i applaud your willingness to publish this content under your real name, and also understand your real name is closely associated with your software service.
i understand that gives you a certain amount of power that other employees, say of Apple, may not have. kudos to you for using it fruitfully - sincerely.
i am sure this will come across as tin foily, but i would advise you to monitor your digital assets and maybe even personal ones for probing/attack/etc. you're publishing an anti-CCP piece on a widely trafficked web property and are easily identifiable. you are making an enemy of a powerful adversary.
Author here. Thank you for your earnest concern. I'm a pretty risk-averse person and I take lots of pains to address those contingencies for all of my digital services.
I agree with you and imagine many others do as well. I think you are right it's about time I draw a line in my own personal life as well. No more Chinese manufactured goods for me. In fact, I think I will go ahead and get rid of what I currently own.
People suggest this a lot, but I don't think it does the trick. Some merchant bought a bunch of inventory from a Chinese factory, then tried to sell it to you, and you didn't buy it. When they get tired of holding onto it, they'll sell it at deep discount and eat the loss, then try to make up the loss on another product (and politically indifferent consumers will happily swoop in for a good deal). Meanwhile, China is laughing all the way to the bank.
If you really care, reach out directly to the merchants you buy from. Tell them you used to be a loyal customer, but you won't buy from them again until they stop carrying products made in China. Get your friends and coworkers to do the same, and keep the pressure on. If they go for it, follow through by rewarding them with your loyalty, and broadcast that win as publicly as possible. Talk about it, hashtag it, whatever. Organize.
Changing individual consumption habits rarely amounts to much more than virtue signalling.
And don't toss your existing stuff. You already paid for it, so it's not helping China anymore, and throwing it away doesn't hurt them. If anything, selling it to someone else reduces demand for new products (by exactly 1 unit).
It is about the principles and the message it conveys.
Gandhi protested against the British by spinning his own fabric, making his own shoes, and being completely independent. It made no difference to the British companies, but it sent a powerful message to the nation that Indians can be independent.
Do not underestimate or discourage people from doing what they principally object, even if practically it makes no sense or has no objective benefit.
Perhaps getting rid of what I currently own won't hurt China but it will help me maintain my resolve. Much like a former smoker tossing his old cigarettes in the fire.
Hi author, wondering what you think China should do with the organs of executed prisoners? It’s easy to find fault with them for (presumably) not asking for permission but it seems it would be a pity for them not to be used to help patients in need, no? This is separate from the question of what supposed crimes led to the execution. Short waiting lists can be explained by the lack of permission not only for executions but for all deaths of healthy people... not to defend China on other points, but this one seems like a odd concern possibly just zeroed in on for dramatic emotional effect, rather than for any actual practical reason.
There's substantial evidence that China has timed executions for the benefit of organ recipients: they're executing people to do organ transplants, not because they did something wrong.
For the other part, I have trouble understanding why a dead person would care about anything after their death ...although I can understand them having wishes before death, but any such wishes should be weighed in context for their reasonableness given all factors.
It's not just about the rights of the person being executed, but also those of their loved ones.
You may say you wouldn't care if your dead carcass was, say, grotesquely abused for someone else's amusement—after all, you're dead and no longer around to have any feelings about it—but how would your children feel? How would you feel if that was the fate awaiting your life partner?
The shared endeavor of human society entitles people to dignity even in death. That includes the right to bodily integrity.
Yeah that would be disrespectful. Kind of moving the goalposts though to use that example when talking about organ transplant, something that helps people who might otherwise die. Obviously I am not saying execution is worth it for that. Just more that if someone is dead already for whatever reason, it's hard to see it as a bad thing to help the living, if that can be done.
I mean if we're going to fashion extreme examples for dramatic effect, that can be done on the other side too. Imagine if the relatives have racist objections to donating an organ, and let someone die because their own feelings would be hurt if they saw a person of the "wrong" race being helped. How do you weigh their racist feelings, versus the life being saved? It's not that clear to me that their feelings should be at the forefront when other factors are considered.
I agree that dignity in death is a good thing. Just not so certain as you that there is only one way to get there. And none of this is to claim that China does what they do with dignity... I highly doubt that. But organ transplants are not such a terrible thing.
> I have trouble understanding why a dead person would care about anything after their death
Examining the unstated implications of your argument, taken on its face, is not the same as moving the goalposts. Saying "I don't care what happens after I die, so no need to even ask if you can take my organs... except hang on, no, don't abuse my body in weird ways, I'm not okay with that"–THAT'S moving the goalposts.
> it's hard to see it as a bad thing to help the living
except to the extent that 1) harvesting organs from political prisoners is just about as close to a bad thing as you can imagine, and 2) even if we're not talking about China in particular, involuntary organ extraction harms the dignity of living kin.
> Imagine if the relatives have racist objections to donating an organ, and let someone die because their own feelings would be hurt if they saw a person of the "wrong" race being helped. How do you weigh their racist feelings, versus the life being saved?
The right to bodily integrity, to the choice about how your body is used, is unaffected by your motives. A right does not cease to become a right once you disagree with how someone wishes to exercise it.
You don't want your organs to go to a black man? Exercise your right to bodily integrity by not agreeing to be an organ donor.
True, but you can find a religious belief from some random major or minor religion to justify or prohibit just about anything.
Including things that harm others or infringe on their rights.
So if that is guiding policy, policy is going to be a mess at worst or severely hobbled at best.
China doesn’t generally hold religion in high regard when formulating policy. They are more guided by practicality and expediency.
That puts them in conflict with many western values but it’s interesting to look at it from their perspective.
For those people who believe that organ donation is a grotesque abuse, that is bad but it should be weighed against other bad things. People dying is also bad. Which is worse? Grotesque abuse of a corpse, or letting someone die? China appears to have made a decision on this question.
Step 0: Don't execute people for non-violent crimes.
That's a part of the problem here. People speak their mind, disappear into a black bag and end up donating their organs to a Party member's daughter five months later.
The other major part being that there's very little due process, or fair justice, not in the way that you or I would expect it. Certainly not with lives on the line.
Worrying about wasted organs misses the point by an absurd distance.
I would say many mainlanders are reluctant say anything in this topic so you don't know.
BTW, I'm Canadian but was from mainland. There are also a lot of debate inside WeChat groups which include oversea Chinese who have access to all information.
The very worst case, he'll be denied access to China (and possibly HongKong) but otherwise he's fine. China is more interested in Chinese living in China and not some western somewhere.
China has very publicly ran DDOS attacks against GitHub when GitHub did some things they didn't like. Specifically they used infrastructure co-located with the GFW to run a MITM on connections to Baidu and serve malicious javascript. The malicious javascript used users computers to DDOS GitHub.
It's generally always worth keeping an eye on that, but AFAIK, the CCP doesn't normally target western nationals who talk trash or take modestly effective actions. They tend to focus on their own citizens, who they can do pretty much anything to without consequences, and on spying on anybody who might have information of significant use to them.
i understand that gives you a certain amount of power that other employees, say of Apple, may not have. kudos to you for using it fruitfully - sincerely.
i am sure this will come across as tin foily, but i would advise you to monitor your digital assets and maybe even personal ones for probing/attack/etc. you're publishing an anti-CCP piece on a widely trafficked web property and are easily identifiable. you are making an enemy of a powerful adversary.
appreciate the piece and best of luck.