4 ms·

Its quite simple. With the advent of globalisation the self-interest of the elites is no longer in alignment with the national interest. They can make money fa

Its quite simple. With the advent of globalisation the self-interest of the elites is no longer in alignment with the national interest. They can make money far more easily by employing Chinese workers, growing Chinese industry, than they do local. And of course, anyone that pushes back against this is (conveniently) a "xenophobic, racist, white supremacist, Trump-voting blah blah blah...".

asplake 5y ago
That last part was both unnecessary and wrong. Globalisation has plenty of opponents on the left too.
- kelnos 5y ago
  I think it's too narrow to talk about it as simply "globalization". Globalization has done some really great things, like lifting millions of people out of poverty. But the US has also failed to keep itself competitive with China, and China has (unfairly, IMO, but I'm of course biased) taken advantage of the US's IP and talent (among other things) in order to increase their global influence and gain leverage over the countries that used to be economically "superior" to China. I think ideology plays a part in why this is "bad", as well. As an American, I wouldn't mind so much if the next growing superpower believed in democratic principles. As much as I'm happy I was born in and grew up in the US, I wouldn't see a problem with a "better US" growing beyond the US in terms of economic and political power. But I'm not particularly comfortable with the idea of an authoritarian country in that position; China already constantly uses its political clout to censor US citizens and businesses, for example. I expect China's power over citizens of other countries, people who will never even set foot in China, to increase over time, and that worries me quite a bit. It often feels like our only hope is that China makes some huge strategic mistakes, or succumbs to unfixable/unknown structural issues.
  - onethought 5y ago
    Did China ever agree to respect “intellectual property”? I ask honestly, it isn’t an obvious concept that you Would expect to exist in all cultures.
    - lumost 5y ago
      This fault lies with the US. Trade and relations normalization was a Cold War strategy to capitalize on the Dino-soviet split and weaken the communist block. Effectively the us threw open the gates on the hypothesis that it would be a Cold War win and that China would eventually liberalize. This problem was well understood by the 90s but the war on terror ultimately blocked any US policy shifts.
Aunche 5y ago
I wouldn't go so far as to call it racism, but I do find it somewhat xenophobic to suggest that it is wrong to outsource you work to other countries. Why is a Chinese worker any less worthy of a job than an American one? $1 in in a developing country goes further than $10 in a developed one. Globalization has granted billions of people access to things we take for granted like electricity and heating.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  We call ourselves “Developed”. It’s already implicitly throwing in the towel - there is nothing more to be done. We’ve already developed. This entire thinking and it’s psyche in our society feels like straight up propaganda. It used to be first-world and third-world. Chinese labor force isn’t going to help defend Taiwan by making tank gadgets for them. Investing in Chinese labor has so many issues. If we didn’t have a rust belt (that led to Trumpism), we would have left a better nation to lead the world and maybe we can think about leveraging world wide labor - but this time with fair conditions and well paid workers. It’s not just US, it is the same in EU and many other G20 nations. Your thinking is appealing to emotional and not rational understanding of the globalism. Truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
  - fumer 5y ago
    > We call ourselves “Developed”. It’s already implicitly throwing in the towel - there is nothing more to be done. We’ve already developed. I don't agree with this take. The terms "developed" and "developing" is just a politically correct term to classify countries based on their industrial base. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country It's use has less to do with developed countries and everything to do with the need to frame the issue as countries working to get where others already are at the moment. > This entire thinking and it’s psyche in our society feels like straight up propaganda. It used to be first-world and third-world. I also don't feel you're right here as well. "Third-world" does not refer to a ranking. It was a classification based on where a nation was with regards to the Cold War. Either they're a NATO and NATO-aligned country, a Warsaw pact and USSR country, or you kept yourself out of the cold war and thus were a part of the third world. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World Development and industrialization and economic output had nothing to do with it.

asplake 5y ago

That last part was both unnecessary and wrong. Globalisation has plenty of opponents on the left too.

kelnos 5y ago
I think it's too narrow to talk about it as simply "globalization". Globalization has done some really great things, like lifting millions of people out of poverty. But the US has also failed to keep itself competitive with China, and China has (unfairly, IMO, but I'm of course biased) taken advantage of the US's IP and talent (among other things) in order to increase their global influence and gain leverage over the countries that used to be economically "superior" to China. I think ideology plays a part in why this is "bad", as well. As an American, I wouldn't mind so much if the next growing superpower believed in democratic principles. As much as I'm happy I was born in and grew up in the US, I wouldn't see a problem with a "better US" growing beyond the US in terms of economic and political power. But I'm not particularly comfortable with the idea of an authoritarian country in that position; China already constantly uses its political clout to censor US citizens and businesses, for example. I expect China's power over citizens of other countries, people who will never even set foot in China, to increase over time, and that worries me quite a bit. It often feels like our only hope is that China makes some huge strategic mistakes, or succumbs to unfixable/unknown structural issues.
- onethought 5y ago
  Did China ever agree to respect “intellectual property”? I ask honestly, it isn’t an obvious concept that you Would expect to exist in all cultures.
  - lumost 5y ago
    This fault lies with the US. Trade and relations normalization was a Cold War strategy to capitalize on the Dino-soviet split and weaken the communist block. Effectively the us threw open the gates on the hypothesis that it would be a Cold War win and that China would eventually liberalize. This problem was well understood by the 90s but the war on terror ultimately blocked any US policy shifts.

Aunche 5y ago

I wouldn't go so far as to call it racism, but I do find it somewhat xenophobic to suggest that it is wrong to outsource you work to other countries. Why is a Chinese worker any less worthy of a job than an American one? $1 in in a developing country goes further than $10 in a developed one. Globalization has granted billions of people access to things we take for granted like electricity and heating.

systemvoltage 5y ago
We call ourselves “Developed”. It’s already implicitly throwing in the towel - there is nothing more to be done. We’ve already developed. This entire thinking and it’s psyche in our society feels like straight up propaganda. It used to be first-world and third-world. Chinese labor force isn’t going to help defend Taiwan by making tank gadgets for them. Investing in Chinese labor has so many issues. If we didn’t have a rust belt (that led to Trumpism), we would have left a better nation to lead the world and maybe we can think about leveraging world wide labor - but this time with fair conditions and well paid workers. It’s not just US, it is the same in EU and many other G20 nations. Your thinking is appealing to emotional and not rational understanding of the globalism. Truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
- fumer 5y ago
  > We call ourselves “Developed”. It’s already implicitly throwing in the towel - there is nothing more to be done. We’ve already developed. I don't agree with this take. The terms "developed" and "developing" is just a politically correct term to classify countries based on their industrial base. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country It's use has less to do with developed countries and everything to do with the need to frame the issue as countries working to get where others already are at the moment. > This entire thinking and it’s psyche in our society feels like straight up propaganda. It used to be first-world and third-world. I also don't feel you're right here as well. "Third-world" does not refer to a ranking. It was a classification based on where a nation was with regards to the Cold War. Either they're a NATO and NATO-aligned country, a Warsaw pact and USSR country, or you kept yourself out of the cold war and thus were a part of the third world. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World Development and industrialization and economic output had nothing to do with it.