7 ms·

1. China is gaining in relevance. 2. People don't understand that they should worry about this.

latch 9y ago
1. Like many countries, China has long been relevant. Like many countries, China has long been gaining relevance. 2. Because they shouldn't If instead of treating global economy as a zero-sum game, and if we backed off from the fear mongering and admitted that China's economic growth has largely (and unsurprisingly) been to most people's benefits, then we'd welcome the competition and innovation and productivity that China has and will continue to provide.
- richard___ 9y ago
  Telling that you've been downvoted.
- ben_w 9y ago
  Religious persecution doesn’t disappear just because of economic growth. Neither does discrimination against sexual preferences (+). That’s the fear expressed above. (+) unless you limit your knowledge of sexual preferences to just gay/straight — human sexuality is much more complicated than that.
  - chvid 9y ago
    Actually it does - history is full of examples of just that. As the middle class grows in economic terms, it grows in political influence and the overall values of the society changes to accommodate that class. Introduction of democracy and women’s rights in Europe are good examples.
    - cabalamat 9y ago
      China may be different. Their planned social credit reputation system, coupled with ubiquitous surveillance, may make it impossible for public opinion in China to force the Chinese government to liberalise. In the past, the West has had a massive advantage because: (1) their econpomic system was better than everyone else's, and (2) in order to modernise, other cultures have had to adopt some of the West's characteristics, including a greater level of freedom of speech/thought than in other societies. The combination meant that the West had few serious ideological competitors. But if China becomes the world's biggest economy, if it continues to increase its economy so its per capita GDP is the same as in the USA and western Europe, and it does this while still being an autocracy, things will get very very serious. The future may well be a jackboot stamping on a human face forever.
      - chvid 9y ago
        Maybe. But china’s overall path is towards more democracy and civil liberty. Compare tianamen square 30 years ago with the handling of the Hong Kong protests.
        coldtea 9y ago
        Or, maybe, compare Tianamen square with Kent state, the Chicago '68 democratic convention, and so on.
        dctoedt 9y ago
        After both Chicago '68 and the Kent State shooting, there was immediate, extensive blowback in the American press and public. Quite the opposite happened in China after Tiananmen Square. (Of course, all of the above were decades ago, so we need to keep an open mind about the condition today in the respective countries.)
        coldtea 9y ago
        >After both Chicago '68 and the Kent State shooting, there was immediate, extensive blowback in the American press and public. Quite the opposite happened in China after Tiananmen Square. I'd say after those it was business and usual, and those involved didn't get even a slap on the wrist. If anything, venting through the press merely let people get steam out and forget more easily....
        dctoedt 9y ago
        > If anything, venting through the press merely let people get steam out and forget more easily.... But we didn't get a repeat of either episode. That raises the possibility that people learned lessons, albeit imperfectly, from those experiences of others, which is something for which humankind (not uniquely among the species) has at least some talent. That's a benefit of a free press. It can be aggravating to see some of the shadier so-called journalists go shamelessly whoring after eyeballs. Still, journalists' collective, competitive desire for attention helps to bring "training cases" (in NN terms) to a broader societal audience. That seems to influence at least some people's behavior. Over the long term — and not without exceptions, some catastrophic — that influence, on balance, is usually for the good.
    - Chris2048 9y ago
      Europe had similar cultures to begin with, there's high correlation between European cultures such that you can't assume that i a universal norm.
    - ben_w 9y ago
      > Introduction of democracy and women’s rights in Europe are good examples. Which is why I said “religious” and “sexual preference”. Jews were widely discriminated against even a few years after WW2; Muslims are a current whipping-boy; I’m not sure if Catholic-vs-Protestant is as big a divide in Northern Ireland as it looks from the outside, but it does look big; In the USA, Atheists are almost as disliked as Muslims. Then there’s sexual preference. You’re fine if you’re gay (finally!), but not so much if you’re into BDSM or have any fetishes more complicated than underwear. Also, I have a friend whose sexuality was previously legal, but which was outlawed in half of Europe and half of the USA this century. I invite you to guess what that might be.
      - coldtea 9y ago
        Well, if the biggest problem is some bizarro religions and BSDM are frowned upon / deemed illegal so be it
        ben_w 9y ago
        5-10% of the population are “into” BDSM, although sex surveys are notorious for underestimating things. Atheism is a curious thing to call a “bizarro religion”; likwise for different reasons Islam, given the latter has ~1.8 billion followers worldwide.
        rjzzleep 9y ago
        I seriously doubt that. 5-10% of what? the _US population_? I'm pretty certain that 5%-10% of the population have more serious and pressing matters than worrying about their sexual preferences. luxury problems as they say.
        nugi 9y ago
        I could not disagree more. If having a sexual identity is a luxury, I hate to think what actually enjoing life is. What a sad point of view.
    - rayiner 9y ago
      Many of the rights we consider intrinsic to modern society, due process, etc., didn’t arise in Europe in respond to the rise of a middle class. In the Anglo tradition, they date back 800 years to the Magna Carta.
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >Religious persecution doesn’t disappear just because of economic growth. Neither does discrimination against sexual preferences (+). That’s the fear expressed above. The hypocrisy of a country that props constant wars all around the globe, has bombed/invaded 3-4 countries in the last 20 years alone, and constant meddling and manipulations of other governments for its "interests", that had segregation up to the 70s, the worlds largest prison populations by a huge margin, with routine police shootings in the 10x of any other country, pointing the finger to another country for "religious persecution" and "discrimination against sexual preferences" (which itself until 2000 or so had laws declaring "illegal" in many states, and even now has a good 40% or more of the population considering them immoral and believing in all kinds of Bible crap), never ceases to amaze...
    - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
      Can you imagine China having a government shutdown?
    - smaddox 9y ago
      That would be hypocrisy... if a county could critisize. However, a citizen of such a country can critisize both countries without being a hypocrite.
    - ben_w 9y ago
      I am not an American. I am criticising American states for criminalising a sexuality that my own country never legalised. I am also appalled by my own country’s behaviour in the colonial era.
    - mcv 9y ago
      I agree that the United States' run as the world's biggest superpower has been far from perfect. I criticise the US a lot. And I actually consider China to be one of the few countries that is not governed by amateurs. China gets a lot of things right. The one big problem, though, is that China does not believe in freedom. At all. Censorship, no free press, no freedoms of opinion, expression, religion, etc. And they see nothing wrong with that. Whenever the US hurts these freedoms, they get criticised, even by their own people, and they eventually back down. The fact that the US promises freedom but constantly breaks that promise makes them hypocrites, but it also always has the option that they will get back to their promise. China does not see the point of freedom at all, and considers it dangerous. And that's terrifying. If we're going to have a superpower, I would love a China that respects freedom in that role. They would be better at it than the US. But current China is not that China. As flawed as the US is, they at least have that going for them (pre-Trump US, at least). Though ideally, the EU would step up. They don't seem to want to, though.
- org3432 9y ago
  Turns out economics, like rational thought on what's best, doesn't naturally prevail.
lloeki 9y ago
> Laissez donc la Chine dormir, car lorsque la Chine s'éveillera le monde entier tremblera > Let China thusly slumber, for when China wakes up the world will shiver — Napoleon 1er
herbst 9y ago
Why is this particularly a reason to worry? I for one welcome a well needed fresh wind in our global ecosystem.
- coldtea 9y ago
  Well, those that lose their 1st place might not welcome it as much...
- tenpies 9y ago
  Because as much as people love to hate on the West and its faults, it is also the most tolerant system and allows for the most freedom in every category. The Chinese do not value things like freedom or tolerance very much, especially if they conflict with order. The value of the individual is also extremely low, whereas the West held the individual as the most valuable thing until just recently when group identities became incredibly important for the sake of skin-deep diversity. It will be interesting to see how that continues to creep into Western culture.
  - moltar 9y ago
    Just a reminder that slavery was abolished in 1865, 153 years ago. And recently, lots of laws have been passed restricting freedom. NSA has been watching your every move. The west only has freedom on paper. And countries change and adapt.
    - mieseratte 9y ago
      > The west only has freedom on paper. Let me know when they start black-bagging dissidents for speaking up a bit too much. There are festering problems regarding surveillance in the West, and the prison system is a bit much here in the US, but "freedom on paper" is a load of BS.
      - jazzyk 9y ago
        >"freedom on paper" is a load of BS “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....” - Noam Chomsky

1. Like many countries, China has long been relevant. Like many countries, China has long been gaining relevance. 2. Because they shouldn't If instead of treating global economy as a zero-sum game, and if we backed off from the fear mongering and admitted that China's economic growth has largely (and unsurprisingly) been to most people's benefits, then we'd welcome the competition and innovation and productivity that China has and will continue to provide.

richard___ 9y ago
Telling that you've been downvoted.
ben_w 9y ago
Religious persecution doesn’t disappear just because of economic growth. Neither does discrimination against sexual preferences (+). That’s the fear expressed above. (+) unless you limit your knowledge of sexual preferences to just gay/straight — human sexuality is much more complicated than that.
- chvid 9y ago
  Actually it does - history is full of examples of just that. As the middle class grows in economic terms, it grows in political influence and the overall values of the society changes to accommodate that class. Introduction of democracy and women’s rights in Europe are good examples.
  - cabalamat 9y ago
    China may be different. Their planned social credit reputation system, coupled with ubiquitous surveillance, may make it impossible for public opinion in China to force the Chinese government to liberalise. In the past, the West has had a massive advantage because: (1) their econpomic system was better than everyone else's, and (2) in order to modernise, other cultures have had to adopt some of the West's characteristics, including a greater level of freedom of speech/thought than in other societies. The combination meant that the West had few serious ideological competitors. But if China becomes the world's biggest economy, if it continues to increase its economy so its per capita GDP is the same as in the USA and western Europe, and it does this while still being an autocracy, things will get very very serious. The future may well be a jackboot stamping on a human face forever.
    - chvid 9y ago
      Maybe. But china’s overall path is towards more democracy and civil liberty. Compare tianamen square 30 years ago with the handling of the Hong Kong protests.
      - coldtea 9y ago
        Or, maybe, compare Tianamen square with Kent state, the Chicago '68 democratic convention, and so on.
        dctoedt 9y ago
        After both Chicago '68 and the Kent State shooting, there was immediate, extensive blowback in the American press and public. Quite the opposite happened in China after Tiananmen Square. (Of course, all of the above were decades ago, so we need to keep an open mind about the condition today in the respective countries.)
        coldtea 9y ago
        >After both Chicago '68 and the Kent State shooting, there was immediate, extensive blowback in the American press and public. Quite the opposite happened in China after Tiananmen Square. I'd say after those it was business and usual, and those involved didn't get even a slap on the wrist. If anything, venting through the press merely let people get steam out and forget more easily....
        dctoedt 9y ago
        > If anything, venting through the press merely let people get steam out and forget more easily.... But we didn't get a repeat of either episode. That raises the possibility that people learned lessons, albeit imperfectly, from those experiences of others, which is something for which humankind (not uniquely among the species) has at least some talent. That's a benefit of a free press. It can be aggravating to see some of the shadier so-called journalists go shamelessly whoring after eyeballs. Still, journalists' collective, competitive desire for attention helps to bring "training cases" (in NN terms) to a broader societal audience. That seems to influence at least some people's behavior. Over the long term — and not without exceptions, some catastrophic — that influence, on balance, is usually for the good.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    Europe had similar cultures to begin with, there's high correlation between European cultures such that you can't assume that i a universal norm.
  - ben_w 9y ago
    > Introduction of democracy and women’s rights in Europe are good examples. Which is why I said “religious” and “sexual preference”. Jews were widely discriminated against even a few years after WW2; Muslims are a current whipping-boy; I’m not sure if Catholic-vs-Protestant is as big a divide in Northern Ireland as it looks from the outside, but it does look big; In the USA, Atheists are almost as disliked as Muslims. Then there’s sexual preference. You’re fine if you’re gay (finally!), but not so much if you’re into BDSM or have any fetishes more complicated than underwear. Also, I have a friend whose sexuality was previously legal, but which was outlawed in half of Europe and half of the USA this century. I invite you to guess what that might be.
    - coldtea 9y ago
      Well, if the biggest problem is some bizarro religions and BSDM are frowned upon / deemed illegal so be it
      - ben_w 9y ago
        5-10% of the population are “into” BDSM, although sex surveys are notorious for underestimating things. Atheism is a curious thing to call a “bizarro religion”; likwise for different reasons Islam, given the latter has ~1.8 billion followers worldwide.
        rjzzleep 9y ago
        I seriously doubt that. 5-10% of what? the _US population_? I'm pretty certain that 5%-10% of the population have more serious and pressing matters than worrying about their sexual preferences. luxury problems as they say.
        nugi 9y ago
        I could not disagree more. If having a sexual identity is a luxury, I hate to think what actually enjoing life is. What a sad point of view.
  - rayiner 9y ago
    Many of the rights we consider intrinsic to modern society, due process, etc., didn’t arise in Europe in respond to the rise of a middle class. In the Anglo tradition, they date back 800 years to the Magna Carta.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >Religious persecution doesn’t disappear just because of economic growth. Neither does discrimination against sexual preferences (+). That’s the fear expressed above. The hypocrisy of a country that props constant wars all around the globe, has bombed/invaded 3-4 countries in the last 20 years alone, and constant meddling and manipulations of other governments for its "interests", that had segregation up to the 70s, the worlds largest prison populations by a huge margin, with routine police shootings in the 10x of any other country, pointing the finger to another country for "religious persecution" and "discrimination against sexual preferences" (which itself until 2000 or so had laws declaring "illegal" in many states, and even now has a good 40% or more of the population considering them immoral and believing in all kinds of Bible crap), never ceases to amaze...
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    Can you imagine China having a government shutdown?
  - smaddox 9y ago
    That would be hypocrisy... if a county could critisize. However, a citizen of such a country can critisize both countries without being a hypocrite.
  - ben_w 9y ago
    I am not an American. I am criticising American states for criminalising a sexuality that my own country never legalised. I am also appalled by my own country’s behaviour in the colonial era.
  - mcv 9y ago
    I agree that the United States' run as the world's biggest superpower has been far from perfect. I criticise the US a lot. And I actually consider China to be one of the few countries that is not governed by amateurs. China gets a lot of things right. The one big problem, though, is that China does not believe in freedom. At all. Censorship, no free press, no freedoms of opinion, expression, religion, etc. And they see nothing wrong with that. Whenever the US hurts these freedoms, they get criticised, even by their own people, and they eventually back down. The fact that the US promises freedom but constantly breaks that promise makes them hypocrites, but it also always has the option that they will get back to their promise. China does not see the point of freedom at all, and considers it dangerous. And that's terrifying. If we're going to have a superpower, I would love a China that respects freedom in that role. They would be better at it than the US. But current China is not that China. As flawed as the US is, they at least have that going for them (pre-Trump US, at least). Though ideally, the EU would step up. They don't seem to want to, though.
org3432 9y ago
Turns out economics, like rational thought on what's best, doesn't naturally prevail.

lloeki 9y ago

> Laissez donc la Chine dormir, car lorsque la Chine s'éveillera le monde entier tremblera > Let China thusly slumber, for when China wakes up the world will shiver — Napoleon 1er

herbst 9y ago

Why is this particularly a reason to worry? I for one welcome a well needed fresh wind in our global ecosystem.

coldtea 9y ago
Well, those that lose their 1st place might not welcome it as much...
tenpies 9y ago
Because as much as people love to hate on the West and its faults, it is also the most tolerant system and allows for the most freedom in every category. The Chinese do not value things like freedom or tolerance very much, especially if they conflict with order. The value of the individual is also extremely low, whereas the West held the individual as the most valuable thing until just recently when group identities became incredibly important for the sake of skin-deep diversity. It will be interesting to see how that continues to creep into Western culture.
- moltar 9y ago
  Just a reminder that slavery was abolished in 1865, 153 years ago. And recently, lots of laws have been passed restricting freedom. NSA has been watching your every move. The west only has freedom on paper. And countries change and adapt.
  - mieseratte 9y ago
    > The west only has freedom on paper. Let me know when they start black-bagging dissidents for speaking up a bit too much. There are festering problems regarding surveillance in the West, and the prison system is a bit much here in the US, but "freedom on paper" is a load of BS.
    - jazzyk 9y ago
      >"freedom on paper" is a load of BS “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....” - Noam Chomsky