zlacker

[parent] [thread] 35 comments
1. arctic+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-04-09 17:34:55
It's also not xenophobic to suggest the possibility of a lab leak because lab leaks happen regardless of who's doing the research; even at BSL-4 facilities, mistakes are made. And also because there were two separate SARS-CoV-1 leaks/outbreaks from Chinese labs which the PRC admitted to. [1]

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC403836/

replies(4): >>godels+h3 >>Pokepo+O5 >>elif+xy >>refene+RR
2. godels+h3[view] [source] 2021-04-09 17:51:14
>>arctic+(OP)
I just want to add: "A government is not the people and the people are not the government." Just in case this needs to be stated for anyone here or reading. If you disagree with a people's government that doesn't mean you should treat the people of said government in a critical manner. Their views do not necessarily reflect that of their government (often they do not, just look at us here in America where criticizing the government is the great American past time)
replies(2): >>clairi+bf >>chrisc+tJ1
3. Pokepo+O5[view] [source] 2021-04-09 18:05:01
>>arctic+(OP)
It is not xenophobic to suggest that.

However; since the "leaked virus" narrative was mostly parroted by rightwing media, and promoted from an overtly racist and xenophobic administration and political party, (in the USA) - it very much muddies the waters. There's also some very strong, direct evidence, that political appointees discussed (over email) strategies for subverting messaging from actual scientific experts who had actual data and studies backing up alternative explanations.

It would be nice if such narratives arose organically from actual events, and could be discussed openly. But that's impossible in our present political environment, and that's one of many many hazards of far-right politics. Any questions? Just ask Galileo his opinion on the matter.

replies(1): >>godels+S8
◧◩
4. godels+S8[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 18:20:28
>>Pokepo+O5
This is why it becomes important for us to have good faith conversations. I don't think it is impossible to have said conversations, but more difficult. We have to act in good faith and determine who is using this language as a dog whistle vs who is using it normally. We've seen how assuming everything is a dog whistle has backfired on us, so I'm not sure erroring in that direction is correct. But at the same time I don't think we should necessarily act as if there is no possibility someone is using language in that way (muddied waters). I think we just proceed with caution and do our best.
◧◩
5. clairi+bf[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 18:46:44
>>godels+h3
the american experiment in democracy was to make the government synonymous with the people. certainly that was pulled back a bit by the republican (as in republic, not the political party) elements by our founders, who were themselves 'elites' of the time. in china, the communist party is meant to be the same: a party of (all) the people.

certainly xenophobia expresses itself acutely in mediopolitical contexts where power and money are on the line, but also in forums like this where such ego boosts are basically costless. it's not really about a distinction between the people and the government.

replies(1): >>joketh+D91
6. elif+xy[view] [source] 2021-04-09 20:23:41
>>arctic+(OP)
There are also cases isolated from US blood samples taken before any known infection in China's outbreak, so the racist nature of this discussion is really misplaced. In reality, statements about the origin of this virus are almost purely geopolitical speculation, and it is from these politics that racism is injected into the etymology.

[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-01/covid-inf...

replies(1): >>drran+JX
7. refene+RR[view] [source] 2021-04-09 22:11:02
>>arctic+(OP)
The fact that this particular theory reaches the front page of hacker news every week, despite zero evidence besides the existence of a lab.. hey, we're just asking questions, here, right?

Frankly, it would be irresponsible NOT to provacatively suggest this thing we have no evidence of, repeatedly.

replies(4): >>arctic+zZ >>cscurm+661 >>menset+X61 >>Igelau+Ee1
◧◩
8. drran+JX[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 22:52:21
>>elif+xy
The First covid-like symptoms were registered in November 2019 in Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMh11FtfaP0

◧◩
9. arctic+zZ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:09:45
>>refene+RR
Yes it sure would be irresponsible to ask questions about the...

(1) BSL-3 lab doing bat coronavirus research...

(2) on gain-of-function projects...

(3) one block away from the epicenter of a coronavirus pandemic with bat ties...

(4) that nobody's being allowed into...

(5) when they have a history of coronavirus lab escapes.

I'm not saying we know this is what happened. I'm saying it's not a far-fetched position and there's a lot of experts who agree. I hear there's even an MIT Technology Review write-up about it.

replies(1): >>refene+W01
◧◩◪
10. refene+W01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:21:23
>>arctic+zZ
The write-up specified that they're a noisy minority who disagree with the consensus. In the subheading, after the heading 'scientists say..'. Media!

It's still 100% speculation. The question to ask is, would there be this level of suggestive speculation if it wasn't America's newest top rival?

replies(2): >>arctic+u11 >>spfzer+Su1
◧◩◪◨
11. arctic+u11[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:26:44
>>refene+W01
Sure, but also, if the PRC didn't have a tendency of murdering it's dissenters and anyone who made them look bad. They're not exactly a shining beacon of transparency. If this was going down in New Zealand I'm not sure anyone would be speculating, and also WHO investigators would have been granted full access to the facility on day 1.
replies(1): >>refene+E31
◧◩◪◨⬒
12. refene+E31[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:49:22
>>arctic+u11
And we're up to the nub of it -- lots of people fundamentally think China is evil and this topic is just another battleground.
replies(2): >>arctic+o41 >>voidfu+9f1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
13. arctic+o41[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:57:09
>>refene+E31
Nope, I don't think they're evil, I think they have a track record. That's not the same thing at all. Track records can be good or bad -- in this case, it's a bad track record.
replies(1): >>refene+h51
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
14. refene+h51[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:03:47
>>arctic+o41
Plenty of bad track records to go around. You started off saying this wasn't about xenophobia, and sure that's a strong word, but it does seem like 'bias' would hit the mark pretty squarely.
replies(1): >>arctic+U61
◧◩
15. cscurm+661[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:10:52
>>refene+RR
> despite zero evidence

Zero evidence because independent third parties have not been given access.

An event of this magnitude requires a free and fair scientific investigation.

Absent that, one theory is as good as another.

Downvoted as always by the irrational.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
16. arctic+U61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:19:02
>>refene+h51
Xenophobia is roughly defined as "dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries." Certainly a blanket dislike without any justification.

On the other hand, what I've said is (a) I have nothing against "foreigners" (b) there's a ton of circumstantial evidence and (c) China has a long track record of silencing opposition and criticism to prevent derogatory information from getting out. That's not xenophobia.

It's like if you have someone who's robbed 6 convenience stores, and your reaction is "hey I'm not sure they're a good fit for the world of cashiering." Or better yet, a 7th convenience store is robbed adjacent to the first 6 in the same exact way, and your reaction is "someone should see what Steve was up to that night." That's not bias, that's a substantiated track record.

It's inductive reasoning.

It's utterly unreasonable to call anyone who holds China's track record against them xenophobic or biased lol. They've earned that track record. When they show a different attitude they'll get treated differently.

> Plenty of bad track records to go around.

That right there is quintessential whataboutism.

◧◩
17. menset+X61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:19:20
>>refene+RR
Roll a die representing all possible human-bat virus interactions in the world.

How many of those rolls land next door to a lab researching these?

replies(2): >>jedueh+fa1 >>refene+6b1
◧◩◪
18. joketh+D91[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:51:06
>>clairi+bf
I'm not sure where you got the idea that the American experiment is about making the government synonymous with the people.

The American experiment was all about splitting the governmental power among different entities, keeping the government small and letting the people preserve freedom and power - while still being protected by the government.

The constitution is a tool to prevent the government from overreaching - and it's been successful at that.

Unfortunately, this experiment also grew in the largest and most warmongering government in the world.

To me, the USA are the proof that minarchism doesn't work and that we need to try anarcho-capitalism.

replies(3): >>Igelau+pe1 >>clairi+Iq1 >>arctic+i13
◧◩◪
19. jedueh+fa1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:58:01
>>menset+X61
Hi there's actually quite a bit of reason to believe the zoonotic transmission didn't actually happen in Wuhan, based on the available genetic and epidemiological evidence.

See here: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did...

◧◩◪
20. refene+6b1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 01:06:56
>>menset+X61
Add in bat-livestock interactions and a very hands-on agricultural sector, and you get a real, real lot of rolls.

Obviously noone can prove a negative, there's a chance it came from that lab, but the odds are astronomical that it came about the same boring way as bird flu and SARS.

replies(1): >>arctic+Pk1
◧◩◪◨
21. Igelau+pe1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 01:46:05
>>joketh+D91
> I'm not sure where you got the idea that the American experiment is about making the government synonymous with the people.

It's a common mistake to conflate the Gettysburg Address ("government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth") and the Preamble of the US Constitution ("We the people...")

replies(1): >>arctic+I53
◧◩
22. Igelau+Ee1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 01:48:58
>>refene+RR
This comment is so encumbered by snark that it's not clear what you're even trying to say.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
23. voidfu+9f1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 01:54:10
>>refene+E31
The Chinese government is definitely evil by western standards.
replies(1): >>refene+2h1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
24. refene+2h1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 02:17:57
>>voidfu+9f1
We're pretty deep into "I support this lab theory for unrelated political reasons", but hey, it's Friday night, I'll get sidetracked.

Their government has more support from their people than ours does -- ours is capped at 50% approval.

So go whole hog or go home. Hair-splitting is for cowards. Either include the people or, if you'd like, you can start wondering why they think that, maybe they have more context and things are more subtle. But you can't think one is black-and-white evil without including the other.

replies(1): >>voidfu+Pj1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
25. voidfu+Pj1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 02:57:02
>>refene+2h1
Youd support your government too if it massively raised yours and your neighbors standard of living within a 30-40 year period. The Nazis did that too and were wildly popular.

But evil is evil. And theres a really bad and consistent track record.

replies(1): >>refene+ek1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
26. refene+ek1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 03:02:16
>>voidfu+Pj1
The Nazis were not wildly popular, they were a minority government, and they definitely did not improve material conditions for their people. World War II fucking sucked. They barely held on by being at war, stirring things up against foreign enemies, and getting lucky against assassination attempts. Peace would have ruined them.

The Chinese government is not at war. They are vastly less at-war than the US is. They have no rally-around-the-flag effect and yet their people still like them better than we like our government.

replies(1): >>oyeben+yE1
◧◩◪◨
27. arctic+Pk1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 03:13:52
>>refene+6b1
And SARS escaped from a lab twice. In China. The government at the time admitted it. So I’m not 100% that’s the example I’d go with haha.

It’s important to split this in two: one thesis is that it was invented or created or synthesized at a lab in China. This I’m far less bullish on.

The other separate thesis is regardless of origin, man made or wild, it accidentally or intentionally found its way through the doors of a lab in China and into society. It’s this one we’re talking about. At least I am.

replies(1): >>refene+0s1
◧◩◪◨
28. clairi+Iq1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 04:41:59
>>joketh+D91
it's hard to take that criticism seriously when you choose to hang your hat on anarcho-capitalism, a system that isn't even coherent in theory, much less in practice (were it to be). democracy is literally about aligning the government to the will of the people. the US is a representative democracy, which is a compromise borne of the founders' uneasiness with direct democracy (partially because it would mean piercing the sovereignty of the states).
◧◩◪◨⬒
29. refene+0s1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 05:02:38
>>arctic+Pk1
The point is it didn't start in a lab.

Look, if the point here is blame, have at it. It started in China, blame China, feel great about that and don't worry about our government's performance or theirs.

But if the point is truth, it probably came from agriculture->society. Labs are not necessary for that story, and China was blindsided anyways.

replies(1): >>arctic+yx1
◧◩◪◨
30. spfzer+Su1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 05:50:20
>>refene+W01
Yes, if millions of people had died. There would, and justifiably so.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
31. arctic+yx1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 06:27:08
>>refene+0s1
Define "start in a lab" -- are you talking about "created in a lab" or "accidentally released from a lab in which it was being studied causing a pandemic"?

If the latter, I don't think you have any evidence to say the pandemic didn't begin as a result of an accidental release from a lab in the literal epicenter of the pandemic. It's not possible to prove a negative in general, although in this case, it would have been pretty easy to prove by allowing international inspectors into the facility and turning over records.

Of course labs are not necessary. However, there's a precedent for labs causing outbreaks.

Were it indeed a totally spontaneous wild situation that occurred, why would I blame China? Diseases start all over the place, there's no fault for that. Any more than I blame the Congo for Ebola (named after the Ebola River) or America for Lyme disease (named after Old Lyme, CT). Even if it was an accidental release from a lab, I don't think China as an entity bears responsibility for that.

If it was an accidental release from a lab (an if), then they bear the responsibility for the coverup that led to insufficient efforts towards containment.

America has done a dreadful job to be sure, but that's more whataboutism.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
32. oyeben+yE1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 08:09:36
>>refene+ek1
You're on crack.
◧◩
33. chrisc+tJ1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 09:19:10
>>godels+h3
The CCP is basically China and at least most Chinese people, because it draws its authority and power from the complacency of its constituents. Trying to differentiate the CCP from its subjects will leave you labeling all counter-parties as communist agents until you’ve realized you’ve labeled the majority of Chinese citizens!

Of course no country’s government has the full support of its citizens, but to say Chinese people are wholly distinct from the CCP is disingenuous.

There is no ruling ethnicity, just a more unified single party system. People can choose to participate in politics, they just have to do it within the party.

◧◩◪◨
34. arctic+i13[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 21:03:51
>>joketh+D91
> ... we need to try anarcho-capitalism.

This is the worst idea I've ever heard. [1]

[1] https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertari...

replies(1): >>clairi+t83
◧◩◪◨⬒
35. arctic+I53[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 21:36:47
>>Igelau+pe1
The whole point of the electoral college was to intermediate the people and the government. The fear was that information wouldn't travel quickly enough to all edges of the realm, and that people couldn't therefore be trusted to make an electoral decision.
◧◩◪◨⬒
36. clairi+t83[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 21:59:59
>>arctic+i13
that had me literally laughing out loud. although to be fair, it was only depicting libertarian capitalism. anarcho-capitalism would be more like westworld on steroids.
[go to top]