Dixie V. AHZ on Slave Labor

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=61919&postcount=405

So why do you support slave labor? Mr. Morality? Is it all about money?

I don't support slavery, I support ending it through effective political diplomacy based on mutual financial interests. Why do you condone ignoring slavery?

You mean you believe the neocon fantasy that buying slave goods will somehow reduce slavery. Here's a hint to get you on the right track: Making things profitable generally doesn't lead to their demise.


Solving problems through diplomacy? You sound like a retarded liberal. You know, the ones you talk about all the time? They always want to use DIPLOMACY with terrorists. It's stupid in that context as well. You should know that when politicians want to use diplomacy, it means they don't want to solve the problem. Why is your brain warped?
__________________

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=61919&postcount=405

You mean you believe the neocon fantasy that buying slave goods will somehow reduce slavery. Here's a hint to get you on the right track: Making things profitable generally doesn't lead to their demise.


Solving problems through diplomacy? You sound like a retarded liberal. You know, the ones you talk about all the time? They always want to use DIPLOMACY with terrorists. It's stupid in that context as well. You should know that when politicians want to use diplomacy, it means they don't want to solve the problem. Why is your brain warped?
__________________

Yes, believe it or not, diplomacy does solve problems sometimes! If diplomacy never worked, I somehow doubt it would ever be considered, what would be the purpose? I agree, diplomacy doesn't work on terrorists, and is a stupid liberal idea. Terrorists are terrorists because they can't be negotiated with anymore, they have reached a point beyond reason, and seek to effect a change through terror tactics, rather than mutual diplomatic efforts.

As I said in response to your off-topic retort, I support ending the slavery in China through diplomacy. I see no other tangible way to do it, and you've not presented one. Let's break it down, we essentially have three options, war, embargoes, and diplomacy. War is out of the question unless China does something to provoke us, like attacking Taiwan. We will probably never declare war on China for their human rights violations. Embargo doesn't work, and hasn't worked, we've essentially tried this approach since WWI, and it has changed nothing in China. The main reason being, when it gets right down to it, more people had rather have cheap goods than denounce slavery.

Okay, so two of the three options are invalid, and must be taken off the table in considering how to deal with China and the slavery issue. To continue repeating what we know will not work, is the definition of insanity. This is the policy you endorse, a return to the isolationist embargo of China, in the hopes it will 'starve' them into submission... well, it doesn't work! When practiced, China became the #2 world superpower behind the US! I suppose you could make a case for your defiant isolationism if we were trying to make China #1, but to change the conditions in China or effect any difference at all, we can't continue using an approach that doesn't work, and only allows China to continue to grow and prosper.

It's difficult to explain my position with analogy, but if you could imagine trying to stop a fast spinning merry-go-round... You can't stop it by standing flat footed, firmly entrenched in your position, and sticking your hand out.... the merry-go-round just keeps going, and as long as the European dude is pushing on the other side, you will never stop the merry-go-round. However, if you begin to run along side, where you and the merry-go-round share commonality in your direction and speed, you can start to slow down the merry-go-round, and eventually you can stop it completely. At first glance, this might seem illogical, how is traveling in the same direction as the merry-go-round going to ever stop it? It allows you to gain a firm hold on the problem, to gain some leverage, and eventually effect a change. You can never order the merry-go-round to stop, that doesn't work, and stubbornly standing there with your hand out, hasn't worked... so why not try to think about how we can actually DO something about the problem?

We only just recently began trade with China, so we haven't even started to slow the merry-go-round yet, we need to first achieve some level of mutual commonality, in this example, financial interests. Once that happens, we can begin to slow the merry-go-round, we can begin to pressure the government of China with the money and contracts established in trade. I realize, to someone who doesn't understand what we are doing, it might appear we are not 'stopping' the merry-go-round, but we are running with it instead. To which I will ask again, what is YOUR alternative?

We've debated this on another thread for several days and several pages, and you never have given me any reasonable answer on how your viewpoint will effect a change in the human rights issues of China. You claim you want to stop the merry-go-round, yet your answer is to stand there with your arms folded, looking sternly at the spinning merry-go-round, and demanding it stop NOW! Not only that, but to make matters worse, you will take every opportunity to stick your foot out and try to trip up those of us who are now running along side the merry-go-round, trying to stop it.

You predicated your entire argument and point, on the terrible and awful human rights violations in China, but you offer no solution to this problem. In fact, you advocate a return to policy which enabled China to become the #2 world superpower, and never address human rights.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Making things profitable generally doesn't lead to their demise.

So you are saying, US trade produces an increased profit? How is it different from German trade, French trade, or British trade? Chinese goods are already profitable, otherwise they couldn't feed their population and wouldn't be the #2 world superpower. They already sell as much as they can produce, and produce as much as they can sell, so those are not factors of profit we can consider. You claim that China has this vast pool of non-working free Chinese, who they can just go round up and put to work to increase the production, but I've never heard of, or seen them. This is the myth you have to believe to make your point, and I understand that, but I rely on facts you can produce, not myths. The fact is, China will produce and sell X amount of goods next year, with or without US trade. The only real difference such a view will produce, is to give the EU cheap Chinese goods, at the expense of the US. If France can buy $2 widgets from China, why would they ever be compelled to buy $4 union-made widgets from the US?

By refusing to trade with China, you are saying... you can do what you want to do, we won't try to stop you, but we will rest well knowing our $4 widgets which no one will buy, are made with well-paid American labor and not slaves! Now, in some twisted illogical liberal ideology, I can understand this view, but if you are truly focused on changing the problems in China, or doing something to change the problems of cheap Chinese goods in the world market, you're not going to get there from here. It's as simple as that.

See... your problem is, you think that because I am a capitalist, my interest here is purely economic and financial. However, as a capitalist, what good does it serve me to have my competition using slaves? As long as China can out-produce the US and do it cheaper, we are going to struggle in the global economy and world market. No, if my interests were purely economic and financial, I would advocate that we ALL get to use slave labor. That is NOT my position at all. As a capitalist, I want to be able to compete with China and anyone else, on the global market. In order to compete with China, they must change their internal policies, I can't make them do that by ignoring them.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

Making things profitable generally doesn't lead to their demise.

So you are saying, US trade produces an increased profit?

Yes. Which you were arguing against, saying our orders somehow didn't increase their trade volume. Do you still stick by that?

How is it different from German trade, French trade, or British trade?

They use slave labor.

Chinese goods are already profitable, otherwise they couldn't feed their population and wouldn't be the #2 world superpower.

The increased demand of u.s. business INCREASES either their trade volume, or their prices and hence their income, in either scenario. They've become the #2 superpower because of the U.S. blessing their unholy totalitarianism.

They already sell as much as they can produce, and produce as much as they can sell, so those are not factors of profit we can consider.

They will endeavor to increase production if our demand increases as well. Maybe they will enslave more people.

You claim that China has this vast pool of non-working free Chinese, who they can just go round up and put to work to increase the production, but I've never heard of, or seen them.

They could always pass new laws against spitting to increase their prison labor work force. Just the other day you were saying 100% of china was slaves. Now you haven't seen or heard of them. You're an incoherent inconsistent fascist idiot.

This is the myth you have to believe to make your point, and I understand that, but I rely on facts you can produce, not myths. The fact is, China will produce and sell X amount of goods next year, with or without US trade. The only real difference such a view will produce, is to give the EU cheap Chinese goods, at the expense of the US. If France can buy $2 widgets from China, why would they ever be compelled to buy $4 union-made widgets from the US?

What myth do I believe? Tell me plainly. You believe many myths or have made up theories on the spot to support your idiocy.

Im not pro union necessarily, Im just anti-slavery. There's a difference. And if there is no difference in your view, please explain your position.

By refusing to trade with China, you are saying... you can do what you want to do, we won't try to stop you, but we will rest well knowing our $4 widgets which no one will buy, are made with well-paid American labor and not slaves! Now, in some twisted illogical liberal ideology, I can understand this view, but if you are truly focused on changing the problems in China, or doing something to change the problems of cheap Chinese goods in the world market, you're not going to get there from here. It's as simple as that.

You blathered about unions to try and change the subject. You made it clear that you have no sense of morality. What you haven't done is explain how your strategy will eventually reduce slavery.

See... your problem is, you think that because I am a capitalist, my interest here is purely economic and financial. However, as a capitalist, what good does it serve me to have my competition using slaves? As long as China can out-produce the US and do it cheaper, we are going to struggle in the global economy and world market. No, if my interests were purely economic and financial, I would advocate that we ALL get to use slave labor. That is NOT my position at all. As a capitalist, I want to be able to compete with China and anyone else, on the global market. In order to compete with China, they must change their internal policies, I can't make them do that by ignoring them.

you also will not change them by buying more of their slave goods and also profitting from the slavery.

The world should embargo slave goods. We could pass laws against Ivory because of elephant poaching, but when it comes to slavery you are unwilling to do anything. You're an intellectual fraud or an idiot. Im leading toward idiot, considering your arguments are so idiotic.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

How is it different from German trade, French trade, or British trade?

They use slave labor.

I mean, how is US trade different? China will sell their products and make just as much profit with or without US trade, they have demonstrated this over the past 100 years. They will sell to the French, Germans and Russians, all they can produce with all the slaves they can find, and never even bother glancing at the US, frankly, they don't have the time to worry with us, they are so busy making money and profit with the EU and Russia. US trade accounts for just a small fraction of Chinese trade at this time. We hope to change this, we believe we can, and perhaps this will finally give us the leverage to effect some level of change for the people in China? It beats the hell out of your advocating of a policy which frankly, enabled many of the human rights problems to continue for the past century in China.

In this debate, we have two views, yours is a return to the policy of nearly a century, where America simply refused to trade with the Chinese. Mine is the official US trade policy, which has evolved over the course of the last 35 years, and has sound valid reasoning and rationale to effect a change in human rights conditions. It gives us the necessary leverage to negotiate, because we then have something of interest to the Chinese, where we have nothing otherwise.

I am trying to be patient with you, but so far, you have not given me one single solitary argument for why your approach will effect a change in China. I've presented mine, and you've simply denounced it and proclaimed it wrong, and continued your propaganda campaign to mischaracterize the truth. I am interested in hearing how your approach is going to change the conditions in human rights for China. I think I can be open-minded enough to listen to your thoughts, but you are unable to give me any. Instead, you want to attack my view, which is the official trade policy of the US. You want to claim it is some Neocon Plot, although MFN status was signed by Clinton.

So, I must ask myself, why do I continue to discuss it with you? I have clearly shown you to be a fraud and your ideas to be void of substance, most of what you are saying is fabrication, over-exaggeration, and outright kook conspiracy theory. The debate is constantly being diverted to minutia and word parsing, instead of telling us just how your viewpoint solves the problem of slavery in China.

Here is the answer, it doesn't. It ignores the problem, and claims the 'moral high ground' while allowing the problem to continue unfettered. It is the same ideology used by pro-welfare, pro-choice and anti-war liberals.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

How is it different from German trade, French trade, or British trade?

They use slave labor.

I mean, how is US trade different? China will sell their products and make just as much profit with or without US trade,

I believe US orders are fairly substantial and do make a difference in their capacity planning and enslavement requirements.

they have demonstrated this over the past 100 years. They will sell to the French, Germans and Russians, all they can produce with all the slaves they can find, and never even bother glancing at the US, frankly, they don't have the time to worry with us, they are so busy making money and profit with the EU and Russia.

I maintain our orders matter, but the real point is that slavery is immoral. THe ultimate extension of your idiocy is that anything which makes money is justified.

Besides the moral argument, is the inherent stupidity of empowering people to build a military against you with your own trade dollars.

US trade accounts for just a small fraction of Chinese trade at this time. We hope to change this, we believe we can, and perhaps this will finally give us the leverage to effect some level of change for the people in China?

But what about the trade from europe and other areas. According to your argument, that trade is why we have no leverage now. Are you an idiot?

It beats the hell out of your advocating of a policy which frankly, enabled many of the human rights problems to continue for the past century in China.

I believe we could change them now if we had the moral will. The truth is that china is key to enslaving the world, according to the illuminati plan.

Your plan only guarantees the perpetuation of chinese slavery long into the foreseeable future.

In this debate, we have two views, yours is a return to the policy of nearly a century, where America simply refused to trade with the Chinese. Mine is the official US trade policy, which has evolved over the course of the last 35 years, and has sound valid reasoning and rationale to effect a change in human rights conditions. It gives us the necessary leverage to negotiate, because we then have something of interest to the Chinese, where we have nothing otherwise.

YOU said we have no leverage. Why do we have no leverage now, but will have it in the future?
I believe we should enact trade barriers against any slave labor nation and any nation which does business with slave labor nations. You know, "you're either with us or against us".

I am trying to be patient with you, but so far, you have not given me one single solitary argument for why your approach will effect a change in China.

Don't worry about me, worry about the inconsistencies in your own arguments. At least my plan will save the rest of the world from enslaving their own people in this mad notion to compete with slave labor. Maybe we should amputate the gangrenous limb; that's fine with me.

I've presented mine, and you've simply denounced it and proclaimed it wrong, and continued your propaganda campaign to mischaracterize the truth. I am interested in hearing how your approach is going to change the conditions in human rights for China. I think I can be open-minded enough to listen to your thoughts, but you are unable to give me any. Instead, you want to attack my view, which is the official trade policy of the US. You want to claim it is some Neocon Plot, although MFN status was signed by Clinton.

Your plan makes no sense.

My plan is to ebargo them. You say this will have no effect, but that refutation is in obvious ignorance of the laws of supply and demand.

Newsflash, the policy sucks. Justifying your position by saying it's the current policy is quite moronic.

So, I must ask myself, why do I continue to discuss it with you? I have clearly shown you to be a fraud and your ideas to be void of substance, most of what you are saying is fabrication, over-exaggeration, and outright kook conspiracy theory. The debate is constantly being diverted to minutia and word parsing, instead of telling us just how your viewpoint solves the problem of slavery in China.

I mention my plan in nearly every discussion we have on the subject, and you reject it based on ignorance everytime. We have used embargos successfully in the past and should use one now.

Here is the answer, it doesn't. It ignores the problem, and claims the 'moral high ground' while allowing the problem to continue unfettered. It is the same ideology used by pro-welfare, pro-choice and anti-war liberals.

No. It is the moral high ground. While my plan may not be successful, yours guarantees the perpetuation and increased profitability of human slavery.

I have an infinite amount of patience with this issue. This is the most important issue of our time, and how we deal with it will effect the nature of human relations of earth for years to come.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

The real agenda behind the empowerment of china is to make the entire world dependant upon slave labor, to make all people either A) slaves themselves or B)unemployed and thus dependant on the state. The goal is to eliminate freedom on the planet.


I suggest a rejection of all slave labor goods and a redevelopment of any and all production capacities domestically. This will serve the trifold purpose of taking a stand against slavery, ceasing funding a military that could be used against us, and enhancing our own self reliance.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I believe US orders are fairly substantial and do make a difference in their capacity planning and enslavement requirements.

This is a belief predicated on something you've not shown to be the case. China is a Communist Socialist government, no one has "freedom" to do the job they wish and desire to do, they do the jobs the government tells them to do, this would not be effected by US trade. They will sell the same number of widgets, (which is the most they can drive their slaves to produce), regardless of US trade.

I maintain our orders matter, but the real point is that slavery is immoral.

Well, it is impossible for our orders to matter if they don't exist, correct? I completely agree with your point about slavery, it is indeed immoral, we agree on this, that is not the issue here. You want to paint this argument with me condoning slavery and you opposing it, and that is simply unreasonable and unfair. My viewpoint offers a potential solution through diplomacy and reform, leveraged by strong trade alliances and finance, your viewpoint is a retreat to the practices that encouraged the level of slavery now present in China.

You can make off-the-cuff repudiations of what I say all day long, you can continue to portray a mythical illusion of reality and prop up your evil capitalist conspiracy theories, but you can't answer the most basic and logical question I have asked... How exactly does your proposal effect a change in China? You can claim that it would, but history doesn't show that to be the case, our isolationist policy regarding China has not worked, in fact, they grew into the #2 superpower of the world instead. So, living in some sort of bubble of denial and ignorance, is not the answer here. We can't force China to do a damn thing China isn't somehow motivated to do, and without some economic or financial tie to China, we have absolutely nothing to negotiate with. Where am I wrong?

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The real agenda behind the empowerment of china is to make the entire western world dependant upon slave labor

Again, this is predicated on liberal hogwash which has no basis in fact. It has been demonstrated, society can indeed overcome dependence on slavery. I also believe the AFL-CIO is vehemently opposed to slave labor in this part of the Western world, and would not condone such a movement, should some whacked out skinhead group start one! Let's try to focus on facts and not some liberal conspiracy theory here, we are debating what to do about slave labor in China.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

I believe US orders are fairly substantial and do make a difference in their capacity planning and enslavement requirements.

This is a belief predicated on something you've not shown to be the case. China is a Communist Socialist government, no one has "freedom" to do the job they wish and desire to do, they do the jobs the government tells them to do, this would not be effected by US trade. They will sell the same number of widgets, (which is the most they can drive their slaves to produce), regardless of US trade.

Though there are not legally protected freedoms there are some more well off than others, but SINCE there are no legal protections, more slaves can be acquired easily. The fascist state/industrial complex does what they please. This doesn't meant their MAXED OUT on atrocity.

I maintain our orders matter, but the real point is that slavery is immoral.

Well, it is impossible for our orders to matter if they don't exist, correct?

Don't get existential, dipwad. WIthdrawing our orders would matter.

I completely agree with your point about slavery, it is indeed immoral, we agree on this, that is not the issue here. You want to paint this argument with me condoning slavery and you opposing it, and that is simply unreasonable and unfair. My viewpoint offers a potential solution through diplomacy and reform, leveraged by strong trade alliances and finance, your viewpoint is a retreat to the practices that encouraged the level of slavery now present in China.

Your long term plan has never been throrougly explained, and from what I see, you condone perpetuation of slavery in the short term.

You can make off-the-cuff repudiations of what I say all day long, you can continue to portray a mythical illusion of reality and prop up your evil capitalist conspiracy theories, but you can't answer the most basic and logical question I have asked... How exactly does your proposal effect a change in China? You can claim that it would, but history doesn't show that to be the case, our isolationist policy regarding China has not worked, in fact, they grew into the #2 superpower of the world instead. So, living in some sort of bubble of denial and ignorance, is not the answer here. We can't force China to do a damn thing China isn't somehow motivated to do, and without some economic or financial tie to China, we have absolutely nothing to negotiate with. Where am I wrong?

Our orders do matter. You're wrong about that. THey;re not MAXED OUT on oppression. you're wrong about that. Perpetuating slavery to end it, makes no sense. You're wrong about that. Your argument fades aways in glittering generalities about diplomacy.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

The real agenda behind the empowerment of china is to make the entire western world dependant upon slave labor

Again, this is predicated on liberal hogwash which has no basis in fact. It has been demonstrated, society can indeed overcome dependence on slavery. I also believe the AFL-CIO is vehemently opposed to slave labor in this part of the Western world, and would not condone such a movement, should some whacked out skinhead group start one! Let's try to focus on facts and not some liberal conspiracy theory here, we are debating what to do about slave labor in China.

THere is no will to grant legal personal freedom at any level of the totalitarian regime, and they kill people who talk like that. The technology available today makes real the possibility of a revolution proof totalitarian regime. Not only is this what china is now, this is the plan behind the globalist agenda for the rest of the world in due time.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

*cue twilight zone music*

We're done "debating" here.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

*cue twilight zone music*

We're done "debating" here.

Yeah. Cuz I handed you your ass, wrapped up with a bow.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

And Dixie runs away in 13 posts.

I SOOO rule.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

I beat his ass so bad in this thread he had to leave the board.