|
 at the thought that anyone in D&D gets offended when you criticize the US of all places.A shameful snipe.
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 09:43 |
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:
Americans reserve the right to criticize themselves only in the most abstract, guilt ridden terms that ultimately mean very little. Point out how India, Russia and China would be better stewards for the world than western imperialist powers and watch as all the liberal guilt melts away and the inner jingoism comes out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 15:39
|
|
|
Most of US states are functionally third world countries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 15:49
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Americans reserve the right to criticize themselves only in the most abstract, guilt ridden terms that ultimately mean very little. Point out how India, Russia and China would be better stewards for the world than western imperialist powers and watch as all the liberal guilt melts away and the inner jingoism comes out. Aral Sea? Never heard of it. If we're putting someone in charge of the world I vote for the Dutch. They basically hosed a country out of the ocean so they can probably figure things out. Also they love windmills. Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Dec 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Noted great steward of the ecology, Russia. And locks. And levees. All of which we're gonna need as sea levels rise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:As I said in the previous page, Americans love talking about what their government is doing wrong but god forbid other countries criticise America as a whole. you realize this is a thread about China and politics, right
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 16:51
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:Most of US states are functionally third world countries. you believe at least 50% of the United States of America is the same as a third world country?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 16:54
|
|
|
The Great Autismo! posted:you believe at least 50% of the United States of America is the same as a third world country? By land mass most of America is third world. Visit NE Missouri sometime, where electricity and running water is still not a given.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:
Welp, guess millions are going to die no matter what we do. CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Americans reserve the right to criticize themselves only in the most abstract, guilt ridden terms that ultimately mean very little. Point out how India, Russia and China would be better stewards for the world than western imperialist powers and watch as all the liberal guilt melts away and the inner jingoism comes out. Not sure if trolling or really believes this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
Wistful of Dollars posted:Welp, guess millions are going to die no matter what we do. Only if the West fails to meet its moral obligations to the rest of the world which judging by history means we're boned
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:Only if the West fails to meet its moral obligations to the rest of the world which judging by history means we're boned Let's up the tally to billions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:By land mass most of America is third world. Visit NE Missouri sometime, where electricity and running water is still not a given. I have. Have you visited the 3rd world before?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
Wistful of Dollars posted:Not sure if trolling or really believes this. CAPS LOCK BROKEN aka Pevan Stan is a fascist. He genuinely believes it because he loves autocracy, especially autocracy that he feels is appropriately formed along ethnic lines. Purple Prince posted:Only if the West fails to meet its moral obligations to the rest of the world which judging by history means we're boned "Millions of people will die without coal power" is literal fossil fuels executive rhetoric. You are part of the problem. But let's elaborate on this notion of moral obligation, especially since you yourself have argued such on the foundation of individual egalitarianism. To what extent is an immigrant from the developing world to the USA or other western country bound to this moral obligation? Do Syrian or Latin American migrants share this original sin? What about African Americans and Asian Americans? Native Americans? Since the implicit substance of your argument is that "The West" contributed most to climate change over the previous several hundred years of industrialization, shouldn't this moral obligation only apply to individuals with ancestry from industrialized countries (mainly in Europe,) spanning the centuries since industrialization? If not, why? Second, let's dispense with that and assume for the sake of argument that the moment someone becomes a permanent resident of Europe, North America, or Japan that they immediately inherit this moral obligation. That means that roughly 1 billion people bear this shared moral responsibility. From an egalitarian sense, this would mean that the developing world's "you started it" budget would be roughly the same at 1 billion. This, obviously, doesn't account for the population of even China or India alone, let alone the rest of the developing world. Does the developing world have to stop at emissions equivalent to 1 billion Westerners? If so, this seems to defeat the very purpose of your argument since that's still a lot of people who would be "left behind." If not, and they get to double or even triple the West's historical emissions, it would not be long until the emissions of the developing world increase exponentially to the point that they far exceed even the total aggregate emissions of the West. And of course, once you start making "Well it's their turn" excuses for China, India is going to expect the same accommodation with their emissions. And since that precedent is well and firmly established, Southeast Asia obviously gets the same consideration. And once the Middle East gets its poo poo together it'll be their turn of course, to say nothing of the extreme amounts of carbon-fueled growth that Africa is entitled to in light of its history of exploitation. At a certain point, this sort of solution to climate change is the leftist equivalent to "drill baby drill" where your problem clearly isn't Co2 emissions, but that the Co2 emissions aren't coming from the correct people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:Part of the reason the US and Canada can reduce their emissions is they just outsource heavy industry to China and the global south. Also give me a break. China and the global south aren't composed of automatons whose sole agency is determined by how westerners pluck their strings. They are deploying carbon-intensive heavy industry because they choose to do so. The West is complicit in providing capital and markets, but China and the global south are hardly being held at gunpoint.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:China and the global south are hardly being held at gunpoint.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
A huge amount of the renewable power capacity in China is currently wasted, since provincial/local governments don't want to connect to or buy from their neighbours, since it doesn't benefit their own local power generating industry. Even on a provincial level there is a lack of high capacity interconnections between rural and urban areas, since putting up windmills looks better than the boring infrastructure required to fully utilize them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 23:06
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Americans reserve the right to criticize themselves only in the most abstract, guilt ridden terms that ultimately mean very little. Point out how India, Russia and China would be better stewards for the world than western imperialist powers and watch as all the liberal guilt melts away and the inner jingoism comes out. You and Modi have a lot in common so I can see why you'd pick India as your preferred hegemon
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 00:23
|
|
|
Assuming, which I do, that the world will ignore and bicker about climate change until it's too late (it may be already) it seems a rich, strong, industrially and scientifically sophisticated China would be uniquely positioned to rescue the world from this disaster by actively pulling carbon from the air at a mass scale, or possibly other cooling and enviromental control methods. What western government could put together the will to spend like would be needed? China has both the state economic control and hubris to tackle this. The way it has combined industry academics and the state for research could be the model.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 00:46
|
|
|
Spectral_beard posted:Assuming, which I do, that the world will ignore and bicker about climate change until it's too late (it may be already) it seems a rich, strong, industrially and scientifically sophisticated China would be uniquely positioned to rescue the world from this disaster by actively pulling carbon from the air at a mass scale, or possibly other cooling and enviromental control methods. What western government could put together the will to spend like would be needed? China has both the state economic control and hubris to tackle this. The way it has combined industry academics and the state for research could be the model. Why don't they just build another planet and move everyone to it
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 00:51
|
|
|
If they do that they could reuse those delightful child astronaut propaganda posters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
Spectral_beard posted:If they do that they could reuse those delightful child astronaut propaganda posters.  The west is in terminal decline, western chauvinists like forjar can only rattle their cage as the walls close in on the anglosphere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 00:59
|
|
|
China is going to rip itself apart as soon as the Himalayan glaciers disappear and all of the great Chinese rivers along with them. It is going to be extremely bad, and at this point it's inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
How are u posted:China is going to rip itself apart as soon as the Himalayan glaciers disappear and all of the great Chinese rivers along with them. It is going to be extremely bad, and at this point it's inevitable. Yeah I don't know about that. It seems to me that the people melting glaciers would gently caress over more would be the hundreds of millions in central and west asia first before any ripple effects hit outwards towards the PRC. And unlike the impoverished Afghans who rely on those glaciers for 90% of their fresh water, the PRC could adapt in a century to utilize widespread desalination along with better water conservation features, since the glaciers are projected to run completely dry in over a century from now. Also, it is important to keep in mind that the demographic curve means that 2100 China will have probably less than a billion people, which eases things considerably when it comes to resource use. I doubt that mother nature will do westerners' dirty work for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Also give me a break. China and the global south aren't composed of automatons whose sole agency is determined by how westerners pluck their strings. They are deploying carbon-intensive heavy industry because they choose to do so. The West is complicit in providing capital and markets, but China and the global south are hardly being held at gunpoint. The rest of the world actually was being held at gunpoint by the West over the last few centuries. I don't doubt that part of what motivates China and much of the Global South is the perception that industrial development is one of the only ways they can assert their economic sovereignty and grow while reducing the prospects of neocolonial meddling. Anything short of a friendly approach Western business interests continues to means the US targets you for regime change if not outright civil war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:21
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:The rest of the world actually was being held at gunpoint by the West over the last few centuries. I don't doubt that part of what motivates China and much of the Global South is the perception that industrial development is one of the only ways they can assert their economic sovereignty and grow while reducing the prospects of neocolonial meddling. Anything short of a friendly approach Western business interests continues to means the US targets you for regime change if not outright civil war. This is literally just a different coat of paint on the same neo-colonialist argument; that only the West has true agency and everyone else just reacts to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:25
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:The rest of the world actually was being held at gunpoint by the West over the last few centuries. I don't doubt that part of what motivates China and much of the Global South is the perception that industrial development is one of the only ways they can assert their economic sovereignty and grow while reducing the prospects of neocolonial meddling. Anything short of a friendly approach Western business interests continues to means the US targets you for regime change if not outright civil war. It's unfortunate that "asserting economic sovereignty" will lead directly to the end of human civilization as we know it. Ah well, we're all going down together.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:25
|
|
|
How are u posted:It's unfortunate that "asserting economic sovereignty" will lead directly to the end of human civilization as we know it. Ah well, we're all going down together. Interesting that westerners could have prevented this, but instead want to shift the onus entirely to poor countries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:This is literally just a different coat of paint on the same neo-colonialist argument; that only the West has true agency and everyone else just reacts to it. It's a more accurate appraisal of reality than demanding standard of living reductions in places the West robbed and laid to waste (or continue to). You're being incredibly disingenuous here. I'm not denying anyone's agency. They are free to play the hand they're dealt and end up like Cuba or Bolivia -- or unjustly reviled among the propaganda-addled political mainstream in the US like China.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
Tell us more about how China is being victimized by "US propaganda." You can start with Xinjiang.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Tell us more about how China is being victimized by "US propaganda." You can start with Xinjiang. How about the wall-to-wall propaganda blitz in favor of violent rioters in HK: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
So your argument is that Western media is covering the Hong Kong protests a lot, therefore concerted propaganda campaign? Is it a concerted propaganda campaign as well when they talk about things like the Afghanistan papers, Wikileaks diplomatic cables, or the Snowden revelations? What about when they cover all of America's gun violence or the ICE facilities? Furthermore, are you suggesting that Hong Kong, Haiti, Ecuador, and Chile are all equally relevant globally? Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Dec 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:So your argument is that Western media is covering the Hong Kong protests a lot, therefore concerted propaganda campaign? The two flagships of anglophone media have covered the events in Hong Kong over 10x more than the other protests around the world combined.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:So your argument is that Western media is covering the Hong Kong protests a lot, therefore concerted propaganda campaign? I didn't say concerted, except in concert with the prevailing ideological winds -- the bipartisan China bashing that coincided with Trump's trade war. Fojar38 posted:Is it a concerted propaganda campaign as well when they talk about things like the Afghanistan papers, Wikileaks diplomatic cables, or the Snowden revelations? What about when they cover all of America's gun violence or the ICE facilities? After getting their money's worth, the media threw Wikileaks and Snowden under the bus at the earliest opportunity. The Afghanistan papers, while interesting, have also only come out as the war has winded down and grown even more politically untenable. The domestic issues are legitimate problems but covered along partisan political lines. We heard relatively little about ICE under Obama, for example. Fojar38 posted:Furthermore, are you suggesting that Hong Kong, Haiti, Ecuador, and Chile are all equally relevant globally? Yes, anywhere in Latin America is more relevant for Americans (we're talking about the US media, remember?) than Hong Kong based on proximity and shared history. But the shared history is also highly inflammatory to the fragile sensibilities of American jingoists. Bathtub Cheese fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Dec 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:17
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:I didn't say concerted, except in concert with the prevailing ideological winds -- the bipartisan China bashing that coincided with Trump's trade war. So because it paints China in an unfavorable light, it is automatically propaganda? That's not what that word means. Bathtub Cheese posted:The media threw Wikileaks and Snowden under the bus at the earliest opportunity. The Afghanistan papers, while interesting, have also only come out as the war has winded down and grown even more politically untenable. The domestic issues are legitimate problems but covered along partisan political lines. We heard relatively little about ICE under Obama, for example. You haven't explained what the difference between the media covering things that embarrass China and covering things that embarrass the USA in terms of credibility, which is what I was asking. All you've said is that they didn't cover things that embarrass the USA hard enough for your liking. To say nothing of the fact that your argument is simply pointing to correlation and saying "therefore, causation." Which is like the most basic argumentative fallacy anyone can make. Bathtub Cheese posted:Yes, anywhere in Latin America is more relevant for Americans than Hong Kong based on proximity and shared history. But the shared history is also highly inflammatory to the fragile sensibilities of American jingoists. Ah, so since proximity is the sole measure of relevance, we can therefore safely assume that any coverage of Vladimir Putin or Boris Johnson in US media instead of Carlos Quesada is a sign of anti-Costa Rican or anti-Latin American bias (Except of course when the US media does cover Latin America in which case we get endless tankie screeching about the existence of coverage being de facto aggression, See: Cuba and Venezuela)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
"All these people yelling about how they hate it when I fart on them is clearly in concert with the prevailing ideological opinion of farts smelling bad. I sense an anti-fart conspiracy."
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:You haven't explained what the difference between the media covering things that embarrass China and covering things that embarrass the USA in terms of credibility, which is what I was asking. All you've said is that they didn't cover things that embarrass the USA hard enough for your liking. The US media not only covered the HK protests to a disproportionate extent but the coverage was rarely, if ever, critical despite sustained property damage and violent rioting. The media treats those activities as flat-out discrediting to social movements when they happen here for even a single day, whereas in HK it happens for months and it's treated as (at worst) a necessity in the face of Chinese tyranny. Fojar38 posted:
You're just putting words into my mouth at this point. I realize part of the posting schtick in D&D is passive-aggressively wasting the time of people you disagree with by way of tedious bullshit in place of insults, but you could at least put some effort into it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
So, uh, just as a thought exercise, how precisely are you going to politically convince China/the global South at large to accept a lower standard of living than the West? Especially if the West continues to refuse to lower its standard of living? "Everyone is going to die if you don't!" may be true but the blatant double standard being applied seems like it would be a complete nonstarter
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:48
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:So, uh, just as a thought exercise, how precisely are you going to politically convince China/the global South at large to accept a lower standard of living than the West? I don't know if you are being serious but no country is putting in serious effort of lowering carbon foot print anyway. However the Europeans are saying it the loudest because they have most to lose if climate change stop the gulf stream weather. Developing countries who are in position to do something such a Brazil is not going to stop cutting down trees unless you pay them. I think you probably can use game theory to show all nations are not going put in serious effort (until serious death toll.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:So, uh, just as a thought exercise, how precisely are you going to politically convince China/the global South at large to accept a lower standard of living than the West? You can't, they won't, and they won't. Congrats, you just discovered the reason climate doom is inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 09:43 |
|
|
Purple Prince posted:
I love you china thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 04:07
|
|
