4 ms·

If anything can be considered the canary in the coal mine for a threat to world peace, this is it. Most people alive to day have experienced nothing but an unpr

If anything can be considered the canary in the coal mine for a threat to world peace, this is it. Most people alive to day have experienced nothing but an unprecedented period of peace and prosperity. It's easy to take it for granted that progress is inevitable, and that wide scale war is a thing of the past. But the CCP's actions against the Uyghurs has shown the world what kind of leader China would be on the world stage. The CCP under the current leadership is the biggest threat to world peace that we've faced in our lifetimes. We should all be pressing our governments to take every peaceful means we can to curtail the rise of CCP power and influence.

squeezingswirls 6y ago
Exactly, and we should keep in mind they're exporting their totalitarian surveillance model to a lot of countries https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/technology/ecuador-surveillance-cameras-police-government.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/technology/ecuador-survei...
jkhdigital 6y ago
Collectivism can find a justification for almost any atrocity. Collectivist ideologies (which includes Nazism) have a pretty well-worn track record of inciting mass murder and Chinese communism was a clear example long before the oppression of the Uighurs. Hearing about the reality of enforcing the one-child policy was enough for me to make up my mind on the CCP.
- DFHippie 6y ago
  The problem isn't collectivism but tribalism. The Han majority in this case don't extend their sympathy to the Uighurs or the Tibetans or the Mongols. The self-described Aryans didn't extend their sympathy to the Jews or the slavs or the Romany. There are plenty of individualists in the US who are indifferent or hostile to other "tribes", blacks or hispanics or native Americans or simply city dwellers, while being very solicitous of the interests of their tribe. I'm sure the Confederacy was full of rugged individualists. They loved Davy Crocket, who died at the Alamo defending the right to enslave Africans and seize land from Mexicans.
  - jkhdigital 6y ago
    Yes, tribalism is at the root of all group-on-group conflict. There are two governing ideologies to deal with this: collectivism and individualism. Collectivism attempts to unite the tribes, so to speak, while individualism seeks to shrink each tribe to a party of one. Obviously tribal warfare happens no matter what, but I think the historical record is pretty clear about which one has done a better job of minimizing it.

squeezingswirls 6y ago

Exactly, and we should keep in mind they're exporting their totalitarian surveillance model to a lot of countries https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/technology/ecuador-surveillance-cameras-police-government.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/technology/ecuador-survei...

jkhdigital 6y ago

Collectivism can find a justification for almost any atrocity. Collectivist ideologies (which includes Nazism) have a pretty well-worn track record of inciting mass murder and Chinese communism was a clear example long before the oppression of the Uighurs. Hearing about the reality of enforcing the one-child policy was enough for me to make up my mind on the CCP.

DFHippie 6y ago
The problem isn't collectivism but tribalism. The Han majority in this case don't extend their sympathy to the Uighurs or the Tibetans or the Mongols. The self-described Aryans didn't extend their sympathy to the Jews or the slavs or the Romany. There are plenty of individualists in the US who are indifferent or hostile to other "tribes", blacks or hispanics or native Americans or simply city dwellers, while being very solicitous of the interests of their tribe. I'm sure the Confederacy was full of rugged individualists. They loved Davy Crocket, who died at the Alamo defending the right to enslave Africans and seize land from Mexicans.
- jkhdigital 6y ago
  Yes, tribalism is at the root of all group-on-group conflict. There are two governing ideologies to deal with this: collectivism and individualism. Collectivism attempts to unite the tribes, so to speak, while individualism seeks to shrink each tribe to a party of one. Obviously tribal warfare happens no matter what, but I think the historical record is pretty clear about which one has done a better job of minimizing it.