4 ms·

Western leaders meet Chinese ones and make a mention of human rights… then sign trade deals anyway.

TaylorAlexander 8y ago
Like how western CEOs pulled out of the Saudi conference... but sent other employees as representatives. They want to look like they are opting out, but they still have every intention of being “in”.
- C1sc0cat 8y ago
  Or maybe taking to their "friends" in the royal family about how MBS is a liability and you know ought to go. I used to work for a big Consulting engineer who did a lot of work in the middle east and we had our friends in high places (you can probably guess who I worked for)
  - biglenny 8y ago
    I am low IQ. Please give me a hint
    - dredmorbius 8y ago
      Bechtel, Halliburton, Kellogg Brown & Root (now KBR), and Schlumbarger are among the larger energy-projects engineering firms in the US. For the UK, BP. OP appears to be British.
      - C1sc0cat 8y ago
        Lol it was not Ove Arup (I did say consulting not contractors) much much better connected :-)
        dredmorbius 8y ago
        https://targetjobs.co.uk/uk300/construction-civil-engineering-and-surveying https://targetjobs.co.uk/uk300/construction-civil-engineerin...
Aeolun 8y ago
It would be nice if we could just be done with all these dictatorships at some point during my lifetime, but I frankly don’t see it happening.
dsfyu404ed 8y ago
Even HN is generally overflowing with pro-authoritarian sentiment and people lamenting the slow pace of western governments when you talk about how good Singapore's healthcare is, how many opportunities there are for genetics based medicine research in China, etc, etc.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  I'm pretty sure people can advocate for both a little bit more efficiency in critical infrastructure and respect for human rights at the same time.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    The power that lets a government steamroll opposition and quarreling over $good_thing can also be used to steamroll opposition to $bad_thing and when everyone's used to seeing the government steamroll opposition for $good_thing they don't ask questions when they see that power used for $bad_thing.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      That's true. And the question - IMO worth investigating - is, is there a way to structure the system so that "steamrolling opposition and quarreling" over $good_thing is easier, while doing the same over $bad_thin is difficult? Maybe there isn't, but did we look at it hard enough? Especially that the inability of the western world to create and maintain infrastructure is starting to turn into a huge risk.
      - xkcd-sucks 8y ago
        Make sure everyone in the group agrees on what good and bad things are? This is much easier in small groups
        mmirate 8y ago
        That, mind you, merely shifts the problem to "make governance-groups smaller". But no politician wants to reduce their job responsibilities such that they now govern fewer people, that's bad for their egos and their resumes. And nobody seems to have figured out how to refactor the law so that ontology (which is finicky, takes lots of resources to get right, and could be applied globally, even if different nations will want some extra nouns and verbs for their own use) and preferences (which ought be as local as possible) are cleanly separated and the former are easily reusable across nations without obligating that such nations come to global consensus on the latter. Instead, every sovereign entity (USA and EU, not France nor Florida) is its own pile of spaghetti-code.

Like how western CEOs pulled out of the Saudi conference... but sent other employees as representatives. They want to look like they are opting out, but they still have every intention of being “in”.

C1sc0cat 8y ago
Or maybe taking to their "friends" in the royal family about how MBS is a liability and you know ought to go. I used to work for a big Consulting engineer who did a lot of work in the middle east and we had our friends in high places (you can probably guess who I worked for)
- biglenny 8y ago
  I am low IQ. Please give me a hint
  - dredmorbius 8y ago
    Bechtel, Halliburton, Kellogg Brown & Root (now KBR), and Schlumbarger are among the larger energy-projects engineering firms in the US. For the UK, BP. OP appears to be British.
    - C1sc0cat 8y ago
      Lol it was not Ove Arup (I did say consulting not contractors) much much better connected :-)
      - dredmorbius 8y ago
        https://targetjobs.co.uk/uk300/construction-civil-engineering-and-surveying https://targetjobs.co.uk/uk300/construction-civil-engineerin...

Aeolun 8y ago

It would be nice if we could just be done with all these dictatorships at some point during my lifetime, but I frankly don’t see it happening.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago

Even HN is generally overflowing with pro-authoritarian sentiment and people lamenting the slow pace of western governments when you talk about how good Singapore's healthcare is, how many opportunities there are for genetics based medicine research in China, etc, etc.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
I'm pretty sure people can advocate for both a little bit more efficiency in critical infrastructure and respect for human rights at the same time.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  The power that lets a government steamroll opposition and quarreling over $good_thing can also be used to steamroll opposition to $bad_thing and when everyone's used to seeing the government steamroll opposition for $good_thing they don't ask questions when they see that power used for $bad_thing.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    That's true. And the question - IMO worth investigating - is, is there a way to structure the system so that "steamrolling opposition and quarreling" over $good_thing is easier, while doing the same over $bad_thin is difficult? Maybe there isn't, but did we look at it hard enough? Especially that the inability of the western world to create and maintain infrastructure is starting to turn into a huge risk.
    - xkcd-sucks 8y ago
      Make sure everyone in the group agrees on what good and bad things are? This is much easier in small groups
      - mmirate 8y ago
        That, mind you, merely shifts the problem to "make governance-groups smaller". But no politician wants to reduce their job responsibilities such that they now govern fewer people, that's bad for their egos and their resumes. And nobody seems to have figured out how to refactor the law so that ontology (which is finicky, takes lots of resources to get right, and could be applied globally, even if different nations will want some extra nouns and verbs for their own use) and preferences (which ought be as local as possible) are cleanly separated and the former are easily reusable across nations without obligating that such nations come to global consensus on the latter. Instead, every sovereign entity (USA and EU, not France nor Florida) is its own pile of spaghetti-code.