6 ms·

I have a feeling 10 years from now Trump will be funny blip on the radar of how crazy the '10s were while Asia will be quite meaningfully transformed. I wish th

I have a feeling 10 years from now Trump will be funny blip on the radar of how crazy the '10s were while Asia will be quite meaningfully transformed. I wish this was getting as much attention as BREAKING NEWS: Trump/staffer did something dumb. The (soon plausibly) richest and most populous country in the world will soon have a dictator. That's a bit scary.

pishpash 9y ago
Trump will be a blip provided a Congress willing to check his powers is elected to office, and doesn't itself go down the same path. It might be one election away from stacking of the courts and all that jazz. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
api 9y ago
It's part of the same larger pattern. The entire world seems to be moving toward totalitarianism to varying degrees. I have yet to encounter a really good explanation of why this trend is occurring across so many nations and cultures.
- pishpash 9y ago
  The explanation is the rise of populism following a bad economic episode. What you are seeing now has been seen in the 20's and 30's. If some good social policies had been implemented and the gains well distributed in the prior decades of growth this wouldn't be happening. But humans won't learn until forced to.
  - api 9y ago
    That's surely valid to some extent but I don't think it goes back far enough. I've seen this trend firmly in place since 9/11 or shortly thereafter and across virtually every segment of society.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- bfred_it 9y ago
  Hasn't that always been the case? Powerful people always wanted more power, throughout history. Now nuclear essentially makes it impossible to go to war with powerful countries, so we're stuck with bullies doing whatever they want. If the bullies are smart enough, they won't attack other powerful (i.e. nuclear) countries.
mannykannot 9y ago
While fussing over every misstep of the administration is a distraction, this is an unfortunate time to have a US President who seems uninterested in global politics.
- ahtu123 9y ago
  For sure. Russia and China have their most keen global political leaders in a generation and the US is infighting.
  - pishpash 9y ago
    The US is infighting because the electorate wants to be infighting. When the citizenry is so sheltered and content to know nothing about the world this is what happens.
    - JBlue42 9y ago
      >When the citizenry is so sheltered and content to know nothing about the world this is what happens. I thought we were supposed to learn that lesson after 9/11?
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - pishpash 9y ago
        We learned the wrong lesson from 9/11 buddy. Look at the TSA still going strong, all the domestic snooping, and an imperial presidency with open-ended powers unchecked by Congress. Over all the conclusion has been to not deal with the world's problems, kick everybody that might cause problems out, and close the door.
        JBlue42 9y ago
        I agree. Maybe my sarcasm was a little too veiled. :)
natecavanaugh 9y ago
Two things give me some hope. 1. I don't think totalitarianism lends itself to economic prosperity, long term. Sure, the right authoritarian can move much faster and implement beneficial changes much more quickly than a democratic government can. But that knife cuts both ways. 2. The entire government system in China, and it's culture, heavily values stability and collective unity (hence it's desire to squash and eliminate anything that may lead to extreme reaction or departure from consensus). But this will lead to calcification, or, if the dictator changes too much or is too heavy handed, instability is inevitable, which leads me to think that the dictator will be changed out. Ultimately, I think that the power of any society is in the hands of the citizens, and that Chinese culture is extremely pragmatic. They may be able to be kept peaceful for a bit, but if progress starts stagnating or even reversing, changes will happen.
- jyrkesh 9y ago
  Naively, and based on historical data, I agree with point #1. What worries me about China is that they've had no problem--politically or technologically--collecting massive data sets on their citizenry via a level of mass surveillance that's never been reached AFAICT. On top of that, they're investing hard in artificial intelligence, and the benefits will ultimately be reaped by whoever's in charge of the datasets (in this case, the government). All of that gives them a lot of levers to control and manipulate their citizenry that has not been available to authoritarian governments yet.
  - natecavanaugh 9y ago
    I remember reading an intro to Orwell's Animal Farm that discussed Orwell's ability to see the dystopian use of technology, but couldn't see how it could liberate a citizenry from totalitarianism (like the shortwave, for example). I think the same of this high level tech as well. I could be wrong, but I think individuals do desire freedom and agency, and as long as that desire is there in some, it's going to be hard to squash.
    - mercer 9y ago
      I do hope you're right. One of my 'in the realm of possibility' dystopian fears is that a totalitarian regime figures out how to (chemically?) keep their society docile. Ideally the populace would still be creative, to an extent, but that might not even be necessary, or compensated for by stealing innovation from other places. One could argue that this is already sort of happening in many places, without there being a big conspiracy behind it, I guess.

pishpash 9y ago

Trump will be a blip provided a Congress willing to check his powers is elected to office, and doesn't itself go down the same path. It might be one election away from stacking of the courts and all that jazz. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.

api 9y ago

It's part of the same larger pattern. The entire world seems to be moving toward totalitarianism to varying degrees. I have yet to encounter a really good explanation of why this trend is occurring across so many nations and cultures.

pishpash 9y ago
The explanation is the rise of populism following a bad economic episode. What you are seeing now has been seen in the 20's and 30's. If some good social policies had been implemented and the gains well distributed in the prior decades of growth this wouldn't be happening. But humans won't learn until forced to.
- api 9y ago
  That's surely valid to some extent but I don't think it goes back far enough. I've seen this trend firmly in place since 9/11 or shortly thereafter and across virtually every segment of society.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bfred_it 9y ago
Hasn't that always been the case? Powerful people always wanted more power, throughout history. Now nuclear essentially makes it impossible to go to war with powerful countries, so we're stuck with bullies doing whatever they want. If the bullies are smart enough, they won't attack other powerful (i.e. nuclear) countries.

mannykannot 9y ago

While fussing over every misstep of the administration is a distraction, this is an unfortunate time to have a US President who seems uninterested in global politics.

ahtu123 9y ago
For sure. Russia and China have their most keen global political leaders in a generation and the US is infighting.
- pishpash 9y ago
  The US is infighting because the electorate wants to be infighting. When the citizenry is so sheltered and content to know nothing about the world this is what happens.
  - JBlue42 9y ago
    >When the citizenry is so sheltered and content to know nothing about the world this is what happens. I thought we were supposed to learn that lesson after 9/11?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - pishpash 9y ago
      We learned the wrong lesson from 9/11 buddy. Look at the TSA still going strong, all the domestic snooping, and an imperial presidency with open-ended powers unchecked by Congress. Over all the conclusion has been to not deal with the world's problems, kick everybody that might cause problems out, and close the door.
      - JBlue42 9y ago
        I agree. Maybe my sarcasm was a little too veiled. :)

natecavanaugh 9y ago

Two things give me some hope. 1. I don't think totalitarianism lends itself to economic prosperity, long term. Sure, the right authoritarian can move much faster and implement beneficial changes much more quickly than a democratic government can. But that knife cuts both ways. 2. The entire government system in China, and it's culture, heavily values stability and collective unity (hence it's desire to squash and eliminate anything that may lead to extreme reaction or departure from consensus). But this will lead to calcification, or, if the dictator changes too much or is too heavy handed, instability is inevitable, which leads me to think that the dictator will be changed out. Ultimately, I think that the power of any society is in the hands of the citizens, and that Chinese culture is extremely pragmatic. They may be able to be kept peaceful for a bit, but if progress starts stagnating or even reversing, changes will happen.

jyrkesh 9y ago
Naively, and based on historical data, I agree with point #1. What worries me about China is that they've had no problem--politically or technologically--collecting massive data sets on their citizenry via a level of mass surveillance that's never been reached AFAICT. On top of that, they're investing hard in artificial intelligence, and the benefits will ultimately be reaped by whoever's in charge of the datasets (in this case, the government). All of that gives them a lot of levers to control and manipulate their citizenry that has not been available to authoritarian governments yet.
- natecavanaugh 9y ago
  I remember reading an intro to Orwell's Animal Farm that discussed Orwell's ability to see the dystopian use of technology, but couldn't see how it could liberate a citizenry from totalitarianism (like the shortwave, for example). I think the same of this high level tech as well. I could be wrong, but I think individuals do desire freedom and agency, and as long as that desire is there in some, it's going to be hard to squash.
  - mercer 9y ago
    I do hope you're right. One of my 'in the realm of possibility' dystopian fears is that a totalitarian regime figures out how to (chemically?) keep their society docile. Ideally the populace would still be creative, to an extent, but that might not even be necessary, or compensated for by stealing innovation from other places. One could argue that this is already sort of happening in many places, without there being a big conspiracy behind it, I guess.