4 ms·

I don't have the ability to downvote, so I'll chime in with my own view. I think it's just the way the world works and if it wasn't the U.S being up there it w

I don't have the ability to downvote, so I'll chime in with my own view. I think it's just the way the world works and if it wasn't the U.S being up there it would be another country (U.K, Russia, China) that do awful things because they could get away with it. Plus, add in the obligatory "absolute power corrupts absolutely." It's a terrible situation, but what do you suppose an effective alternative is? Because cooperating and "compromise" have never been the most beneficial for both parties.

brilliantcode 10y ago
Not sure why you are being downvoted. Seems like any criticism of America on HN lately is automatically receiving drive by downvotes. All colonialism is inherently evil. I guess you are saying the US is the "lesser evil" which I tend to agree. I have no idea what the alternative is, I'm just writing what I observe based on facts that this article reminded me of.
- stagbeetle 10y ago
  Then if I may criticise you, people don't appreciate others complaining without offering a solution to the problem.
  - galtwho 10y ago
    I think his criticism is directed at the inference that USA is benevolent.
willholloway 10y ago
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple, the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon — so long as there is no answer to it — gives claws to the weak." - George Orwell, You and the Atomic Bomb
- dan7678 10y ago
  Thank you, this was brilliant.
- stagbeetle 10y ago
  Then we are in luck. The age of steel and combustion is coming to a close and being succeeded by that of silicon and electricity. The more heavily a country relies on such things, the easier it will be for weak to gain claws through programming.
  - gonzo 10y ago
    > The age of steel and combustion is coming to a close and being succeeded by that of silicon and electricity. and biology. Bio-weapons will be cheap and effective.
  - willholloway 10y ago
    I think you can look at the alleged Russian hacking of Podesta's emails and the subsequent releases as an example of that perhaps. But I wouldn't hold out too much hope for an outpouring of democracy and more equitable relations between individuals and states in an age of total global electronic surveillance. That is a weapon that is extremely expensive, complex and singular. Count me pessimistic, Orwell continues: "We were once told that the aeroplane had ‘abolished frontiers’; actually it is only since the aeroplane became a serious weapon that frontiers have become definitely impassable. The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and co-operation; it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another. The atomic bomb may complete the process by robbing the exploited classes and peoples of all power to revolt, and at the same time putting the possessors of the bomb on a basis of military equality. Unable to conquer one another, they are likely to continue ruling the world between them, and it is difficult to see how the balance can be upset except by slow and unpredictable demographic changes. For forty or fifty years past, Mr. H. G. Wells and others have been warning us that man is in danger of destroying himself with his own weapons, leaving the ants or some other gregarious species to take over. Anyone who has seen the ruined cities of Germany will find this notion at least thinkable. Nevertheless, looking at the world as a whole, the drift for many decades has been not towards anarchy but towards the reimposition of slavery. We may be heading not for general breakdown but for an epoch as horribly stable as the slave empires of antiquity. James Burnham's theory has been much discussed, but few people have yet considered its ideological implications — that is, the kind of world-view, the kind of beliefs, and the social structure that would probably prevail in a state which was at once unconquerable and in a permanent state of ‘cold war’ with its neighbors."

brilliantcode 10y ago

Not sure why you are being downvoted. Seems like any criticism of America on HN lately is automatically receiving drive by downvotes. All colonialism is inherently evil. I guess you are saying the US is the "lesser evil" which I tend to agree. I have no idea what the alternative is, I'm just writing what I observe based on facts that this article reminded me of.

stagbeetle 10y ago
Then if I may criticise you, people don't appreciate others complaining without offering a solution to the problem.
- galtwho 10y ago
  I think his criticism is directed at the inference that USA is benevolent.

willholloway 10y ago

"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple, the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon — so long as there is no answer to it — gives claws to the weak." - George Orwell, You and the Atomic Bomb

dan7678 10y ago
Thank you, this was brilliant.
stagbeetle 10y ago
Then we are in luck. The age of steel and combustion is coming to a close and being succeeded by that of silicon and electricity. The more heavily a country relies on such things, the easier it will be for weak to gain claws through programming.
- gonzo 10y ago
  > The age of steel and combustion is coming to a close and being succeeded by that of silicon and electricity. and biology. Bio-weapons will be cheap and effective.
- willholloway 10y ago
  I think you can look at the alleged Russian hacking of Podesta's emails and the subsequent releases as an example of that perhaps. But I wouldn't hold out too much hope for an outpouring of democracy and more equitable relations between individuals and states in an age of total global electronic surveillance. That is a weapon that is extremely expensive, complex and singular. Count me pessimistic, Orwell continues: "We were once told that the aeroplane had ‘abolished frontiers’; actually it is only since the aeroplane became a serious weapon that frontiers have become definitely impassable. The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and co-operation; it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another. The atomic bomb may complete the process by robbing the exploited classes and peoples of all power to revolt, and at the same time putting the possessors of the bomb on a basis of military equality. Unable to conquer one another, they are likely to continue ruling the world between them, and it is difficult to see how the balance can be upset except by slow and unpredictable demographic changes. For forty or fifty years past, Mr. H. G. Wells and others have been warning us that man is in danger of destroying himself with his own weapons, leaving the ants or some other gregarious species to take over. Anyone who has seen the ruined cities of Germany will find this notion at least thinkable. Nevertheless, looking at the world as a whole, the drift for many decades has been not towards anarchy but towards the reimposition of slavery. We may be heading not for general breakdown but for an epoch as horribly stable as the slave empires of antiquity. James Burnham's theory has been much discussed, but few people have yet considered its ideological implications — that is, the kind of world-view, the kind of beliefs, and the social structure that would probably prevail in a state which was at once unconquerable and in a permanent state of ‘cold war’ with its neighbors."