9 ms·
This ban is primarily to satiate anti-China sentiment. The global economy is too interwined with China. No country can afford to put a blanket ban on things th
by sanmon3186 6y ago
This ban is primarily to satiate anti-China sentiment.
The global economy is too interwined with China. No country can afford to put a blanket ban on things that matter, without a viable plan-B.
- cm2187 6y agoOvernight, I agree. But I think the decoupling will happen. The outsourcing to China took about 10 years (mid 90s to mid 2000s). It will likely not take a lot longer to decouple. 10y is very rapid.
- chrisco255 6y agoWe in the U.S. should have partnered more closely with India in the first place. India is democratic and hold values closer to our own. The CCP not so much.
- agilebyte 6y agoMore democratic than China, yes. A low bar to clear.
- parthdesai 6y agoWhile you may disagree with the current elected government in India (I do as well), it is the definition of democracy. Majority of the population did want that government. Also, in India a person managed to lead a protest, form an entire new party and become the chief minister of a state because people were behind him. That is democracy as well. Tell me when has that happened in the states in recent times.
- kerkeslager 6y agoThe person you are responding to is based in Ontario and is therefore probably Canadian. I'm not informed enough to have an opinion on Canadian politics, but I do know that Canada is has provinces, not states. ;)
- unishark 6y ago> Also, in India a person managed to lead a protest, form an entire new party and become the chief minister of a state because people were behind him. That is democracy as well. Tell me when has that happened in the states in recent times. This seems like a really specific request. I'm not sure what aspect you're looking for. But for starters, here's an interesting wikipedia page for governors that went outside the major parties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_third_party_and_independent_United_States_state_governors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_third_party_and_indepe... Looks like the most common thing in recent times is to just use the label "independent" rather than start a new party.
- wadkar 6y agoI think the point that GP made doesn’t have any equivalence in US two party system. The person in question really did start a new party that was not coupled with any of the existing parties and won the capital state with crushing majority. That is a sign of a working democracy in my book. I am not sure if US is one of the better version of a well functioning democracy given its two party system. I recall that it was one of the things that the founding fathers were afraid of when they were debating the constitution.
- unishark 6y agoJesse Ventura wasn't affiliated with either party, along with a lot of people on that list. The founding fathers were afraid of democracy itself and put in many explicit constraints on it, never mind undesired self-organization like the two parties. So it's easy to find perspectives from which the US isn't the archytype democracy. But what's the point? That it somehow a bit farther down the road to authoritarianism as a result? I'm not sure about that.
- parthdesai 6y agoThey are state governors, but did the state have a majority that wasn't either of the two main parties? That's the point. In India, in this particular instance, majority of the population were sick of the political parties in the country, there were protests and then this person created an entire new party and this party went to get elected in the capital state. I think that's the what democracy should allow you to do.
- claudeganon 6y agoIndia is controlled by a fascist, ethnonationalist party that has encouraged pogroms toward Muslims and enshrined racial hierarchies into law. They haven’t put Muslims in concentration camps, like the CCP, but I hope our “values” don’t get any closer to their leadership.
- chrisco255 6y agoI think people abuse the word fascist these days. What makes India fascist? And how does that compare to the economic model of China? Is China fascist?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- claudeganon 6y agoIndia is not fascist. The Hindu-nationalism promoted by the BJP and used to degrade and direct violence toward other ethnic groups is a fascist ideology. They never really have tried to pretend otherwise: > In 2004, when now-Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat, school textbooks published by the Gujarat State Board portrayed Hitler as a hero, and glorified fascism. The tenth-grade social studies textbook had chapters entitled "Hitler, the Supremo," and "Internal Achievements of Nazism." https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/hitlers-hindus-indias-nazi-loving-nationalists-on-the-rise-1.5628532 https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/hitlers-hindus-indias-nazi-l... China is an authoritarian state Capitalist regime, but not fascist, because of its history and relationship with communist ideologies, and how they still shape their internal politics and ruling structures.
- NicoJuicy 6y agoYou are blaming India for things against Muslims while selectively ignoring China is imprisoning a couple of millions? Lol
- claudeganon 6y ago
- briandear 6y agoI agree, however India has a bureaucracy that makes running and starting businesses over there extremely difficult. As well as aggressive tariffs and Byzantine legal processes. China can be a difficult place, but nothing seems to approach India when it comes to paperwork and the dismal speed at which things get done.
- NicoJuicy 6y agoWell, except getting your money out of China is also very hard :)
- u801e 6y ago> India is democratic and hold values closer to our own. Especially in terms of mixing religion and politics and right-wing based supremacy views.
- baybal2 6y agoThis aside, the societal dynamics at large are remarkably, surprisingly similar.
- decon2 6y agoSpontaneous protests around Floyd's killing are different from the anti CAA protestors. All the protest leaders (students) are in jail and accused of terrorism. Dissent is suppressed. How can the two societies be similar?
- justplugitin 6y agoA prominent anti-CAA protestor called for cutting off the secluded eastern part of the country. He is still lauded by the fellow protestors. Petrol bombs were used by protestors. This was no ordinary protest.
- dtwest 6y agoI completely agree, my understanding of why the US did not is due to India's ties with the Soviet Union and Russia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Russia_relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Russia_relations Would love to hear more detail from those who know more on the subject.
- mav3rick 6y agoUS wanted proximity to Afghanistan and always warmed up to Pakistan. China knew Pakistan would never compete with them. Sided with Pak to keep India in check. India had no option but to lean on Russia initially.
- NicoJuicy 6y agoI believe the shift to this is already happening. That's perhaps why China is getting a bit more cocky
- blackoil 6y agoMore to do with India being on back foot. Lockdown has halted the economy, millions of migrant workers have been displaced and MSMEs are in disarray. India can't afford to have a war at the moment. I don't think any substantial shift will happen in near future.
- blackoil 6y agoInternational Partnerships are not based on values or Democracy/*cracy. China moved to market based economy earlier then India and being an autocratic country the move was swift and efficient. US wanted to befriend China against Russia in 70s/80s. India started late and kept struggling internally because of the democratic values. If values were such important, Saudis wouldn't have been your best buddies.
- ciarannolan 6y ago>[not all] International Partnerships are not based on values or Democracy/*cracy FTFY. Think about the "special relationship" among the UK/US that is (definitely was) primarily based on values. The Saudis are a pragmatic ally, not a values-based one. Both exist.
- Udik 6y ago> Think about the "special relationship" among the UK/US that is (definitely was) primarily based on values. Which values? Atheism? The welfare state? Well defined social classes? The royal family?
- ciarannolan 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Relationship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Relationship It's always disappointing commenting on HN only to get reddit/twitter "zinger" replies.
- Udik 6y agoYou entirely missed my point: I'm not questioning the existence of a "special relationship", I'm asking if it's based on "values". What values does the US share with the UK more than with most other western countries?
- ciarannolan 6y agoI don't think there was really a point to be missed. If you have a point, go ahead and make it.
- decon2 6y agoYup. US should have partnered with India as the largest functioning democracy. But that was 50 years back. Last 6 years though, there is a clear challenge to democracy from right wing and fascist groups. Eerily similar to what happened in pre-Nazi Germany. This decade will tell us if democracy will survive. Uncritical alliance or support will only strengthen the anti-democratic forces. The govt is very interested in stoking anger against an external force (china) to divert serious failures in handling covid crisis. It had adopted the same strategy using pakistan or muslims as the bogey man several times in the recent past.
- thowme245 6y agoTrue. China did not slaughter 20 Indian soldiers and it's not building up on Indian border. China good. India bad.
- sremani 6y agoIf we walk into the past a little in 2000 world is not intertwined with China, and very likely 2040 world is not intertwined with China. If only people read about PBOC, CNY/CNH and how currency is a political tool within China, you realize they have successfully exploited the "free market" impulse to effectively use state capitalism and dumping to create the world we are in Today. Just because the supply chains got complex and intertwined with China does not mean it will that way forever -- it is going to be a painful 5 - 10 years, just like the ramp up, the tear down will take time.
- kumarvvr 6y agoDe coupling with Chinese economy is good for India in the long run. This is the first step. India should engage more with democracies.
- puranjay 6y agoWhat democracies do you think are capable of meeting India's vast demand for consumer goods? Anything in the developed world is going to be prohibitively expensive. Anything outside is most likely a "democracy" just in name, or already within China's sphere of influence. The trade alliance with China has been materially good to Indians. We've been able to afford more goods at cheaper rates. While we should try and move things back home, it's not going to happen overnight. In the meantime, a population that was already struggling with income inequality, wage stagnation, unemployment and even growing poverty will see its material wealth slip further.
- yumraj 6y agoYou have to start somewhere, this is a starting point. It's better than just raising the hands and saying that it cannot be done.
- sdinsn 6y agoAnd yet, China bans foreign apps. God forbid other countries give China a taste of their own medicine.