

Human Rights Record of United States in 2011 - phreeza
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-05/26/content_15392452.htm

======
swombat
Even though this is hardly HN material, there's some kind of hackerish mindset
about reacting to accusations by doing an in-depth "pot, kettle, black" report
about the accuser, so I upvoted this.

For those of us who keep track of US news, it's pretty obvious that the human
rights situation there is "variable", to say the least. You rarely hear about
people being wrongly killed by the police in Europe, whereas in the US it
appears to be relatively frequent. As for freedom... let's not go there. The
easily manipulated US government is probably the single most important
political force for evil in the fight to protect our rights online.

Anyway, so, totally off-topic, but a smart approach from China...

~~~
jonnathanson
With all due respect, this is a tall order of false equivalence. The US's
track record on human rights, income inequality, etc., is far from spotless.
It's borderline infuriating at times. But even to place it in the same
ballpark as the PRC's is silly.

Consider that, in the US, people were able to protest and stop SOPA and PIPA
from coming to pass. In China, the government controls the entire internet.
It's actually debatable that we could be having a similar conversation about
the government, on a site like this one, were we in China right now. The U.S.
detains certain people without warrant or trial in its misguided "war on
terror." But the PRC can detain any of its citizens, at any time, for any
reason, and often does.

It's interesting to consider the hypocrisies and inconsistencies of our own
government and society. I'm all for it. But we shouldn't lose sight of
reality.

~~~
Morg
With all due respect, you are blinded by the kool aid my dear.

In the US the government controls the entire internet, as well as every
information every company holds, including facebook, twitter, google and apple
- as well as Intel and Microsoft.

The PRC and the US both have "legitimate" ways to detain any citizen or non-
citizen at any time, for any reason, and often do.

I would like to insist that there is NO difference on that specific point
since the patriot act.

SOPA and PIPA aren't govt related, they're big content's attempt at having
it's own control channel over the internet.

By the way, you forget the positive aspects of China, like those emphasized in
the article: In a communist country, there's real security.

My grandparents were in USSR in the 70's, and many like them said they had
absolutely NO FEAR AT ALL letting their kids play outside.

That's right dream on. You'll never get that in the US, unless you have your
own security.

~~~
adventureful
Really simple way to answer your false declarations:

Then how come Hacker News exists and I can say what I want here?

Try that in China some time =)

~~~
Morg
You can talk and it makes no difference, I doubt that is as relevant as
knowing your children are safe.

~~~
adventureful
I grew up in an area in Maryland with nearly zero crime (and it was a modestly
poor area). I went to one of the best public schools in Maryland, and again,
it was in what is considered poor Appalachia. So I'm not sure what you're
talking about. The only crime where I live now, is driving under the
influence. There's 1 murder per year per 100,000 people in the entire county.

You obviously have extremely little first hand experience with America. Look
up the crime stats for Boise, Idaho some time on city data. America is an
extraordinarily diverse nation, the most diverse nation in world history to be
exact, and it has every sort of living style and environment you could want to
choose from.

Don't like the crime in Chicago, move to a safer city at your leisure. Seattle
is beautiful, and so is Austin TX. Don't like Florida? Move to Virginia. Don't
like Vermont, move to NYCity. Don't like NYC? Move to San Francisco. Don't
like urban, America is massive and extremely low population density, so move
rural. And on and on.

~~~
adventureful
Drucken & Morg:

You'll note that in no way have I said China doesn't have exactly the same,
safe rural areas, or even safe urban areas.

What I said is: America does have those things. My response was to point out
that the notion of America being nothing but a giant crime wave or an
extraordinarily dangerous place is pure myth. The reality is: America has just
about everything, pick what kind of life you want accordingly, and pursue it.

And Morg: the points about Europe would be interesting, except most of Europe
allows exceptionally little immigration. So how can outsiders even consider
benefiting even if it were the safest place on earth crime wise?

Look up the immigration rates for: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Germany,
Switzerland, Belgium, Norway, etc. I'm sure you already know this however.
Then look up America's extreme immigration over the past 100 years. How do you
think 20% of our population got to be hispanic? We have a long history of
allowing a relatively high amount of immigration (particularly compared to the
rest of the world). It's how we become the world's melting pot.

It's not easy to get into America, but it's radically easier than becoming a
citizen of most European nations just based on the extremely limited numbers
they allow in.

~~~
Morg
That would be because we don't just allow them in> when they get in they get
social protection, not just the right to pay taxes.

Racism imho is one of the minor issues though, I'm far more concerned by the
police state aspects of the US than the cultural details (such as everyone is
fat woohooo).

~~~
adventureful
That's a snarky comment, but you're dodging: what I'm talking about is legal
immigration. America has a much higher rate of legal immigration than pretty
much all of Europe. Canada is one of the few first world nations with a higher
immigration rate. When you legally immigrate to America, you're treated as a
citizen. We've had a lot of illegal immigration over the last 20 years as
well, but the odds strongly favor that those illegal immigrants will be
naturalized into citizenship over time, it's very likely the Democrats will
achieve that outcome.

And if you want to talk about shadow immigration, or people that fall through
the cracks, Europe has plenty of that. You must know that. Take a look at the
African immigration in France and Spain over the last 20 years, and then look
at how many are under the radar. Europe also gets a massive amount of abuse
from immigrants that leech off the social systems and never work and
contribute properly, which is helping to make the looming EU bankruptcy even
worse, which is amping up the rapidly rising xenophobia currently going on
Europe, such that the Nazi Party is rising in Greece, and the extreme right is
gaining in many nations.

The whoohoo on your fat comment certainly betrays to the flippant nature of
it. 26% to 27% of people in the UK are obese, in America it's about 33%.
Australia and New Zealand is around 24% to 25%. Chile is 25%. Ireland is 23%
to 24%. Canada is 25% obese as well. Mexico is about the same as America on
obesity. Clearly the problem is greatest in America, but it's hardly alone in
the obesity problem.

If you've ever read the book, The China Study, you obviously understand why
these countries have such obesity and higher cancer rates that, for example,
China has traditionally avoided. However, now China is gradually switching to
a killer western diet, particularly among the affluent, and they're seeing
skyrocketing obesity and heart disease rates.

You're concerned about the police state aspects of America? So am I, I live
here, and it's very disturbing. China is a police state almost by definition,
but that doesn't seem to concern you at all. And the police state is rising
all over the place, take a look at some of the police state actions and laws
being passed in Britain where you practically can't step out your front door
without showing up on a cctv.

~~~
Morg
It IS going to burn when you open your eyes.

------
smoyer
I suspect we can generate pros and cons for anywhere you might choose to live
... and within the U.S., there's a huge variation in things like violent crime
and gun violence from city to city (or in the rural areas).

I'm in the U.S. and I can tell you that I don't like the direction our
government is heading. And after typing that, I'm not expecting the police to
show up (though I am expecting the comment to appear on HN).

I'm happy to hear that the Chinese are so happy (and safe, etc) living in
China ... everyone should get a chance at happiness.

------
daniel_solano
Just to be clear, this is a report published by the government of China.

I don't have the time to read the whole article, but here's a few thoughts:

Regarding _On life, property and personal security_ , this section is about
violent crime in the U.S. Indubitably, violent crime is particularly bad in
some parts of the U.S., but is this part of the 'human rights record' of the
federal government? In essence, the Chinese government here is implying that
the fact that the U.S. government doesn't outlaw gun ownership results in
violent crime.

Throughout most of the text, it just strikes me that the notion of what
constitutes "human rights" is unclear. Some people believe that human rights
are about the recognition of individual liberty and freedom from government
intrusion. Others believe that human rights are about achieving equality and
freedom from want. The Chinese government is certainly sympathetic to the
latter definition, at least in this report. While this is a point of view
favoured by many, in the U.S. the former view of human rights is still strong.

Finally, some of the points made by the Chinese are simply symbolic. For
example, they criticise the U.S. for not ratifying the "Convention on the
Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)". That is
true, but the U.S.'s laws and enforcement are considered better than China
with respect to CEDAW.

------
ktizo
I sort of like this finger pointing and "Yeah? Well you're no better..."
approach to international diplomacy. You never know, it might end up in a
round of ethical one-upmanship that goes beyond mere words. Not that I'm
holding my breath.

------
adventureful
Right now the most important difference is that in the US you still have
democratically elected representation and a substantial freedom of speech
component. So long as you have that, you have the potential to change the
system peacefully through argumentation / debate / voting etc.

Is Obama a terrible President? A great President? Debate it endlessly, but he
was elected by a massive wave of popular support in a democratic fashion,
beating an opponent (Clinton) that vastly outmatched him in theory.

Doesn't mean the US isn't still going to continue driving right off the cliff,
but with those pieces in place, it'll be nobody's fault but our own if we
don't take the opportunity and remaining critical freedoms to reverse course
and fix the system peacefully.

~~~
Morg
Man is it going to burn when you open your eyes ...

~~~
adventureful
Nope. I'm completely right in what I said, and I was very careful to be
specific about it.

My eyes are in no way closed, and what you said is not a valid retort, it's
proof that you have nothing to say.

~~~
Morg
"you have the potential to change the system peacefully through argumentation
/ debate / voting etc."

Sure, by voting for one of two parties that have existed for centuries and
been sponsored by the same 1% for as long.

You have the potential to watch your fellow americans brainwashed a bit more
everyday into accepting their function as modern slaves with less and less
benefits and more and more stress.

~~~
adventureful
The American people can wipe out the parties at their leisure, they have
chosen not to. Throughout American history, our parties have changed numerous
times, some disappear, some rise, some evolve, and that isn't going to stop.

Americans get to choose. If they choose to be brainwashed as you call it, then
that's their volition. If America collapses, it will be the responsibility of
the people that they didn't use their voice while they had it.

The Chinese do not get to choose anything. Every time they try - and they have
tried - they get violently put down by their own government. In China, nothing
like the Occupy movement would ever be tolerated at all, those people would
not be allowed to squat on park property and protest, they would not be
allowed to march, they would not be allowed to do even a fraction of what they
got away with here in the states, and it sure as hell wouldn't all be filmed
and put on YouTube for everybody to see.

The various movements of the 1960s and 1970s would have been completely
impossible in China. Try holding a rally for free unionization rights in China
some time, see how that goes.

Try openly and expressively declaring your religious beliefs. See how much
they love that.

~~~
Morg
Yet you wouldn't dare to visit some parts of the ghettos your biggest cities
are famous for.

The various movements of the 60s and 70s are completely impossible in the
western world now, the brainwashing is far too advanced for that.

Unionization doesn't make sense in communism. It amounts to revolution. Try a
revolution in the US and call me back when you've completed your twentieth
mandatory cavity search for security purposes.

I don't think you saw much of Gitmo on Youtube, even less today - luckily with
the patriot act, anyone who pisses off the govt will get his own personal
gitmo experience.

At least China doesn't pretend they respect the human rights - I think that's
what the article was about, and fundamentally right.

~~~
thunfischbrot
It seems interesting to me how you (as in you both) continue to argue
different points in increasing force. That's not how a dialogue works.

Argue based on issues. Clearly address each issue your 'opponent' raised.
Substantiate it with facts. Link to reliable sources if possible. Point out
weak points in your own argument and why you think your general point still
stands. Don't commit logical fallacies (see <http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/>
).

Both of you raise valid points. Engaging in a discussion would probably make
us all better off in the end. Currently I can only read "your country is
stupider than mine!" _.

_ Interpret the possessive 'your' as you will.

~~~
adventureful
The problem with that is: I haven't said China is a shitty place or a
wasteland. I happen to like China, and I happen to love America and live
there. It's absolutely in no way about saying China is worse or better, it's
about pointing out the ignorance in claiming China is a vastly superior place
to live.

I'm willing to be objective about America and China's faults. The problem with
the person I'm arguing with, is that that person is not willing to be
objective about China's faults, and is more than willing to be biased about
America's faults.

In my observation, most first world countries have the same societal problems
that America does (or some modest variation), the big difference is whether
they're publicized heavily or not. For example, America gets accused of being
a highly racist nation: well, how racist is Japan? How about African racism?
How about antisemitism in France? How about the Muslim ghettos in France? How
about the extreme xenophobia in many nice European nations? Nobody likes to
talk about that, and Americans are mostly ignorant of it, but it's all over
the BBC's news reports regularly.

