The keptocrats running China have repeatedly rejected rule of law, self-government, and human rights. Sooner or later, they will meet the same fate as the Soviet Union. China may have a worse fate if they don't manage conflict with their neighbors.
I believe that the ability to look honestly at your own failings gives you the opportunity to learn from them, and makes you stronger, both individually, and as a community and nation.
It's almost impossible for someone who is 'strong' in the sense used in this article, no matter how unique and noble of character, to maintain that honesty and dedication to continuously improve. Ultimately it becomes difficult for them even to know what the truth is, as people around them become more and more unprepared to share it with them, and the whole structure stultifies.
Putting all the faults and failings and divisions and bickering out in the open may seem weak, but it can lead to a kind of dynamic strength and robustness that is not available to the authoritarian.
The cartoon at the top of this article (squinty eyes, fatty short figure) makes me uncomfortable, as it edges pretty close to old racist depictions of Asians and Blacks from half a century ago.
That said, the article itself takes a negative and biased approach to evaluating China's government. China's system seeks, and achieves, representation of its people through a variation of a social contract that has lasted - and been updated and modernized - through thousands of years.
China's current Communist Party is measured against specific outcomes, the livelihoods, outlooks, and possibilities of the people of China, which have never looked better (the next century has been dubbed by historians the "Chinese Century" based on the demographic, financial, cultural, and technological success of China: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Century). That same party is measured against corruption, and recent efforts in the country to excise grift and nepotism have given its government new efficiency, purpose and effectivity.
Old Western power centers (Europe pre-WWII and America post-) may have some anxiety about the the relative loss of leadership that global scandals, lost legitimacy, financial crashes, and systemic corruption have wrought in recent years. Its with this anxiety that I find articles like this written: China is, and has been, doing something right, and the West needs to look at its own failings and correct them to succeed and keep pace with 21st century dynamism.
More propaganda from vested interests who thrive where human rights and rule of law are absent. If you want to see the Chinese future, look at the Soviet Union, Venezuela, and even Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Are there any reasonable people here on HN who are willing to actually trade their lives to live as a Uighur in China or a Saudi female? Or any sort of Venezuelan? Have fun with your life without representative govetnment or respect for individual rights.
I mean, I wouldn't trade my life for almost any other life - even a life of greater wealth and power.
But to take the point you've made and work through its conclusions: Hacker News skews heavily privileged male high-income engineer, and likely wouldn't trade their lives to live as an _American_ female, much less a Detroiter, Hispanic laborer, or American prison inmate.
Living in the world's sole superpower (most of HN) has, of course, its own advantages that we don't need to enumerate.
> Are there any reasonable people here on HN who are willing to actually trade their lives to live as a Uighur in China or a Saudi female? Or any sort of Venezuelan?
8 comments
[ 187 ms ] story [ 642 ms ] threadIt's almost impossible for someone who is 'strong' in the sense used in this article, no matter how unique and noble of character, to maintain that honesty and dedication to continuously improve. Ultimately it becomes difficult for them even to know what the truth is, as people around them become more and more unprepared to share it with them, and the whole structure stultifies.
Putting all the faults and failings and divisions and bickering out in the open may seem weak, but it can lead to a kind of dynamic strength and robustness that is not available to the authoritarian.
That said, the article itself takes a negative and biased approach to evaluating China's government. China's system seeks, and achieves, representation of its people through a variation of a social contract that has lasted - and been updated and modernized - through thousands of years.
China's current Communist Party is measured against specific outcomes, the livelihoods, outlooks, and possibilities of the people of China, which have never looked better (the next century has been dubbed by historians the "Chinese Century" based on the demographic, financial, cultural, and technological success of China: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Century). That same party is measured against corruption, and recent efforts in the country to excise grift and nepotism have given its government new efficiency, purpose and effectivity.
Old Western power centers (Europe pre-WWII and America post-) may have some anxiety about the the relative loss of leadership that global scandals, lost legitimacy, financial crashes, and systemic corruption have wrought in recent years. Its with this anxiety that I find articles like this written: China is, and has been, doing something right, and the West needs to look at its own failings and correct them to succeed and keep pace with 21st century dynamism.
Are there any reasonable people here on HN who are willing to actually trade their lives to live as a Uighur in China or a Saudi female? Or any sort of Venezuelan? Have fun with your life without representative govetnment or respect for individual rights.
But to take the point you've made and work through its conclusions: Hacker News skews heavily privileged male high-income engineer, and likely wouldn't trade their lives to live as an _American_ female, much less a Detroiter, Hispanic laborer, or American prison inmate.
Living in the world's sole superpower (most of HN) has, of course, its own advantages that we don't need to enumerate.
Chinese future looks a lot brighter according to most political forecasters, economists, etc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Century
Or a poor US citizen?