3 ms·

Indeed. The next 10 to 15 years in China will either further set an example that you don't need American/European democratic ideals in order for economic prospe

Indeed. The next 10 to 15 years in China will either further set an example that you don't need American/European democratic ideals in order for economic prosperity and a good life for your citizens, or it will go a long way to disproving the idea that those can be separated. With several eastern European countries trending in an authoritarian direction (and Turkey pretty far along that path already) I am worried about the effect that Chinese prosperity without democratic ideals will have.

kristianc 8y ago
Legatum rates China's prosperity at 90th in the world, alongside El Salvador and Nepal, precisely because the lack of personal freedom and environmental degradation act as a counterbalance against China's robust economy. You can question the methodology, but then you have to make an argument as to why Norway, New Zealand, Finland, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, the US and other mature social democracies which routinely top these rankings are not good places to live. Very few citizens of those countries would choose to live in Xi's China instead.
- wilsonnb 8y ago
  I don't have to make an argument as to why Norway, New Zealand, Finland, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, and the US are not good places to live. They are good places to live. That has nothing to do with whether or not China is a good place to live. I only have to make the argument that personal freedom is not as important as economic prosperity. Since the end of the Cold War the general thinking was "democratic ideals -> economic prosperity -> good life". China's economic success without embracing democratic ideals to the extent that successful Western countries is making people and governments once again question whether or not the democratic ideals are actually needed. I would rather live in the US or Europe than China at the moment, but how long will that remain true for most people if China surpasses the US as the world's reigning superpower?
  - musage 8y ago
    > how long will that remain true for most people if China surpasses the US as the world's reigning superpower? You don't even answer it for yourself. Most people in Nazi Germany didn't mind what was done to Jews, and those who did could hardly do anything about it. Why does that affect your own judgement in the least, how many other people think what? Wouldn't you rather be in the company of the best people, than the most? If the Nazis had remained in control, washing brains and crushing dissent as they did, and bred Germany to be the most populous country in the world, would that matter?
- smhost 8y ago
  > Very few citizens of those countries would choose to live in Xi's China instead. But that's not the relevant question. The relevant question is whether the businesses of those countries would choose to do business from within Xi's China.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    The Enlightenment was about more than business.
    - smhost 8y ago
      Oh, I'm with you there, but I'm skeptical that the lessons of the Enlightenment mean very much in a context where powerful business interests have actual control of public psychology to such an extent that they can convince people that they came to those conclusions of their own free will.

kristianc 8y ago

Legatum rates China's prosperity at 90th in the world, alongside El Salvador and Nepal, precisely because the lack of personal freedom and environmental degradation act as a counterbalance against China's robust economy. You can question the methodology, but then you have to make an argument as to why Norway, New Zealand, Finland, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, the US and other mature social democracies which routinely top these rankings are not good places to live. Very few citizens of those countries would choose to live in Xi's China instead.

wilsonnb 8y ago
I don't have to make an argument as to why Norway, New Zealand, Finland, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, and the US are not good places to live. They are good places to live. That has nothing to do with whether or not China is a good place to live. I only have to make the argument that personal freedom is not as important as economic prosperity. Since the end of the Cold War the general thinking was "democratic ideals -> economic prosperity -> good life". China's economic success without embracing democratic ideals to the extent that successful Western countries is making people and governments once again question whether or not the democratic ideals are actually needed. I would rather live in the US or Europe than China at the moment, but how long will that remain true for most people if China surpasses the US as the world's reigning superpower?
- musage 8y ago
  > how long will that remain true for most people if China surpasses the US as the world's reigning superpower? You don't even answer it for yourself. Most people in Nazi Germany didn't mind what was done to Jews, and those who did could hardly do anything about it. Why does that affect your own judgement in the least, how many other people think what? Wouldn't you rather be in the company of the best people, than the most? If the Nazis had remained in control, washing brains and crushing dissent as they did, and bred Germany to be the most populous country in the world, would that matter?
smhost 8y ago
> Very few citizens of those countries would choose to live in Xi's China instead. But that's not the relevant question. The relevant question is whether the businesses of those countries would choose to do business from within Xi's China.
- icebraining 8y ago
  The Enlightenment was about more than business.
  - smhost 8y ago
    Oh, I'm with you there, but I'm skeptical that the lessons of the Enlightenment mean very much in a context where powerful business interests have actual control of public psychology to such an extent that they can convince people that they came to those conclusions of their own free will.