4 ms·
> more capitalist than the US in many ways, particularly with regards to healthy competition. I'd argue that the US and Europe are bad benchmarks, given the en
by ethbr1 2mo ago
> more capitalist than the US in many ways, particularly with regards to healthy competition.
I'd argue that the US and Europe are bad benchmarks, given the entrenched quasi-monopolies the governments refuse to break up.
But we'll see how that goes for China.
It's still early days for their capitalistic ambitions, and tensions between party and corporations are starting to show (Jack Ma et al.).
Personally, I think the more destructive moment is going to be after they have large national champions competing globally. Is the CCP going to have the discipline to let an Alibaba, BYD, or SAIC be supplanted, if an external or internal more efficient competitor starts growing? Or will they become too big to fail and intertwine with government?
- somenameforme 2mo agoIn general I'd agree with all of this. I think the biggest challenge they're going to face is that Xi Jinping isn't immortal. The nature of a dictatorship is such that benevolent and skilled leadership can achieve amazing things, but incompetent leadership can completely destroy a society. And relying on good leadership to choose good successors is rife with precedent of failure. By contrast in the US whether we have a vegetable or a clown in the driver seat, the system remains relatively more stable. But that also means that even if somehow we managed to find a skilled and benevolent leader, the amount of good he'd be able to really do is just as limited as the amount of harm the aforementioned can do.