Live data from Hacker News

I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

nobelprize.org

221–230 of 234 posts

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, tho, the economic success of these three countries is on many fronts a direct result of China's rise, while their own policies have kept them back on some fronts, economic integration with China has helped grow them. Second, these other countries are smaller. It's easier to administer a smaller country. You next next level social organization and governance to guide over 1bn from poor to rich. And specifical…

Thanks for the honest and detailed response. It definitely makes it easier to engage with an opposing view :-) Firstly regarding the size of China. I do take the point that this makes administration easier. A counterpoint is that it also makes internal markets smaller. China's protectionist approach to the internet for instance likely wouldn't work in Taiwan. I'm unclear of the effect of protectionism in general here…

China has more skill to be able to run a larger system than places that only know how to run smaller systems. So they have socio-political governing ideas that work at scale, and they've produced consistent results. It's probably because they've been doing stable bureaucracies for 5000 years.

Yes smaller markets are harder to run protectionism on. So it's harder to have an economic policy direction independent of other countries. But that doesn't mean you can't make skillful policy and trade engagements with other big players, and benefit as much as possible from their growth. I don't think this East Asian set has done that, and I think they've let partisan politics and historical resentments get in the way of this. Swapped long term prosperity and regionalism for short term political capital, incentivized by a democratic system.

You're right about trade. It's a nothing point. Since everything is basically equal. Even if China had an asymmetric relationship where it "contributed more" in its trade with the East Asian set, and in its trade with the West, ( and I'm not saying it does have that ) that still doesn't really speak to the differences in any of those traders political systems. So it's totally useless of me to bring that up here when we're evaluating different socio-political systems. Good catch. I think I just raised it to say "you can't judge their success on their Western merits alone, you have to see their interconnection with the China model" but as you correctly point out, that's two way street. It doesn't matter where the trade money comes from, it matters what you choose to do with it. And that's where I think China has more skilfully used their opportunities, as a result of their model, by focusing heavily on infrastructure and long term projects, than the East Asian "WLD" set. You got to play to the short term in a democracy. And in a changing, globalized world, that might be the wrong set of incentives to best serve your population's well being. Too limiting. You're playing the global economy and local long term prosperity with both hands tied behind your back. In the Chinese model they're more free to act in their citizens best interests. Everyone is envious of that. Europe acknowledges this advantage openly. But does nothing. So European.

In terms of living in a society, for me the ideal is to have the option to live in whichever and move between them. They all ( or both, considering USA and China as the two biggest examples of the different models ) have their benefits and challenges. Differences are fun. No one system offers everything. In terms of honesty, what I mean is that they are honest about their censorship and control. Whereas censorship and information control in the West is necessarily secret to preserve the stagecraft of "moral supremacy" and freedom. Yes, controlling information is not honest, but you can be honest that you do it, which is what they are. This is important to me. In the West the spies just lie to your face, and shadow you, in China, they openly harass you in the street and put you under house arrest. A system of control that hides in the shadows is one harder for the average individual to comprehend. One that is out in the open is easier for people to understand. Notice how Chinese citizens routinely circumvent censors activities? The transparency and openness make this possible, and this is just one example. To me, that is the Chinese state showing its citizens respect. In the West, or a Western style East Asian state, the average citizen doesn't know who is watching, what their policy or agenda is, nor what they are doing. To me, that is the Western model showing contempt for the individual it pretends to protect the freedoms of. I sort of see it like, if your partner betrays you would you rather it be an honest open relationship or secret betrayals behind your back? At least the Chinese sec intel apparatus are honest about how they try to control. And Westerners criticize China's human rights and praise their own credibility to do so. Ha. 5D doublethink masters. That kind of dishonesty is just not my style. It's too inefficient. Just be straight up. Own what you do. Stop being such a coward and lying about everything. Is how I see it. This is just one aspect of the transparent and honest interface to the population. But enough for now from me.

Sure the experiment still has longer to run. Maybe you're right and China will have the same stagnation once its economy moves beyond the current hyper growth period or becomes a net importer. It's a good point about Japan. I didn't know it was predicted to surpass USA at some point in the past as well. I guess personally I just find a country that can provide a pretty-much first-world-standard of living ( in the cities, anyway, for a price ), and develop so quickly with so many people, more interesting and inspiring than those that already are stagnating. A country where people are still charging forward, optimistic about the future, rather than bickering over welfare benefits. So, in a sense, I'm pinning my hopes for proof of civilizational advance on the success of the Chinese experiment. I hope they keep winning, so I'm cheering them on. I see a lot of signs to say they will, and I like to counter the ignorance and negative propos about them, but you're right that we don't know yet what path their road will take.

Even if the economy stagnates the same, I'm inclined to think the Chinese will have more social harmony. I'm comfortable with how much I've conveyed about that already, but to summarise it's really based on a culture that I see promotes harmony and values-based-nationalism ( even tho they it is tied to ethnicity currently ), and I hope that is successful in avoiding the painful and wasteful division and fabricated conflict along exaggerated identity politics / tribalistic differences, that I feel is so destructive to social fabric ( and productivity, optimism, focus ) in the West. So while I say they will have more social harmony, clearly I am an optimist and I probably just hope they do, because I hope their system has success where I see the Western one has failed, and lead to a divided society, indulging in policy stagnation and civil ideological conflict.

When you say, "protectionism in general here", do you mean the USA?

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#222
post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The closest to a good answer was one guy who said he'd seen an interview in which the guy clarified that yes he did mean that. No, the closest was this: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=14775990 You can find further confirmation of his views very easily by googling the English language media. Doing this could have saved a lot of pointless back and forth: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/dec/15/nob…

> No, the closest was this: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=14775990 Well, now we have this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14780074 > In a 1988 interview he stated that "to choose westernisation is to choose to be human". > Affirming this sentiment in Open magazine in 2006, he added that progress in China depends on westernisation and the more westernisation, the more progress. Westernisation doesn't imp…

>who said some dumb shit that was widely misinterpreted

It wasn't misinterpreted. He explicitly stood by what he said. If it was sarcasm, he could just have clarified that it was sarcasm.

>Westernisation doesn't imply colonisation in the traditional sense

It kind of does, in the context of talking about a former British colony.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#223
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, the closest was this: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=14775990 Well, now we have this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14780074 > In a 1988 interview he stated that "to choose westernisation is to choose to be human". > Affirming this sentiment in Open magazine in 2006, he added that progress in China depends on westernisation and the more westernisation, the more progress. Westernisation doesn't imp…

>who said some dumb shit that was widely misinterpreted It wasn't misinterpreted. He explicitly stood by what he said. If it was sarcasm, he could just have clarified that it was sarcasm. >Westernisation doesn't imply colonisation in the traditional sense It kind of does, in the context of talking about a former British colony.

I was hoping for a more conciliatory ending to our conversation from you, but I suppose when you arouse someone's passions that isn't possible. Have a nice week.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that insubstantial? Many do not realize that the west is also a purveyor of lots of propaganda and perhaps they should challenge what they hear from the western media about controversial China topics. That is a very valid point.

It would be substantial (that is, having substance) if the grandfather post perhaps included an example of how the western media screws up its China coverage. I have no doubt there are a lot to choose from. "Oh the coverage is all wrong" is a pretty empty statement by itself.

So ask for an example to back it up rather than write the person off. Like I said, most posts here on HN are not backed up by references until they are asked for.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#225
post #13

If aren't sure who Liu Xiaobo is or want to learn more, this essay by China expert Perry Link is excellent: http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/07/13/the-passion-of-liu-x...

Such censored view is not good for anyone. "It took Hong Kong 100 years to become what it is. Given the size of China, certainly it would need 300 years of colonisation for it to become like what Hong Kong is today. I even doubt whether 300 years would be enough." Liu Xiaobo made himself quite clear back in the 1980s. The in 1996, he further argued that "progress in China depends on westernisation and the more wester…

Here's the thing. You don't have to agree with his political views. You don't have to pick a side. But you can still see his treatment as bad. This man is in prison for disagreeing with the government, that is very bad.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#226
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 三百年殖民地。香港一百年殖民地变成今天这样,中国那么大,当然需要三百年殖民地,才会变成今天香港这样,三百年够不够,我还有怀疑。 I am a decently educated Chinese native speaker. The quoted Chinese sentence from Liu is not acceptable to me. I do not think it is a direct comparison against HongKong. I am fine with him arguing about changing the political situation of China or whatsoever. And, actually, the discussion on that should be more open. However, I cannot agree on his view…

Do you agree with his jail sentence and permanent house arrest?

I'd imagine that's not a 'safe' question for a Chinese national to answer publicly.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not even close to the core issue. The core issue is that the Chinese government locked someone up for stating an opinion. An opinion not much different in substance than then ones you are stating in this thread. Would you consider it just for you to be imprisoned for your views alone? I would not, and I think that is also true for other people.

Would you consider it just for Snowden to be exiled out of the country? Would you consider it just for Assange to be under house arrest in an Embassy? Would you consider it just for Liu Xiaobo to be under house arrest at his own home? Well, IMHO, all 3 incidents are unjust. However, they all happened. Interestingly, Liu Xiaobo earned a Nobel price, but Snowden didn't. Not sure what would happen if the Chinese governm…

Remember Assange is wanted for sexual assault and probably should face the sexual assault charges. But it's not realistic that he could do without facing charges related to wikileaks.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#228
post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, that's "not a bug it's a feature (#wontfix)" of democracy. But also democracy's weakness. Democracies can't take deterministic stances for the long term good of their people and because any clear deterministic stance about the future can be ridiculed and criticised, and thus a democracy can't execute an effective long term plan for rapid progress and development, and naturally wallows in stagnation. The peo…

> democracy is simply an effective means for social control to maintain a status quo Occasionally, democracies elect a party that promises change and then actually delivers on it. That the status quo is mostly maintained has more to do with the fact that one high-stakes mistake can obliterate a party's reputation and completely ruin their chance at reelection, so representatives end up being more careful. It is essen…

Yes, democratic political culture is a culture of popular, low risk decisions, and stagnation. This limits how far these countries can develop. The problem with assuming China will reach the same stagnation, is because that outlook is the situation democracies accept as inevitable, because it's the best they've been able to achieve. It doesn't mean that's the best there is. China runs on a different engine. I believe it can go further. I hope it does, because then they've created a new system that we can all learn from. The current results of political rule in western liberal democracies i find disappointing, so i sincerely cheer on the Chinese for doing something different and hope they have created something better in some aspects.

As you point out, the Chinese are expert copiers. What i love about this is that it means they are open to taking the best parts of what's worked, and adapting it themselves. They're pragmatic, and flexible. I love that about them, because that adaptability and openness to achievements of others ( instead of insecurely insisting their existing way is superior ) means they are effective learners, and can effectively make the most of opportunities. So we can say they are simply doing this with policy, politics and governance, to create a new system.

Their risk taking attitude means they can run lots of experiments, different policies in different cities, and learn from the results. Remember tho, their scale didn't just happen. They built a country that big. Also, it's not just about having scale, it's about how skillful the choices you make with what you have, are. Russia and India also possesses scale of d different sorts, but they're not as successful to me as China.

yorwba and I believe different things about propaganda and harmony. I think the gap in beliefs is too much to cover here now. We agree that propos is an effective tool, but I believe it can be put to good and that's what the Chinese do. yorwba views propos cynically, and doesn't see it that way at all. Similarly, i think, differ our beliefs about harmony.

Finally i believe the option, the freedom, to make a bold move is a requirement, for taking care of your citizens well being. If your can't take risks because your political system disincentivizes you from doing so, then you're not not able to serve your citizens well being as much as you could. I don't know how you get around that weakness.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#229
Culture-lock is the very reason China is having such a hard time become a modern technology leading state.

Its the same as in martial arts, the fixed form practices got absolutely decimated by MMA, diversity is a strength and modern cultures are very bad at accepting outsiders.

Re: I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (2009)

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the honest and detailed response. It definitely makes it easier to engage with an opposing view :-) Firstly regarding the size of China. I do take the point that this makes administration easier. A counterpoint is that it also makes internal markets smaller. China's protectionist approach to the internet for instance likely wouldn't work in Taiwan. I'm unclear of the effect of protectionism in general here…

China has more skill to be able to run a larger system than places that only know how to run smaller systems. So they have socio-political governing ideas that work at scale, and they've produced consistent results. It's probably because they've been doing stable bureaucracies for 5000 years. Yes smaller markets are harder to run protectionism on. So it's harder to have an economic policy direction independent of oth…

When I referred to "protectionism in general here" I was thinking mostly of its consequences for developing countries during and after their rise to prosperity. I'm afraid my history isn't really good enough to say whether this applies to the USA in the last few centuries :-) I imagine it's quite possible that it does.

I definitely get where you're coming from with optimism for China and can align with it to some extent. I do think we need to be a little careful about giving the CCP or the political structure too much credit for China's achievements when the ingenuity and hard work of the citizens seems to be the much greater part of the explanation to me. OTOH I agree they've made some good decisions along the way - infrastructure in particular. Time will tell I guess.

Whatever the outcome politically I certainly hope the Chinese people carry on along the path towards prosperity.

Post reply on HN