• Warl0k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    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?

      • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        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.

          • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            wrong again.

            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.

              • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                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.

                  • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    everyone else in the comments

                    You’re trying to misrepresent reality again - go look at the comments (of which 1/2 are now just us two bickering); and fully 1/2 (7/14 (excluding us two), of the (as of posting) 28 total comments (including us two) (edit: this is confusingly worded, I apologize)) of the other comments in this thread are critical of the claims, most of those criticizing how sorry this promise is from China. You can’t just assert easily-verified falsehoods as truth and then claim some kind of victory from that (despite that practically being codified US policy at this point…).

                    I chose to focus on criticism because they are leading the pack, and their efforts are sad, much like a great many other people in this thread are doing. I suppose a case could be made for that to include their politics, since politics shapes policy, but that’d be a kinda pointless semantic argument to make. My criticism of China has nothing to do with my distatste for the CCP directly and everything to do with them being the #1 global emitter of greenhouse gasses, and then even in lip-service planning to do the barest minimum. I’m not criticizing the US right now because the US is not the leader of the pack, or even relevant in this discussion (beyond being the #2 emitter).

                    To put in context something, this year if China’s planed 10% reduction had gone through instantly at the start of the year, they would still have produced more than double the greenhouse gas emissions of the US. THEY HAVE TO DO BETTER. We all do, yes, but THEY ESPECIALLY have to do better. It ain’t fucking racism to criticize the #1 culprit for choosing a target that barely does anything.