zlacker

[parent] [thread] 12 comments
1. arctic+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-04-09 23:09:45
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+n1
2. refene+n1[view] [source] 2021-04-09 23:21:23
>>arctic+(OP)
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+V1 >>spfzer+jv
◧◩
3. arctic+V1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:26:44
>>refene+n1
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+54
◧◩◪
4. refene+54[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:49:22
>>arctic+V1
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+P4 >>voidfu+Af
◧◩◪◨
5. arctic+P4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-09 23:57:09
>>refene+54
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+I5
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. refene+I5[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:03:47
>>arctic+P4
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+l7
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
7. arctic+l7[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 00:19:02
>>refene+I5
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.

◧◩◪◨
8. voidfu+Af[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 01:54:10
>>refene+54
The Chinese government is definitely evil by western standards.
replies(1): >>refene+th
◧◩◪◨⬒
9. refene+th[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 02:17:57
>>voidfu+Af
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+gk
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
10. voidfu+gk[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 02:57:02
>>refene+th
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+Fk
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
11. refene+Fk[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 03:02:16
>>voidfu+gk
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+ZE
◧◩
12. spfzer+jv[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 05:50:20
>>refene+n1
Yes, if millions of people had died. There would, and justifiably so.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
13. oyeben+ZE[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-10 08:09:36
>>refene+Fk
You're on crack.
[go to top]