[coliveira]

Agreed, and is interesting to see that the arguments against China are purely ideologic. There is no fact supporting the idea that India would have an advantage over China because of democracy. In fact, people really don't care. As long as the quality of life for people is improving, they don't have any problem with a communist government.

[Mirioron]

>As long as the quality of life for people is improving, they don't have any problem with a communist government.

But they do or at least they will. At some point the next quality of life improvement you want is to be able to openly express ideas and not have somebody decide your life for you without input from you.

[pm90]

That is the dreaded inflection point the CPC wants to avoid. Its interesting to think about what would have happened if the sophisticated system of censorship currently in place would not have been present: if the great firewall didn't exist, would we have already seen riots, revolutions and such?

And that's the horrible conclusion I get from that fact: technology has always been celebrated as tool of liberation, but the CPC has effectively yielded it as a tool of oppression. And if the CPC can do it, why not other countries?

[kbenson]

It's just a tool, like any other tool. Any time someone publicizes a tool as for or against any one thing, it's at most more easily used in that respect for the current time or circumstances.

A bow and arrow can be an effective way to feed your family, or a tool or warfare that changed the outcome of many battles. Advances in textiles can be useful for keeping people warm in winter, or advanced armors with metal sewn inside.

It's not even as simple as a tool shifting from one thing to another either. Bows shifted from a hunting tool, to a tool of warfare, until eventually being relegated to sports equipment for the most part in the modern age. Medieval and Japanese swords used to be the heights of military technology, now they're collector curios.

I'm not sure of any technology that can be used purely for "good" or "bad", or even for one thing at all. The world doesn't often follow absolutes, so we shouldn't fall into the trap of believing absolutes when presented to us. At least not without a lot of justification and the requisite caveats.