[Kadin]

"Dictatorships are bad" is not the game-over argument that it once was, maybe 20 years ago.

The Chinese aren't just competing against the US for control of some islands and sea lanes here and there, they are putting their political system -- which is de facto a dictatorship selected periodically by a small ruling clique -- as an alternative model to democracy. One that can compete with and defeat democracy, in fact.

And to be blunt, it's not clear to me that they are losing. We in the US have put ourselves at a disadvantage w/r/t China over and over again, relying ostensibly on the magical power of democracy to always win the day. As far as I can tell, it's straight-up magical thinking.

If we do not take China seriously as a threat to democracy, not just internally to Asia but as an aspirational model of society and the basis for legitimate government, I think we risk losing.

Why we would allow a propaganda outlet of what is effectively an enemy state to operate in the US, and why we would allow technology transfers and other advantageous trade arrangements, is mind boggling to me. Sure, the 'marketplace of ideas' sounds great on paper, but not when the other people don't believe in the same things. That sort of treatment -- access to the US market, both economically and that of ideas -- should be reserved for polities that at least have signed-on to the basic concepts that the US is built on.

[stavros]

I didn't say "dictatorships are bad". Also, there's quite some area between allowing a propaganda outlet and banning it completely.

Then again, by the same token, why should the EU allow Meta to operate on its territory?

[mrkstu]

You're already seeing the EU investigate X/Twitter for not modulating the messaging of their users according to their (the EU's) dictates.

[nradov]

Back during the early Cold War, some Americans were concerned that the Soviet model would out compete democracy and free market capitalism. They might beat us without even fighting. Later we found out that it was all a facade. Their purported successes were all lies and failures. The entire society was rotten to the core and eventually the internal contradictions ripped it apart.

China is not to be taken lightly. They are a legitimate threat and strategic competitor. But they also face enormous problems due to unfavorable geography, lack of key natural resources, corruption, malinvestment, and demographic collapse. These problems are not getting better, and I won't be surprised if there's a violent civil war in 30 years (as has happened many times over millennia of Chinese history).

[Duya-Taksis]

"China is not to be taken lightly."

Yet that's exactly what you're doing.

"But they also face enormous problems due to unfavorable geography, lack of key natural resources, corruption, malinvestment, and demographic collapse."

None of these things are true. Stop consuming intellectual droppings from the likes of Peter Zeihan.

China has a monopoly on rare earths and more importantly, processing technologies, which are the key resources for a technological society. It's rapidly transitioning its grid and transportation systems to run on renewable power. Over the next decade it will do in hydrogen what it did in solar and wind. That will give it total self sufficiency in critical inputs like ammonia and synthetic fuels.

Corruption was an issue before Xi's anti-corruption drive. Corruption was wonderful when it served American interests, when the CIA was paying out the bribes. Now that the CIA networks have been torn up and the corrupt officials put behind bars and executed, the US cries that China is "increasingly authoritarian." Well, the louder the US cries, the more I know China is on the right path.

Malinvestment? That's rich coming from an OnlyFans economy like America. You people can't even make enough artillery shells to send to Ukraine. You're being outbuilt by an order of magnitude by Russia, a country you mock as having an economy the size of Texas. Your GDP is entirely hot air and all you make is noise.

As for demography, that's the last thin reed you have to hang all your ill wishes toward China on. Unfortunately for you, that's changing for the better. The Chinese government has shifted from an anti-natal/neutral policy to a pro-natal one and will introduce a raft of policies to boost birth rates. Before you even think that that never works, it does work. It worked in Hungary and it will work far better in China, where the Chinese government can pull many more levers than the Hungarian government can.

Incidentally, the biggest block to Chinese people marrying and having children is the high cost of housing. Guess what the deflating housing bubble is going to do for that.

"These problems are not getting better, and I won't be surprised if there's a violent civil war in 30 years"

I've just demonstrated that they either don't exist or they are getting much better. If you want to look for violent civil wars, look to the US. You won't have to wait 30 years.

"as has happened many times over millennia of Chinese history"

China has millennia of history. Let's see the US make it to 300 years.

[janalsncm]

I believe your analysis conflates economic systems with political ones. The U.S. doesn’t have an entirely free market capitalism system (see: farm subsidies which fed into supermarket propaganda) and China doesn’t have an entirely planned economy.

As far as political systems go, the collapse of China seems to always be around the corner. But in reality, the U.S. seems to be much closer to civil war. No faction stormed the Capitol in Beijing when Xi was appointed. And even if our political system is not overthrown, it may die the death of 1000 cuts. How much can you honestly say Congress represents the People’s vs lobbyists (professional bribery) and PAC interests?

[hsuduebc2]

Context is very important here. Xi was appointed not elected by people. He got almost three thousand votes and one against. There is no election so it can't create friction. Like in eastern European nations where there was one party system and elections were virtually non existent. Friction there is not generated by politicians but usually from poverty or similar systematic issue. As long as Chinese population would perceive themself as improving and even rich system is safe. Democracies works very differently.

[aaomidi]

I mean, then why did we spend so much money and kill so many people destabilizing half the world?

If the model was so rotten to begin with, that is.

How many people did the west directly and indirectly kill in the 20th century?

[callalex]

For the same reason we still do: it’s incredibly profitable for the people who make weapons.

[malwarebytess]

> One that can compete with and defeat democracy, in fact.

If it's better then why shouldn't it win? Frankly the lines are blurred. So called liberty is not so clearly championed by the west any longer, and on top of that robber barons and corporations are running rampant through our societies and governments. There's no apparent upside for ordinary people to a Western victory any longer, or at least it's not clear cut.

After all if we're going to be ruled by elites, and be under a system which can compete with capitalist "democracy," might as well be ruled by elites who are ideologically aligned with the people's well-being.

[hsuduebc2]

Better in what? This is really shallow relativization of someone mad at current system. It is not better in any values valued in "western civilization".

[Natsu]

Better for whom is the key question, I think. They're quite eager to do something about Taiwan which showed how much better China could be doing.

[aaomidi]

Honestly not sure if comparing China and Taiwan gets that conclusion for everyone?

[Natsu]

Economically it's doing much better than even most of the USA, though there's a question of how long that might last.

[foverzar]

> they are putting their political system -- which is de facto a dictatorship selected periodically by a small ruling clique -- as an alternative model to democracy.

Oh please. Just because you people in the west are stuck in the 20th century and have an unyielding urge to reformat other nations and instill a political system you're familiar with, doesn't mean anyone else cares for this kind of idiocy. Stop projecting.

You're just like USSR with its obsession with "global revolution" and counterproductive dichotomies. And just like it happened with USSR, everyone else is getting pretty pissed with all that zealous crap that doesn't amount to anything but guised political opportunism IRL.

It's not like your specific approach to governance looks any less shitty to other cultures. Grow up, embrace diversity, learn to play nice with others - yours is the last civilization that needs to take a long hard look at itself. Either naturally, or through some major political crisis, or, worst case scenario, everyone else will just gang up on you like Saudis, China, US, WEU and many others did on USSR, if god forbid all that global (outside NATO and its few aspirants) distaste for bullshit "holier than thou" attitude reaches a boiling point.

Srsly, grow up. Traveling and meeting new people is extremely helpful in that regard.

[aaomidi]

What’s really funny is that the democracy Americans keep touting as some amazing system is currently stripping away rights from:

Queer folk

Women

Pro-Palestinian people

Maybe it’s time to question if your democracy is at a point to be exported to the rest of the world (?)

[mikrotikker]

Which rights exactly?

[aaomidi]

Are you serious? lol

Maybe let’s start with the basic one that’s abortion?

[Levitz]

This is a map of countries in which abortion is legal:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/Ab...

This is a map of democratic countries:

https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/18737.jpeg

You might notice a resemblance. Want to do gay rights next?

[defrost]

Your maps appear to support the premise put forward by aaomidi.

The USofA is labelled there as not very democratic, grouped as with "Flawed Democracies" and the premise put forward was that US Democracy was stripping rights (eg: abortion) and perhaps wasn't a great example of a good democracy.

[foverzar]

> You might notice a resemblance.

Only if you really-really squint and look only at americas, while ignoring most of Eurasia and huge chunk of Africa where most of the world's population happens to live.

I hardly see much of a global correlation here.

[mikrotikker]

Try another? The abortion issue is clearly used by either side to drive division, they don't want to fix it. So it's less a stripping and more of a peasants stuck in the middle kind of thing.

[callalex]

Can you name one non-democracy that isn’t doing exactly those same things?

[aaomidi]

I never said non democracies are good. I just said our democracy isn’t mature enough.

[peyton]

I dunno, the whole point of a government based on natural rights theory is the government isn’t the giver of rights, so it can’t strip people of rights. If you’re thinking of privileges granted by a group of doctrinaires, that’s more like an ecclesiastical polity.

[callalex]

Ok, then what was the point you were actually trying to make while listing minority groups with high specificity?

Let’s start from a point of common understanding: I agree that it is a bad thing to oppress minority groups.

[mvdtnz]

> "Dictatorships are bad" is not the game-over argument that it once was, maybe 20 years ago.

Yes, it is. By god, something needs to be done about the absolute stupidity that is making its way through American universities. This is tragic.

[colechristensen]

It is indeed not the game over argument any more, measured by the people. Both sides of the political spectrum in America have been ever more strongly advocating for authoritarian enforcement of their political goals and both sides have increasing admiration for foreign dictatorships and terrorists.

The extremes are closing in on the excluded middle which doesn’t have much of a voice at all as nonextremist views are attacked as supporting the other sides.

They are not always doing this in the same ways and in the same places, but there is a definite trend.

I’m not making excuses for one side by saying the other side is doing it, both threaten the republic and world peace.

[mensetmanusman]

People that don't understand math appreciate dictatorships because they can imagine themselves in power.