5 ms·

Well the rest of the world will dismantle the US hegemony "brick by brick". Not because they want to but because they have to. It may take decades but trust has

Well the rest of the world will dismantle the US hegemony "brick by brick". Not because they want to but because they have to. It may take decades but trust has been lost. The US can't be trusted at any level and investments will adjust to this level like any other unstable state. Research, investments and talents are all avoiding the US. AI won't save the US economy either as there is no moat as we can all see.

smashah 29d ago
D.C is controlled by enemies to humanity and freedom. They openly plan on enslaving the rest of the world to secure their hegemony.
lenerdenator 29d ago
There will be another one. I hope you like the CCP's vision of the future.
- orwin 29d ago
  I'd rather have no overlord, but between China and the US, the one abusing its power to force deals since the 80s us obviously the worst.
  - throw-the-towel 29d ago
    I was going to say you're probably not going to like the Chinese take on the surveillance state. Then I remembered Flock exists. Can't have shit in this era :(
    - lenerdenator 28d ago
      The Flock that's currently the subject of massive public scrutiny and vandalism campaigns? How many of the cameras operated by the state security apparatus of the CCP do you reckon are shot, cut down, spray painted, stolen, or otherwise made ineffective on a weekly basis?
  - ben_w 29d ago
    If faced with two genocidal villains who see a nearby sovereign territory as theirs really even if the locals need to be reminded of this with guns, I'd rather have the competent one who sees the interest of the people collectively as important. I don't have to think either isn't "abusing its power to force deals".
    - lenerdenator 28d ago
      > I'd rather have the competent one who sees the interest of the people collectively as important. If this is meant to be in reference to China, the problem is, you cannot truly ascertain competence given the current regime. It's totalitarian. Everything within the state, nothing without it. The flow of information in and out of the country, and within it, is heavily controlled with a hope of increasing positive perception of the nation abroad. Otherwise, totalitarian control cannot be maintained, as this introduces something outside of the state. This contrasts with the United States, where the flow of information is relatively uncontrolled and people will regularly bring up the ways that things are handled incompetently in the national dialog. Sometimes, they even do this when no such incompetence exists.
      - ben_w 28d ago
        I cannot *perfectly* ascertain competence. However, I can look at broad indicators, many of which are easy to investigate from the outside. When e.g. people suggest that China is having "economic problems" and growth is "slowing", over the last 30 years the Chinese idea of "normal" (5-8%) is the USA's idea of "extraordinary". (I'd describe them as heavily authoritarian, but not quite as far as "totalitarian", though I accept the exact boundary is a somewhat fuzzy and subjective one and that it is not unreasonable to paint the line on either side of where China is today).
        lenerdenator 27d ago
        > When e.g. people suggest that China is having "economic problems" and growth is "slowing", over the last 30 years the Chinese idea of "normal" (5-8%) is the USA's idea of "extraordinary". It's all relative. It's easier to make five cents out of one dollar than it is five dollars out of one hundred dollars. Furthermore, you might wish to enquire why, exactly, you see the growth rates you do in China, and whether that makes it a good broad indicator from the outside. What made the PRC so attractive to development over the last 30-40 years? India also has a large workforce and a low cost of labor, and Eastern Europe instituted market reforms similar to those that China undertook at around the same time, yet neither were the darlings of those who wanted to export manufacturing jobs from the West to cheaper markets. The answer likely involves, at least in part, the fact that China doesn't allow for people to exercise their innate human right to organize. India is a democratic republic, and most Eastern European countries were transitioning to democratic republicanism around the time that their market reforms were enacted, same time as China did their market reforms. People in a democratic republic can do things like form labor unions, petition to block the construction of factories in sensitive areas, and do other things that reduce capital's ability to transfer value as profit. These things regularly happen to some extent in Eastern Europe, India, and the US. We saw what happened when people in China wanted more say in their government in 1989, as did business leaders. If cutting manufacturing costs meant some student got crushed by a main battle tank for wanting the right to cast a ballot or run contrary to the Party's platform, so it was. You have to be careful with the broad indicators.
  - lenerdenator 29d ago
    > I'd rather have no overlord Unfortunately, that's not how humans work. > the one abusing its power to force deals since the 80s us obviously the worst. Agreed. China's behavior towards its own people, its neighbors - Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and India - and the international community as a whole since Dengism took hold have been inexcusable, no matter how much cheap manufacturing they're able to pull off. They've blatantly enabled the totalitarian DPRK in its quest to defy UN sanctions over its nuclear program, and have violated the sovereignty of their neighbors in the South China Sea. Now they're undercutting manufacturing around the world by producing goods without the consideration of environmental concerns that places like the EU and US try to take into account with their own industrial development. PLA hackers have attacked numerous international targets. PRC agents have worked to abduct Chinese citizens exercising their basic human rights to free thought abroad through a system of secret police stations. All of this since they ran over protestors with main battle tanks in 1989. What's truly frightening is that the powerful in the rest of the world seem to want to emulate this sort of behavior, particularly totalitarian control of their own populations.

smashah 29d ago

D.C is controlled by enemies to humanity and freedom. They openly plan on enslaving the rest of the world to secure their hegemony.

lenerdenator 29d ago

There will be another one. I hope you like the CCP's vision of the future.

orwin 29d ago
I'd rather have no overlord, but between China and the US, the one abusing its power to force deals since the 80s us obviously the worst.
- throw-the-towel 29d ago
  I was going to say you're probably not going to like the Chinese take on the surveillance state. Then I remembered Flock exists. Can't have shit in this era :(
  - lenerdenator 28d ago
    The Flock that's currently the subject of massive public scrutiny and vandalism campaigns? How many of the cameras operated by the state security apparatus of the CCP do you reckon are shot, cut down, spray painted, stolen, or otherwise made ineffective on a weekly basis?
- ben_w 29d ago
  If faced with two genocidal villains who see a nearby sovereign territory as theirs really even if the locals need to be reminded of this with guns, I'd rather have the competent one who sees the interest of the people collectively as important. I don't have to think either isn't "abusing its power to force deals".
  - lenerdenator 28d ago
    > I'd rather have the competent one who sees the interest of the people collectively as important. If this is meant to be in reference to China, the problem is, you cannot truly ascertain competence given the current regime. It's totalitarian. Everything within the state, nothing without it. The flow of information in and out of the country, and within it, is heavily controlled with a hope of increasing positive perception of the nation abroad. Otherwise, totalitarian control cannot be maintained, as this introduces something outside of the state. This contrasts with the United States, where the flow of information is relatively uncontrolled and people will regularly bring up the ways that things are handled incompetently in the national dialog. Sometimes, they even do this when no such incompetence exists.
    - ben_w 28d ago
      I cannot *perfectly* ascertain competence. However, I can look at broad indicators, many of which are easy to investigate from the outside. When e.g. people suggest that China is having "economic problems" and growth is "slowing", over the last 30 years the Chinese idea of "normal" (5-8%) is the USA's idea of "extraordinary". (I'd describe them as heavily authoritarian, but not quite as far as "totalitarian", though I accept the exact boundary is a somewhat fuzzy and subjective one and that it is not unreasonable to paint the line on either side of where China is today).
      - lenerdenator 27d ago
        > When e.g. people suggest that China is having "economic problems" and growth is "slowing", over the last 30 years the Chinese idea of "normal" (5-8%) is the USA's idea of "extraordinary". It's all relative. It's easier to make five cents out of one dollar than it is five dollars out of one hundred dollars. Furthermore, you might wish to enquire why, exactly, you see the growth rates you do in China, and whether that makes it a good broad indicator from the outside. What made the PRC so attractive to development over the last 30-40 years? India also has a large workforce and a low cost of labor, and Eastern Europe instituted market reforms similar to those that China undertook at around the same time, yet neither were the darlings of those who wanted to export manufacturing jobs from the West to cheaper markets. The answer likely involves, at least in part, the fact that China doesn't allow for people to exercise their innate human right to organize. India is a democratic republic, and most Eastern European countries were transitioning to democratic republicanism around the time that their market reforms were enacted, same time as China did their market reforms. People in a democratic republic can do things like form labor unions, petition to block the construction of factories in sensitive areas, and do other things that reduce capital's ability to transfer value as profit. These things regularly happen to some extent in Eastern Europe, India, and the US. We saw what happened when people in China wanted more say in their government in 1989, as did business leaders. If cutting manufacturing costs meant some student got crushed by a main battle tank for wanting the right to cast a ballot or run contrary to the Party's platform, so it was. You have to be careful with the broad indicators.
- lenerdenator 29d ago
  > I'd rather have no overlord Unfortunately, that's not how humans work. > the one abusing its power to force deals since the 80s us obviously the worst. Agreed. China's behavior towards its own people, its neighbors - Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and India - and the international community as a whole since Dengism took hold have been inexcusable, no matter how much cheap manufacturing they're able to pull off. They've blatantly enabled the totalitarian DPRK in its quest to defy UN sanctions over its nuclear program, and have violated the sovereignty of their neighbors in the South China Sea. Now they're undercutting manufacturing around the world by producing goods without the consideration of environmental concerns that places like the EU and US try to take into account with their own industrial development. PLA hackers have attacked numerous international targets. PRC agents have worked to abduct Chinese citizens exercising their basic human rights to free thought abroad through a system of secret police stations. All of this since they ran over protestors with main battle tanks in 1989. What's truly frightening is that the powerful in the rest of the world seem to want to emulate this sort of behavior, particularly totalitarian control of their own populations.