin as well.  High tech engineers.

 

 

 

[Jeff Matthews]

1 minute ago, dwilawyer said:

There is a large community in Austin as well.  High tech engineers.

 

 

 

Petro engineers over here.

[Travis In Austin]

23 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

when it costs their constituents their jobs.  Interesting how it always circles back to the same thing, isn't it?

How would human rights violations, in any country, cost US workers jobs?

 

Isn't cheap labor ( with no real cost to US companies, such as taxes) what costs constituents their jobs?

 

Consumers drive making changes in labor practices in fashion/clothing, coffee production, exotic woods etc, don't they?  

[Travis In Austin]

I guess we are in our own bubble over here,  China is big news, human rights and otherwise, in all of the foreign policy journals I subscribe to, it has been big news in MSM for decades, and it started to be a big issue for Texas last year,

 

https://lbj.utexas.edu/lbj-school-home-new-ut-china-public-policy-center

 

Quote from news release, emphasis is mine,

 

 

"Angela Evans, dean of the LBJ School, said: “I am honored that the university has entrusted the LBJ School to be the center’s home. The China Public Policy Center will be a hub for collaboration among multiple disciplines in our work to create innovative approaches to policy challenges in the global arena. No one is better suited to lead this new policy-focused center than David Firestein. I warmly welcome him to UT and to the distinguished LBJ team.”

 

The China Public Policy Center will increase the impact of the study of China policy and diplomacy at the state’s flagship university. China is the world’s second largest economy, America’s largest trade partner and a formidable economic competitor. China is Texas’ third largest export market and the second largest source of imports. Texas is also the third most popular destination for Chinese foreign direct investment and the third most popular U.S. state destination for Chinese undergraduate and graduate students. 

 

“China is a vitally important global player, the United States’ single most consequential overall bilateral partner, and a country of immense and growing importance to Texas, its economy and its people,” David Firestein said. “The University of Texas at Austin, a premier institution of higher learning in the United States and the world, has a mandate to ‘change the world.’ This new China Public Policy Center, which I am deeply honored to be entrusted by President Fenves and Dean Evans to stand up and lead, will help The University of Texas realize that ambition.” 

A former U.S. diplomat, Firestein has spent most of his 25-year professional career working on China and U.S.-China relations. In the course of his career as a professional diplomat and senior executive at a top-50 U.S. think tank, Firestein has made significant contributions to U.S.-China relations, at both the conceptual and practical levels. His work has garnered written plaudits from numerous former U.S. secretaries of state, national security advisers and members of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as senior mainland Chinese and Taiwan officials. In 2006, on the strength of his China-focused external communications efforts, Firestein won the Secretary of State’s Award for Public Outreach. He is the author or co-author of three books on China, including two China-published, Chinese-language best-sellers, and well over 100 policy papers, op-eds and articles in major international periodicals. Described by the Voice of America’s Mandarin Service in November 2016 as “one of the best nonnative speakers of Chinese in the world,” Firestein has interpreted for scores of U.S. and Chinese Cabinet-level officials. A native of Austin, Firestein is a graduate of UT Austin’s joint master’s degree program in public affairs and Asian studies. He previously served as an adjunct member of the UT graduate faculty, teaching U.S.-China relations and U.S.-Russia relations. 

[T2K]

 

If 'Life' is assumed to be a part of Human Rights, where is that guaranteed ?

 

Keith

[Zen Traveler]

8 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Serious human rights violations over there, whether we should care, what we should do, and the risks we should be willing to take.

We shouldn't have stuck with the TPP and tried to work within it. 

[Jeff Matthews]

54 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

We shouldn't have stuck with the TPP and tried to work within it. 

You're still not getting it.  China is not oppressing its citizens because we insist on better trade terms.  China is oppressing its people despite our trade policy.  You keep thinking if we improve trade with China, they will stop oppressing their people.  This is far from the case.  Sticking with the TPP will do nothing for the Uyghurs being held in concentration camps and all the myriad authoritarian crackdowns going on over there.

[Jeff Matthews]

22 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

1 hour ago, Zen Traveler said:

We shouldn't have stuck with the TPP and tried to work within it. 

You're still not getting it.  China is not oppressing its citizens because we insist on better trade terms.  China is oppressing its people despite our trade policy.  You keep thinking if we improve trade with China, they will stop oppressing their people.  This is far from the case.  Sticking with the TPP will do nothing for the Uyghurs being held in concentration camps and all the myriad authoritarian crackdowns going on over there.

Let me be more clear.  China appears to be on the verge of going through another Cultural Revolution.  Diversity is out.  Dissent is out.  Party is king.  Laws and rights are secondary.  They want a singular population devoid of ethnic tensions.  They are trying to indoctrinate minorities forcibly to achieve this.  They are also destroying the artifacts of their culture (mosques, etc.).  They are engaging in ethnic cleansing.  This has nothing to do with foreign policy of the US - except in regard to how we choose to react.

 

Remember the outrage you and many others expressed concerning our domestic "Muslim ban?"  China is engaging in a "Muslim ban on steroids."  It's not our fault.

 

China is imperialistic, and its frontier has been the regions adjacent to the ME.  There is a large Muslim population in those regions.  The Chinese version of "Anglo" is called "Han."  Hans presently account for about 40% of the population in Xinjiang province.  This 40% is clamping down hard on the 60% that is not Han (mostly Muslim).  China is continuing to build more concentration camps as fast as they can.  If you are a Han and sympathetic to the plight of the Uyghurs, you are dangerous, too, and in need of some "re-education" in one of their many camps, where you are taught to chant, "Long live the party.  Long live Xi Jinping!"   Not our fault.  Not a trade issue.

[Jeff Matthews]

You should also look into China's current plan to institute a national "Social Credit Score" for citizens.  Your score will determine whether you get to travel freely, etc.  The score is not simply derived from your debt/repayment history.  It will be based on many things, such as your family surname, your internet search activity, your affiliations with friends, etc.  Basically, your score will be shite and you will be deprived of rights unless you tow the party line.  

[oldtimer]

9 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

How would human rights violations, in any country, cost US workers jobs?

 

Isn't cheap labor ( with no real cost to US companies, such as taxes) what costs constituents their jobs?

 

These are related.  A good propagandist (visit the primary definition of propaganda) could point it out easily.

[windashine]

.. o O (the rhetoric of an antithesis)

[oldtimer]

54 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Let me be more clear.  China appears to be on the verge of going through another Cultural Revolution.  Diversity is out.  Dissent is out.  Party is king.  Laws and rights are secondary.  They want a singular population devoid of ethnic tensions.  They are trying to indoctrinate minorities forcibly to achieve this.  They are also destroying the artifacts of their culture (mosques, etc.).  They are engaging in ethnic cleansing.  This has nothing to do with foreign policy of the US - except in regard to how we choose to react.

 

Remember the outrage you and many others expressed concerning our domestic "Muslim ban?"  China is engaging in a "Muslim ban on steroids."  It's not our fault.

 

China is imperialistic, and its frontier has been the regions adjacent to the ME.  There is a large Muslim population in those regions.  The Chinese version of "Anglo" is called "Han."  Hans presently account for about 40% of the population in Xinjiang province.  This 40% is clamping down hard on the 60% that is not Han (mostly Muslim).  China is continuing to build more concentration camps as fast as they can.  If you are a Han and sympathetic to the plight of the Uyghurs, you are dangerous, too, and in need of some "re-education" in one of their many camps, where you are taught to chant, "Long live the party.  Long live Xi Jinping!"   Not our fault.  Not a trade issue.

This and these kinds of things have been ongoing for years.  Tibet has been an issue in the same way.  You almost seem shocked at recent efforts despite their long running history of oppression, especially of minorities.  Our foreign policies have often used human rights abuses as part of the reasoning to do one thing or another, sometimes to criticism at home simply because it conflicts with other interests.