Chinese Tiger Farms

Byrnzie

PJ_Soul said:

I do think that people should stop buying from China (says the gal who still buys shit from China :-\" ), and that nations should impose economic sanctions on China, but not because of this issue.

So what issue is it then?

Byrnzie

Bronx Bombers said:

Fucking savages

"Did you see the thing on the news about their treatment of animals and animal welfare? Absolutely horrific. You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies."

Morrissey

Savages? Subspecies? You my friend, are a fucking racist.

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

hey ... not to defend this practice ... but it's kind of hypocritical to call the Chinese a subspecies when the majority of the food production in the US is unethical and we haven't even gotten into the wars the US will start to make a buck ...

shark fin consumption is down in china based on PR campaigns ... it's about educating the ignorant ... classifying them as subspecies serves no purpose ...

To my way of thinking, there's a little bit of a difference raising animals for food purposes and killing animals painfully for entertainment purposes and afterwards... processing parts of the animal for 'medicinal uses' which, to any human being with a reasonable brain, are freaking ridiculous (eat a tiger and become a tiger?).

The original comment was: You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies. No definitive statement by any means and clearly implying (in my mind) that given the depravity displayed towards these animals, it's hard to have any respect for these people.

* Don't get me wrong here... factory farms are as depressing as anything.

well ... no, the animals in industrial farming are not raised for food - they are raised for profit ... saying big-agri is out to feed the world is the same as saying big oil is out to power the world ...

how can you say a statement is both not definitive and then say it is clearly implying!? ... i get the devils advocate thing here but the statement says he thinks the chinese are a subspecies ... and that he thinks the majority of chinese people support this treatment ... the fact that he hasn't even tried to retract it or say otherwise should be an indication of that ...

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

hey ... not to defend this practice ... but it's kind of hypocritical to call the Chinese a subspecies when the majority of the food production in the US is unethical and we haven't even gotten into the wars the US will start to make a buck ...

shark fin consumption is down in china based on PR campaigns ... it's about educating the ignorant ... classifying them as subspecies serves no purpose ...

To my way of thinking, there's a little bit of a difference raising animals for food purposes and killing animals painfully for entertainment purposes and afterwards... processing parts of the animal for 'medicinal uses' which, to any human being with a reasonable brain, are freaking ridiculous (eat a tiger and become a tiger?).

The original comment was: You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies. No definitive statement by any means and clearly implying (in my mind) that given the depravity displayed towards these animals, it's hard to have any respect for these people.

* Don't get me wrong here... factory farms are as depressing as anything.

well ... no, the animals in industrial farming are not raised for food - they are raised for profit ... saying big-agri is out to feed the world is the same as saying big oil is out to power the world ...

how can you say a statement is both not definitive and then say it is clearly implying!? ... i get the devils advocate thing here but the statement says he thinks the chinese are a subspecies ... and that he thinks the majority of chinese people support this treatment ... the fact that he hasn't even tried to retract it or say otherwise should be an indication of that ...

Poor choice of words.

His statement doesn't label the Chinese as subspecies as much as it defines the sentiment and/or disgust he feels for the mistreatment of the animals. I could be wrong, but that is how I interpreted it.

Your analogy is fine, but it doesn't accurately describe this situation. When you say profit... I say food. If the market wasn't there for the animals' meat... the farmers wouldn't be housing them as they do. Granted, there is a market for tiger bones, but there seems to be a cold, callous, 'joy' for the spectacle of killing these animals in China that doesn't exist in our meat farms. I don't see people gathering in groups to witness the electrocution of a cow or pig like we do a tiger which has already been reduced to skin and bones. Further, the processing of tigers for 'medicinal' purposes is ridiculous. Whereas the factory farms, with all their faults, ultimately put food in our bellies... the tiger farms do nothing.

We need to eat, but we don't need morbid entertainment and bone powder to make us strong. There is a difference whether you care to admit it or not.

PJ_Soul

Byrnzie said:

PJ_Soul said:

I do think that people should stop buying from China (says the gal who still buys shit from China :-\" ), and that nations should impose economic sanctions on China, but not because of this issue.

So what issue is it then?

I didn't say on purpose. This is a thread about a specific topic, so I don't want to get into a debate with you here about other issues regarding Chinese international relations (with all due respect).

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

hey ... not to defend this practice ... but it's kind of hypocritical to call the Chinese a subspecies when the majority of the food production in the US is unethical and we haven't even gotten into the wars the US will start to make a buck ...

shark fin consumption is down in china based on PR campaigns ... it's about educating the ignorant ... classifying them as subspecies serves no purpose ...

To my way of thinking, there's a little bit of a difference raising animals for food purposes and killing animals painfully for entertainment purposes and afterwards... processing parts of the animal for 'medicinal uses' which, to any human being with a reasonable brain, are freaking ridiculous (eat a tiger and become a tiger?).

The original comment was: You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies. No definitive statement by any means and clearly implying (in my mind) that given the depravity displayed towards these animals, it's hard to have any respect for these people.

* Don't get me wrong here... factory farms are as depressing as anything.

well ... no, the animals in industrial farming are not raised for food - they are raised for profit ... saying big-agri is out to feed the world is the same as saying big oil is out to power the world ...

how can you say a statement is both not definitive and then say it is clearly implying!? ... i get the devils advocate thing here but the statement says he thinks the chinese are a subspecies ... and that he thinks the majority of chinese people support this treatment ... the fact that he hasn't even tried to retract it or say otherwise should be an indication of that ...

Poor choice of words.

His statement doesn't label the Chinese as subspecies as much as it defines the sentiment and/or disgust he feels for the mistreatment of the animals. I could be wrong, but that is how I interpreted it.

Your analogy is fine, but it doesn't accurately describe this situation. When you say profit... I say food. If the market wasn't there for the animals' meat... the farmers wouldn't be housing them as they do. Granted, there is a market for tiger bones, but there seems to be a cold, callous, 'joy' for the spectacle of killing these animals in China that doesn't exist in our meat farms. I don't see people gathering in groups to witness the electrocution of a cow or pig like we do a tiger which has already been reduced to skin and bones. Further, the processing of tigers for 'medicinal' purposes is ridiculous. Whereas the factory farms, with all their faults, ultimately put food in our bellies... the tiger farms do nothing.

We need to eat, but we don't need morbid entertainment and bone powder to make us strong. There is a difference whether you care to admit it or not.

uhhh ... ok - if you choose to read it that way ... that's your choice ... if you look at his initial response to my response to his subspecies comment - he makes no effort to clarify it in that manner ...

does the spectacle of cruelty make it worse!?? ... cruelty is cruelty ... if you want to rationalize our cruelty - so be it ... but it simply doesn't hold any water for me ... a report came out recently on democracynow talking about the shameful human rights record of the US ... how can we sit here and criticize China when our record is equally piss poor ... this deliberate rationalization of our "way of life" only allows these injustices to continue ... the ends doesn't justify the means ... we can grow food and feed people without the cruelty ... i honestly can't believe someone would try to defend the food industry when they are primarily responsible for obesity, unhealthy society, cruelty to animals, bankruptcy of farmers, and beyond ...

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

hey ... not to defend this practice ... but it's kind of hypocritical to call the Chinese a subspecies when the majority of the food production in the US is unethical and we haven't even gotten into the wars the US will start to make a buck ...

shark fin consumption is down in china based on PR campaigns ... it's about educating the ignorant ... classifying them as subspecies serves no purpose ...

To my way of thinking, there's a little bit of a difference raising animals for food purposes and killing animals painfully for entertainment purposes and afterwards... processing parts of the animal for 'medicinal uses' which, to any human being with a reasonable brain, are freaking ridiculous (eat a tiger and become a tiger?).

The original comment was: You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies. No definitive statement by any means and clearly implying (in my mind) that given the depravity displayed towards these animals, it's hard to have any respect for these people.

* Don't get me wrong here... factory farms are as depressing as anything.

well ... no, the animals in industrial farming are not raised for food - they are raised for profit ... saying big-agri is out to feed the world is the same as saying big oil is out to power the world ...

how can you say a statement is both not definitive and then say it is clearly implying!? ... i get the devils advocate thing here but the statement says he thinks the chinese are a subspecies ... and that he thinks the majority of chinese people support this treatment ... the fact that he hasn't even tried to retract it or say otherwise should be an indication of that ...

Poor choice of words.

His statement doesn't label the Chinese as subspecies as much as it defines the sentiment and/or disgust he feels for the mistreatment of the animals. I could be wrong, but that is how I interpreted it.

Your analogy is fine, but it doesn't accurately describe this situation. When you say profit... I say food. If the market wasn't there for the animals' meat... the farmers wouldn't be housing them as they do. Granted, there is a market for tiger bones, but there seems to be a cold, callous, 'joy' for the spectacle of killing these animals in China that doesn't exist in our meat farms. I don't see people gathering in groups to witness the electrocution of a cow or pig like we do a tiger which has already been reduced to skin and bones. Further, the processing of tigers for 'medicinal' purposes is ridiculous. Whereas the factory farms, with all their faults, ultimately put food in our bellies... the tiger farms do nothing.

We need to eat, but we don't need morbid entertainment and bone powder to make us strong. There is a difference whether you care to admit it or not.

uhhh ... ok - if you choose to read it that way ... that's your choice ... if you look at his initial response to my response to his subspecies comment - he makes no effort to clarify it in that manner ...

does the spectacle of cruelty make it worse!?? ... cruelty is cruelty ... if you want to rationalize our cruelty - so be it ... but it simply doesn't hold any water for me ... a report came out recently on democracynow talking about the shameful human rights record of the US ... how can we sit here and criticize China when our record is equally piss poor ... this deliberate rationalization of our "way of life" only allows these injustices to continue ... the ends doesn't justify the means ... we can grow food and feed people without the cruelty ... i honestly can't believe someone would try to defend the food industry when they are primarily responsible for obesity, unhealthy society, cruelty to animals, bankruptcy of farmers, and beyond ...

I'm not really defending the food industry as much as I am making a comparison between the two evils. One, in my opinion, is worse than the other.

I live in Canada and so do you. What do the shameful human rights record of the US have to do with tiger farms in China? At what point can we just look at a situation for what it is? Why is it such a challenge on this forum to present something for as awful as it might be without having to read (to use the term you just offered) rationalizations as to why we should not be as concerned as we are?

What I mean to say is that there is a factory farm thread on this forum. When introduced and discussed, I cannot recall posts that attempted to rationalize these processes by making reference to, say, tiger farms. Instead, what I can recall is a general, widely-held belief that these factory farms were very poor (for many reasons). Most of the discussion I can recall centered around what individuals might do to offset the cruel and unhealthy practice.

The presentation of this material in this thread should have amounted to people universally agreeing that this is brutal. Instead, some have felt the need to defend the Chinese culture by deflecting responsibility for the brutal behaviour and pointing fingers at other practices and other cultures. How about we let these people own their behaviours? What they are doing to tigers and why they are doing it is depraved, cold and callous. Period.

PJ_Soul

I am not a fan of arguments like that, i.e. well if you think _________ what about ____________, because that's bad too.
No one should ever be encouraged to ease up on their concern about an issue just because some similar issue may be happening elsewhere. It's called picking your battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. At least a battle is being fought.

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

hey ... not to defend this practice ... but it's kind of hypocritical to call the Chinese a subspecies when the majority of the food production in the US is unethical and we haven't even gotten into the wars the US will start to make a buck ...

shark fin consumption is down in china based on PR campaigns ... it's about educating the ignorant ... classifying them as subspecies serves no purpose ...

To my way of thinking, there's a little bit of a difference raising animals for food purposes and killing animals painfully for entertainment purposes and afterwards... processing parts of the animal for 'medicinal uses' which, to any human being with a reasonable brain, are freaking ridiculous (eat a tiger and become a tiger?).

The original comment was: You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies. No definitive statement by any means and clearly implying (in my mind) that given the depravity displayed towards these animals, it's hard to have any respect for these people.

* Don't get me wrong here... factory farms are as depressing as anything.

well ... no, the animals in industrial farming are not raised for food - they are raised for profit ... saying big-agri is out to feed the world is the same as saying big oil is out to power the world ...

how can you say a statement is both not definitive and then say it is clearly implying!? ... i get the devils advocate thing here but the statement says he thinks the chinese are a subspecies ... and that he thinks the majority of chinese people support this treatment ... the fact that he hasn't even tried to retract it or say otherwise should be an indication of that ...

Poor choice of words.

His statement doesn't label the Chinese as subspecies as much as it defines the sentiment and/or disgust he feels for the mistreatment of the animals. I could be wrong, but that is how I interpreted it.

Your analogy is fine, but it doesn't accurately describe this situation. When you say profit... I say food. If the market wasn't there for the animals' meat... the farmers wouldn't be housing them as they do. Granted, there is a market for tiger bones, but there seems to be a cold, callous, 'joy' for the spectacle of killing these animals in China that doesn't exist in our meat farms. I don't see people gathering in groups to witness the electrocution of a cow or pig like we do a tiger which has already been reduced to skin and bones. Further, the processing of tigers for 'medicinal' purposes is ridiculous. Whereas the factory farms, with all their faults, ultimately put food in our bellies... the tiger farms do nothing.

We need to eat, but we don't need morbid entertainment and bone powder to make us strong. There is a difference whether you care to admit it or not.

uhhh ... ok - if you choose to read it that way ... that's your choice ... if you look at his initial response to my response to his subspecies comment - he makes no effort to clarify it in that manner ...

does the spectacle of cruelty make it worse!?? ... cruelty is cruelty ... if you want to rationalize our cruelty - so be it ... but it simply doesn't hold any water for me ... a report came out recently on democracynow talking about the shameful human rights record of the US ... how can we sit here and criticize China when our record is equally piss poor ... this deliberate rationalization of our "way of life" only allows these injustices to continue ... the ends doesn't justify the means ... we can grow food and feed people without the cruelty ... i honestly can't believe someone would try to defend the food industry when they are primarily responsible for obesity, unhealthy society, cruelty to animals, bankruptcy of farmers, and beyond ...

I'm not really defending the food industry as much as I am making a comparison between the two evils. One, in my opinion, is worse than the other.

I live in Canada and so do you. What do the shameful human rights record of the US have to do with tiger farms in China? At what point can we just look at a situation for what it is? Why is it such a challenge on this forum to present something for as awful as it might be without having to read (to use the term you just offered) rationalizations as to why we should not be as concerned as we are?

What I mean to say is that there is a factory farm thread on this forum. When introduced and discussed, I cannot recall posts that attempted to rationalize these processes by making reference to, say, tiger farms. Instead, what I can recall is a general, widely-held belief that these factory farms were very poor (for many reasons). Most of the discussion I can recall centered around what individuals might do to offset the cruel and unhealthy practice.

The presentation of this material in this thread should have amounted to people universally agreeing that this is brutal. Instead, some have felt the need to defend the Chinese culture by deflecting responsibility for the brutal behaviour and pointing fingers at other practices and other cultures. How about we let these people own their behaviours? What they are doing to tigers and why they are doing it is depraved, cold and callous. Period.

because the context of our discussion is the sentiment that the OP believes that Chinese people are a subspecies based on some people's treatment of these tigers ... if you're going to call Chinese people a subspecies - you should have the integrity to call americans the same ...

and from what i can gather - you feel the same way which would explain why you are spending so much time defending his words ... what you and the OP fail to understand which others have tried to point out is that the majority of chinese people do not have anything to do with tigers and their bones or their torture ... we've already agreed that this is cruel ... but if we have the conviction to call one practice cruel - we should have the conviction to see it across the board instead of trying to rationalize it as something that it really isn't ...

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

hey ... not to defend this practice ... but it's kind of hypocritical to call the Chinese a subspecies when the majority of the food production in the US is unethical and we haven't even gotten into the wars the US will start to make a buck ...

shark fin consumption is down in china based on PR campaigns ... it's about educating the ignorant ... classifying them as subspecies serves no purpose ...

* Don't get me wrong here... factory farms are as depressing as anything.

well ... no, the animals in industrial farming are not raised for food - they are raised for profit ... saying big-agri is out to feed the world is the same as saying big oil is out to power the world ...

how can you say a statement is both not definitive and then say it is clearly implying!? ... i get the devils advocate thing here but the statement says he thinks the chinese are a subspecies ... and that he thinks the majority of chinese people support this treatment ... the fact that he hasn't even tried to retract it or say otherwise should be an indication of that ...

Poor choice of words.

We need to eat, but we don't need morbid entertainment and bone powder to make us strong. There is a difference whether you care to admit it or not.

uhhh ... ok - if you choose to read it that way ... that's your choice ... if you look at his initial response to my response to his subspecies comment - he makes no effort to clarify it in that manner ...

does the spectacle of cruelty make it worse!?? ... cruelty is cruelty ... if you want to rationalize our cruelty - so be it ... but it simply doesn't hold any water for me ... a report came out recently on democracynow talking about the shameful human rights record of the US ... how can we sit here and criticize China when our record is equally piss poor ... this deliberate rationalization of our "way of life" only allows these injustices to continue ... the ends doesn't justify the means ... we can grow food and feed people without the cruelty ... i honestly can't believe someone would try to defend the food industry when they are primarily responsible for obesity, unhealthy society, cruelty to animals, bankruptcy of farmers, and beyond ...

I'm not really defending the food industry as much as I am making a comparison between the two evils. One, in my opinion, is worse than the other.

I live in Canada and so do you. What do the shameful human rights record of the US have to do with tiger farms in China? At what point can we just look at a situation for what it is? Why is it such a challenge on this forum to present something for as awful as it might be without having to read (to use the term you just offered) rationalizations as to why we should not be as concerned as we are?

What I mean to say is that there is a factory farm thread on this forum. When introduced and discussed, I cannot recall posts that attempted to rationalize these processes by making reference to, say, tiger farms. Instead, what I can recall is a general, widely-held belief that these factory farms were very poor (for many reasons). Most of the discussion I can recall centered around what individuals might do to offset the cruel and unhealthy practice.

The presentation of this material in this thread should have amounted to people universally agreeing that this is brutal. Instead, some have felt the need to defend the Chinese culture by deflecting responsibility for the brutal behaviour and pointing fingers at other practices and other cultures. How about we let these people own their behaviours? What they are doing to tigers and why they are doing it is depraved, cold and callous. Period.

because the context of our discussion is the sentiment that the OP believes that Chinese people are a subspecies based on some people's treatment of these tigers ... if you're going to call Chinese people a subspecies - you should have the integrity to call americans the same ...

and from what i can gather - you feel the same way which would explain why you are spending so much time defending his words ... what you and the OP fail to understand which others have tried to point out is that the majority of chinese people do not have anything to do with tigers and their bones or their torture ... we've already agreed that this is cruel ... but if we have the conviction to call one practice cruel - we should have the conviction to see it across the board instead of trying to rationalize it as something that it really isn't ...

Your first passage is ridiculous and supports what I stated earlier- deflecting responsibility instead of letting people own their behaviours. Why didn't you include Japan and Norway for their whaling practices while you were at it? Or Eskimos clubbing seals? The OP is talking about Chinese people and tigers.

Americans hardly get a pass in this forum. When critics are attacking them for- as an example- their foreign policies... is it reasonable for them to defend their actions by deflecting criticism and citing tiger farms in China or rapes in India? Does this make it better? Do people go, "Oh. Well... Gee... seeing as you put it that way... yah... we're all a bunch of fuckin' idiots so fair enough. Bombs away!"

I don't fail to understand anything- I don't agree with the blanket categorization of the entire Chinese population as 'sub-human'... get serious. I do understand where a person might develop such an emotional response given the level of depravity on trial throughout this thread though and with some historical background to boot. It's no secret that China has a rather curious culture with regards to how they treat animals. To my way of thinking, it wouldn't be very fun to be an animal in China. If tiger bone powder was more accessible and cheaper, I'm not exactly sure what the prevalent attitude might be with regards to accepted practices for handling tigers prior to processing them so that Chinese people can 'get stronger'.

With that said, there are cultural differences I must accept. I understand Canadians likely do somethings that the Chinese must look at while thinking to themselves, "Geezuz. What the Hell, man?"

What you fail to understand is that you are focused on someone's reaction to the horrors presented in this thread. This is your prerogative, but understand that while you do this... you're missing the point of the thread. And when you make references to 'other' evil doings as this situation is being presented... you tend to trivialize the subject on hand.

Byrnzie

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

What you fail to understand is that you are focused on someone's reaction to the horrors presented in this thread. This is your prerogative, but understand that while you do this... you're missing the point of the thread.

No, he's not missing the point of this thread. The point of this thread is for Bronx Bombers to further express his racism and hatred for the Chinese. Look at his posting history. Every other comment is an attack on the Chinese.
Why? Because he's upset at people - ie, me - criticizing his beloved government.
Therefore he thinks it's acceptable to label the Chinese a race of savages, and as a subspecies.

If you think he genuinely gives a fuck about tigers in China then you're deluding yourself.
He's a pathetic, sad little racist, and this thread should have been locked already.

Byrnzie

Can somebody remind me of the posting guidelines? Did I miss a change in the rules where racist comments are now deemed acceptable?

Annafalk

At least it's a bit hopeful to read that you Byrnzie are seeing positive things happening in China in the animal perspective.

Is there any laws on how animals are allowed to be treated in China ?

rgambs

anybody here from china want to weigh in on whether you are fully human or a subspecies?
Racism is not cool and patriotism is racisms little brother here in the States.

Since this thread is already derailed and on the way to closing.... Is anybody on the Moving Train going to any shows in europe this summer? I dont see this crowd post elsewhere much so asking in the porch about AMT didnt seem right

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Byrnzie said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

What you fail to understand is that you are focused on someone's reaction to the horrors presented in this thread. This is your prerogative, but understand that while you do this... you're missing the point of the thread.

No, he's not missing the point of this thread. The point of this thread is for Bronx Bombers to further express his racism and hatred for the Chinese. Look at his posting history. Every other comment is an attack on the Chinese.
Why? Because he's upset at people - ie, me - criticizing his beloved government.
Therefore he thinks it's acceptable to label the Chinese a race of savages, and as a subspecies.

If you think he genuinely gives a fuck about tigers in China then you're deluding yourself.
He's a pathetic, sad little racist, and this thread should have been locked already.

I'm not quite ready to say Bronx posted this as a veiled attempt to attack the Chinese. I'm pretty sure he feels as much disgust about the mistreatment of these animals as anyone else. Considering he introduced the material, it might even be fair to say he feels more disgust than anyone else. I still think the comments he made, although perhaps more strongly worded, fall into line with several other comments that others have made including: boycotting China, throwing these bastards to the lions, and hoping for the tigers to turn the tables and attack their captors. In short, they reflect more disdain for the practice than they do any deeper, inner sentiments for China.

Bronx... you might do well to ease of your assertion a touch. I completely understand your anger and outrage. I'm okay with hating the bastards that participate in the abuse, torture, processing, and usage of the tigers. I'm even okay with calling them 'sub-human'. But in fairness to all those in China that feel as much disgust as us... we cannot paint an entire country with the same brush we use for these scumbags. You may not have intended to do such, but in light of the criticism that has been thrown your way- as I've said- I think you should either clarify what you meant... or at least re-think your position... so that we can focus on the subject versus our approach to the subject.

With that said... I recall countless threads where Americans are universally painted as villains with no specific clarifications or qualifying statements that absolve the countless 'good' Americans. More often than not... it seems that it is quite reasonable to categorize Americans as a whole, or as a half (right or left) when assassinating their character in some context. Some of the same people who feel indignant over the statement that has created some controversy might do best to remember this feeling when approaching other hot topics and other countries (mainly the US).

Remember... I'm not American.

PJ_Soul

Just wanted to mention that I see nothing wrong with talking about economic boycotts against a country for any number of reasons (other than pure racism). Definitely don't think that falls in line with calling an ethnicity a subspecies.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul said:

Just wanted to mention that I see nothing wrong with talking about economic boycotts against a country for any number of reasons (other than pure racism). Definitely don't think that falls in line with calling an ethnicity a subspecies.

Boycott an entire country because some idiots abuse tigers? Is this fair to the sweatshop capital of the world?

It does fall in line with such comments because it too doesn't account for the millions of people that have absolutely nothing to do with the tiger farms. It might not be as distasteful, but its ideology is the same- broad based characterization or reform in response to a much smaller problem in perpsective.

PJ_Soul

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Just wanted to mention that I see nothing wrong with talking about economic boycotts against a country for any number of reasons (other than pure racism). Definitely don't think that falls in line with calling an ethnicity a subspecies.

Boycott an entire country because some idiots abuse tigers? Is this fair to the sweatshop capital of the world?

It does fall in line with such comments because it too doesn't account for the millions of people that have absolutely nothing to do with the tiger farms. It might not be as distasteful, but its ideology is the same- broad based characterization or reform in response to a much smaller problem in perpsective.

Did anyone say that they should be boycott just because of how they treat tigers? I don't believe so. But if anyone had, it still wouldn't be the same as calling the Chinese a subspecies. It would simply mean that the person really really hates how tigers are treated in China. It's not wrong to disapprove of the actions of people in a particular nation or to disagree with cultural practices. But to call them a subspecies for their actions? Ummmm.... doesn't sit well with me either. Seems to be the definition of a racist comment (not that the person who said it is necessarily a racist... it was perhaps a badly worded sentiment).
(anyway, I hadn't planned on discussing it, but since it's gone that way.... I think it was a really inappropriate comment to make, just for the record).

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Just wanted to mention that I see nothing wrong with talking about economic boycotts against a country for any number of reasons (other than pure racism). Definitely don't think that falls in line with calling an ethnicity a subspecies.

Boycott an entire country because some idiots abuse tigers? Is this fair to the sweatshop capital of the world?

It does fall in line with such comments because it too doesn't account for the millions of people that have absolutely nothing to do with the tiger farms. It might not be as distasteful, but its ideology is the same- broad based characterization or reform in response to a much smaller problem in perpsective.

Did anyone say that they should be boycott just because of how they treat tigers? I don't believe so. But if anyone had, it still wouldn't be the same as calling the Chinese a subspecies. It would simply mean that the person really really hates how tigers are treated in China. It's not wrong to disapprove of the actions of people in a particular nation or to disagree with cultural practices. But to call them a subspecies for their actions? Ummmm.... doesn't sit well with me either. Seems to be the definition of a racist comment (not that the person who said it is necessarily a racist... it was perhaps a badly worded sentiment).
(anyway, I hadn't planned on discussing it, but since it's gone that way.... I think it was a really inappropriate comment to make, just for the record).

The comment was I feel sick to my stomach reading about things like this. What can we do? Stop buying things from china? Your comment regarding why someone would say something like that (It would simply mean that the person really really hates how tigers are treated in China) is exactly what I have suggested is at the root of Bronx's comment. I seem to be in the minority here and he hasn't come on to address his charges, but I feel, whether right or wrong, his comment was spawned from his intense disgust at the tiger practice and not an intense hatred of Chinese people that some have put forth.

Anyways... again... we digress.

Byrnzie

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Your comment regarding why someone would say something like that (It would simply mean that the person really really hates how tigers are treated in China) is exactly what I have suggested is at the root of Bronx's comment. I seem to be in the minority here...

So you're saying that racism is acceptable under certain circumstances? That it's ok to racially denigrate an entire nation based on the actions of a few?

Sorry, but that's bullshit.

If I said that all Africans are savages and constitute a subspecies because some Africans poach elephants and rhinos, would that be ok too?