Intel apologized on Thursday after a letter in which the chip maker said it would avoid products and labor from Xinjiang set off an outcry on Chinese social media, making it the latest American company caught between the world’s two largest economies.
The chip maker apologized to its Chinese customers, partners and the public in a Chinese-language statement on Weibo, the popular social media site. The company said that the letter, which had been sent to suppliers, was an effort at expressing its compliance with United States sanctions against Xinjiang, rather than a political stance.
Intel following in the footsteps of major US companies supporting genocide – Ford, IBM, Apple, and countless others.
Had to change their stance once they examine their own workforce. “Eh, it’s not so bad. AMD has been killing us for years.”
The problem is China is too big to ignore, and they know it.
And the relationship is very lopsided.
Chinese companies can buy Western ones outright (Tencent with their gaming acquisitions), but the reverse it not true. They can not even list in US exchanges anymore. And Tesla being able to build their own factory made news everywhere. (Normally, you invest in a Chinese company which owns that factory, and makes a pinky promise not to steal your technology).
Even Jack Ma, their largest “founder” could not escape these restrictions.
Jack Ma who championed the 966 work schedule? The man who behaved like Microsoft in the 90s?
What are these restrictions for Jack Ma for example?
Thom, show me photos of refugees escaping from genocide. Xinjiang borders are not guarded, so Uyghurs are free to escape from the genocide.
You must have a pile of photos in your disposal.
If none, you are just making and spreading fake news.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3131010/xinjiang-cotton-why-it-so-hard-find-out-truth-about-forced
But since the borders “are not guarded”, you can always go by yourself, I’m pretty sure Chinese patrols won’t bulge a bit watching you taking pictures and interviews of locals, then return to tell us all how wrong we are.
Try again. No such photos exists about people you photograph escaping from *GENOCIDE* taking place at Xinjiang.
Look at wartime Europe, we must have some form of evidence similar to the Jews escaping Europe.
Article only who reports people are not permitted to go on areas in Xinjiang, therefore the Chinese must be hiding something?
You guys must have a screwed definition of Genocide. Just as how the west is using “freedom of speech” and “censorship” for propaganda tools. Now add *Genocide* to the list. I think people like Thom are zombies, who believe dearly for their freedom as the ultimate expression of freedom for humankind and at the same time were sleeping when their own hypocrisy(Past crimes) are revealed.
https://qr.ae/pG6kOA
@Thom,
Do you understand what Matthew 7:6 means? This is a response against the common excuse from western hypocrites of using whataboutism to justify their judgmental looks without feeling guilty of their past crimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_7:5
Is this an excuse to allow people making the same mistakes ?
No. Whataboutism is in itself a logical fallacy. My point about Matthew 7:6 if you read it, is you cannot remove the speck from your neighbour’s eye, until you remove the beam that is hindering you to see where the speck is from your neighbour’s eye.
To emphasize my comment above about using whataboutism:
Where X is a crime or something horrible.
Person A: Why are you doing X?
person B : Why should I care, you are also doing X!
Person A: You are committing whataboutism fallacy.
Here, both persons are committing logical fallacies While person A’s argument is valid, and need to be assessed by person B, it doesn’t change the fact that person A has committed the same crime as B.
Meaning, you can’t just CORRECT other people of wrongdoings, when you, yourself is doing it in the recent past. Specially, if that past is just 10 years ago or less(Mostly the US/west crimes are still very recent).
In short, Person A has no *moral* ascendacy to correct other people.
Person A has a beam in his own eyes and yet trying to remove *specks* from other people’s eyes. You cannot do that without committing a fallacy yourself hence I reject the usage of Whataboutism. Whataboutism is just a modern excuse used by western apologists defending their past crimes.
When correcting others, Person A must approach the problem the other way, not use propaganda terms like “freedom of speech”, “censorship”, “human rights” and now *genocide*, Here, Thom is extremely anti-China, I wonder if he really visited China.
AER,
It can be, but isn’t always. Sometimes making connections between different things has merit and can help establish more context. I do find it ironic to hear you criticize “Whataboutism” in this specific case though because you are the one who clearly used a “what about” argument at the top of the thread. The article is about forced labor in Xinjiang and you’re bringing up western crimes of the past. I don’t really have a problem with pointing out the hypocrisy of the west if you can make a case for that, but then you should logically concede your own “whataboutism fallacy”.
What about Matthew 23:4? “So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.”
See what I did there 🙂 In a way quoting passages from the bible is an implicit form of whataboutism by aiming to discredit an opponent’s position without directly refuting or disproving the argument.
I’m just playing semantic games here for the fun of it, but on a serious note I don’t think you and Thom will be able to come to an agreement because your philosophies may be ideologically incompatible. I doubt that any logic can bridge the gap. Maybe you can reach a compromise by acknowledging that everyone shares some of the guilt, even western benefactors. The thing is even if that’s true, two wrongs don’t make a right. Would you be willing to acknowledge China has any guilt whatsoever?
We should hold organizations like Intel accountable to their actions and words, and lobby governments for sweeping trade restrictions with China. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to prove if goods originating from China are free from slave labor and if they are not used to fund genocide
Bah, governments will be no help here. Consumers have to push companies where it hurts: in the wallet. Take a look in the past at government trade sanctions and the results, and ask yourself if it has ever really worked toward the desired end. I can’t think of an example where such sanctions ever produced a meaningful change in behavior.
See, this is the problem with companies virtue signaling. The second word, signaling, is what they’re really doing. Had Intel stuck to this, I’d have gained a lot of respect for them as a company as that’s how you have to deal with countries such as China. Either you do business there and play by their rules (which are horribly lop-sided and care nothing for the people they exploit) or you take a firm stand and say no, and let your no be no. This signaling just goes to show everyone what cowards the leaders of Intel are, not that this makes them unique by any stretch.