8 ms·

The CCP is terrible but there’s no question intellectually they outclass the United States’ geriatric leadership. Much more STEM too. We love our lawyers and bu

The CCP is terrible but there’s no question intellectually they outclass the United States’ geriatric leadership. Much more STEM too. We love our lawyers and business folk, don’t we?

bigbubba 6y ago
I prefer being ruled by incompetent fuckwit lawyers if the alternative is competent genocidal engineers.
- justicezyx 6y ago
  It's not that Indians were magically disappearing on earth... I don't think your statement is baseless. But you are being emotional and completely dodges the OP's intention: I.e. US leadership have not been as competent in most major domestic areas as Chinese counterpart. BTW: US leadership probably caused more civilian death international than Chinese government's domestic figure. Probably 2-3 orders of magnitude more. Iraq Syria etc. Of course, in the name of spreading democracy and universal human rights. I have no doubt on the sincerity. I just don't think the leadership has the competence to carry out those goals.
  - croissants 6y ago
    > BTW: US leadership probably caused more civilian death international than Chinese government's domestic figure. Probably 2-3 orders of magnitude more. Iraq Syria etc. Going off the conservative estimates, the CCP-led Great Leap Forward killed over 10 million people. 2-3 orders of magnitude more than that is 1-10 billion.
    - justicezyx 6y ago
      I implied to be recent history. Mostly within 20 years. Let's extend to 2 regimes history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas#:~:text=One%20of%20these%20factors%20was,of%20overall%20native%20population%20decline https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_indige.... Wow, US and China are among the most evil government in human history! What a surprise... Give me a break, my lad. I am not talking about how morally superior CCP is to US government. Look at the havoc raged by the US leadership. I am fking weeping every night regretting the stupid 12 years I spend at this damn declining country. Cannot we stop the bittering and focus on improving and positive thinking... I never defend CCP in any degree beyond showing the lack of leadership from US. Read my comments, judge for yourself. I don't think a US born person can understand the profound disappointment I am experiencing everyday now. I am comparing US to CCP, that's not what I setup to learn 12 years ago coming to this country...
    - yeetman21 6y ago
      If you want to go back you can count all the natives and slaves killed by the US, going off the conservative estimates the US killed over 100 million people. HOWEVER. The US back then is not the US right now. And the CCP back then is not the CCP right now, so both arguments are quite foolish.
    - WaxProlix 6y ago
      I guess the real question if you want to be scientific-ish about it is, how many more died in the 1959-61 famine than in previous, similar ones? The Chinese region has a rich history of famine going back for thousands of years, so it shouldn't be too hard to do a bit of math. What's interesting is that after this period, there are no more famines (though food scarcity I think is still an issue). So China did something right in its industrialization. Edit to quote from a slate article that was on top of a search: > Over the past 2,000 years, China has suffered almost one famine per year. Severe drought killed as many as 13 million Chinese in the two-year famine beginning in 1876. The 1927 famine killed as many as 6 million. There were significant famines in 1929, 1939, and 1942. from https://slate.com/technology/2014/04/why-does-china-not-have-famines-anymore-capitalist-and-socialist-reforms.html https://slate.com/technology/2014/04/why-does-china-not-have...
- adultSwim 6y ago
  US has never confronted it's foundations of genocide and slavery
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - chrisco255 6y ago
    Yeah we fought a big war over it 160 years ago. 600,000 people died.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Indeed, but even then the US never recognized officially that it perpetrated genocide, and US bills still have the faces of slave holders and slave rapists on them. I guess that for some definitions of confronting that does qualify as "not confronting".
    - oh_sigh 6y ago
      I think it's kinda cute (but mostly sickening) that far left ideologues and far right ideologues can at least come together and agree that the Civil War was not actually about slavery (despite every fact contradicting that view).
      - chrisco255 6y ago
        I think the reasons for the elites who initiated the war and the people who actually fought the war were quite different, but that is so often the case in world history.
      - sudosysgen 6y ago
        I don't know anyone on the left that thinks that the Civil War wasn't about slavery. That doesn't mean that they think that it wasn't just about slavery - because it wasn't just about slavery, and even less just about the moral issues of slavery. When people say that the US hasn't confronted its legacy of slavery and genocide, they mean things like personality cults of people that owned slaves, institutional racism - that persisted a hundred years after the civil war, not recognizing that there was a genocide of natives, and so on. It's perfectly consistent to say that the Civil War was mainly about slavery (and, of course, also for economic reasons as an extension of that) and to say that the US still hasn't fully confronted its origins of slavery. Also, there is still a lot of people in the US that are sympathetic to the Confederacy, even amongst the government - the Civil War didn't even go all the way.
HenryKissinger 6y ago
Shou'en Li's answer to this Quora query[1] is insightful. > In China, if you want to be a leader, you have to start from the grassroots level to accumulate rich government work experiences after ascending nine levels of posts (section chief, deputy division chief, division chief, deputy director of general office, director of general office, vice-minister, minister, deputy-state leader, state leader). With such experiences, you may have the opportunity to become one of the candidates for leadership. [1] https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-Communist-Party-of-China-select-and-groom-a-person-to-be-the-next-paramount-leader https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-Communist-Party-of-China-...
- oh_sigh 6y ago
  That sounds like the system's ideal - but is that how most people become, say, deputy state leaders? Or can you pay your way in, advance through nepotism, or blackmailing, or mutual corruption, etc?
  - eunos 6y ago
    One reason why Chinese bureaucrats are constantly rotated and not allowed to serve in their homeland is to prevent those.
itsthetruth 6y ago
2 social credits have been added to your account
bassman9000 6y ago
How is it a good thing to have more efficient dictators?
- burnte 6y ago
  China isn't ignoring climate change, understands geopolitics, learns from it's mistakes, etc. The US is falling behind in all of those areas.
  - ghostcluster 6y ago
    China isn't ignoring climate change in their rhetoric. What they are actually doing is building record amounts of coal power plants, right now, this year. https://www.wired.com/story/china-is-still-building-an-insane-number-of-new-coal-plants/ https://www.wired.com/story/china-is-still-building-an-insan... The US' greenhouse emissions peaked years ago and have been in steady decline. China is the #1 emitter, #1 coal consumer, and building record amounts of new coal domestically. And not just in China, but all over the developing world through their Belt and Road program.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      This is true, however these plants are being used quite rarely and are instead base load. Chinese emissions per capita and per dollar are falling, and total emissions seem to have plateaued, so I'm not sure that really qualifies as ignoring it. Same in the developing world, while some kinds of fossil fuels for baseload generation is necessary so long as nuclear is taboo, they are on track to never even get close to the level of emissions per capita of the US, and indeed plateau in total emissions soon. Of course, you can make the argument that this isn't enough. That being said, for places stricken by poverty, it's certainly a hell of a lot more effort than the US that doesn't even deign join the Paris Climate Agreements.
      - pueblito 6y ago
        > This is true, however these plants are being used quite rarely Hence the need for more of them at record pace? Ridiculous
mkj 6y ago
Where's the mention of more STEM? (I was hoping it might have some details, but can't see it)
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dnautics 6y ago
Let's not forget that Wilson was a Princeton Professor and Hoover was an engineer. (Wilson appointed KKK members to his cabinet, screened a white supremacist film in the white house, invaded and occupied the soviet union for two years; hoover treated society as a machine that he would "tweak the knobs to try to optimize" - we all know how that turned out) And Coolidge, a lawyer, was arguably the "least bad" president of the 20th c (didn't invade any countries, re-desegreated the federal workforce).
- c1ccccc1 6y ago
  Just to clarify for those reading this, Wilson studied political science and history, and went to law school. He wasn't a "STEM" professor.
  - dnautics 6y ago
    Parent comment had three parts. First part was about intelligence in general, second part drew attention to stem in particular, third part was about lawyers and businessmen. I structured my response with deliberate parallelism.

The CCP is terrible but there’s no question intellectually they outclass the United States’ geriatric leadership. Much more STEM too. We love our lawyers and business folk, don’t we?

bigbubba 6y ago

I prefer being ruled by incompetent fuckwit lawyers if the alternative is competent genocidal engineers.

justicezyx 6y ago
It's not that Indians were magically disappearing on earth... I don't think your statement is baseless. But you are being emotional and completely dodges the OP's intention: I.e. US leadership have not been as competent in most major domestic areas as Chinese counterpart. BTW: US leadership probably caused more civilian death international than Chinese government's domestic figure. Probably 2-3 orders of magnitude more. Iraq Syria etc. Of course, in the name of spreading democracy and universal human rights. I have no doubt on the sincerity. I just don't think the leadership has the competence to carry out those goals.
- croissants 6y ago
  > BTW: US leadership probably caused more civilian death international than Chinese government's domestic figure. Probably 2-3 orders of magnitude more. Iraq Syria etc. Going off the conservative estimates, the CCP-led Great Leap Forward killed over 10 million people. 2-3 orders of magnitude more than that is 1-10 billion.
  - justicezyx 6y ago
    I implied to be recent history. Mostly within 20 years. Let's extend to 2 regimes history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas#:~:text=One%20of%20these%20factors%20was,of%20overall%20native%20population%20decline https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_indige.... Wow, US and China are among the most evil government in human history! What a surprise... Give me a break, my lad. I am not talking about how morally superior CCP is to US government. Look at the havoc raged by the US leadership. I am fking weeping every night regretting the stupid 12 years I spend at this damn declining country. Cannot we stop the bittering and focus on improving and positive thinking... I never defend CCP in any degree beyond showing the lack of leadership from US. Read my comments, judge for yourself. I don't think a US born person can understand the profound disappointment I am experiencing everyday now. I am comparing US to CCP, that's not what I setup to learn 12 years ago coming to this country...
  - yeetman21 6y ago
    If you want to go back you can count all the natives and slaves killed by the US, going off the conservative estimates the US killed over 100 million people. HOWEVER. The US back then is not the US right now. And the CCP back then is not the CCP right now, so both arguments are quite foolish.
  - WaxProlix 6y ago
    I guess the real question if you want to be scientific-ish about it is, how many more died in the 1959-61 famine than in previous, similar ones? The Chinese region has a rich history of famine going back for thousands of years, so it shouldn't be too hard to do a bit of math. What's interesting is that after this period, there are no more famines (though food scarcity I think is still an issue). So China did something right in its industrialization. Edit to quote from a slate article that was on top of a search: > Over the past 2,000 years, China has suffered almost one famine per year. Severe drought killed as many as 13 million Chinese in the two-year famine beginning in 1876. The 1927 famine killed as many as 6 million. There were significant famines in 1929, 1939, and 1942. from https://slate.com/technology/2014/04/why-does-china-not-have-famines-anymore-capitalist-and-socialist-reforms.html https://slate.com/technology/2014/04/why-does-china-not-have...
adultSwim 6y ago
US has never confronted it's foundations of genocide and slavery
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- chrisco255 6y ago
  Yeah we fought a big war over it 160 years ago. 600,000 people died.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Indeed, but even then the US never recognized officially that it perpetrated genocide, and US bills still have the faces of slave holders and slave rapists on them. I guess that for some definitions of confronting that does qualify as "not confronting".
  - oh_sigh 6y ago
    I think it's kinda cute (but mostly sickening) that far left ideologues and far right ideologues can at least come together and agree that the Civil War was not actually about slavery (despite every fact contradicting that view).
    - chrisco255 6y ago
      I think the reasons for the elites who initiated the war and the people who actually fought the war were quite different, but that is so often the case in world history.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      I don't know anyone on the left that thinks that the Civil War wasn't about slavery. That doesn't mean that they think that it wasn't just about slavery - because it wasn't just about slavery, and even less just about the moral issues of slavery. When people say that the US hasn't confronted its legacy of slavery and genocide, they mean things like personality cults of people that owned slaves, institutional racism - that persisted a hundred years after the civil war, not recognizing that there was a genocide of natives, and so on. It's perfectly consistent to say that the Civil War was mainly about slavery (and, of course, also for economic reasons as an extension of that) and to say that the US still hasn't fully confronted its origins of slavery. Also, there is still a lot of people in the US that are sympathetic to the Confederacy, even amongst the government - the Civil War didn't even go all the way.

HenryKissinger 6y ago

Shou'en Li's answer to this Quora query[1] is insightful. > In China, if you want to be a leader, you have to start from the grassroots level to accumulate rich government work experiences after ascending nine levels of posts (section chief, deputy division chief, division chief, deputy director of general office, director of general office, vice-minister, minister, deputy-state leader, state leader). With such experiences, you may have the opportunity to become one of the candidates for leadership. [1] https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-Communist-Party-of-China-select-and-groom-a-person-to-be-the-next-paramount-leader https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-Communist-Party-of-China-...

oh_sigh 6y ago
That sounds like the system's ideal - but is that how most people become, say, deputy state leaders? Or can you pay your way in, advance through nepotism, or blackmailing, or mutual corruption, etc?
- eunos 6y ago
  One reason why Chinese bureaucrats are constantly rotated and not allowed to serve in their homeland is to prevent those.

itsthetruth 6y ago

2 social credits have been added to your account

bassman9000 6y ago

How is it a good thing to have more efficient dictators?

burnte 6y ago
China isn't ignoring climate change, understands geopolitics, learns from it's mistakes, etc. The US is falling behind in all of those areas.
- ghostcluster 6y ago
  China isn't ignoring climate change in their rhetoric. What they are actually doing is building record amounts of coal power plants, right now, this year. https://www.wired.com/story/china-is-still-building-an-insane-number-of-new-coal-plants/ https://www.wired.com/story/china-is-still-building-an-insan... The US' greenhouse emissions peaked years ago and have been in steady decline. China is the #1 emitter, #1 coal consumer, and building record amounts of new coal domestically. And not just in China, but all over the developing world through their Belt and Road program.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    This is true, however these plants are being used quite rarely and are instead base load. Chinese emissions per capita and per dollar are falling, and total emissions seem to have plateaued, so I'm not sure that really qualifies as ignoring it. Same in the developing world, while some kinds of fossil fuels for baseload generation is necessary so long as nuclear is taboo, they are on track to never even get close to the level of emissions per capita of the US, and indeed plateau in total emissions soon. Of course, you can make the argument that this isn't enough. That being said, for places stricken by poverty, it's certainly a hell of a lot more effort than the US that doesn't even deign join the Paris Climate Agreements.
    - pueblito 6y ago
      > This is true, however these plants are being used quite rarely Hence the need for more of them at record pace? Ridiculous

mkj 6y ago

Where's the mention of more STEM? (I was hoping it might have some details, but can't see it)

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

dnautics 6y ago

Let's not forget that Wilson was a Princeton Professor and Hoover was an engineer. (Wilson appointed KKK members to his cabinet, screened a white supremacist film in the white house, invaded and occupied the soviet union for two years; hoover treated society as a machine that he would "tweak the knobs to try to optimize" - we all know how that turned out) And Coolidge, a lawyer, was arguably the "least bad" president of the 20th c (didn't invade any countries, re-desegreated the federal workforce).

c1ccccc1 6y ago
Just to clarify for those reading this, Wilson studied political science and history, and went to law school. He wasn't a "STEM" professor.
- dnautics 6y ago
  Parent comment had three parts. First part was about intelligence in general, second part drew attention to stem in particular, third part was about lawyers and businessmen. I structured my response with deliberate parallelism.