Communist China is just plain brutal and sick.

[Kooky]

A country is best judged by the way it treats its animals.

I think many in China are outraged givin the attention this has.

And yea, Communist China is severely brutal with animals.

I'm curious, do you eat meat?

 

[Kooky]

Just what has been going on there with the Uighurs?

They are "Muslim terrorists" and therefore get to be put into blacksites and extralegal detention camps, a practice that should be familiar to Americans.

 

[Revoltingest]

They are "Muslim terrorists" and therefore get to be put into blacksites and extralegal detention camps, a practice that should be familiar to Americans.

Your post appears to favor both the PRC & fascism.
Why is that?

 

[Twilight Hue]

I'm curious, do you eat meat?

Of course. And I slaughtered animals in the past.

I get upset at a brutalized death, I stand with quick decisive blows that death is within seconds. A firearm or proper euthanasia would be far better than a tire iron swung at the animal by a lunatic.

 

[Kooky]

Of course. And I slaughtered animals in the past.

I get upset at a brutalized death, I stand with quick decisive blows that death is within seconds. A firearm or proper euthanasia would be far better than a tire iron swung at the animal by a lunatic.

It's dead either way, killed so you can devour its meat. As far as I can tell, the only meaningful difference between a death that looks gruesome and one that doesn't is our personal reaction to it.
The dead no longer care how they died, after all.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

It's dead either way, killed so you can devour its meat. As far as I can tell, the only meaningful difference between a death that looks gruesome and one that doesn't is our personal reaction to it.
The dead no longer care how they died, after all.

Humans, and I don't know about animals, are capable of triangulating a story about all that which can typically result in varying levels of disgust. That the dead no longer care how they died, is a given, but that is not typically where the humans rest much comfort. Animals may not be able to do much of that, due to differences in cognitive ability, though that isn't something for us to blame them for.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That the dead no longer care how they died, is a given,

No, it isn't.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

No, it isn't.

I suppose you are correct, if you believe in a post-death state where someone's spirit becomes cognizant of the fact they can no longer operate an earthly body, and they dislike that. I was answering using the logic of what we sense is apparent. The steak in your freezer no longer appears to be a suffering organism, to the perception of most people

 

[Kooky]

No, it isn't.

No factual dead person is on the record for having complained about their death after it happened.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The steak in your freezer no longer appears to be a suffering organism, to the perception of most people

Well, yeah, as it's a piece of literal meat, not the spirit of the animal...But this is off topic.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It's dead either way, killed so you can devour its meat. As far as I can tell, the only meaningful difference between a death that looks gruesome and one that doesn't is our personal reaction to it.
The dead no longer care how they died, after all.

Maybe so. Nature is that way in the raw, and we are still animals.

Yet I'd prefer if one kills, do it in a way that is efficient and quick and not for sport or pleasure.

It is a reminder either way that psychopaths are around.

 

[Kooky]

Maybe so. Nature is that way in the raw, and we are still animals.

Yet I'd prefer if one kills, do it in a way that is efficient and quick and not for sport or pleasure.

It is a reminder either way that psychopaths are around.

I prefer not to kill at all, which preserves life.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I prefer not to kill at all, which preserves life.

That would be best if it were so ideologically.

I know the reality lays towards indifference and neutrality as it pertains to the big picture within the scope of human introspection and observation.

There is no pause even among the worst of circumstances.

 

[Kooky]

That would be best if it were so ideologically.

I know the reality lays towards indifference and neutrality as it pertains to the big picture within the scope of human introspection and observation.

There is no pause even among the worst of circumstances.

Indifference and neutrality is fine in my book, I don't need to love a creature in order to not kill it.

The real issue is that changing ingrained habits requires effort.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

They are "Muslim terrorists" and therefore get to be put into blacksites and extralegal detention camps, a practice that should be familiar to Americans.

Eh, it's not like any country is all that innocent. No one really gets points, the ancestors of many americans from europe and elsewhere probably are here because of anti-poverty laws to some significant degree

Let me ask you, do you sense any partisan divide on the view of China? How should the left view China in any way that differs from how the right should view it?

If there is a difference, which partisan route restricts the possibility of nuclear war more

 

[Kooky]

Eh, it's not like any country is all that innocent. No one really gets points, the ancestors of many americans from europe and elsewhere probably are here because of anti-poverty laws to some significant degree

We are not talking about some distant historical phenomena, but very recent events that happened in most RF member's living memory.

Let me ask you, do you sense any partisan divide on the view of China?

As far as I can tell, in the US, singling out China as the next Cold War bogeyman to measure off of is a bipartisan project, likely carried by a desire for support from the US military-industrial complex in the near future.

How should the left view China in any way that differs from how the right should view it?

In my humble opinion, "the left" (that is, the anti-capitalist and pro-working class movements currently located at the left-most fringe in most of the world, not the liberal-centrist mainstream) should view China as it should view every other imperialistic military power, as a fundamentally unjust system of oppression that needs to be toppled by the international working class just like every other oppressive state structure, including but not limited to the US and Russia.

As for how the US Democratic Party should view China, honestly I don't know and don't care very much. I simply find it striking how badly the party leadership seems to want to cozy up with the US military complex, perhaps due to fears of the military siding with the Right when the next coup happens.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

In my humble opinion, "the left" (that is, the anti-capitalist and pro-working class movements currently located at the left-most fringe in most of the world, not the liberal-centrist mainstream) should view China as it should view every other imperialistic military power, as a fundamentally unjust system of oppression that needs to be toppled by the international working class just like every other oppressive state structure, including but not limited to the US and Russia.

There is no such body though, as the 'international working class' as a coherent body. I keep hearing the left talk about, or imply, the existence of some social construct that has yet to exist. There are only two options for humans, democracy and authoritarianism. Anything other than those two options is incoherent; fictional.

The actual dynamic parameter that you should look at is scale. The qualities of either of the two options change when you adjust for that. But even with that, you either are in a system of democracy or authoritarianism. Voting or no voting. How could anything else exist?

 

[amorphous_constellation]

extralegal

By the term 'extralegal,' you seem to imply that a higher law exists, than what a government defines. Where does that higher law come from? Again, it comes from either voting, if that works, or it from the central authority figure. I can't imagine another body or power that could define law. Are you talking about a platonic law?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Here in the states some people see it bad to raise hogs, chickens, beef, turkey, etc only to slaughter them for food.

Eat a cow and its great steak and hamburger.
Eat a horse and its taboo.

We value some while not others.

I can't say this for sure, but I think most of it is down to regulations. Regulations encourage the eating of beef, chicken and pork but discourage the eating of almost ever other kind of meat. Let me explain. Many people hunt deer, but almost no one is allowed to sell their deer meat. You cannot go to a butcher or a grocer and request deer meat. For that reason in spite of its plenty most people in the US have never tasted deer, but most people have tasted beef. Horse meat regulations, similarly, make horse meat difficult to sell and obtain. It is put into dog food, but they won't sell it for human consumption. Therefore few have ever tasted horse. You'd have to buy a horse and slaughter it yourself to have horse meat.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

A country is best judged by the way it treats its animals.

Customs and Border protection employee shoots, kills dog at Fairfax County archery range, police say

Video of Detroit police officer fatally shooting dog through fence goes viral

Police officer sued after shooting puppy dead in front of its owners