"Until contacted by AP in August, biotech giant Thermo Fisher Scientific’s website marketed DNA kits to the Chinese police as “designed” for the Chinese population, including “ethnic minorities like Uyghurs and Tibetans.”"
"Nvidia posted on its WeChat social media account in 2022 that Chinese surveillance firms Watrix and GEOAI used its chips to train AI patrol drones and systems to identify people by their walk, but told the AP those relationships no longer continue."
"In 2016, Dell boasted on its WeChat account that its services assisted the Chinese internet police in “cracking down on rumormongers.” Seagate said on WeChat in 2022 that it sells hard drives “tailor made” ...for use by police to help them ”control key persons."
Bullshit. Charlie Kirk organized a 850 chapter, 300,000 man opposition machine & regularly broadcast to 7 million+ followers. The Biden government allowed him to do this. The Trump government allows the same to its opposition. The two regimes are not comparable.
If Charlie Kirk was Chinese he would have been "invited for tea" back in 2013. He would never have been banned from Weibo with the other Big Vs in 2014. If he persisted in organized action he would have disappeared or placed under house arrest the minute he announced a campus
campus tour, a tour whose promotion and existence would be scrubbed from the web. He would not have been allowed to say one thousandth of the critical things he said of Obama, Biden, and the left.
He might be alive--but only because he would have been a powerless nobody.
There are several reasons why Charlie Kirk’s assassination will not create the sort of culture change dynamic as the George Floyd death in 2020.
Attempting to do so will likely be self defeating.
In politics the question is never “what is the right thing to do?” or “does this make me feel like I am doing justice.” Thr question is always “what can actually be accomplished and what will be the likely cost and consequences of accomplishing it?”
I don’t mean that in the squishy sense of norms or “don’t create tools the enemy will use against us” sense, though sometimes those are useful questions to think through.
Before his murder, Charlie Kirk was two things: a power broker in the Trump coalition and a symbol of a specific vision for that coalition.
You will not understand why his murder feels so cataclysmic to so many if you do not first understand what Kirk symbolized.
I have been thinking about Kirk and his appeal for several weeks now, actually. A producer from his show invited me to come on and talk to Kirk about China and Taiwan.
After I accepted this offer I began to binge his past shows, trying to prepare for the episode.
I also talked with several fans, asking them what shows they thought were best and what they liked most about Charlie Kirk.
This episode will obviously never happen now. But I can share with you what I learned about what Kirk means to the right--especially the young right.
I have no patience for this. I especially have no patience for the legions of anons who have accomplished nothing with their life claiming that Kirk accomplished nothing with his.
Kirk showed us a path that works: building institutions with active mass membership, breaking bread and talking constantly with normal Americans, having courage to stand up for our ideas no matter how hostile the environment, and grounding politics in actual virtuous living.
Charlie Kirk was murdered for this. But the assassin did not destroy what Kirk accomplished. TurningPoint exists! Tens of thousands of young men are open Republicans because of him! Hundreds of thousands of voters were mobilized! Donald Trump is president!
But I also think communists are especially susceptible to think of problems in terms of engineering, and this has been true for a very long time (eg. Stalin's "Engineers of the soul").
Something that does make Chinese party frames interesting is how often they rely on engineering concepts and metaphors. Outside of Marxist theory, the *most* common source of metaphors and concepts come from the military domain; the second most common source is probably ancient
1. The LDS faith is a minority faith in every country in which it exists (except Tonga).
2.a The majority of the Church lives outside the US
2.b Many Americans in the Church served missions outside the US
2.c Or served missions aimed at foreign language populations within US
3. The LDS experience in these other cultures is that their institutions and way of living can be successfully planted and replicated among these diverse populations. Church meetings and communities in Virginia feel similar to those in Taiwan.
I suspect that this lived experience, even more than Church teachings about all men and women being children of God, is the most important shaper of the views of the LDS faithful.