Comments on: Universal or selective human rights?

By: Omanator

Omanator — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:03:31 +0000

To Ryan, I guess you both are missing the most important thing. China gives a hoot for human rights, we can agree on that. China has only one aim, to become a world super power and to dominate the world stage. China has the largest standing army in the world, is building the largest aircraft carrier, has the largest submarine fleet, probably larger than the US but most of all China is the only nation so far that is capable of shooting down satelites from orbit. That in itself is a frightening thought. It would destroy all our communications in a heartbeat. I sincerely hope that chinas investments in Canada are limited according to Canadian law. Even that makes me shake.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 10:25:52 +0000

You do make sense. And I too understand that human rights are important. My argument has less to do about Liberal vs Conservative than trying to get a point across that without dialogue and a relationship, Canada will have even less power in swaying the Chinese. You know there is a lot of propaganda on both sides..a lot. As an example, lets look at Tibet, since this is played out here as “human rights abuses” the most — even elements of this conflict are not fully understood here, and to pretend we understand ALL the complexities in those dealings, is also a bit unfair. I doubt highly if China invited Quebec for dinner stating they should be free, would that play very well here. Now, granted we didn't beat them – although I question whether a good beating might be a good thing. (I kid.)

I still do think though that there is an old-style of politics at play here — almost like they haven't woken up to how China has changed..which is sort of bothersome, too. Like I said, I am not justifying the human rights issues, but the whole world went to China for the Olympics — this is a time to put differences aside. He was snubbing the people — not the government — which is sort of ironic, don't' you think?

By: Omanator

Omanator — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 07:03:31 +0000

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 02:25:52 +0000

By: Gayle

Gayle — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:28:13 +0000

marie – have you looked up the term “hypocrisy”. I think you will see it applies very well to many actions by the CPC.

I am not aware of any time I ever said the CPC were the only hypocrites in town. Maybe you can refresh my memory with a link or something.

By: Gayle

Gayle — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:26:05 +0000

Yes. That is why she was all for allowing people to call me names. I guess it is OK for one side to resort to that kind of conduct, but being sarcastic is a no go. The truth is it had nothing to do with abusive behaviour on my part given the kind of abuses she allowed (and may still allow) from others. She only cares when that abuse is directed towards her or anyone who agrees with her.

As for SDA, I have not forgotten at all. I stopped going there several years ago, by my choice.

Anyway…

By: batb

batb — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:55:13 +0000

Ryan, I haven't been to China and, truth to tell, I have no desire to go to China, which isn't to say that it wouldn't be fascinating. But there are other countries I'd rather visit -- and support with my hard-earned dollars.

I take it, Ryan, that you are a relativist: "Come on. Get over it. Everyone knows that the Chinese don't care a fig for human rights, everyone knows that the Liberal$ talk a good line about caring about human rights and equality for all but don't follow through, but who cares? China is the new land of opportunity! Prime Minister Stephen Harper should just get with the program, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, overlook China's appalling human rights record and, ahem, unique business practices, in order to make sure that Canada and Canadians cash in on the new gold rush."

There's more to life than economic success -- and, in fact, without protecting human rights, there aren't too many other rights that are worth a darn.

Maybe I've misunderstood what you said, but you seem to be saying that Canada, which enjoys one of the freest democracies in the world, shouldn't be concerned about miscarriages of justice in China. That seems like a real double standard to me -- and that Canada will be held to a much higher standard vis a vis human rights than China which, in the short run, gives China a real economic advantage.

'Doesn't seem like such a great deal to me, though it's clear to me that the need to uphold individuals' human rights is essential in the making of a civilized society. We shouldn't care if China does what China wants while breaking all of the rules we hold sacred -- all of the rules which built our democracy?

Does that make sense?

By: marie7

marie7 — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:37:29 +0000

Gayle,
have you ever read the Lesser Evil? I dont think the hypocrisy belongs to the CPC.

By: Liz J

Liz J — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:49:56 +0000

Not true, Joanne does permit dissent, she doesn't permit people who visit her site to needle other commenters laced with condescending arrogance which is your shtick. It's tiresome after a while, a waste of bandwidth. As for SDA,it's not by choice you don't go there either, it's been a while,perhaps you've forgotten.

If your trying to help your cause, the LPC, as an intelligent person, which I believe you to be, you could put your talents to better use, they are sorely in need of help.

By: Gayle

Gayle — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:17:10 +0000

Just what I thought you would say. Of course I have given my opinion. Your problem is that you want to argue with me and you can't.

By the way, I asked you a question. Do you have a link to where the LPC is criticizing Harper for standing up for human rights? I would be amazed if they are given what Chretien said in his speech when he was in China.