3 ms·

One reason to care which is bigger is the effect they each will have on the norms of governance around the world. Superpowers tend to nudge the rest of the worl

One reason to care which is bigger is the effect they each will have on the norms of governance around the world. Superpowers tend to nudge the rest of the world's governments to be more like them (see Britain and the US over the last 300 years). Do you want the rest of the world to be more like China or more like the West? China has shown the world what it considers to be acceptable norms of governance: unrepentant, ongoing genocide against the Uigers, snuffing out liberal democracy in Hong Kong, and denying the sovereignty of a liberal neighbor in Taiwan. I'm fully expecting plenty of whataboutism and false equivalencies in response to this comment and others making a similar point. Believe me, I'm disappointed in the US and the rest of the West's recent slide away from liberal values, and I hope we can start doing better soon, but I encourage onlookers to ask themselves: do you really believe the there's no meaningful difference between China's vision for the future and the West's? No difference between the future each will create for you?

statquontrarian 6y ago
> I'm fully expecting plenty of whataboutism and false equivalencies in response to this comment and others making a similar point. Please don't poison the well. If you believe I've made such an argument, please politely point that out about a specific statement and I'll try to understand my biases and correct it. > do you really believe the there's no meaningful difference between China's vision for the future and the West's? If we were comparing to Mao, Stalin, or Hitler, then, yes; but, modern states, no. The U.S. imprisons millions of people for petty drug crimes and kills millions of people in imperial wars. Is that so different than the treatment of the Uigers, Taiwanese, or those in Hong Kong? The social credit system and Great Firewall are being implemented through different means: social ostracism and social media oligopolies. I've personally experienced it. > No difference between the future each will create for you? I'm actually generally optimistic. If we take the evidence of the past few hundred years, we are likely to innovate and grow despite such excessive governance. It's the innovators that will make my future better. As far as the government goes, the practical difference seems minimal: I will meticulously pay my taxes and follow the laws so as not to receive the glare of either of the Saurons.
- pdonis 6y ago
  > The U.S. imprisons millions of people for petty drug crimes and kills millions of people in imperial wars. Is that so different than the treatment of the Uigers, Taiwanese, or those in Hong Kong? Yes, because in the US, we can actually have a conversation about changing those policies. In China, they can't.
  - statquontrarian 6y ago
    Although there are counter-examples of Snowden, Assange, and others, I do generally agree with you that there are fewer political crimes in the U.S.; however, words are cheap, it's actions that matter. My point is about the results: the government continues to grow in depth and breadth. So, yes, if you're on the socialist end of the spectrum, you may feel very free to accomplish your goals. Those on the other end do not. As an example, how did all of our free speech help in stopping the war in Iraq based on a lie about WMDs that killed millions of people? Is anyone even arguing that China has killed millions of Uyghurs? To be clear, I think both sides are wrong. I'm just saying they're not qualitatively different by a magnitude.
soperj 6y ago
>unrepentant, ongoing genocide against the Uigers, snuffing out liberal democracy in Hong Kong, and denying the sovereignty of a liberal neighbor in Taiwan. You're quoting Britain there as someone to look to, and at the same time mentioning genocide...
- GradientAssent 6y ago
  I guess the present day somehow seems more relevant?

statquontrarian 6y ago

> I'm fully expecting plenty of whataboutism and false equivalencies in response to this comment and others making a similar point. Please don't poison the well. If you believe I've made such an argument, please politely point that out about a specific statement and I'll try to understand my biases and correct it. > do you really believe the there's no meaningful difference between China's vision for the future and the West's? If we were comparing to Mao, Stalin, or Hitler, then, yes; but, modern states, no. The U.S. imprisons millions of people for petty drug crimes and kills millions of people in imperial wars. Is that so different than the treatment of the Uigers, Taiwanese, or those in Hong Kong? The social credit system and Great Firewall are being implemented through different means: social ostracism and social media oligopolies. I've personally experienced it. > No difference between the future each will create for you? I'm actually generally optimistic. If we take the evidence of the past few hundred years, we are likely to innovate and grow despite such excessive governance. It's the innovators that will make my future better. As far as the government goes, the practical difference seems minimal: I will meticulously pay my taxes and follow the laws so as not to receive the glare of either of the Saurons.

pdonis 6y ago
> The U.S. imprisons millions of people for petty drug crimes and kills millions of people in imperial wars. Is that so different than the treatment of the Uigers, Taiwanese, or those in Hong Kong? Yes, because in the US, we can actually have a conversation about changing those policies. In China, they can't.
- statquontrarian 6y ago
  Although there are counter-examples of Snowden, Assange, and others, I do generally agree with you that there are fewer political crimes in the U.S.; however, words are cheap, it's actions that matter. My point is about the results: the government continues to grow in depth and breadth. So, yes, if you're on the socialist end of the spectrum, you may feel very free to accomplish your goals. Those on the other end do not. As an example, how did all of our free speech help in stopping the war in Iraq based on a lie about WMDs that killed millions of people? Is anyone even arguing that China has killed millions of Uyghurs? To be clear, I think both sides are wrong. I'm just saying they're not qualitatively different by a magnitude.

soperj 6y ago

>unrepentant, ongoing genocide against the Uigers, snuffing out liberal democracy in Hong Kong, and denying the sovereignty of a liberal neighbor in Taiwan. You're quoting Britain there as someone to look to, and at the same time mentioning genocide...

GradientAssent 6y ago
I guess the present day somehow seems more relevant?