6 ms·

To play a bit of devil’s advocate, “beating China at Not-Being-A-Repressive-Dystopia” requires ensuring China’s influence in the world is minimized or contained

by sidlls 5y ago

To play a bit of devil’s advocate, “beating China at Not-Being-A-Repressive-Dystopia” requires ensuring China’s influence in the world is minimized or contained. It’s hard to beat them if they take over, in other words. (Note that this also requires defeating the same kinds of forces domestically.)

kbenson 5y ago
But isn't that begging the question? Couldn't we just as easily say "beating China at not starting the zombie apocalypse" requires ensuring China doesn't invest in weird chemical experimentation with death and voodoo? We're taking as a given that China's end state is a repressive dystopia, just as we would have to take as a given that China would start a zombie apocalypse. The only difference in one is seen as patently absurd by all people, and the other is only seen that way by some.
- themacguffinman 5y ago
  Considering that China's current state is a repressive dystopia, it's quite hard to compare the fairly mundane prediction that this will continue to a claim about zombies that contradicts available scientific evidence. I feel like I'm going crazy seeing people make absurd comparisons like this. Do you honestly not see the difference between an inference based on China's current behavior and ... zombies? Are you playing at some broader rhetorical point or do you literally think both claims are equally absurd?
  - kbenson 5y ago
    > Considering that China's current state is a repressive dystopia Is it? I know that's how it's presented, and it's easy to assume that presentation is accurate, but do most the people living there see it that way? I don't doubt it's a repressive dystopia for those that are repressed, and that's horrible, but does that make it a repressive dystopia overall? Because I'm pretty sure there's quite a number of different subgroups I could pick out in the U.S. that would say we live in a repressive dystopia already. > I feel like I'm going crazy seeing people make absurd comparisons like this. It was made absurd on purpose, to not muddy the waters with a comparison to something that people could have actual questions about. > Are you playing at some broader rhetorical point I thought that was obvious with the "begging the question" part, which literally means that something is being used as fact that hasn't been proven. I'm not saying China is great, or better than the U.S. or west or anything. What I am saying is that when people throw around statements that assume China's natural end state, and what they are moving towards right now, is a repressive dystopia, I'm going to want to see some evidence or reasoning to back it up. Otherwise how do I know it's not just "everything I've read in USA Today the last few years leads me to believe that, therefore it must be true"?
    - soco 5y ago
      Of course we can get into a post-modernist post-truth debate, but the facts bring one back to reality: Uighurs, suppression of speech, Hong Kong, military expansion, political influence, the Great Firewall, are all real points making it difficult to keep the discussion on the philosophical level.
      - kbenson 5y ago
        It doesn't even need to be philosophical. Has China gotten more repressive over time, or less repressive? The first step in a discussion about "beating China at Not-Being-A-Repressive-Dystopia" would be determining which way China is trending, and if there was evidence that will continue or reverse (whether that means more or less repressive). The other half is which we "we" (whoever we are, there's an international audience, but it's probably safe to say either the U.S. or the west) are trending? We're unlikely to beat China at that no matter what we do if we only focus on them and not ourselves as well. And to tie it all together, part of not becoming a repressive dystopia ourselves is not trusting the narrative put out about other countries by our government without evidence and looking for reasons why that narrative may be beneficial to put forth other than the truth. Put another way, the first step in protecting your right to question things is to actually question things.
        themacguffinman 5y ago
        Little about this line of conversation strikes me as a coherent point about China's emergence as a repressive dystopian global power. Starting from a dismissive point that China's dystopianism is somehow absurd, two goalpost-moving comments later we've arrived at the uninsightful point that the future is uncertain and we should ask questions. Assuming charitably that you perhaps just didn't read some comments fully, "Has China gotten more repressive over time, or less repressive?" has fairly obvious answers involving "Uighurs, suppression of speech, Hong Kong, military expansion, political influence, the Great Firewall" that didn't exist before and that you've not addressed at all. Thanks for reminding me that I can actually question things. One critical component of questioning things is that you look at available information and address questions to what we think we know, not dismiss available information and say we shouldn't trust everything we read. With that in mind, what questions do you have about available information about China's repressive dystopia?
- skrebbel 5y ago
  Given that China has pretty much been a repressive dystopia forever, it's not weird to assume that that's their end state (though I'm confused about what "end" you're referring to).
  - kbenson 5y ago
    > Given that China has pretty much been a repressive dystopia forever You mean communist China, or the China that existed prior to that? The time when the British had influence (control?), or prior to that? How long does this "forever" go back, and what makes you think they prior periods where repressive dystopias? > it's not weird to assume that that's their end state We're talking about a country that went through a violent rebellion just over seventy years ago, changing the method of government and economic system entirely in the process. And in the last few decades, they've made sweeping changes to the economic model again to the point where in some places it's extremely capitalistic where it was entirely communism based. > (though I'm confused about what "end" you're referring to). I guess it's decided the same way you decide who "beat" the other in not being a repressive dystopia. You can't have a winner without an end, so however people thought that meant. I don't see why my response should have any other rules than the premise it's responding to.
8note 5y ago
If that containment involves forcing other countries to do your bidding, all you're doing is beating china at being a repressive dystopia
- sidlls 5y ago
  There’s definitely a thin line there. Bluntly, if other countries don’t oppose China they’re part of the problem and I have absolutely no qualms with working around them or forcing compliance if required. We should certainly tread carefully, though.

by sidlls 5y ago

kbenson 5y ago

But isn't that begging the question? Couldn't we just as easily say "beating China at not starting the zombie apocalypse" requires ensuring China doesn't invest in weird chemical experimentation with death and voodoo? We're taking as a given that China's end state is a repressive dystopia, just as we would have to take as a given that China would start a zombie apocalypse. The only difference in one is seen as patently absurd by all people, and the other is only seen that way by some.

themacguffinman 5y ago
Considering that China's current state is a repressive dystopia, it's quite hard to compare the fairly mundane prediction that this will continue to a claim about zombies that contradicts available scientific evidence. I feel like I'm going crazy seeing people make absurd comparisons like this. Do you honestly not see the difference between an inference based on China's current behavior and ... zombies? Are you playing at some broader rhetorical point or do you literally think both claims are equally absurd?
- kbenson 5y ago
  > Considering that China's current state is a repressive dystopia Is it? I know that's how it's presented, and it's easy to assume that presentation is accurate, but do most the people living there see it that way? I don't doubt it's a repressive dystopia for those that are repressed, and that's horrible, but does that make it a repressive dystopia overall? Because I'm pretty sure there's quite a number of different subgroups I could pick out in the U.S. that would say we live in a repressive dystopia already. > I feel like I'm going crazy seeing people make absurd comparisons like this. It was made absurd on purpose, to not muddy the waters with a comparison to something that people could have actual questions about. > Are you playing at some broader rhetorical point I thought that was obvious with the "begging the question" part, which literally means that something is being used as fact that hasn't been proven. I'm not saying China is great, or better than the U.S. or west or anything. What I am saying is that when people throw around statements that assume China's natural end state, and what they are moving towards right now, is a repressive dystopia, I'm going to want to see some evidence or reasoning to back it up. Otherwise how do I know it's not just "everything I've read in USA Today the last few years leads me to believe that, therefore it must be true"?
  - soco 5y ago
    Of course we can get into a post-modernist post-truth debate, but the facts bring one back to reality: Uighurs, suppression of speech, Hong Kong, military expansion, political influence, the Great Firewall, are all real points making it difficult to keep the discussion on the philosophical level.
    - kbenson 5y ago
      It doesn't even need to be philosophical. Has China gotten more repressive over time, or less repressive? The first step in a discussion about "beating China at Not-Being-A-Repressive-Dystopia" would be determining which way China is trending, and if there was evidence that will continue or reverse (whether that means more or less repressive). The other half is which we "we" (whoever we are, there's an international audience, but it's probably safe to say either the U.S. or the west) are trending? We're unlikely to beat China at that no matter what we do if we only focus on them and not ourselves as well. And to tie it all together, part of not becoming a repressive dystopia ourselves is not trusting the narrative put out about other countries by our government without evidence and looking for reasons why that narrative may be beneficial to put forth other than the truth. Put another way, the first step in protecting your right to question things is to actually question things.
      - themacguffinman 5y ago
        Little about this line of conversation strikes me as a coherent point about China's emergence as a repressive dystopian global power. Starting from a dismissive point that China's dystopianism is somehow absurd, two goalpost-moving comments later we've arrived at the uninsightful point that the future is uncertain and we should ask questions. Assuming charitably that you perhaps just didn't read some comments fully, "Has China gotten more repressive over time, or less repressive?" has fairly obvious answers involving "Uighurs, suppression of speech, Hong Kong, military expansion, political influence, the Great Firewall" that didn't exist before and that you've not addressed at all. Thanks for reminding me that I can actually question things. One critical component of questioning things is that you look at available information and address questions to what we think we know, not dismiss available information and say we shouldn't trust everything we read. With that in mind, what questions do you have about available information about China's repressive dystopia?
skrebbel 5y ago
Given that China has pretty much been a repressive dystopia forever, it's not weird to assume that that's their end state (though I'm confused about what "end" you're referring to).
- kbenson 5y ago
  > Given that China has pretty much been a repressive dystopia forever You mean communist China, or the China that existed prior to that? The time when the British had influence (control?), or prior to that? How long does this "forever" go back, and what makes you think they prior periods where repressive dystopias? > it's not weird to assume that that's their end state We're talking about a country that went through a violent rebellion just over seventy years ago, changing the method of government and economic system entirely in the process. And in the last few decades, they've made sweeping changes to the economic model again to the point where in some places it's extremely capitalistic where it was entirely communism based. > (though I'm confused about what "end" you're referring to). I guess it's decided the same way you decide who "beat" the other in not being a repressive dystopia. You can't have a winner without an end, so however people thought that meant. I don't see why my response should have any other rules than the premise it's responding to.

8note 5y ago

If that containment involves forcing other countries to do your bidding, all you're doing is beating china at being a repressive dystopia

sidlls 5y ago
There’s definitely a thin line there. Bluntly, if other countries don’t oppose China they’re part of the problem and I have absolutely no qualms with working around them or forcing compliance if required. We should certainly tread carefully, though.