4 ms·

I'm not sure we need to impede authoritarianism or any other form of government. It is more than likely that level of investment that has gone into China over t

I'm not sure we need to impede authoritarianism or any other form of government. It is more than likely that level of investment that has gone into China over the last few decades have put the country in the a strong position. But I think the CCP and the Chinese people in general can take a lot of credit for what they have achieved. And to my point...if the end result is rising incomes for all, better life expectancy and an overall better quality of life does it matter that it came about through an authoritarian regime?

starfallg 6y ago
>if the end result is rising incomes for all, better life expectancy and an overall better quality of life does it matter that it came about through an authoritarian regime? And when this growth ends, what will happen? An authoritarian system is able to withstand challenges with the full power of the state behind it. People that dissent are crushed, and many times the people that dissent do so with the most honourable of intentions. Viewed under the prism of authoritarianism this matters not. It's a system that remains not because of consent and merit, but ultimately due to suppression of dissent. Just because China is able to catch-up some of the growth that it completely missed out on due to the turmoil of the Communist revolution and the turbulent 50s and 60s, doesn't validate this system one bit. Other countries were ahead of China, with more growth and sustainability, minus the cruelty.
- genoapol 6y ago
  >Just because China is able to catch-up some of the growth that it completely missed out on due to the turmoil of the Communist revolution and the turbulent 50s and 60s, doesn't validate this system one bit. Other countries were ahead of China, with more growth and sustainability, minus the cruelty. The most powerful countries in the world were literally coasting on stolen Chinese wealth for 100 years of so. When the UK couldn't coast anymore, it lost world reserve currency status.
  - starfallg 6y ago
    That era ended long before the Communists took power. Which they did by allowing the KMT to deplete their resources by fighting the Japanese first. They contributed surprising little in the war effort. Now, can we get back on the subject of how the CCP is treating dissidents (and neighbouring countries)?
  - genoapol 6y ago
    >doesn't validate this system one bit. . India springs to mind as a good 1:1 comparison candidate and it seems to be doing much worse than China in most economic metrics.
    - starfallg 6y ago
      Was India next to a financial hub like Hong Kong and a electronics and manufacturing hub like Taiwan that rapidly industrialised in the 60s and 70s? India is also further positioned from the Pacific and the sea routes to the US market, but that's a secondary reason, not the primary one. Just because they both have large populations don't make them alike.

starfallg 6y ago

>if the end result is rising incomes for all, better life expectancy and an overall better quality of life does it matter that it came about through an authoritarian regime? And when this growth ends, what will happen? An authoritarian system is able to withstand challenges with the full power of the state behind it. People that dissent are crushed, and many times the people that dissent do so with the most honourable of intentions. Viewed under the prism of authoritarianism this matters not. It's a system that remains not because of consent and merit, but ultimately due to suppression of dissent. Just because China is able to catch-up some of the growth that it completely missed out on due to the turmoil of the Communist revolution and the turbulent 50s and 60s, doesn't validate this system one bit. Other countries were ahead of China, with more growth and sustainability, minus the cruelty.

genoapol 6y ago
>Just because China is able to catch-up some of the growth that it completely missed out on due to the turmoil of the Communist revolution and the turbulent 50s and 60s, doesn't validate this system one bit. Other countries were ahead of China, with more growth and sustainability, minus the cruelty. The most powerful countries in the world were literally coasting on stolen Chinese wealth for 100 years of so. When the UK couldn't coast anymore, it lost world reserve currency status.
- starfallg 6y ago
  That era ended long before the Communists took power. Which they did by allowing the KMT to deplete their resources by fighting the Japanese first. They contributed surprising little in the war effort. Now, can we get back on the subject of how the CCP is treating dissidents (and neighbouring countries)?
- genoapol 6y ago
  >doesn't validate this system one bit. . India springs to mind as a good 1:1 comparison candidate and it seems to be doing much worse than China in most economic metrics.
  - starfallg 6y ago
    Was India next to a financial hub like Hong Kong and a electronics and manufacturing hub like Taiwan that rapidly industrialised in the 60s and 70s? India is also further positioned from the Pacific and the sea routes to the US market, but that's a secondary reason, not the primary one. Just because they both have large populations don't make them alike.