I know this started about binoculars, but it´s gone far beyond that. China spent the last few hundred years being invaded, carved up, opiumed-up, exploited and robbed by the major "Western" powers (including Russia and Japan). In the last little invasion-session, it lost 18% of its population. I really think the average Chinese would find it vaguely amusing to hear "westerners" pontificating and sermonising about China joining the inter-global economy and actually selling us stuff we really, really want to buy cheap. And the sanctimonious stuff about human or labour rights in China is fascinating....what about minerals from South America, or Diamonds from Africa? Are these produced under the kind of labour conditions we approve of? Or does child slavery, torture and murder of union activists, environmental destruction and denial of basic human rights only outrage us if it happens in an economy that can compete with us on equal terms? Rant over.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Buying Chinese products (binoculars) yes or no (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter kristoffer
- Start date
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
Well to be fair, except for a brief period of statistical "rollbacks" North American enviromental pollution has steadily increased year on year. I think the old cliche, "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones" is very apt concerning most of the opinions of Western moral, economic, political superiority over those of the Chinese being expressed in this thread. Ironic since I'd wager 99% of posters have never even been to China or even Asia. The one lone post by a person actually living in China was barely even acknowledged.
It's not a question of superiority. It's a matter of conscience. We have cheap consumer products because much of the real cost of production has been deliberately hidden, buried in poisoned land, rivers and unbreathable air. I get a cheap binocular and someone else dies an early death. Trust me, there is no moral superiority in that equation.
John
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/world/asia/26china.html?pagewanted=print
"Nearly 500 million people lack access to safe drinking water."
"Only 1 percent of the country’s 560 million city dwellers breathe air considered safe by the European Union."
"Environmental woes that might be considered catastrophic in some countries can seem commonplace in China: industrial cities where people rarely see the sun; children killed or sickened by lead poisoning or other types of local pollution; a coastline so swamped by algal red tides that large sections of the ocean no longer sustain marine life."
"Chinese manufacturers that dump waste into rivers or pump smoke into the sky make the cheap products that fill stores in the United States and Europe"
Please don't question the source or factual nature of this article. Numerous sources are available and the facts are undeniable.
John
The "Dark Satanic Mills" move around and are replaced by other dangers in their stead. Here in the Rust Belt the newest threat is to our drinking water caused by the exploration (or is that "exploitation?") of the Marcellus Shale natural gas belt, which runs through most of Pennsylvania, including "Cloudy Valley." This is being done, not surprisingly, in the cause of saving the environment. It is projected to lower our collective "carbon footprint."
Even in Iowa, Corn Bread Basket of our country, the potable water supply is in danger.
http://iowaindependent.com/19046/report-says-herbicide-levels-in-iowa-drinking-water-are-dangerous
"Greater love hath no man than to poison himself for his brother." There is much irony in the name "Love Canal."
Sleep well,:cat:
Bob
Even in Iowa, Corn Bread Basket of our country, the potable water supply is in danger.
http://iowaindependent.com/19046/report-says-herbicide-levels-in-iowa-drinking-water-are-dangerous
"Greater love hath no man than to poison himself for his brother." There is much irony in the name "Love Canal."
Sleep well,:cat:
Bob
jaymoynihan
Corvus brachyrhynchos watcher
A position of moral superiority is a fragile thing to stand upon.
China is pretty much doing what the United States did in the 2nd half of the 19th century and first half of the 20th. We forget that British & French capital flowed to America in the 19th century fueling the destruction of the landscape and natural capital services. And, in a way, what Euroasia did with more limited technologies for a couple hundred years.
The current negative impact of U.S. & European lifestyles on the biogeophysical infrastructure of the planet is massive. I have no sympathy for the PRC's fascist government, nor the rampant destruction of their lands. But it seems to me all too familiar to allow my feeling morally on a higher plain.
China is pretty much doing what the United States did in the 2nd half of the 19th century and first half of the 20th. We forget that British & French capital flowed to America in the 19th century fueling the destruction of the landscape and natural capital services. And, in a way, what Euroasia did with more limited technologies for a couple hundred years.
The current negative impact of U.S. & European lifestyles on the biogeophysical infrastructure of the planet is massive. I have no sympathy for the PRC's fascist government, nor the rampant destruction of their lands. But it seems to me all too familiar to allow my feeling morally on a higher plain.
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
As John said: there's really no moral superiority involved. It's a simple question of what you want to contribute to.
And what's the point of all these historical analogues? It was wrong then, and it's wrong now. If you want to contribute to that, fine. At least acknowledge that's what you're doing, and acknowledge that it's not inevitable, that humans make choices, and that we could all get along just fine with a single pair of binoculars if need be.
If a position of moral superiority is fragile, then a position of self-serving rationalization can only self-destruct.
And what's the point of all these historical analogues? It was wrong then, and it's wrong now. If you want to contribute to that, fine. At least acknowledge that's what you're doing, and acknowledge that it's not inevitable, that humans make choices, and that we could all get along just fine with a single pair of binoculars if need be.
If a position of moral superiority is fragile, then a position of self-serving rationalization can only self-destruct.
John M Robinson
Well-known member
Is it a rationalization to believe that the end result of the Chinese economic growth and domination in the global arena, will be a westernizing of their culture and economic practices along the lines the Japanese took? When I was a kid Japan was very impoverished following WW II, and was able to produce stuff much more cheaply than here in the US. Over the years Japan became more and more dominant and as they did, their workers became more prosperous middle class consumers, demanding higher wages and better working conditions. I believe that the only hope for China or any third world country to become more enviromentally conscience or for them to be able to afford being envriromentally conscience. Now whither it is good for the west politically to give up it's economic domination to the Chinese for the good of world health is another question.
Maybe it's less of a rationalization than a nievety on my part, but that's what I believe.
John
Maybe it's less of a rationalization than a nievety on my part, but that's what I believe.
John
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
I'll grant that China may well get through this economic stage to something better (it's not yet a given, however). My concern is that we tend to see what's happening as the ONLY way towards progress: first you ruin everything, then, with all the money you've made, you try to repair some of the damage. And of course, as Europe and North America know too well, most of what you lost ain't never coming back. You live with the remains.
First, I believe it's not the only way for developing countries to prosper (there appears to be a substantial rural counter-movement in places like India, for instance). Second, I do think it's tempting to say this model of progress is unavoidable, and then, presumably with a clean conscience, go on a shopping binge.
I've succumbed to that myself; I just won't let myself off the hook.
Mark
First, I believe it's not the only way for developing countries to prosper (there appears to be a substantial rural counter-movement in places like India, for instance). Second, I do think it's tempting to say this model of progress is unavoidable, and then, presumably with a clean conscience, go on a shopping binge.
I've succumbed to that myself; I just won't let myself off the hook.
Mark
jaymoynihan
Corvus brachyrhynchos watcher
Given the reference to "historical analogues..", i assume it is related to my last post.
"...what's the point of all these historical analogues?"
Perspective.
"It was wrong then, and it's wrong now."
Yes
"If you want to contribute to that, fine. At least acknowledge that's what you're doing,"
I contribute little to it in the "bird toys" area of my life, but i certainly do in other areas. And, given the intergrated, economy, it is not a matter of choice for the most part, if i am still to work etc.
"...and acknowledge that it's not inevitable"
It is not inevitable.
"we could all get along just fine with a single pair of binoculars "
True, :-C
Good point. And I´m not arguing that there is no environmental destruction in China, or that its human rights record is spotless. No-one´s is. We´ve all contributed to screwing up the planet, and we´ve all got dirt and blood on our hands one way or another. I have lived in China (in the past) for a number of years, and certainly I didn´t like the air in the cities. I lived in New York too and wasn´t crazy about the air there either. And for most of my life the air in Dublin was foul. Poverty? Human Rights abuses? Doesn´t matter where you live. Just look around you , folks, or scratch the surface and you´ll find the same. You sure the slums and jails in your country aren´t predominantly populated by one ethnic group? You sure there aren´t some native peoples in your country who claim land was robbed from them? You sure democracy in your country isn´t denied to some, or heavily compromised by Supercapitalism? You sure Superbusiness Inc. in your country isn´t screwing up the air, or the water, or the land? So why criticise China ´cos they produce cheap binoculars? You sure the guarantee of our oil supplies isn´t leading to massive human rights abuses in many countries? There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that Chinese-produced binoculars have caused any destruction, or infringement of basic labour rights. But there is plenty of evidence that the copper we buy from Bolivia, or the Coffee from just about anywhere, or the Diamonds from Africa, and much else we take for granted, are produced in inhumane conditions. The only way to try to improve the lot of the planet, the Chinese people and by extension the peoples of the world, is to co-operate with them, as they are eager to do, rather than preaching at them. They are not a newly-arrived "developing" society, they were an advanced civilisation when most of us were still barbarians. Have a look this coming October 1st. Through your Zen-Rays or your Leicas or your Vortexes, whatever.
