I don’t believe the likes of Steve Bannon ought to have any voice or platform in discussions of U.S. policy on China. His ties to the alt right and links to white supremacists are appalling and disgraceful, truly dangerous and un-American. thewirechina.com/2020/05/24/ste…
I can understand why @thewirechina team might choose to interview him, given the extent to which his views and impact in debates on U.S.-China relations have been noteworthy--and deeply damaging, in my opinion. But I was also troubled by how this Q&A was framed and featured.
In particular, I was troubled to see this profile posted without directly addressing his links to the alt right and promotion of intolerance and xenophobia. Instead, he's framed as more or less a 'China expert,' which could convey legitimacy beyond that his views ought to merit. 
@DavidBarboza2, I hope you will consider amending this introduction or including an addendum that provides context from anti-hate organizations that have raised very serious concerns about Bannon, such as this backgrounder from @ADL. adl.org/resources/back…
I appreciate the pieces raises some critical points (i.e., "Your position sounds incredibly aggressive.") and fairly tough questions (e.g., "What do you say to those who argue that you’re demonizing China?"). But the format of a Q&A amplifies his voice without robust rebuttal.
Asking him his views on recent issues and events can convey legitimacy to his opinion (e.g., on Hong Kong) despite his lack of actual expertise. I'd hope to have seen tougher questions and robust fact checking of points that Bannon raises, of which many are terribly problematic.
I don't have time to respond point by point to Bannon's arguments in this piece. Certain concerns that he raises (e.g., on human rights) are very valid. But this is also a very dangerous message delivered by a messenger with a history of hate that has been dangerously normalized.
Bannon's involvement in this policy debate is also corrosive insofar as points he raises that are actually important and/or relatively legitimate (and often expropriated from actual experts and activists) are tarnished by the association with the intolerance that he represents.
When voices such as his can gain or receive prominence in debates on U.S.-China relations, that undermines more rigorous and reasoned consideration of the critical issues and potential consequences at stake, while crowding out or distracting from other voices and specialists.
Moreover, I was surprised to see @thewirechina feature this Q&A in #AAPI Heritage Month, an important moment to feature and elevate vital voices and diverse perspectives, especially when there are critical initiatives underway in the APPI community to combat hate and intolerance.
