[oreally]

Sounds like the typical westernized narrow view of China.

Whenever there's a rising power that threatens the current number #1, you'll see such events happening. It has happened time and again and the only difference now is that there is far less blood being spilled.

On the flip side, the rest of the world remembers what dirty things the US did during it's hold on global power. WMDs in iraq, double ethical standards in conflicts around the world. In this case many chinese think this whole debacle is a based off lies fabricated by dubious western sources (which has some basis behind it) and they're reacting accordingly.

As was shown when China helped the US during the UN security meeting to not declare the iraq war illegal, big powers will abuse whatever they have and can get in their own interests. The problem is whether you western folks will be played by your institutions into doing things that destroy your own credibility in the eyes of the rest of the world.

[hayst4ck]

> In this case many Chinese think this whole debacle is a based off lies fabricated by dubious western sources

This is very true, our media lies to us, and it lies to you, but isn't there something to be said about not having the freedom to think what you want in your own country, nor being able to read what information you want?

No matter who commits a condemn-able act it should be condemned, most of all if it's your own group. The most scary thing to me about China or a Chinese hegemony is not the shift of power, but that Chinese citizens are unable to be informed nor are they able to condemn their own government. There is no public veto for CPC behavior. China has assumed the role of the victim (century of humiliation), but acts as the abuser (destruction of Tibetan/Uigher/Hong Kong culture and a desire to destroy Taiwan), and then justifies the abuse it doles out by the abuses it has received.

The second most scary thing to me about Chinese hegemony is that dialogue is primarily based around power. Who has the power to do what, not what is morally right, not the rules that should apply to all countries and people, but most of all itself. So what is China's moral basis and ethics system founded upon? Might makes right. That is terrifying to me.

> The problem is whether you western folks will be played by your institutions into doing things that destroy your own credibility in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Does China's own credibility not matter?

[oreally]

> This is very true, our media lies to us, and it lies to you, but isn't there something to be said about not having the freedom to think what you want in your own country, nor being able to read what information you want?

Sure, but priorities need to be in order. The average chinese asian person prefers food, water, medicine, competence, before a moderate amount of freedom within reason. Their 'overton windows' are not as wide as america where you have NRA blocking gun law reviews despite mass shootings. You'd also never have someone of Trump-like competence in charge; there's a certain degree of vetting within the chinese political system.

> The second most scary thing to me about Chinese hegemony is that dialogue is primarily based around power. Who has the power to do what, not what is morally right, not the rules that should apply to all countries and people, but most of all itself. So what is China's moral basis and ethics system founded upon? Might makes right. That is terrifying to me.

'Might makes right' is omnipresent in negotiations of every geopolitical sphere of influence. Yes, the chinese have been increasingly aggressive as of recent, but still I can pluck some facts to ally your fears:

- China hasn't invaded any other country since 1979 Vietnam. That's 30+ years.

- It's more interested in growing it's soft power.

- Chinese have had their children being sent to US varsities. When they return to China they'll have a certain degree of ethical standards and impact over the long term. China's government does still listen to its citizens despite what you think.

> Does China's own credibility not matter?

Yes it matters. It's trying to setup global institutions like the Belt Road Initiative, and other Asian lending bank which I can't remember the name of (which the US dislikes). Time will tell if it makes the same mistakes as the western ones have. As I said, watch them.

[hayst4ck]

>The average chinese citizen prefers food, water, medicine, competence, before a moderate amount of freedom within reason...

Do you think fox news viewers see themselves as manipulated? Do you think these people are born fearing their guns will be taken away and democrats want to murder babies? Do you think they see these things you say as bad? Fox news viewers perceive themselves to be informed, they are adamant that they are and that what they are told is right. They believe their politicians are competent despite all evidence to the contrary.

You say the overton window is more wide in America, but ignore the idea that the overton window is controlled in both china and republican controlled media. The system is the flaw, not the instantiated output of the system.

Do you think with controlled information you could influence Chinese citizen preferences? Do you think an average person would be able to discover incompetence if all whistleblowers were arrested? Do you think the media would report criminal incompetence? If there is incompetence, but the state run media protects it, how do you know if your perception of competence is even remotely correct?

If your government was performing genocide, but reporting on it in a completely different framing, and limiting all direct evidence of the topic, do you think its possible you could be misinformed? Let's assume China is doing truly evil things in Xinjiang. If that was a fact, how would that make you feel?

> Trump-like competence in charge;

Yeah. I am happy Trump was not able to execute any kind of great leap forward.

> China hasn't invaded any other country since 1979 Vietnam. That's 30+ years.

China doesn't invade countries. It declares its territory and then says stay out of internal matters. Otherwise, it might make me feel better, but it's very curious to me, that while I (an American) was in Vietnam, Vietnamese seemed to not have much of a problem with me, but they were very open about their dislike of China.

> Chinese have had their children being sent to US universities.

One can hope, but the idea that investment into china will lead to democratization or a boost to human rights seems pretty bleak. China's action's in Hong Kong made it's heart very clear.

My fears are not allayed and won't be until China gives up on any form of military conquest of Taiwan and Chinese people can speak freely.

[zenexer]

Nothing that the US or any other country has done justifies China’s actions. This isn’t a contest to see who’s worse. Your entire argument here is tangential to the fact that China’s actions have been ridiculously abusive.

Has my own country done some despicable things? Yes. Is it still doing despicable things? Yes. That doesn’t mean I have no right to point out abuse elsewhere. Abuse is abuse; to the victim, it makes very little difference whether it’s one government or another. If abusive actions come to my attention, the absolute least I can do is condemn them.

[oreally]

Sure you can point it out, echo it, but your words mean very little if it's based off dubious sources like Adrian Zenz. To China you westerners look like the guy on the higher moral ground, yelling slogan after slogan together with other like minded people but when approached with facts continue to repeat the same slogans.

Why trust an institution that lies? What happened to the truth? Or do westerners value their version of freedom over the truth? If you want relations to move forward consider that.

[zenexer]

> your words mean very little if it's based off dubious sources like Adrian Zenz

My words? I don’t think I’ve ever quoted anyone by that name, let alone stated an opinion based on such a source.

> To China you westerners look like the guy on the higher moral ground

“You Westerners?” I’m me. I have opinions of my own. I act as an individual. I neither support nor condone many of the actions taken by my government or other people in my country—I’m frequently disgusted by their actions. We are not a single entity; we are a loose collection of individuals who disagree more often than we agree. I do not represent “the West,” nor does “the West” represent me. I’m strongly opposed to arbitrary groupings of people based on factors they cannot reasonably control.

> yelling slogan after slogan together with other like minded people but when approached with facts continue to repeat the same slogans.

What slogans? I’m not part of some hivemind; I develop my own opinions based on a wide array of sources, and those opinions are in constant flux. I do not subscribe to a single philosophy or political ideal.

> Why trust an institution that lies?

Which institution? I don’t trust any media outlet or governmental institution to provide objective, unbiased information. I question everything. I question my government, I question China’s government. What have any of them done to deserve my trust? Nothing. Nothing at all.

[jcranmer]

It's funny that you mention the WMDs in Iraq. This is an episode of US foreign policy that many people and countries (rightfully) criticized. Yet when it happened, the US didn't start boycotting everyone who criticized it; the worst that happened was US Congress deciding to change the name of "French Fries" to "Freedom Fries" in its cafeteria [1].

In contrast, China right now seems to be responding right now to anyone who dares to criticize it with immediate sanctions and reprisals. I'm not immediately aware of any time in the history of hegemon replacement cycles where either the old or the new hegemon acted in such a manner.

[1] Amusingly, the dish isn't even French, it's Belgian.

[petre]

A liar always covers their lies with more lies. In the case of totalitarian states such as the PRC, it's called propaganda, changing the narrative and rewriting history books with alternative history, aka fiction.

The Nixon administration took another approach in the US: they started the war on drugs to discredit and silence the anti war hippie movement. This worked fine for those in power, but had and still has a lot of victims. Chairman Xi would have probably pulled a Tiananmen.

[alasdair_]

The US does all kinds of terrible things but, importantly, we are all mostly[1] free to call these things out and make it clear that bullshit is happening.

The CCP is different. Their censorship is overt and draconian. Even the most wealthy and powerful citizens of China risk being taken in for questioning for speaking the truth about power.

[1] Manning, Snowden, Assange et al notwithstanding.

[tirrex]

I’m from a country which US did its dirty things in it but don’t even compare China to US. China is another league, a big threat to the rest of the world and China has a lot less credibility than US.

[mlindner]

It's funny you speak for the rest of the world when it's quite clear in what they publicly say that they support the US rather than attack it.

[jonathannat]

This seems like a very US-centric response. As I wrote

> China sanctioned US/Canadian/UK/EU individuals and entities

> erased H&M (swedish company) in all major Chinese platforms

[8note]

Those are all American colonies. What's the difference?

[mlindner]

EU, Canada, the UK, and Sweden are American colonies are they now? Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?