[forgot_again]

Escalation between the US and China is inevitable.

China is fundamentally opposed to everything the US and Democracies around the world stand for politically. Likewise, the US and friends are fundamentally opposed to everything China stands for politically. There is no Universe in which two diametrically opposed juggernauts do not come into conflict. Conflict is simply inevitable when the stakes are this high and there is no greater power able to force deescalation.

Either China converts to Democracy or the US and friends adopt Chinese style authoritarianism, or one of the two belligerents collapses either on its own in the manner of the Soviet Union, or by force.

[dang]

Could you please stop taking HN threads further into ideological and nationalistic flamewar? You've been doing it a lot, unfortunately, and it's not what this site is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[modeless]

It's unfortunate that there are flamewars here but this is big news and it has dropped off the front page now. It would be sad if HN was no longer a place where relevant news like this could be discussed, just because it relates to China.

[billfruit]

I doubt any reasonably productive thread will happen with any China-related thread, as they simply seems to be hijacked by people with a very US centric hawkish mentality.

[coliveira]

This is a bunch o ideological BS. China just wants to make money, it doesn't care if the US is running a dictatorship or whatever. It is the US government that is trying to stir up ideological issues because it doesn't see any other way to compete with China. Everything was very fine while China was just supplying Walmart with cheap plastic stuff.

[philliphaydon]

If the CCP just wanted money they wouldn’t need to lie and buy off people and countries for influence.

[nitrobeast]

Xi’s China is abosolutely authoritorian, but that’s not what this conflict is about. This is more like US vs Japan in the 80s, where US wants to secure its influence and power, by keeping others down if necessary.

[jacquesm]

Unlike Japan China has a large (potential) internal market.

[sudosysgen]

Except that China is 7 times japan.

[fermienrico]

By some theory of games, mutual destruction between two opposing parties when they are aware of it simply doesn't happen. In addition, when one party knows that they are weaker than the opposing party, conflict cannot happen as the weaker party never escalates. So, Wars in modern age of information are hard to come by since we have a tremendous amount of surveillance and global recon.

[euix]

It's not about tanks or numbers its national resolve and there each side can vastly misread the other. Each side believes it has greater resolve and is in the right. There is no quantitative way to measure this. The only way to to find out is to fight. Just like two people who size each other up, one may be bigger or faster but the will to prevail and willingness to bare any sacrifice and tolerate pain in order to achieve victory is intangible and cannot be known until it is tested.

I fear the future will be dark in our lifetime.

[forgot_again]

Exactly.

Not only that, but it's so much easier to misread your opponent and the nature of the game when the dynamics are very high dimensional as they are now. It's not just about tanks or militaries anymore. Information warfare and misinformation campaigns, economic warfare, cyber warfare... When all of these potential channels of conflict exist it's very hard to reduce tension in any one domain without tensions rising in another, which in turn fuels an increase in general tension.

[bsder]

> It's not about tanks or numbers its national resolve and there each side can vastly misread the other.

Agreed, but to be perfectly honest, I would be 100% happy to see the US pull all manufacturing out of China and put it back on US soil. The US has gained a temporary price reduction in labor that is now evaporating, gained no access to the Chinese market or influenced China to open further, and has lost the actual ability to manufacture far too many goods.

If that means things will get more automated because of expensive labor, great! Then we should build our own robots, too. If things will get more expensive, then perhaps we will start throwing things away less and start worrying about longevity more.

And, you know, the US has a lot of unemployed people who will need jobs very shortly.

[sudosysgen]

The US doesn't care about China being open. They care about maintaining domination.

The US has no issue replacing democratic governments with dictatorships as long as they keep their influence and power. If China was a democracy, we would see the exact same rhetoric.

[jacquesm]

And who in the US will do the work? It's not just the jobs that went overseas, it's also the factories, the molds, and the skills, on top of that we all apparently want cheap stuff.

[jessaustin]

Just because we elect morons, don't assume all of us are morons. Lots of people could do factory work for the right wages, and lots of capital is floating around that could build new factories. Sure, we're deficient in certain specific skills, but skills can be learned and processes can be designed around their lack.

[jacquesm]

A couple of decades should do it then.

[harpratap]

I don't think it will be such a dramatic shift. It will be more of a middle ground IMO. The mega corporations of US will be regulated by the government just like it happens in China. And China will end up with more rights and transperancy like a democracy.

[bilbo0s]

I think it more likely that china will end up with these facilities in country, along with their typical good old fashioned protectionism freezing others out of the china market in that segment.

As horrible as this sounds, there will be a large number of entities in china that will view this as the opportunity of a lifetime.

But hey, here's hoping.

[bsder]

> And China will end up with more rights and transperancy like a democracy.

I see no timeline in which this happens short of Xi Jinping catching coronavirus and dying.

China is headed into "What is best for Xi Jinping" rather than "What is best for China". Lysenkoism is coming.

[bilbo0s]

>I see no timeline in which this happens short of Xi Jinping catching coronavirus and dying.

Yeah, I don't see it happening then either.

But it certainly isn't gonna happen after an enormous market opens up for domestic competitors.

[harpratap]

> China is headed into "What is best for Xi Jinping" rather than "What is best for China"

Isn't this the same happening everywhere?

[throwaway2048]

China becoming more democratic has been a pipe dream getting sold by businesses making money off the fantasy for 3 decades and running.

The opposite is currently happening.

[harpratap]

People said the same thing about free markets in Soviet Union. Yet here we are with entrepreneurs and stock markets in Communist China.

[throwaway2048]

Entrepreneurs and stock markets have nothing to do with democracy, its a conceit anyone ever thought they did.

[bilbo0s]

throwaway is right though, free markets are much easier than political systems. It could be argued that china is already free market, and even still, that political system has not budged.

[jackguy]

Probably off topic, but does democracy "guarantee" more rights and transparency?

[harpratap]

The democratic process incentivises transparency. You want to make public all the good work you're doing and the opposition wants to discover all the bad you did so they could turn the people against you in next elections. And it also does guarantee more rights (although eventually) as history has already proven.

[sudosysgen]

This is not true. You're buying into the propaganda, sadly. Both powers care little about democracy. They care about their interests. No need to get nationalistic or even involved in the situation.