4 ms·
I think you have an interesting point about America's tendency to wrap itself in the mythos of the "Good Guy" and the inherent hypocrisy between our words and a
by eunoia 8y ago
I think you have an interesting point about America's tendency to wrap itself in the mythos of the "Good Guy" and the inherent hypocrisy between our words and actions.
But with that being said, I think you're making an unfair comparison between two countries. America has been the world hegemon for ~70 years. Have we abused that power at times? Absolutely. Would China abuse the same power given the opportunity? Most certainly. It's human nature.
It would appear as though you're confusing relative weakness (i.e. their current inability to project their values upon the entire world) with virtue. If they had that power, they would probably use it like every other powerful country has over the course in human history.
> China doesn't intervene, for better or worse, in the running of other countries.
Taiwan and Tibet would like a word.
- okal 8y ago> It would appear as though you're confusing relative weakness (i.e. their current inability to project their values upon the entire world) with virtue. Not quite. I think the idea I'm struggling to communicate is that China is an amoral force upon the world. They're not good. They're just far less bad, in my opinion, from a utilitarian perspective. > Taiwan and Tibet would like a word. Taiwan and mainland China both lay claim to each other, so that's a bit more complicated. You're right about Tibet. Most of my statements are, I'll happily admit, generalizations, but it says something that those are the only two examples that come to mind, wouldn't you agree?
- eunoia 8y agoI think the crux of my disagreement comes from the fact while China may act "amorally" on the internal stage now, acquiring world hegemon level power will likely change that like it has changed every nation to come into that role before them. Doubly so because they already act (imo) immorally towards those they have current power over (their own people). Remember that America was once a relatively "amoral" isolationist country too. >Taiwan and mainland China both lay claim to each other, so that's a bit more complicated. I'm not a scholar on China-Taiwan relations but as a betting man I'd put money on the PRoC not renouncing their claim on Taiwan even if the RoC renounced theirs on the mainland. > but it says something that those are the only two examples that come to mind, wouldn't you agree? Yes I would. But once again, China is a relatively recent major world power (in the modern era). Plenty of time to make enemies yet. Obviously we're trading in a lot of speculation, opinion and bias here. Thank you for engaging in such a potentially heated discussion in such good faith.
- okal 8y agoI understand where you're coming from. Interesting times we live in, regardless of outcome. I enjoyed this discussion. Thank you.
- paradite 8y ago> Taiwan and Tibet would like a word. Until Taiwan stops claiming itself to be China, it's an internal affair (or rather a civil war) within "China". I don't want to go into a long debate over Tibet, but I suggest reading wikipedia articles on it if you haven't done so, to get a more holistic view of the timeline.