4 ms·

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.

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.