←back to thread

628 points nodea2345 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
loquor ◴[] No.21126953[source]
This might sound alarmist, but do you think China is the biggest upcoming global problem after climate change? For two reasons:

1. China has a totalitarian ruling system. They intend to realize George Orwell's 1984.

2. Present-day China essentially has no ethics. Take the US in comparison. No matter how perverse the people in power become and even if they do messed up things, the US has some founding morals and principles they do not forget. China, in comparison, systematically rooted out these values since the Great Leap Forward. The happenings at Hong Kong and Xinjiang epitomize that.

I do think China's expansionist policy bodes poorly for all of humanity.

replies(19): >>21127054 #>>21127118 #>>21127223 #>>21127235 #>>21127255 #>>21127399 #>>21127405 #>>21127627 #>>21127650 #>>21127780 #>>21127868 #>>21128006 #>>21128202 #>>21128212 #>>21128261 #>>21128381 #>>21128749 #>>21131179 #>>21131661 #
parliament32 ◴[] No.21127255[source]
I'm usually not a huge fan of the US rolling in and stomping out governments (and installing their own, of course), but this is one faux-dictatorship where it sorely needs to happen. Some actual democracy would be amazing for these people.

With the recent "trade war" and whatnot the stage has been set pretty well for a US intervention.

replies(5): >>21127331 #>>21127448 #>>21127450 #>>21127703 #>>21127961 #
umvi ◴[] No.21127450[source]
You can't force democracy upon people that don't want it and aren't ready for it - it ends disastrously. The US tried to do that in the middle east and failed miserably.

The only success story seems to be South Korea, but I would argue they wanted democracy and fought alongside the US for it.

replies(4): >>21127546 #>>21127576 #>>21127794 #>>21131086 #
parliament32 ◴[] No.21127576[source]
>middle east

I'm not super knowledgeable on the topic, but although the new governments didn't really work out, didn't the mass murders and other atrocities stop with the removal of the old dictator? Those countries may not be "stable" (yet), but is the situation really worse that it was?

replies(1): >>21127935 #
1. luckylion ◴[] No.21127935{3}[source]
> but is the situation really worse that it was?

Was Saddam torturing a limited amount of dissidents and his sons raping and murdering people as they pleased better or worse than ISIS ruling significant parts of the middle east? Was Gaddafi better or worse than Libya in civil war, slave markets being revived etc? Was life under Assad better or worse than civil war in Syria?

Even with bloodthirsty dictators, there's usually a way to make it worse, and NATO/US is pretty good at finding it.