Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

committees.parliament.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 87 posts

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#31

Post by Kaibeezy »

HL33tibCe7 wrote: post #16
cs702 wrote: post #9

Reads like a slogan for anti-globalization and nationalism. As with all slogans, it ignores important details that contradict it. Over the past four decades, our current global economic system, promoting economic integration and interdependence between countries, has lifted billions out of poverty.[a][b] Billions. No sensible discussion of globalization can ignore that . The current backlash is not against globalizat…

But let’s also not throw out the baby with the bathwater in the _opposite_ direction. We should not be reliant on Russia for energy to such an extent that our economy gets destroyed when a Russian tyrant goes on an ego trip. We should not be allowing Chinese entities to own our energy infrastructure. We should not be allowing foreign nationals to buy up massive amounts of property in London with shady money, distorti…

Of course, the UK threw out the baby and the bathwater with Brexit.

I'd have rendered that slogan as “The more reliant we are on others with whom we have any substantive combination of: a severe trade imbalance, no framework for meaningful dialog, and conflicting major foreign policy goals -- the less resilient we are as a nation”

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#32

Post by [deleted] »

cs702 wrote: post #9

Reads like a slogan for anti-globalization and nationalism. As with all slogans, it ignores important details that contradict it. Over the past four decades, our current global economic system, promoting economic integration and interdependence between countries, has lifted billions out of poverty.[a][b] Billions. No sensible discussion of globalization can ignore that . The current backlash is not against globalizat…

[deleted]

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#33

Post by AntoniusBlock »

brookst wrote: post #27
AntoniusBlock wrote: post #23

The comments in this thread are kneejerk responses to the quote in the OP, which is silly because if you people had just clicked the link you'd realise that the report is mainly focused on China. We are _all_ too reliant on China and addressing the issue is not "nationalistic" or "North Korean juche" or the other rubbish I've read ITT so far.

IMO that’s also a kneejerk response. There are dangers to our already-declining reliance on China, but also benefits. The big one is that countries with deeply entangled economies rarely go to war with each other. A world where we don’t rely on China for anything is a world where we are more likely at war with them. “Security means not depending on anyone else” is just off-the-grid survivalism writ large. It’s true i…

I might've agreed with you had Russia not invaded Ukraine. Your assumption is the same assumption we all made, but they invaded Ukraine anyway.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#34

Post by c22 »

celeritascelery wrote: post #7

While there is certainly some truth and wisdom to this view, it also worries me. I see the increasing globalization and interdependence of the modern world as one of the major reasons for the decrease in armed conflicts. You are a lot less likely to attack someone who is a trade partner. There is a saying that “there has never been an armed conflict between two nations that both had a McDonald’s”. Russia has broken t…

On the other hand it sucks when the only burger you can buy comes from McDonalds.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#35

Post by thfuran »

HL33tibCe7 wrote: post #20
celeritascelery wrote: post #7

While there is certainly some truth and wisdom to this view, it also worries me. I see the increasing globalization and interdependence of the modern world as one of the major reasons for the decrease in armed conflicts. You are a lot less likely to attack someone who is a trade partner. There is a saying that “there has never been an armed conflict between two nations that both had a McDonald’s”. Russia has broken t…

> that is case where the exception proves the rule. On the contrary, I think this exception disproves the rule.

Yeah, there are some dumb sayings, but I really think that one tops the list.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#36

Post by Aachen »

thfuran wrote: post #35
HL33tibCe7 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that is case where the exception proves the rule. On the contrary, I think this exception disproves the rule.

Yeah, there are some dumb sayings, but I really think that one tops the list.

I've never understood it actually. What does the author mean when using "proves the rule", is it somehow proving it by it being a clear exception with special circumstances (somehow that rarely seems the case) or are they just acknowledging the incorrectness of the rule in a joke-y manner?

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#37

Post by jhbadger »

funstuff007 wrote: post #12

It's worked out real well for North Korea. > The goal of Juche is to establish a self-reliant state which independently determines its political, economic, and military affairs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juche

Although Juche never really was meant to be taken as actual NK policy but just as internal propaganda (why want to leave if we have everything we need and the rest of the world must be worse?). NK has always been dependent on foreign aid from the USSR (when it existed) and China. Originally because these countries supported NK ideology, but now mostly because China fears what would happen if NK collapsed.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#38

Post by psacawa »

cs702 wrote: post #9

Reads like a slogan for anti-globalization and nationalism. As with all slogans, it ignores important details that contradict it. Over the past four decades, our current global economic system, promoting economic integration and interdependence between countries, has lifted billions out of poverty.[a][b] Billions. No sensible discussion of globalization can ignore that . The current backlash is not against globalizat…

> The current backlash is not against globalization per se, but against: ...

I cannot speak about the UK, but in general this isn't all that people are dissatisfied with about globalization. Very many are angry about the loss of a sense of home. If you examine the situation in purely material terms, you won't observe or measure those feelings. For others, the loss of home extends to a loss of community, which extends to a loss of self.

Educated tech people can be software engineers first and English second, while the lower classes are, in my experience, English first, and their profession second. The loss hits harder for them.

I haven't seen media discuss the identitarian dimension of globalisation. I suppose that has to do with media being populated primarily by one social class. Yet I feel that by ignoring them they have been burying nuclear waste for decades.

I don't mean to tell you whether these emotions are "abhorrent racism" or "valid", I just mean say that they are to me the elephant in the room in any discussion of globalisation.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#39

Post by mozman »

cs702 wrote: post #9

Reads like a slogan for anti-globalization and nationalism. As with all slogans, it ignores important details that contradict it. Over the past four decades, our current global economic system, promoting economic integration and interdependence between countries, has lifted billions out of poverty.[a][b] Billions. No sensible discussion of globalization can ignore that . The current backlash is not against globalizat…

I support nationalism, we have many domestic problems we must fix before we start fixing other countries.

If we have to go to war than so be it. People will always argue and there will always be consequences of these arguments.

Re: “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation”

#40

Post by cs702 »

psacawa wrote: post #38
cs702 wrote: post #9

Reads like a slogan for anti-globalization and nationalism. As with all slogans, it ignores important details that contradict it. Over the past four decades, our current global economic system, promoting economic integration and interdependence between countries, has lifted billions out of poverty.[a][b] Billions. No sensible discussion of globalization can ignore that . The current backlash is not against globalizat…

> The current backlash is not against globalization per se, but against: ... I cannot speak about the UK, but in general this isn't all that people are dissatisfied with about globalization. Very many are angry about the loss of a sense of home. If you examine the situation in purely material terms, you won't observe or measure those feelings. For others, the loss of home extends to a loss of community, which extends…

That's a really good point. I missed mentioning it in my post above. That "sense of loss" is definitely an issue. That said, I do wonder whether people would be experiencing such a "sense of loss" if market power, political clout, and economic gains hadn't become so highly concentrated. That is, if more people in rich countries felt that their lives have changed for the better, they'd probably want more economic integration, not less.
Post reply on HN