The actual article title is "Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor," don't know if it was edited or the poster just chose something different.
> I can only guess, but it could be explained by mentally categorizing Uyghurs, Hong Kongers and even Tiananmen protesters as "not Chinese." I don't think it's so much racism as a binary "us vs. them" classification system that expresses itself as the opinion that "the Chinese" should be punished for oppressing <some group>...
That could be in some cases, though what you're describing sounds more like a government leaders/enforcers vs. liberals/oppressed minorities classification (which also leaves a big gray area). The people sympathize and feel allied to the latter group, so the "us" includes a lot of Chinese people, so it's not so much Chinese vs not-Chinese.
I think I've seen similar comments, but I usually interpreted it as a mess of lazy or imprecise language, because often the complaints could only apply to a narrow group even though the person is using some broad term like "China" or "Chinese."
>> the "hate," if it can even be called that, is for the Chinese government and the CCP.
> You may only hate the government...
Hate is actually not a very good word to describe the situation, IMHO. I only used it because the GP did, but I quoted and questioned the choice. If I had to describe it, I would say it's moral disapproval coupled with a recognition of incompatible goals that requires some kind of response.
> You may only hate the government, but you should be aware that many of those who seem to be on your side criticising the CPC do in fact hate everything Chinese.
I find that a bit hard to square with the support of Chinese things by the same group, like the Tiananmen Square and Hong Kong protests (for instance). I don't doubt that there exist people who are racist against Chinese people, but I think the overlap with HN is small, and definitely small enough that it's a derail to bring up on a vague prompt like in the parent of this subthread.
> Why then is there no outrage that Americans are the victim of their own government as well?
What makes you think there isn't? There's outrage about that kind of thing all the time.
> If TikTok is banned by the US because of the actions of the Chinese government
Where in the article does it say that TikTok could be banned in the US?
> If TikTok is banned by the US because of the actions of the Chinese government, then we are no better than the Chinese government who have banned countless "American" apps, as if apps should even have a nationality in the first place.
Honestly, I believe you're kinda confused and looking at things too shallowly. Sort of like insisting we condemn someone who killed defending a child from murder the same as we'd condemn someone who committed murder, because they both killed a human being. Identical actions can be rightly judged very differently based on circumstances. The PRC bans American apps because (among other things) its authoritarian ruling oligarchy fears that Western ideas like constitutional democracy and human rights could threaten their power, if taken up by the Chinese people. If the US bans Chinese apps (or disinformation outlets like Russia Today), it will likely be because it values those same ideas and fears losing them.
> I absolutely do not understand why there is so much hate for Chinese people, Chinese companies, or the Chinese government.
> please do not act as if your statements about Chinese nationals
I think it's misleading to bring up the Chinese people in this way: the "hate," if it can even be called that, is for the Chinese government and the CCP. The real or imagined influence of the CCP over Chinese companies is causing the latter to be viewed with greater suspicion.
The Chinese people/Chinese nationals as a group aren't being viewed as antagonists (though unfortunate abbreviations like using "the Chinese" for "the Chinese government" do confuse things sometimes). If anything, I'd bet most people who are critical of the CPP, etc. would see the Chinese people sympathetically as closer to victims than anything else.
>> If that non-US culture advocates that democracy is a threat to society, or that political re-education camps are not an issue, I would say that yes, we need to keep that out.
> [citation needed]
The "non-US culture" framing of the GP and GGP is ignorant and wrong, but what they say is certainly true with regards to the party and government:
> Communist Party cadres have filled meeting halls around China to hear a somber, secretive warning issued by senior leaders. Power could escape their grip, they have been told, unless the party eradicates seven subversive currents coursing through Chinese society.... The first was “Western constitutional democracy”; others included promoting “universal values” of human rights, Western-inspired notions of media independence and civic participation, ardently pro-market “neo-liberalism,” and “nihilist” criticisms of the party’s traumatic past.
> ...students are increasingly playing a key role by monitoring how teachers view Mr. Xi, the party and ideas like democracy. In exchange, they are promised rewards like scholarships, higher grades and advancement within prestigious Communist Party groups.
> Ankang University in northwest China said in an online notice that student informers should formally report professors who spread superstition, cults and pornography, “promote Western political values,” and criticize the party’s tenets. School administrators, the notice says, should respond to each complaint within three working days.
Or the political cover to make the changes they wanted to make all along.