Chinese President Xi Jinping said that by 2035 his country would cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 7% to 10% from their peak, a day after President Donald Trump called climate change a “con job.”
Criticizing the most prominent country for still utterly failing (and paying little more than lip-service to the problem) has very little to do with their skin being brown, and everything to do with criticism of the leader of the pack indicting the rest of the pack implicitly. But thank you for delegitimizing everything you might say in response by demonstrating beyond any reasonable doubt that you’re arguing in bad faith.
I’d be criticizing western countries if this article had been about the western world - but it’s not, so that’s not really relevant commentary. If I showed up to say something like “why aren’t western countries doing better” it would be a valid point, but would absolutely not address the issue - that china is in no uncertain terms absolutely failing the environment. Trying to deflect that with accusations of racism is… transparent, at very least because you have yet to address the criticism but only the form my argument takes.
Why are you so biased that you can’t even accept criticism of a group you support might be legitimate in an article explicitly about the actions of said group? People from the US do that all the time, what makes China special?
Sigh. 4 out of 13 of the paragraphs in that article are about trump’s behavior and there isn’t even a mention of another country besides the US and china. Kinda hard to criticize what just isn’t there (at least, if you’re arguing in good faith…)
Shockingly you continue to not address the criticism, just the form of the argument. I can’t imagine why that would be.
Oh you know what, you’re absolutely right. The article (ten more paragraphs!) wasn’t loading due to their godawful… comment widget? I’m not sure what happened there. BUT I’ll amend my prior claim since Brazil is in there too! And while hardly a western-aligned country, and I am deeply skeptical of their ability to follow through on their claims, I’ll give them credit for thumbing their nose at both the US’ and China’s utterly pathetic showing with those climate targets. Here’s hoping they can stick to them, and that COP30 will follow in their example.
Hardly an article relying on contrasting the US and China, though I suppose quoting Xi that much really does throw some spectacular shade by putting trump’s whole… thing… as contrast.
ah, yes, the good old “you support the CCP because you criticized the US” line.
Uhm… no, I just think you’re arguing in bad faith. That’s been my whole thesis, and it’s maybe worth introspecting that you’ve directly jumped to being persecuted for supporting china instead of the thing I keep criticizing you for.
Let me know if you ever wanna respond to the substance here (to reiterate: criticizing china is absolutely warranted, especially in light of how much better Brazil is doing) instead of issues to take with the form of the argument, it’ll be interesting.
Wrong again.
Bud that’s the whole point here - you’re supporting the group (edit: in this case the CCP) by rejecting legitimate criticism with bad faith meandering (accusations of racism and classic whattaboutisms). Despite your presumed personal position you 100% are supporting the utterly pathetic chinese environmental goals here.
Criticizing the most prominent country for still utterly failing (and paying little more than lip-service to the problem) has very little to do with their skin being brown, and everything to do with criticism of the leader of the pack indicting the rest of the pack implicitly. But thank you for delegitimizing everything you might say in response by demonstrating beyond any reasonable doubt that you’re arguing in bad faith.
deleted by creator
I’d be criticizing western countries if this article had been about the western world - but it’s not, so that’s not really relevant commentary. If I showed up to say something like “why aren’t western countries doing better” it would be a valid point, but would absolutely not address the issue - that china is in no uncertain terms absolutely failing the environment. Trying to deflect that with accusations of racism is… transparent, at very least because you have yet to address the criticism but only the form my argument takes.
Why are you so biased that you can’t even accept criticism of a group you support might be legitimate in an article explicitly about the actions of said group? People from the US do that all the time, what makes China special?
deleted by creator
Sigh. 4 out of 13 of the paragraphs in that article are about trump’s behavior and there isn’t even a mention of another country besides the US and china. Kinda hard to criticize what just isn’t there (at least, if you’re arguing in good faith…)
Shockingly you continue to not address the criticism, just the form of the argument. I can’t imagine why that would be.
deleted by creator
Oh you know what, you’re absolutely right. The article (ten more paragraphs!) wasn’t loading due to their godawful… comment widget? I’m not sure what happened there. BUT I’ll amend my prior claim since Brazil is in there too! And while hardly a western-aligned country, and I am deeply skeptical of their ability to follow through on their claims, I’ll give them credit for thumbing their nose at both the US’ and China’s utterly pathetic showing with those climate targets. Here’s hoping they can stick to them, and that COP30 will follow in their example.
Hardly an article relying on contrasting the US and China, though I suppose quoting Xi that much really does throw some spectacular shade by putting trump’s whole… thing… as contrast.
Uhm… no, I just think you’re arguing in bad faith. That’s been my whole thesis, and it’s maybe worth introspecting that you’ve directly jumped to being persecuted for supporting china instead of the thing I keep criticizing you for.
deleted by creator
Let me know if you ever wanna respond to the substance here (to reiterate: criticizing china is absolutely warranted, especially in light of how much better Brazil is doing) instead of issues to take with the form of the argument, it’ll be interesting.
Bud that’s the whole point here - you’re supporting the group (edit: in this case the CCP) by rejecting legitimate criticism with bad faith meandering (accusations of racism and classic whattaboutisms). Despite your presumed personal position you 100% are supporting the utterly pathetic chinese environmental goals here.