4 ms·

This is actually false and the type of dangerous logic that has brought us to where we are today. You are arguing the same tired logic that have been lost on mo

This is actually false and the type of dangerous logic that has brought us to where we are today. You are arguing the same tired logic that have been lost on most globalists today (whether out of ignorance or not): 1. Not entering the Chinese market during this time of growth is a lost opportunity. 2. Chinese citizens working and living in a free country will import these values back home (false) #1 may be true in the short-term, if you are okay with selling out your users and giving up your IP but in the long term, you are essentially investing in the rise of a totalitarian state, which does not care about fairness and individual rights and freedoms. In the long term, investing in China today is effectively chipping away at democracy for our descendants. #2 is false because it is derived from a western frame of thought. For the majority of Chinese citizens coming to the US to study or work, they do not care about knowledge, enlightenment, or the freedoms that the western civilization values so much. They are here for the thing that their society values most - $$$. Do not think for once that the Chinese care at all about western "freedoms".

toxicFork 7y ago
How are you sure of #2? Quite a few of my University classmates and colleagues who came from China have had their mindsets reasonably affected by what they have seen and what conversations they had. I agree that my reasoning is anecdotal; can you provide references for your argument?
- zpallin 7y ago
  This reasoning is anecdotal, but coincidentally it's my experience as well. Most of my Chinese friends have expressed the same change of mind as yours. If any of them are supporters of their government they've certainly kept it to themselves. As for everyone else, they're all frightened to return home.
CountSessine 7y ago
This is actually false and the type of dangerous logic that has brought us to where we are today #1 may be true in the short-term, if you are okay with selling out your users and giving up your IP but in the long term, you are essentially investing in the rise of a totalitarian state, which does not care about fairness and individual rights and freedoms. In the long term, investing in China today is effectively chipping away at democracy for our descendants What does that have to do with the point that he brought up? Of course democracy is in peril - we're all climbing a local short-term maximum only to find that it will lead us all into a global long-term minimum. But what he said isn't false. It's true. Democracy will be in peril whether it's your company that sells out to China or whether its a competitor that sells out and then out-profits you, out-competes you, and then buys you out. Its an efficient market and not going to China will lead you to the local minimum. What we need is firm government action on the part of the US, the EU, and Japan. We need to stop feeding this monstrosity that we've nourishing in Beijing and it isn't private industry that can do it.
- MichaelMoser123 7y ago
  You suggest to build a chinese wall in reverse? Historically that didnt work out too well.
  - CountSessine 7y ago
    I suggest a unified front against China in the form of tariffs and trade barriers. I believe it was a strategic blunder admitting China into the WTO. What is the historical precedent here?
    - MichaelMoser123 7y ago
      Historical precedent: the Ming dynasty turned inwards and built the great wall of China. Just a few centuries later China was now a bit behind the west and was defeated in the opium wars.
      - CharlesColeman 7y ago
        > The Ming dynasty turned inwards and built the great wall of China. Just a few centuries later China was now a bit behind the west and was defeated in the opium wars. Their problem wasn't that they built a wall, but rather they stopped looking past it because of beliefs in their own superiority.
        MichaelMoser123 7y ago
        I agree with this observation.
zpallin 7y ago
I think you misunderstand my intent. My advice is not for governments or individuals, but rather corporations who are invested in their own survival. I don't think it's wise to disagree that a missed market opportunity can spell the end for a corporation. And in the wording I chose I am careful to limit my advice to "a business that must operate in China to stay competitive." I do not think you were careful enough to notice this, but hey I can see that your kneejerk reaction accidentally echoed my own opinion on what my country (the US) should be doing about China. I mean, in the same breath of my aforementioned advice I could have added that "by the way, don't over-invest in China because the inevitable embargo of Chinese trade in the West might destroy your company." But it's not dangerous to recommend that a business operate as a business. What is dangerous is to not have our governments intervene and to hogtie our politicians from making difficult choices when it comes to trade principles. For example, the US should have long ago forced China to recognize its patent laws. Additionally, China's human rights violations should be tried in international court regardless of its power and size (interestingly enough, so should the US's human rights violations.) I think it's all too obvious that the time has come for China to back down on its authoritarianism. And that's what I vote for and that's what I support. But I don't think it's unreasonable to recommend a corporation act like a corporation. You seem smart enough to know this.
CharlesColeman 7y ago
> 2. Chinese citizens working and living in a free country will import these values back home (false) > For the majority of Chinese citizens coming to the US to study or work, they do not care about knowledge, enlightenment, or the freedoms that the western civilization values so much. They are here for the thing that their society values most - $$$. Do not think for once that the Chinese care at all about western "freedoms". The problem is that they've been deliberately kept ignorant about western freedoms (and fed a fair amount of propaganda to counter them), and that the West hasn't been trying hard enough to impart understanding and spread them. The false part of #2 is that merely working or living in a place does not lead to fast assimilation of its values. When Chinese people actually learn about liberal values, they want them and fight for them: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/01/world/asia/hong-kong-protests-education-china.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/01/world/asia/hong-kong-prot...

toxicFork 7y ago

How are you sure of #2? Quite a few of my University classmates and colleagues who came from China have had their mindsets reasonably affected by what they have seen and what conversations they had. I agree that my reasoning is anecdotal; can you provide references for your argument?

zpallin 7y ago
This reasoning is anecdotal, but coincidentally it's my experience as well. Most of my Chinese friends have expressed the same change of mind as yours. If any of them are supporters of their government they've certainly kept it to themselves. As for everyone else, they're all frightened to return home.

CountSessine 7y ago

This is actually false and the type of dangerous logic that has brought us to where we are today #1 may be true in the short-term, if you are okay with selling out your users and giving up your IP but in the long term, you are essentially investing in the rise of a totalitarian state, which does not care about fairness and individual rights and freedoms. In the long term, investing in China today is effectively chipping away at democracy for our descendants What does that have to do with the point that he brought up? Of course democracy is in peril - we're all climbing a local short-term maximum only to find that it will lead us all into a global long-term minimum. But what he said isn't false. It's true. Democracy will be in peril whether it's your company that sells out to China or whether its a competitor that sells out and then out-profits you, out-competes you, and then buys you out. Its an efficient market and not going to China will lead you to the local minimum. What we need is firm government action on the part of the US, the EU, and Japan. We need to stop feeding this monstrosity that we've nourishing in Beijing and it isn't private industry that can do it.

MichaelMoser123 7y ago
You suggest to build a chinese wall in reverse? Historically that didnt work out too well.
- CountSessine 7y ago
  I suggest a unified front against China in the form of tariffs and trade barriers. I believe it was a strategic blunder admitting China into the WTO. What is the historical precedent here?
  - MichaelMoser123 7y ago
    Historical precedent: the Ming dynasty turned inwards and built the great wall of China. Just a few centuries later China was now a bit behind the west and was defeated in the opium wars.
    - CharlesColeman 7y ago
      > The Ming dynasty turned inwards and built the great wall of China. Just a few centuries later China was now a bit behind the west and was defeated in the opium wars. Their problem wasn't that they built a wall, but rather they stopped looking past it because of beliefs in their own superiority.
      - MichaelMoser123 7y ago
        I agree with this observation.

zpallin 7y ago

I think you misunderstand my intent. My advice is not for governments or individuals, but rather corporations who are invested in their own survival. I don't think it's wise to disagree that a missed market opportunity can spell the end for a corporation. And in the wording I chose I am careful to limit my advice to "a business that must operate in China to stay competitive." I do not think you were careful enough to notice this, but hey I can see that your kneejerk reaction accidentally echoed my own opinion on what my country (the US) should be doing about China. I mean, in the same breath of my aforementioned advice I could have added that "by the way, don't over-invest in China because the inevitable embargo of Chinese trade in the West might destroy your company." But it's not dangerous to recommend that a business operate as a business. What is dangerous is to not have our governments intervene and to hogtie our politicians from making difficult choices when it comes to trade principles. For example, the US should have long ago forced China to recognize its patent laws. Additionally, China's human rights violations should be tried in international court regardless of its power and size (interestingly enough, so should the US's human rights violations.) I think it's all too obvious that the time has come for China to back down on its authoritarianism. And that's what I vote for and that's what I support. But I don't think it's unreasonable to recommend a corporation act like a corporation. You seem smart enough to know this.

CharlesColeman 7y ago

> 2. Chinese citizens working and living in a free country will import these values back home (false) > For the majority of Chinese citizens coming to the US to study or work, they do not care about knowledge, enlightenment, or the freedoms that the western civilization values so much. They are here for the thing that their society values most - $$$. Do not think for once that the Chinese care at all about western "freedoms". The problem is that they've been deliberately kept ignorant about western freedoms (and fed a fair amount of propaganda to counter them), and that the West hasn't been trying hard enough to impart understanding and spread them. The false part of #2 is that merely working or living in a place does not lead to fast assimilation of its values. When Chinese people actually learn about liberal values, they want them and fight for them: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/01/world/asia/hong-kong-protests-education-china.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/01/world/asia/hong-kong-prot...