[FooBarWidget]

If I think a few steps ahead, about the implications so what you say, then this is what I read:

Unless the Chinese people overthrow their government, and succesfully install a democratic government, they do not deserve to gain wealth through business with the rest of the world, and do not deserve to live a good life. The chaos and suffering that such a process brings is not important. The unknown chance that a post-overthrow government is both democratic and competent, is also not important. The fact that the Chinese people's lives in the past 30 years have become tremendously more free and more prosperous, and that these are the best 30 years in the past 3000 years, is also not important.

In the words of Kishore Mahbubani: do you want to FEEL good, or DO good? Condemning China on a single ideological issue, while ignoring the complexity of the context as a whole, feels good because it aligns with your values, but doesn't do anybody anything good.

Actual good changes are achieved through more dialog, better mutual understanding, better relations and rational approaches.

[ir77]

china's masses have traded freedom and liberty for wealth and prosperity -- or i should say had them 'exchanged for them by their government'. but make no mistake, that wealth and prosperity is only there for those that support the regime, how are dissidents treated? how are muslims treated?

i don't understand your argument, just because the chinese are wealthy and happy doesn't mean they can't be be shunned for their ideology.

your argument is like the comment i heard when i traveled to chartleston and all the locals still to this day lament the civil war -- the war of northern aggression -- and how prosperous and beautiful life was in charleston [beacause it was all supported at the colossal expense of slavery]. this is your argument for china: ignore the slavery of the mind and actions, look how prosperous they are; well, some of them anyways.

i'm happy to say that i live on the side that won't sell you a seat at the table simply because you've brought a bunch of money with you. that there is some principal reason that goes beyond that.

[FooBarWidget]

That is not my argument at all. My argument is not, ignore the things you disagree with. It's: if you want to change them, that cannot be achieved just by denying business with them and with a 'my way or the highway' attitude. Instead, dialog and understanding yield better results. And you're not doing that.

You also state a number of things that I think are not as factual as you believe. I do not know whether you are interested in challenging those believes, so I will keep my mouth shut about them unless you indicate you are willing to.

[ir77]

no snide remark intended, but please do enlighten me.

i understand where you're coming from when you say "denying business with them"... but i believe that approach is taken because it is such a bottoms-down regime. because any business invariably gets approved by the regime and simply benefits the regime. it's not like a dissident is allowed to live there disconnected with the government and do business independently and start a voice/party to challenge the status quo -- that business man is there because the government allowed him to exist and he knows it.

[FooBarWidget]

If you are interested in discussing such things, I suggest we take the discussion off HN, because HN is not the right place. Please feel free to reach out to me through the contact details you can find if you follow the links in my profile.