Maybe it's good for the world that they burn so much talent and wealth on adding inefficiency to their internal information exchange.
Maybe it's good for the world that they burn so much talent and wealth on adding inefficiency to their internal information exchange.
For example they actually bow to American pressure and try to avoid sanctions or other trade problems. As of today their navy could be completely destroyed with like 30% of the US Navy, so any naval blockade is probably unbreakable for them. Iran's hunta would (and did) just say "whatever" and continued tanking the GDP.
Another example - the Chinese intelligence helps domestic industries, even those that are far from the defense business.
See the Tiananmen Square Massacre.
Shanghai Residents Told to 'Control Your Thirst for Freedom' Amid Lockdown
https://www.newsweek.com/shanghai-residents-told-control-you...
- offers no way of replacing itself democratically
- extends own term indefinitely
- blocks free exchange of information
- censors specific speech that shows its failures or desire of people to replace it
- suppresses internal protests with murders and disappearings of people (1989 Tiananmen, 2019+ Hong Kong, blank paper movement, ...)
etc then it's super clear its primary goal is maintaining power.
Sure, it cannot maintain power without at least seeming to be "aligned with nation". But it takes second place to maintaining power.
I am guessing the comment above somehow meant that more infighting within a gang of literal criminals who put themselves in power and clearly struggle to maintain it means the gang is somehow better than a democratic government? But I cannot see the logic
So, on the surface, you appear aligned with growth and advancement and all that.
But under the surface, the system is about control, and only control.
>They spend almost the same %GDP as the US does on the US military as on their internal suppression forces.
It's almost as if PRC doesn't spend that much %GDP on military. The waste is PRC spending as much as US on domestic policing, which is not great considering how militarized US policing is. Meanwhile PRC simply doesn't spend that much on defense <2% vs US ~3.5%, if you include guestimates of shadow budgets, 3% vs 6%.
The technologies for resolving America's problems are well understood - majority decision making, parliamentarism, representation and participation of electoral minorities rather than inhibiting the work of the majority, a narrower scope of judicial review and/or a more flexible constitution. But as long as people say, as you do, "it isn't the thing that caused the problem that is the problem, it is some fancy gadget that is the problem", then you will be unable to solve the problems
That's not really enough to establish a pattern, though. People in China have furniture older than the United States.
> But as long as people say, as you do, "it isn't the thing that caused the problem that is the problem, it is some fancy gadget that is the problem", then you will be unable to solve the problems
This is victim blaming. US citizens get no say in governance:
"Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens"
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...