|
CommieGIR posted:Depends on access to decent rail infrastructure. Nope. Water transportation is typically a fraction of the cost vs rail. For a US example, if time was not an issue, and you wanted to send a container from say, Los Angelos to Memphis, it would be significantly cheaper to put it on a boat, have it sail through the Panama canal, to New Orleans and then up the Mississippi rather than a direct overland rail route which is less than half the distance the boat would have to travel. No one moves anything by rail unless they absolutely have to. This is why almost all rail traffic patterns typically hauls primary resources like metal ores or grains to distribution points along major waterways and then ship manufactured goods back into the interior. This is why no one uses the silk road anymore and also why landlocked countries are almost invariably poor. Tei posted:Is that or just the normal effect of industrialization? I mean this is the normal pattern of Industrialization. Let's go back to the genesis of East Asian prosperity. The 4 Asian Tigers of Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore were among the first wave of major players in the Asian economy that experienced rapid industrialization in the 50s and 60s, rose to develop complex and advanced financial markets that sustained them once their industrial boom was over. Only one of those 4 Tigers had a US military footprint. I think Cpt Obvious is obviously trolling but in the event, he is just misguided, it isn't just about who got bombed and who got FDI. The formula is actually pretty simple, the issue is whether the political elite in control actually execute on the formula or do they just become corrupt, and embezzle money for short-term gains. The factors for lifting your population up from abject poverty are pretty simple. -The first geographic. Is your city, region, country located to and has independent access to an ocean or major waterway that leads to an ocean and is not reliant on another sovereign power for said access. You can't manufacture poo poo if you can't ship in raw materials and ship out finished goods cheaply or access is at risk of being cut off. Bonus points if you are a producer of a strategic resource (like oil or precious metals), or you are situated at a natural hub where shipping lanes would regularly flow since significant infrastructure might already be present. -The second is demographics. Is your city, region, country have a population pyramid that is the right way up rather than inverted. If you are poverty-stricken, then this usually isn't a problem as people die early and have lots of kids. And is the base of that population educated in literacy and basic arithmetic/mathematics. Cheap human labour in factories requires basic literacy so they can follow instructions and you need to be able to hire/create a class of intermediate white-collar sector to run the administration and logistics of your factories and shipping companies. Language isn't a problem you can always translate instructions and accounting is accounting. If the populace can't read or write, or you have to invest your own money into it, good luck. -The third is legal. Is your city, region, country capable of a rules-based legal system that is predictable to the foreign investor and subject to the rule of law. We aren't talking political freedom here. We are talking about a system where Mr. Moneybags can walk in, pay to buy land, build a factory and hire workers to make the factory crank out goods and make huge profits without random seizures, loss of business, or in the worst-case scenario, random detention. Greasing palms isn't usually a significant barrier. Just as long as greasing palms is predictable and buys you actual fair or preferential treatment when it comes to the law and maintaining your business. -The final one is political. Is the political elite stable enough and focused enough to enact the decades-long policies necessary for the 2nd and 3rd factors to play out over time? Ex, if greasing palms is part of the business culture, is the political structure stable enough that FDI won't have to grease another set of palms after some factional struggle? Usually, you need incentives such as tax deductions or other freebies in order to make your location more attractive to long term FDI than the other guy so if the political class prioritizes short term gain (possibly due to lack of stability) then it is going to be difficult to attract business. Also are the politics of your country anathema to the West. If your government regularly spews out anti-capitalistic rhetoric, FDI might be in doubt whether #3 actually exists. Naturally, the more successful your little fiefdom becomes, the economy must transform before the foreign factory owners pick up shop and leave for the same reason they left home in the first place - high labour cost. The 4 Asian Tigers gave way to China who will now soon give way to others. The question now is how will China transition? Labour and money, like water, will always seek the lowest point and China is already rising out of dry land. Even if it wanted to try and develop the interior, the challenges are that it is rapidly running out of demographic runway and Xi in the past 5 years has made decoupling with the West somewhat of a priority. His economic speeches sound almost Autarkic in nature, talking about how Chinese production should feed Chinese consumption. This is another reason why alarm bells should be ringing. Trade is a natural reason to avoid war. If you are important all your natural resources or cheap goods from a country, attacking them seems like a bad idea for your own economy. Likewise, attacking your best customer also seems counterproductive. Autarky is the reliance of the self which means China - a major net energy importer - would be wary of the trade from the outside. I mean, it would rather suffer from rolling blackouts and its citizens in Manchuria freezing in the dark rather than lose face and accept Australian coal after cutting them off due to pride. So like the Japanese, they are going to have to build their own version of the Co-Prosperity Sphere (Belt and Road) to ensure their resource needs are met.
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 02:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
MikeC posted:This is why no one uses the silk road anymore and also why landlocked countries are almost invariably poor. There aren't all that many landlocked countries in the world in general, but a glance at Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg doesn't exactly show that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 03:01
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Nope. Water transportation is typically a fraction of the cost vs rail. For a US example, if time was not an issue, and you wanted to send a container from say, Los Angelos to Memphis, it would be significantly cheaper to put it on a boat, have it sail through the Panama canal, to New Orleans and then up the Mississippi rather than a direct overland rail route which is less than half the distance the boat would have to travel. No one moves anything by rail unless they absolutely have to. This is why almost all rail traffic patterns typically hauls primary resources like metal ores or grains to distribution points along major waterways and then ship manufactured goods back into the interior. This is why no one uses the silk road anymore and also why landlocked countries are almost invariably poor. This isn't true at all, even in China, while most of the cities are nearer to the shore, a lot of the heavy industry is further inland and China transports a lot of logistics by rail to the coast  Nobody just builds on the coast for export purposes, and a lot of industry isn't just for export. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 03:06
|
|
|
Hrm Mike's post accounted for river transport; and China has a load of rivers/canals which let it ship a lot of goods deeper inland. Its hard to tell from that map but it looks like the vast majority of the inland industrial regions are by major water ways.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Hrm Mike's post accounted for river transport; and China has a load of rivers/canals which let it ship a lot of goods deeper inland. Its hard to tell from that map but it looks like the vast majority of the inland industrial regions are by major water ways. That could be almost coincidental as towns tend to pop up along major waterways, especially heavy industry like textile and metal foundries.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 03:11
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:There aren't all that many landlocked countries in the world in general, but a glance at Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg doesn't exactly show that. The vast majority of landlocked countries are absolutely poor, although whether that's specifically due to them being landlocked as opposed to a sparsity of natural resources, corruption, bad neighbours or all of the above is another matter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 03:12
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:This isn't true at all, even in China, while most of the cities are nearer to the shore, a lot of the heavy industry is further inland and China transports a lot of logistics by rail to the coast China's internal rail network is designed to move coal and minerals from the western provinces to the east where it is consumed or shipped out - 70% of freight in China that runs on rails falls into those two categories. That and to move people. Industrial freight accounts for next to nothing, it is 5%. Rail is there, like I said before, to address logistics when resources are located inland where there are no navigatable waterways. They are building multimodal links precisely because shipping by water is much, much cheaper when talking mass volume over long distances in the hopes that FDI will move inland. But we can see it isn't exactly a smash hit given other countries are starting to take over China's role at the very bottom of the manufacturing pile like in textiles. China retains an edge in heavy industry because emerging competitors don't yet have the capacity in those areas. How long that will last, who knows. url]https://bg.qianzhan.com/trends/detail/506/201225-1b79fc07.html[/url] Translation "In 2018, the volume of railway containers accounted for only about 5% of China's total railway transportation. According to the "Thirteenth Five-Year Railway Container Multimodal Transport Development Plan" issued by the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Transport and China Railways, the railway container volume is planned to reach about 20% of the total railway freight volume, and the railway-waterway integrated container freight volume is planned to start from 2020. It will increase by 10% every year starting from 2010." Chongqing, a major inland industrial hub transports 90% of its goods on the Yangtze. https://www.seetao.com/details/40250.html. China certainly has a rail strategy, like any other industrialized country, but it is mainly to address the need for time-sensitive goods, as I have already mentioned. But it is undeniably more expensive. Much, much more expensive. So when the major consideration is cost when figuring out where to set up shop as Mr White Business owner, yes you can set up shop in interior China, but you have to weigh that against the cost of simply setting up shop in Vietnam or Indonesia and just skip the inland transport which adds on time delays and costs vs just having factories an hour from the coast, loading them up on lorries and then heading straight for the piers. You can view the same pattern in North America if you like. The economies of the Great Lakes-St Lawrence basin in Canada and the entire Mississippi network was built on water freight when manufacturing and resource extraction were the major players in the 19th century.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 05:05
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:There aren't all that many landlocked countries in the world in general, but a glance at Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg doesn't exactly show that. 2/3 are tax shelters and Austria has an economy highly integrated with its neighbors (who do have ocean access). For truly landlocked you need to look at nations like Afghanistan and Kazakhstan. Much of their trade is at the whim of nations who might at any moment turn hostile. There are a lot of nations like these if you go looking around on Google Maps. Being far away or denied reliable access to international naval routes is prohibitive to development. It doesn't make it impossible (again, see Kazakhstan), but it makes it more difficult. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Oct 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 06:29
|
|
|
Austria has access to the Danube at Vienna; Switzerland to the Rhine at Basel. Both are very large inland intermodal port cities. Returning back to China though - China has inland waterways and major intermodal terminals on said waterways too; effective freight on the Yangtze does stretch as far west as Luzhou (on the southeast of Sichuan province), 'only' several hours away from Chengdu. My hot take however is not that the barrier is practical access to intermodal freight, but instead the barrier being a more attractive site than already-existing parts of China. Developed countries all over the globe are seeing concentrations to leading cities, with towns or even third tier cities instead shrinking; it's not all about the shipping.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 06:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MachinePix/status/1449129896387616771 I've worked with rail freight companies before, and MikeC is right, they generally just make a beeline for the water unless it's convenient to stop somewhere along the way. MikeC posted:
I broadly agree with what you're saying here, but I'd argue that it's not that simple or easy, at least not if you think beyond just rising above abject poverty. Each of these bullets has an entire sub-field of development behind it and a virtually endless list of failed interventions. And while it may suffice for making sense of the historical development trajectory of currently wealthy places, it is far from a formula that others can follow and get the same results. Development geography is about a lot more than access to sea routes. Lots of places have access to sea routes but face other geographic hurdles, like being in disease-ridden, infertile places or still being isolated. And there are always weird exceptions to the patterns. There are things you can do to overcome geographic disadvantages, but they might involve the kinds of sophisticated physical infrastructure, public health, agriculture, leverage and agreements with neighbors, etc., that poor countries tend not to have. On your population/education point, of course you start with a young and uneducated population, because as you point out, those demographic characteristics are derivative of poverty. And while I think a lot of poor countries have done dumb poo poo with education policy (e.g., trying to establish prestigious universities instead of decent primary schools for all), it's still a tough nut to crack. Not all cultures have long histories of valuing education. School can be a real cost or an opportunity cost for poor families engaged in agriculture or cheap manufacturing/service labor. The final two points on law and politics are about institutional effectiveness and rule of law. How do you establish effective institutions and stable political systems in places without histories of them? It's hard as gently caress! And while there is compelling evidence that institutions are causal for economic development (basically the whole careers of Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson, who wrote Why Nations Fail), it doesn't really explain how you actually build institutions. Those points seem to cover infrastructure, health, education, and rule of law/justice — yes, all critical components of development. I'd argue that there are other important factors for development, too, namely finance. There's also good evidence that the old playbook just doesn't generate the same returns. We may see more poor countries effectively use industrial policy to drive mass employment in sectors like apparel as they graduate up to higher levels of income, but they're not going to get as far with it as East Asian countries did. The same cheap-labor industries don't even look the same. They're far more capital intensive now and require less labor, meaning they'll pull fewer people out of poverty. Ethiopian apparel wages are about $40-$50/month and attract people with college degrees. It's going to remain a relatively small industry there, and they appear to be betting more on value-added agricultural exports to drive growth, not manufacturing, despite the excitement and growth in recent years. This is really getting off the topic of China, though, which I think (as you point out) faces some tough challenges on the development front.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 07:18
|
|
|
it's always struck me that the Rodrik-esque argument of premature deindustrialization (on the argument of a relatively automated nature of low-cost manufacturing) rests heavily on data extracted from a period where China exists: but China represents a uniquely large shock anyway, due the favourable age structure and sheer size at the time it joined the world economy one detects a note of prestige favouritism... everyone wants to leap to being Korea, with shipbuilding and LCD panels and chemicals with intimidating names. they politely omit the undignified stage where South Korea specialized in exporting human hair wigs (at one point it was the second-largest export in Korea, even more so than the other HPAEs - all of which were briefly big in textiles. And other things made from fibres, viz., wigs) I'm not saying that a 'Gregory Clark's technologically-unemployed horse' scenario is impossible but that perhaps the trend features that one China-shock datapoint too heavily, with its focus on a massive one-stop-shop clusters instead of selectively picking off the unsexy parts of a global value chain as the earlier HPAEs did The pattern is recapitulated with the NICs, with prestige flag-carrier automobiles in Malaysia failing whilst automobile parts manufacturing and assembly in Thailand succeeded in securing a niche ronya fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Oct 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 11:59
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:
tell that to my partner's family getting deported from Leningrad to Kazakhstan for the crime of... wait there was no crime I'm sure it was absolutely correct though, they deserved it. Completely different from when the capitalists do similar poo poo. The kazakhs deported further south in advance definitely also deserved it, of course, no tankie racist bullshit there it was all reactionaries. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Oct 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 12:43
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:tell that to my partner's family getting deported from Leningrad to Kazakhstan for the crime of... wait there was no crime You aren't going to get the tankie stanning for North Korea to ever admit fault. Just enjoy the impossible to parody performance art of someone bursting into the thread to say "Oh yeah, would a moron think this!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 13:02
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I'm also again be very clear: If Captain Obvious returns and spouts more "Well, the Chinese can't be doing genocide" its a threadban. I'm done with this. Stop tiptoeing around the line. Maybe you should stop being a baby and allow for opinions that offend you. The last few probes here were extremely weak. As a lurker, this thread is only interesting when the there’s an actual debate, not when it’s just a circlejerk. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 17:36
|
|
|
Starks posted:Maybe you should stop being a baby and allow for opinions that offend you. The last few probes here were extremely weak. As a lurker, this thread is only interesting when the there’s an actual debate, not when it’s just a circlejerk. There is no debate over the fact that the CCP is enacting a genocide of the Uyghur people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 17:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MazMHussain/status/1450870151495176195?s=20
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 18:12
|
|
|
Starks posted:Maybe you should stop being a baby and allow for opinions that offend you. The last few probes here were extremely weak. As a lurker, this thread is only interesting when the there’s an actual debate, not when it’s just a circlejerk. You can talk about China without denying genocide- I don’t see why this is so hard. Talk about their space program, science funding, infrastructure initiatives, diplomatic moves, whatever. Just don’t also go “Uyghurs camps don’t exists and if they do they probably deserved it” which if that is your stance makes you human garbage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 18:19
|
|
|
Starks posted:Maybe you should stop being a baby and allow for opinions that offend you. The last few probes here were extremely weak. As a lurker, this thread is only interesting when the there’s an actual debate, not when it’s just a circlejerk. Exactly what I said when these weak babies got on my case about wanting to debate against people who think the Jewish genocide happened! Suddenly that was 'wrong'?? What about the marketplace of ideas? And I agree with you that the most important thing is that the thread be interesting! If marginalized groups must constantly have atrocities against them propagandized as overblown (or even actually good) and perfectly legitimate, in order for the thread to stay interesting for you, I'm all for it. It's the absolute priority. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 18:23
|
|
|
Starks posted:Maybe you should stop being a baby and allow for opinions that offend you. The last few probes here were extremely weak. As a lurker, this thread is only interesting when the there’s an actual debate, not when it’s just a circlejerk. If this is the best you can do, lurk more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
Maybe I am wrong but Kavros' post read alot like sarcasm to me and doesn't warrant a probation
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 19:09
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Maybe I am wrong but Kavros' post read alot like sarcasm to me and doesn't warrant a probation yeah, i don't think he was being serious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 19:10
|
|
|
Sarcasm about my family being put in death camps ain't funny whether it's intended or not. "lol the jews got gassed get it, i am very communist; it was so funny when they choked on their own blood"
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Maybe I am wrong but Kavros' post read alot like sarcasm to me and doesn't warrant a probation It does read as sarcasm, but its also a "Too soon" sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 19:13
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:It does read as sarcasm, but its also a "Too soon" sort of thing. fair's fair
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 19:55
|
|
|
How are u posted:There is no debate over the fact that the CCP is enacting a genocide of the Uyghur people. someone should do something
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 20:50
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:someone should do something Because I've seen a lot of tankies who think that saying a genocide is going on in china really is somehow a way for America to declare war on china, because all genocides must be stopped.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 21:58
|
|
|
Pharohman777 posted:And that something is? What are you trying to insinuate? What is anyone going to do about it though? For how horrible it is, it's a useless factoid taking up headspace unless it leads to practical actions, no? E: like before you bring out your pitchfork, think for a second what have you done to help? America Inc. fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Oct 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
Sorry, I've just seen enough lines of tankie logic go down that path and end in 'so therefore we must not call it a genocide or ever talk about it because otherwise america will declare war'. On a bit of a hair trigger recently, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 23:26
|
|
|
I think the gist is we can acknowledge the cultural genocide the PRC is doing while also realize we really can't do much about it at the same time. It loving sucks to say that, but here we are. The bigger problem in the thread is the tankie apologists coming out to defend China over it. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Oct 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 23:30
|
|
|
The thing to do about it is to take steps to try to prevent China from going after the next obvious target which is why we can see the US putting considerable effort into developing its military alliances in the Pacific, to the extent that Australia became country number two to get access to that intensely precious nuclear sub tech. Much less intense efforts but still visible is long term strategic goal for the developed world to be less economically dependent on ships being able to move in and out of the South China Sea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2021 23:39
|
|
|
no hay camino posted:What is anyone going to do about it though? For how horrible it is, it's a useless factoid taking up headspace unless it leads to practical actions, no? By this standard pretty much all of D&D is useless. Probably 95% is some form or mix of explanation of what's going on in the world, predictions of what's going to happen, normative yet reasoned arguments about what should be done, the occasional rant to vent, or the occasional comic relief. Some of that may inform what people do in their real-world lives — voting, donating, changing personal behaviors, etc. — but it's probably very rare and of negligible impact. There are groups — governments, civil society, and even businesses — taking action on what is happening in Xinjiang. That doesn't mean they've done enough or that they will have an impact. A lot of governments, mainly but not exclusively Anglosphere and European, were strengthening laws and enforcement around human rights in supply chains before Xinjiang started getting more mainstream attention. We are only just seeing some of that grow some teeth (e.g., US CBP hitting Malaysian PPE suppliers with WROs), and the trend is accelerating. You can argue about the real motivators, the hypocrisy, if it will have an impact on China at all, etc., but it is happening. If people in this thread want to take action, pressure your government or vote or join an advocacy campaign or whatever, assuming you live somewhere where that is possible. NGOs have been working on issues in Xinjiang for ages. I don't know enough about them to say which are doing good work, but I'd bet there are at least some that are providing services to Uyghur victims, advocating to governments, doing valuable watchdog research, etc. They probably won't move the needle tremendously on Xinjiang, but someone who wants to take action could donate to one or volunteer time. Many businesses, regardless of their motivations, are dead serious about Xinjiang now. They see the writing on the wall and know where legislation and public sentiments are going. Getting hit with a WRO by US CBP is like a surprise nuclear attack on your company. A lot of them want governments to take the lead here, because they don't think it's their role to deal with this issue but consumers expect them to do so. But in the meantime they're still taking action, changing suppliers, investing in supply chain tools and practices that make it easier to prevent, detect, and remediate issues, and even funding NGOs that are working on the issue. I don't want to overstate it, because there are still tons of companies that are clueless, don't give a poo poo, or are responding in the worst possible ways. I also don't think anyone can point to any big companies and say "buy your clothes from them because they 100% have no exposure to human rights violations in Xinjiang." But that day may come, and then you can change your personal behaviors. Or if you work in a company where you can have an influence, do it. All of these combined influences and everything we do as individuals may still only have marginal impact on China. It doesn't mean we shouldn't try anything. For what it's worth, I've spent the last half decade working on issues like this with governments, NGOs, and businesses. I am much less experienced with Xinjiang because many of those groups are scared shitless about what will happen to them if they make one wrong statement. I think it's one of the reasons Malaysia is getting smacked around right now (rightfully so) and seeing real progress in addressing labor issues as a result. They're a much easier target. My problem with shitposters in this thread is not their tankie opinions but their lazy posts that amount to spam. They make low-effort, illogical, inflammatory arguments backed with zero evidence or really poor evidence. Others then take the time to dismantle their arguments, often really good posts. The tankies then just ignore, spam more poo poo, resort to bad faith tactics, or literally just deny the reality presented to them (see Cpt_Obvious getting humiliated in the USNews thread about Vietnam). A lot of their positions and arguments are so extreme that actual Party members would be flabbergasted. I know because I have the luxury (?) of breaking bread with Party members regularly, and they have far, far more nuanced and varied views on Xinjiang than the tankies in this thread (and many of the non-tankies for that matter). I imagine they'd view tankies about the same as a Buddhist monk views some kid on gap year who shaves his head after a yoga retreat and starts spouting what amounts to heresy. Meanwhile the tankie posts don't help anyone understand the situation in China better, don't make any interesting predictions, offer only the most eye-rolling normative arguments, and are rarely funny (and it's unintentional when they are).
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 02:09
|
|
|
On the whole water access chat, Austria did have access to the Med directly up until WWI, plenty of time there to industrialize while it was an empire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 02:32
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I think the gist is we can acknowledge the cultural genocide the PRC is doing while also realize we really can't do much about it at the same time. It loving sucks to say that, but here we are. I'm confused, it seems that you are doing a genocide denial by merely referring to what the PRC is doing in Xinjiang as "cultural genocide". From reading the general concensus of the thread i was under the impression that literal death/labour camps were being operated with forced sterilisation, arbitrary imprisonment etc. It's a bit of a bad look for a mod to minimise such as just "cultural genocide" rather than actual genocide. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 10:20
|
|
|
Oh just gently caress right off with that tired bullshit. Edit: quoting in case they change it. thatfatkid posted:I'm confused, it seems that you are doing a genocide denial by merely referring to what the PRC is doing in Xinjiang as "cultural genocide". From reading the general concensus of the thread i was under the impression that literal death/labour camps were being operated with forced sterilisation, arbitrary imprisonment etc. Megillah Gorilla fucked around with this message at 10:54 on Oct 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 10:52
|
|
|
Megillah Gorilla posted:Oh just gently caress right off with that tired bullshit. Umm i'm not sure what seems to have offended you in my post. Didn't realise you were a genocide denier too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 11:12
|
|
|
So this seems significant: https://www.ft.com/content/3f6575a5-048c-411d-8103-162d4b27fcbb (https://archive.md/4r8U0) Caixin is mainly establishment business press, it's like going after the FT
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 12:51
|
|
|
thatfatkid posted:Umm i'm not sure what seems to have offended you in my post. Didn't realise you were a genocide denier too. So you're still salty you ate multiple week long probes for genocide denialism and this is the best you can come up with?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 13:14
|
|
|
China doesn't even make particularly good tanks ronya posted:So this seems significant: What exactly does 'ban on republishing' mean? That power still wants the analysis of the... bold decisions they have upcoming but doesn't really want the general population seeing that analysis?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 14:06
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:China doesn't even make particularly good tanks So basically news aggregates within The Great Wall can no longer source or link to Caixin. Caixin's day to day operations itself is not being directly affected. It is basically a shot across the bow. It is not surprising with the Evergrande situation expanding to other firms failing to meet its loan obligations. With housing prices falling they may be warning the entire financial news sector to watch what they say and try to avoid panic. I am not personally familiar with Caixin but reports on this say they were kind of mavericks turning over rocks that maybe need to stay undiscovered for now. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-new-home-prices-stall-amid-crackdown-speculation-2021-10-20/
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
The thing about talking about the Uighur genocide is that there's not often much new to say other than it's still happening. If there is some kind of appreciable amount of terrorism happening in Xinjiang, I'd be interested to hear about it to give more context. It wouldn't invalidate the suffering of the group as a whole, just like it doesn't invalidate Palestine's suffering when they fire a few rockets that don't hit anything and Israel levels buildings in "retaliation". But there's other news that comes out of China, and sometimes it's just weird. https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1451174905404342275?s=20
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2021 15:13
|
|
