***Li Yongwei, a Yulin resident in his 40s, said dog was the same as any other meat. “You shouldn’t force people to make choices they don’t want to make, the way you wouldn’t force someone to be a Christian or a Buddhist or a Muslim,” he said.***
Li, a budding Lockean seems not to notice that the People’s Republic Of China has no qualms about forbidding Christianity other than under the auspices of the Party-sanctioned Church.
Only a people brainwashed that they have no national culture would defend dog meat as no different than say pork . All Cultures Are Equally Arbitrary is the motto of our “multicultural youth”.
Multiculturalism cannot exist within an individual, other than in multiple personality disorders. (And even then, I wonder if there has ever been a case of such?)
Pigs are supposedly intelligent. But pigs have not evolved like dogs. Dogs have evolved extreme sensitivity to humans’ emotional cues. And their facial muscles (especially Goldens) very much express their thoughts and feelings.
So, the “west eats pork and therefore cannot protest East Asian dog-eating” is not valid.
But what if it were valid. Does the fact that cultures are comprised of arbitrary symbols, signs and ethics mean they are equally as good? “Oh”, the intilecktchuel responds “‘good’ and ‘bad’ themselves are *mere* arbitrary constructions.”
And so is language. But intilecktchuels blather on endlessly spewing syllables like birdsong never perceiving that their every utterance is *merely* an arbitrary sound, or group of squiggles on a page!
WHY DO WE ALLOW CHINESE PRODUCTS TO POUR INTO AMERICA? The Miseans (neo-confederates) argue that Free Trade is based on libertarian principles. Clearly, these are principles the Framers of the Constitution knew not. Congress is given the authority to develop trade policies viz. foreign nations.
The Free Traders then try Utilitarian argument: that if each country specializes in producing that which it does well and efficiently and trades with other countries all will benefit.
But this breaks down completely when some nations keep their workers’ wages to a bare minimum. It allows the production of nearly everything to be offered for less money.
“The choice is in our hands” i.e. we can choose to not purchase Chinese products. This is not a valid argument. The Tea in the ships at the Boston wharves were taxed minisculey. The British East India Company had created a tea glut. The taxed British tea was less expensive than the smuggled product. Human nature being what it is, and not what it’s not, will only rarely forgo immediate self interest in the interests of a better future or out of morality.
The Sons of Liberty unlike the future Sans Coulottes of the French Revolution and then the Reds of the Russian Revolution did not claim the right to “remold the world closer to the heart’s desire”. The American Revolution did not attempt to change human nature.
Taxed Tea was intolerable. Even if it were cheaper than smuggled untaxed tea. Human nature was not going to be changed by the Sons, but the temptation of the tea would be removed.
Same with claiming that Americans vote for cheap Chinese imports with their dollars. Perhaps so. But we have no qualms about outlawing various drugs because they are addictive. The product of coolie labor is addictive.
Boycott it, yes. But that is not sufficient. Destroy it at the docks is the Sons of Liberty’s way. The American way!