|
|
|
|
|
|
by baybal2
1656 days ago
|
|
|
The prosperity of Chinese economy is much at mercy of Japanese, Koreans, and Taiwanese, not Americans, not even remotely, even if USA will go for a financial nuclear option of denying access to its bank system. If you look at median incomes, UAE, and Saudis are of course ones with higher per capital income, but you see plenty of other quite prosperous nations in the club. When oil was above $100, and Russians were swimming in USDs, they were even less proclived to go to the streets. Suharto, Marcos, and a few Latin American dictators equally had their best years when relative prosperity kept populace pliant, even if there was an apparent stagnation. Popular revolts really only happen at the furthest extremes of the spectrum of prosperity, or rapid movement in it. Even just "not dying from hunger" level of prosperity is enough for dictatorships to survive with ease. |
|
|
FWIW, I did not make an argument that economic prosperity or equalisation will bring them to streets at all, but that:
1. Their current "flourishing economy" is not a reason to consider China as "one of the greatest threats of our freedom ever", and
2. How "flourishing" Chinese economy is will change relatively quickly (say in the next 10-30 years) as their median salaries approach those of who they export most to (if that's Japan, Korea or Taiwan, then their salaries instead of US ones).
I would even say that this situation with WTA shows that 1 is exactly not the case: people in charge of large organisations (like Simon) have learned from how eg. NBA handled the case and the flak in the media they received, so now they are being more protective of democratic values (or maybe their image, but regardless) instead of their business interests.
FTR, this was part of the comment I was replying to where economy is highlighted as a big contributor to them being a great threat to "our freedom":
> We're looking at one of the greatest threats to our freedom ever; this time they have nukes, reliable delivery mechanisms and a flourishing economy (which the Soviets lacked).