Ditto Much
TRIBE Member
yeah it is
-
Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!
The Chinese are Monsters
- Thread starter deevah
- Start date
praktik
TRIBE Member
Nonetheless, the terminology of "monster" leads to a dehumanizing caricature of the Chinese, when really and sadly, what happens there is all-too human, and replicated in many other corners of the world, some of them not so far away.deevah said:
I too had similar thoughts to Sunkist reading the first posts.
EDIT: and I don't think the Olympics should be politicized, whatever the crimes of the Chinese. Its a time for sport and competition - waving big banners on the podium would cheapen the purity of the event. Its a time when everyone - whether under the subjugation of "monsters" or market forces or whatever - can get together and compete.
Last edited:
when they see what China is doing on that front. Totally shameless! They know they can get away with it too.
Bass-Invader
TRIBE Member
why are people bringing up ipperwash?
Bass-Invader
TRIBE Member
who cares what compares to what? isn't this bad on it's own right? Or do we have to juxtapose it against our own shortcomings in order to talk about it?
Hi i'm God
TRIBE Member
LOL /\ Someones word-a-day calendar got put to good use.
praktik
TRIBE Member
Well, there is the saying about the "glass house" - but I get your point. Yes we can talk about the Chinese without having to mention our own shortcomings (say, contrasting their lead based paints with our continued exportation of asbestos).Bass-Invader said:
But you can talk about China without using the language of "monsters" - when those kind of judgments come out it invites one to point out our own shortcomings to level things and remind people that we have our own "monsters" and that while conduct may very well be "monstrous" in China it is also very human and not so beyond the pale that there aren't precedents in a thousand different places in the world for other "monstrous" actions/events. Its inflammatory language to use the word "monster" or "barbaric", even if the severity of their actions seems to call for such language because we're (understandably) appalled.
They are a country of a billion after all, and for every "monstrous" act there's also plenty that's "wondrous" about the country and good things happening too. They shouldn't be brushed with such simple strokes.
Bass-Invader
TRIBE Member
yeah but i think it's pretty obvious that she is not referring to Chinese people as a whole when you read the thread.
also, off topic - what's wrong with exporting asbestos?
also, off topic - what's wrong with exporting asbestos?
Is it?Hal-9000 said:
After six years of IR at UofT, I can definitely say that there was virtually zero focus on the relativity of criticism.
It's not hypocritical to for members of one society to criticise injustices elsewhere without first berating their own community's problems...which in this case pale in comparison.
praktik
TRIBE Member
Asbestos exportation: Its cancer causing - many of our clientele are third world countries with little to no laws governing its use.
EDIT: just did a google and found stuff about us forcing asbestos to be imported in the US through a NAFTA or some other trade body's decision that the EPA ban in the states was a "barrier to trade". We're fighting in the WTO to open up Europe. Which would probably explain why a lot of our asbestos was going to third world countries - they dont have the human health laws we take for granted here.
EDIT: just did a google and found stuff about us forcing asbestos to be imported in the US through a NAFTA or some other trade body's decision that the EPA ban in the states was a "barrier to trade". We're fighting in the WTO to open up Europe. Which would probably explain why a lot of our asbestos was going to third world countries - they dont have the human health laws we take for granted here.
Last edited:
Bass-Invader
TRIBE Member
are we like exporting asbestos in the form of pipe coverings and insulation, or are we exporting the material asbestos to people who want to buy asbestos?praktik said:
"Wanting to buy" is a common fallacy used to justify "market-oriented" injustices. Buying out of necessity does NOT represent rational consumer choice. Asbestos is fucking dangerous, that's why we've gone to great lengths to remove it from our buildings. It's a public health issue.
If it's being used for industrial purposes--not sure what--that won't harm humans, that's a different story. But LDCs are notorious for, well, not giving a fuck.
If it's being used for industrial purposes--not sure what--that won't harm humans, that's a different story. But LDCs are notorious for, well, not giving a fuck.
Last edited:
praktik
TRIBE Member
We export 95% of our asbestos, we only use 5%. Of course, we're exporting the material asbestos to people who want to buy it - but primarily to places that dont have laws like we have here governing its use, and to the places that DO have such laws, we're working actively to have those laws struck down.Bass-Invader said:
praktik
TRIBE Member
"Asbestos producer nations have blocked the addition of chrysotile (white) asbestos to the UN list of highly dangerous substances that cannot be exported to developing countries without their knowledge and agreement. The blocking manoeuvre on "prior informed consent" (PIC) listing of chrysotile at the Rotterdam convention meeting in Geneva on 18 September 2004 was spearheaded by the Canadian and Russian governments.
The move drew protests from campaigners, while the European Union said it would set a negative precedent. "The failure to list chrysotile asbestos is a bad omen for the convention, risking serious harm by sending a signal that the convention's requirements do not need to be taken seriously," said Clifton Curtis, director of World Wildlife Fund's global toxics programme.
Global construction union IFBWW, which has been at the forefront of the worldwide union ban campaign on asbestos, expressed "profound disappointment and its determination to continue the struggle for a global ban." Supporters of the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos on the list are expected to keep up the pressure.
The asbestos lobby pulled off an identical blocking move at the 2003 PIC meeting. As the procedure has no mechanism to force signatories to play by the rules, Canada and other asbestos interests could feasibly block listing indefinitely. However, the strategy could totally discredit the Rotterdam Treaty, which could lead to increasing pressure on these nations to observe the spirit of the treaty.
In September 2004, the International Social Security Association joined international union and health organisations in calling for a global asbestos ban."
http://www.hazards.org/asbestos/pic.htm
The move drew protests from campaigners, while the European Union said it would set a negative precedent. "The failure to list chrysotile asbestos is a bad omen for the convention, risking serious harm by sending a signal that the convention's requirements do not need to be taken seriously," said Clifton Curtis, director of World Wildlife Fund's global toxics programme.
Global construction union IFBWW, which has been at the forefront of the worldwide union ban campaign on asbestos, expressed "profound disappointment and its determination to continue the struggle for a global ban." Supporters of the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos on the list are expected to keep up the pressure.
The asbestos lobby pulled off an identical blocking move at the 2003 PIC meeting. As the procedure has no mechanism to force signatories to play by the rules, Canada and other asbestos interests could feasibly block listing indefinitely. However, the strategy could totally discredit the Rotterdam Treaty, which could lead to increasing pressure on these nations to observe the spirit of the treaty.
In September 2004, the International Social Security Association joined international union and health organisations in calling for a global asbestos ban."
http://www.hazards.org/asbestos/pic.htm
Bass-Invader
TRIBE Member
okay, let's not turn this thread into another topic. Asbestos has valid uses that still justify it's production and sale. Similarly, if the material had been lead, there is a difference between selling lead, and selling leaded paints and gasoline, which was what i was trying to ask.SellyCat said:
Bass-Invader
TRIBE Member
thankspraktik said: