[agoodthrowaway]

I don’t really understand comments like this. US has lots of problems but we do have the semblance of rule of law. We do have the notion of transparency and you do not get sent to a labor camp if you have political views antithetical to the state.

The Chinese can and do simply disappear people without the semblance of due process. Their history also is one of ethnic cleansing as the Han people have pushed out or marginalized most other ethnic groups.

The history of: The Great Leap Forward, The Cultural Revolution, and Tianammen Square is pretty awful.

[dependenttypes]

The US is better in terms of handling its own citizens compared to China but they are much worse in terms of international affairs. Consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r... or the bombing of civilians in middle east with killer drones.

[slimed]

Let's check back in a few decades and see if this still holds true. I suspect the current disparity is due the US holding the title of unchecked global super power for the past century while China is still getting up to speed. What happens when Belt & Road initiatives start to be expropriated by radical populist governments in the 2040's?

[jessaustin]

Do you think it will take that long? Surely China will expect its investments to start paying back before 2040?

This still seems like a strange, "pre-crime" sort of standard to which to hold China. You're almost counting USA misdeeds against China: "since USA did all these horrible things, you can be sure China will do even worse, someday!"

[lenkite]

He is right - China is now growing as a super-power and only just beginning to flex their muscle in international affairs. For a proper judgement, you will need to wait a few decades to take a decision on whether they will apply the same principles they use in domestic affairs to international affairs.

Knowing that they treat their third-world neighbours in contempt and tend to regularly infringe on territorial sovereignty, I suspect that answer will be yes. Your media does not tend to cover such affairs.

[frequentnapper]

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. China has total control over its citizens/illegally occupied territories and look how its abused its power. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what would happen if China had global dominance that US currently enjoys - just someone disengenuous to pretend to ignore it.

[sam_lowry_]

What illegally occupied territories, exactly?

[totalZero]

I'm guessing the reference is to Taiwan, mainly, but there is no shortage of disputed territories, including Tibet and a number of border regions near India.

[dodobirdlord]

Tibet

[slimed]

China plays a much longer game than the US. But sure, let's say next decade then. Your analogy is poor. I'm describing the behavior of all hegemonic empires in history. You seem to think the US is a special case. Why is that?

[jessaustin]

I don't think USA is "special" in any sense. I mentioned it only in response to the direct comparison you made between China and USA.

[slimed]

You're beating around the bush. If you agree that hegemonic states engaging in imperialism isn't "special", why are you so resistant to the idea that China will behave that way once it has the opportunity? If you ask those in Tibet and Xinjiang they would argue that they already are.

[totalZero]

One-dimensional arguments are rarely applicable in trying to discover reasons for, and implications of, foreign policy.

China is one of the most exploitative world powers in its relations with resource-rich developing countries. And it's no stretch to say that without the Soviet push for communism to take root in Latin America, the USA would have had little need to support authoritarian right-wing governments there.

[oska]

And the USA is the most exploitative country. By far.

It's odd watching US Americans (I presume) attack China while defending their own country's horrendous record (witness your cavalier setting aside of the CIA's evil doings in South and Central America). You simply don't appear to understand that a large number of people don't like super-states and that includes both the USA and China (and also the USSR up until its dissolution).

[Xylakant]

> I don’t really understand comments like this. US has lots of problems but we do have the semblance of rule of law

I, as a European citizen have no practical way to benefit of that semblance of rule of law.

[ForHackernews]

I don't think that's true at all. If you have a grievance, you can bring a case in American court and be assured of at least a reasonably fair hearing. Far better than in China, at any rate.

[umvi]

I'm sure you enjoy imported goods in your European country no? Imported goods that were likely shipped to you via pirate-free shipping lanes courtesy of the US Navy?

[sam_lowry_]

Even Russia sent their military ships along Somalia borders. This was and still is a military cooperation.

[ralusek]

The US has the strongest military in the world by...a lot. And they're probably your ally. It's better if your ally has semblance of rule of law rather than the alternative.

[kofejnik]

As a European, you benefit immensely from being a member of NATO, you might be a part of Russia otherwise. To think US and China are equally bad requires an astonishing degree of naivety

[sam_lowry_]

>As a European, you benefit immensely from >being a member of NATO

We are having US nukes in our backyard. This adds as much worry as it adds protection.

[washadjeffmad]

The US allows suspension of the law when and where it suits the people who are tasked with serving and protecting it.

Our problem is often of federation. We can't just tell every state to do a thing and expect it to happen - the whole powers enumerated thing in the Constitution made sure of that. We'd have to get every district involved, replace the DAs, vote out governor's, appoint all new officials to get people who won't just uphold the status quo. Change happens from the bottom up.

We also have our own domestic and state sponsored massacres. We have mass shootings and healthcare crises and blacksites and a troubled history with eugenics and ethnic cleansing and medical and military experiments on the unassuming public.

We have labor camps for prisoners in the form of contracted call centers and menial work that pays inmates cents per hour (and "sentenced to hard labor" wasn't that long ago), and a private prison system that colludes with courts and police to keep cells full by any means, no matter the harm to it's occupants. Cash for Kids was an American Enterprise.

You might say these are lesser or more distant wrongs in the face of fresher "foreign evils", but they are no less blemishes for where or when they are perpetuated. Not fighting against them here because there's worse happening there is pretty un-American to me. Setting the example you want upheld is a pretty simple way to live.

[wangii]

don't worry, if American hadn't done these, it will. for starters, how about make Chinese govt. the evil force and every Chinese a potential threat?

seriously, I'm not even going to blame America. it's the tragedy of great power politics. to maintain its hegemony, it will and has done whatever takes. any illusion of moral superiority, is just illusion.

[oska]

> I don’t really understand comments like this.

And I don't understand how you don't understand. It was a very simple point that was being made - that the US has projected far more violence outside its borders over the last century than China. It's an irrefutable point and, from the perspective of people who live neither inside China or the US and so don't have to worry for themselves about how violent those governments are inside their borders, a very pertinent one.

[totalZero]

If you don't include proxy wars fought between China and the US, and you don't include wars where the US came to the aid of allies after intense fighting was already underway, and you don't include wars where the US was retaliating to a direct attack on its soil, then I don't actually believe your assertion to be true.

So it depends how you count.

[zabana]

> the chinese can and do simply disappear people without the semblance of due process

Hum you could use a chat with one or more guantanamo bay inmates

[zzddffgg]

The scales here are extremely different. Millions of uighurs are being detained en masse for their race and religion. Guantanamo has 40 inmates who are related to national security. It's a false equivalence and disrespectful to uighurs to compare them to terrorists.

[CWuestefeld]

to compare them to terrorists.

There are no terrorists at Guantanamo - at least not until such time as we hold a trial to determine whether they are. In this case that's not splitting hairs, the failure to observe the Bill of Rights is quite the point.

[vixen99]

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/features/uighurs/ https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2019/nov/24/dont-lis...

[CWuestefeld]

I have no idea whether I agree with your post, because I'm not going to bother to follow the links. If it's not worth your time to at least write a sentence introducing the links, then it's not worth my time to follow them.

[ceres]

As a non-American, should I be more worried about a state that attacks its own people or one that has a demonstrated history of invading other countries and forced regime changes in those countries?

From a pragmatic perspective, I'd choose the former.

[lenkite]

You appear to have forgotten the Chinese invasion and ethnic cleansing of Tibet.