4 ms·
Haha, you're not wrong. Though I would argue that the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is not that Ma was being calculating and strategic, but that
by SkyMarshal 4y ago
Haha, you're not wrong.
Though I would argue that the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is not that Ma was being calculating and strategic, but that he just got cocky and said something dumb in the moment. He let all the global feting of his rise from schoolteacher to China's richest man go to his head, made an all-too-human mistake, and said something inadvisable.
He may even have been trying to defend the CCP in that moment, trying to communicate to US audiences that the CCP doesn't need to be feared because it's not scary, and thus he himself didn't fear it. But Xi and the powers that be interpreted it differently, and disappeared him. Which is always a risk in that system, but not in liberal democracies.
- kdmccormick 4y agoFair enough! There are certainly other recent examples of billionaires getting themselves in trouble by saying too much....
- SkyMarshal 4y agoI know right. A lot of that going around these days. Maybe something in their bottled water.
- factormeta 4y ago>Which is always a risk in that system, but not in liberal democracies. No, you just get arrested by the authorities, and later committed suicide before the trial.