4 ms·

A bad party that is improving is still bad.

by jdc 6y ago

FooBarWidget 6y ago
So what are the better choices? Do you think that if someone were to liquidate the CCP top members, plunging the country into chaos, that the Chinese would be better off? It's easy to say "X is bad" when you don't have to care about practical consequences, like whether there are better alternatives, why we're in a suboptimal situation in the first place, and how to get to a better place.
- baybal2 6y ago
  > Do you think that if someone were to liquidate the CCP top members, plunging the country into chaos, that the Chinese would be better off? Yes, very much so. Your presumption is that if CPCs rule, whose rule is a chaos itself, disappears, there will be more chaos? We are talking about immediate ruinous effects for the majority of Chinese every day communists stay in power. The moment it stops, lawless land repossessions instantaneously stop, house confiscations stop, fake cases, and expropriations against entrepreneurs stop. > It's easy to say "X is bad" when you don't have to care about practical consequences Practical consequences of letting communists to stay in power are millions left destitute every year after their land, property, and businesses are stolen.
em500 6y ago
That's tautologically true of course. What is far less clear cut is whether it's preferable for someone (and their children) to stay in a country with a bad regime that's improving or in one with a good regime that's deteriorating. It depends on many factors (levels of goodness/badness, rate of improvement/deterioration, persistence and stability of trends, how one is personally affected by goodness/badness/improvements/deterioration). To make it more concrete, there are people (granted, overwhelmingly ethnically Had Chinese fluent in the language) who voluntarily choose to reside in China over the US or EU, and I don't think they are irrational about it.

4 ms·

A bad party that is improving is still bad.

by jdc 6y ago

A bad party that is improving is still bad.

FooBarWidget 6y ago
So what are the better choices? Do you think that if someone were to liquidate the CCP top members, plunging the country into chaos, that the Chinese would be better off? It's easy to say "X is bad" when you don't have to care about practical consequences, like whether there are better alternatives, why we're in a suboptimal situation in the first place, and how to get to a better place.
- baybal2 6y ago
  > Do you think that if someone were to liquidate the CCP top members, plunging the country into chaos, that the Chinese would be better off? Yes, very much so. Your presumption is that if CPCs rule, whose rule is a chaos itself, disappears, there will be more chaos? We are talking about immediate ruinous effects for the majority of Chinese every day communists stay in power. The moment it stops, lawless land repossessions instantaneously stop, house confiscations stop, fake cases, and expropriations against entrepreneurs stop. > It's easy to say "X is bad" when you don't have to care about practical consequences Practical consequences of letting communists to stay in power are millions left destitute every year after their land, property, and businesses are stolen.
em500 6y ago
That's tautologically true of course. What is far less clear cut is whether it's preferable for someone (and their children) to stay in a country with a bad regime that's improving or in one with a good regime that's deteriorating. It depends on many factors (levels of goodness/badness, rate of improvement/deterioration, persistence and stability of trends, how one is personally affected by goodness/badness/improvements/deterioration). To make it more concrete, there are people (granted, overwhelmingly ethnically Had Chinese fluent in the language) who voluntarily choose to reside in China over the US or EU, and I don't think they are irrational about it.