5 ms·

If we did so, what if China picked up the slack? I'm not sure that would be a net win for humanity.

danbruc 5y ago
China will become the most powerful nation eventually if they do not accidentally prevent themselves from doing so. An attempt to stay ahead of China is likely a losing battle so get over this rivalry and focus on cooperation.
- gherkinnn 5y ago
  Now that’s a defeatist attitude if ever I saw one. And a silly one too. There is no cooperation. Only servitude.
  - rscho 5y ago
    Which of course, is completely different from what you get with the US in the lead...
    - SkyMarshal 5y ago
      At least with the US in the lead you can freely criticize the US on the Internet, or even in person, without being censored, disappeared, jailed, and/or "re-educated". Try criticizing the CCP on a Chinese message board, or in person, and see what happens. Is that really the world you want to live in?
      - rscho 5y ago
        The infractions necessary for being "disappeared" or re-educated are different in the US, yes. Yet I could very easily say things on this very site that would lead me straight to prison in my own country, and I owe it directly to US cultural influence because my country does not have those issues for which I'd go to prison. Is that really better? TBH I'm not sure. What's sure is that red is dead, but imperialism is alive and kicking.
    - gherkinnn 5y ago
      The US leaves a documented trail of blood. And yet, the US never went to any length of stopping the head of state being compared to Winnie the Poo. In fact, the mere fact that the US fuckery is so well documented is quite telling. Remember “tank man” not returning any results on Bing just a few weeks back?
  - danbruc 5y ago
    Defeatist. As if there is a game to be won. Do you really believe that humanity will stay divided into states with vastly different lifestyles forever? And even if you believe this, do you have any reason to believe that the most powerful country would be any other than the largest [1] one? [1] Largest here does not imply area, I am more thinking of a combination of factors including area and natural resources which are not affected by technological progress.
  - caycep 5y ago
    I think the better way to view it amongst policymakers on both sides are: do you make your policy decisions to create an antagonistic relationship like US vs. USSR? Or a cooperative one like US-UK or US-Japan? For whatever reasons (and tbh a lot of it is perhaps a massive CCP inferiority complex and short sightedness, vs. US short sightedness), current policymakers have chosen to undergo an antagonistic side. But one can argue the US-China relationship initiated between Nixon/Deng was one of the most mutually beneficial relationships, economically speaking, over the past 3-4 decades, far outpacing US-UK...until the Xi-faction and the Trumpers killed it off...
- edgyquant 5y ago
  This is just not true. China has a range of problems ahead of it that freer (and less populous) nations do not.
  - danbruc 5y ago
    What would China stop from becoming freer if this becomes the limiting factor? Assuming country X has figured out the best way to run a country for whatever you mean with best, at least in principle nothing stops China from doing the same thing. And it is still simply larger. Unsurmountable scaling issues? Does not sound likely to me. Large cultural change required? Maybe hard to do over years or a few decades but again I see not why you would not eventually go through a beneficial cultural change over generations. But this is also why I added the qualification of China not standing in its own way, they have certainly the power to cause their own downfall, cause a [civil] war for example. But even then, unless the country gets fractured into many small countries, what would prevent them raising from the ruins stronger?
    - T-A 5y ago
      https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/china-s-dilemma-growing-old-before-it-becomes-rich-and-powerful-20210408-p57hmx.html https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/china-s-dilemma-...
      - contingencies 5y ago
        In addition to the aging population problem mentioned in the article, a huge economic bubble based on domestic real estate investment funded by poorly secured loans has burst, the effects of which are only beginning to be felt. All across the country skyscrapers stand half built, monuments to better days. Simultaneously, Western supply chains are either actively or passively (due to shipping issues associated with COVID) seeking diversification, and Chinese labour is now considered too expensive for a large swathe of manufacturing. Traditional industries such as textiles, shoes and so forth are all moving out to Vietnam/Bangladesh/Myanmar/etc. The accelerating affects of automation further compound this scenario. Further, the local education system and HR market are undeveloped for higher level skills, and core aspects of the domestic business environment create substantial inefficiency (financial regulation and practice, commercial law enforcement, etc.). That said, I still find China to have many benefits as a business environment, and I will never work for military of any country on principle.
- sremani 5y ago
  China ascend to Power is hardly fiat accompli, and on top of it their food insecurity and disputes with 17 neighbors is only going to compel them to focus inward. Yes, all those Africa and BRI adventures are already turning bitter for host nations. US and USSR won the WW2 - you get power by winning wars and winning decisively. If China wrests Taiwan, we can then seriously talk about their contention until then its just talk.
  - pphysch 5y ago
    China went from a colonial backwater to the #1 real economy in the world, without endless foreign wars. Recent history irrefutably disproves your "might is right" framework.
    - petre 5y ago
      It had a bit of help with US being its #1 market and aiding technology transfer by moving all production offshore.
    - Apocryphon 5y ago
      China was only a colonial backwater during the time centered around the "century of humiliation." It was an unchallenged sprawling empire for millennia. This is just reversion to the mean.
      - pphysch 5y ago
        It is fundamentally an issue of separatism, and associated violent extremism/terrorism. The idea that it is some kind of "race war" is a pure fantasy of race realist Westerners.
    - sremani 5y ago
      There is a reason why USD is the world reserve currency. How much trade is done using your '#1 real economy currency'. Export-Oriented economies have a lot of problems and that will be evident as the Global growth is coming to stagnation this decade. Power is power - that is why every country maintains a military, even the small ones. The recent history is 'stabler' than past because of Bretonwoods and various maritime security guarantees. That did not happen in vacuum and China is not the architect of the system.
- onepointsixC 5y ago
  China's idea of cooperation is the Chinese-Pakistani relationship in which the PM of Pakistan won't even speak up about human rights of Uighurs. As per Document No. 9, the existence of free liberal societies is an existential threat to the CCP and they will act to export their totalitarianism to extinguish them. The only way you give up rivalry with a revisionist expansionist ethnostate is by surrendering. No thanks.
  - pphysch 5y ago
    Imran Khan won't "speak up" about Xinjiang's separatism issues just like he won't "speak up" about the "Great Replacement" or other ideological nonsense that has literally nothing to do with the sovereign nation of Pakistan.
    - onepointsixC 5y ago
      Except he speaks up about Islamophobia in the west all the time. His inability to speak to the genocide right across his border is not ideological nonsense, and calling it merely an issue of separatism is white washing.
      - pphysch 5y ago
        International Islamophobia is quite relevant to a large Islamic nation. Foreign separatism crises are not.
  - danbruc 5y ago
    As per Document No. 9, the existence of free liberal societies is an existential threat to the CCP and they will act to export their totalitarianism to extinguish them. I was not aware of this document and just read the Wikipedia article and skimmed a translation. Yes, it describes the promotion of a number of western values as threats but I can not find where it says anything about extinguishing them, only how to limit their influence in the country itself, for example by blocking certain content in China.

China will become the most powerful nation eventually if they do not accidentally prevent themselves from doing so. An attempt to stay ahead of China is likely a losing battle so get over this rivalry and focus on cooperation.

gherkinnn 5y ago
Now that’s a defeatist attitude if ever I saw one. And a silly one too. There is no cooperation. Only servitude.
- rscho 5y ago
  Which of course, is completely different from what you get with the US in the lead...
  - SkyMarshal 5y ago
    At least with the US in the lead you can freely criticize the US on the Internet, or even in person, without being censored, disappeared, jailed, and/or "re-educated". Try criticizing the CCP on a Chinese message board, or in person, and see what happens. Is that really the world you want to live in?
    - rscho 5y ago
      The infractions necessary for being "disappeared" or re-educated are different in the US, yes. Yet I could very easily say things on this very site that would lead me straight to prison in my own country, and I owe it directly to US cultural influence because my country does not have those issues for which I'd go to prison. Is that really better? TBH I'm not sure. What's sure is that red is dead, but imperialism is alive and kicking.
  - gherkinnn 5y ago
    The US leaves a documented trail of blood. And yet, the US never went to any length of stopping the head of state being compared to Winnie the Poo. In fact, the mere fact that the US fuckery is so well documented is quite telling. Remember “tank man” not returning any results on Bing just a few weeks back?
- danbruc 5y ago
  Defeatist. As if there is a game to be won. Do you really believe that humanity will stay divided into states with vastly different lifestyles forever? And even if you believe this, do you have any reason to believe that the most powerful country would be any other than the largest [1] one? [1] Largest here does not imply area, I am more thinking of a combination of factors including area and natural resources which are not affected by technological progress.
- caycep 5y ago
  I think the better way to view it amongst policymakers on both sides are: do you make your policy decisions to create an antagonistic relationship like US vs. USSR? Or a cooperative one like US-UK or US-Japan? For whatever reasons (and tbh a lot of it is perhaps a massive CCP inferiority complex and short sightedness, vs. US short sightedness), current policymakers have chosen to undergo an antagonistic side. But one can argue the US-China relationship initiated between Nixon/Deng was one of the most mutually beneficial relationships, economically speaking, over the past 3-4 decades, far outpacing US-UK...until the Xi-faction and the Trumpers killed it off...
edgyquant 5y ago
This is just not true. China has a range of problems ahead of it that freer (and less populous) nations do not.
- danbruc 5y ago
  What would China stop from becoming freer if this becomes the limiting factor? Assuming country X has figured out the best way to run a country for whatever you mean with best, at least in principle nothing stops China from doing the same thing. And it is still simply larger. Unsurmountable scaling issues? Does not sound likely to me. Large cultural change required? Maybe hard to do over years or a few decades but again I see not why you would not eventually go through a beneficial cultural change over generations. But this is also why I added the qualification of China not standing in its own way, they have certainly the power to cause their own downfall, cause a [civil] war for example. But even then, unless the country gets fractured into many small countries, what would prevent them raising from the ruins stronger?
  - T-A 5y ago
    https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/china-s-dilemma-growing-old-before-it-becomes-rich-and-powerful-20210408-p57hmx.html https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/china-s-dilemma-...
    - contingencies 5y ago
      In addition to the aging population problem mentioned in the article, a huge economic bubble based on domestic real estate investment funded by poorly secured loans has burst, the effects of which are only beginning to be felt. All across the country skyscrapers stand half built, monuments to better days. Simultaneously, Western supply chains are either actively or passively (due to shipping issues associated with COVID) seeking diversification, and Chinese labour is now considered too expensive for a large swathe of manufacturing. Traditional industries such as textiles, shoes and so forth are all moving out to Vietnam/Bangladesh/Myanmar/etc. The accelerating affects of automation further compound this scenario. Further, the local education system and HR market are undeveloped for higher level skills, and core aspects of the domestic business environment create substantial inefficiency (financial regulation and practice, commercial law enforcement, etc.). That said, I still find China to have many benefits as a business environment, and I will never work for military of any country on principle.
sremani 5y ago
China ascend to Power is hardly fiat accompli, and on top of it their food insecurity and disputes with 17 neighbors is only going to compel them to focus inward. Yes, all those Africa and BRI adventures are already turning bitter for host nations. US and USSR won the WW2 - you get power by winning wars and winning decisively. If China wrests Taiwan, we can then seriously talk about their contention until then its just talk.
- pphysch 5y ago
  China went from a colonial backwater to the #1 real economy in the world, without endless foreign wars. Recent history irrefutably disproves your "might is right" framework.
  - petre 5y ago
    It had a bit of help with US being its #1 market and aiding technology transfer by moving all production offshore.
  - Apocryphon 5y ago
    China was only a colonial backwater during the time centered around the "century of humiliation." It was an unchallenged sprawling empire for millennia. This is just reversion to the mean.
    - pphysch 5y ago
      It is fundamentally an issue of separatism, and associated violent extremism/terrorism. The idea that it is some kind of "race war" is a pure fantasy of race realist Westerners.
  - sremani 5y ago
    There is a reason why USD is the world reserve currency. How much trade is done using your '#1 real economy currency'. Export-Oriented economies have a lot of problems and that will be evident as the Global growth is coming to stagnation this decade. Power is power - that is why every country maintains a military, even the small ones. The recent history is 'stabler' than past because of Bretonwoods and various maritime security guarantees. That did not happen in vacuum and China is not the architect of the system.
onepointsixC 5y ago
China's idea of cooperation is the Chinese-Pakistani relationship in which the PM of Pakistan won't even speak up about human rights of Uighurs. As per Document No. 9, the existence of free liberal societies is an existential threat to the CCP and they will act to export their totalitarianism to extinguish them. The only way you give up rivalry with a revisionist expansionist ethnostate is by surrendering. No thanks.
- pphysch 5y ago
  Imran Khan won't "speak up" about Xinjiang's separatism issues just like he won't "speak up" about the "Great Replacement" or other ideological nonsense that has literally nothing to do with the sovereign nation of Pakistan.
  - onepointsixC 5y ago
    Except he speaks up about Islamophobia in the west all the time. His inability to speak to the genocide right across his border is not ideological nonsense, and calling it merely an issue of separatism is white washing.
    - pphysch 5y ago
      International Islamophobia is quite relevant to a large Islamic nation. Foreign separatism crises are not.
- danbruc 5y ago
  As per Document No. 9, the existence of free liberal societies is an existential threat to the CCP and they will act to export their totalitarianism to extinguish them. I was not aware of this document and just read the Wikipedia article and skimmed a translation. Yes, it describes the promotion of a number of western values as threats but I can not find where it says anything about extinguishing them, only how to limit their influence in the country itself, for example by blocking certain content in China.