Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists • Hacker News Board

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#81

Post by varjag » Tue, May 17, 2011, 7:49 PM UTC

cabalamat wrote: post #55

Duff wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communist governments have usually attracted intellectuals to higher levels of power -- the results so far haven't been uplifting. I don't think that a comparison of the US system vs. China is going to produce a clear "winner", only a list of pros/cons whose weighting will be shaped by your perceptions and bias. The explosive growth of China hides most of the warts of the system. When you have economic growth so fast…

> the results so far haven't been uplifting 10% growth every year for a quarter of a century? I regard that as very impressive. > I don't think that a comparison of the US system vs. China is going to produce a clear "winner" It's likely that one of these two countries is going to end up dominating the world. Of course, it's not so much about countries as social systems: both have their strengths and weaknesses. > An…

> 10% growth every year for a quarter of a century? I regard that as very impressive.

They are catching up to status quo. Mostly because they squandered the previous decades scientifically hunting down sparrows and enemies of the state.

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#82

Post by Hawramani » Tue, May 17, 2011, 7:55 PM UTC

lionhearted wrote: post #32

kentrado wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As for Chomsky - well, he's completely discredited to me after comparing his writings about Southeast Asia to spending significant amounts of time in SE Asia. Also the ex-Communist countries. He's a relic from a dead age. Ad Hominem circumstantial. >Guaranteed perspective-changer. If I was a BP CEO I would have a different perspective on the oil spill, and If I was a Goldman&Sachs CEO I would have a different perspe…

> Ad Hominem circumstantial. Hey, welcome to Hacker News. This is your second comment, your first was, "Meanwhile, red necks scream in anger, teir took uor jobs!!" So, let me clue you in to the vibe here. First, we aim for a really high level of civility here. Second, standard throwing out of cliche is frowned upon - yeah, we get it. Nobody liked the bailouts and the BP oil spill was bad. But most importantly - here,…

Mentioning a comment he made somewhere else to discredit him is clearly an ad hominem, even if your attack on Chomsky wasn't.

Chomsky is wrong on a lot of things. That in no way makes him wrong about everything.

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#83

Post by Apocryphon » Tue, May 17, 2011, 7:56 PM UTC

And for some reason, many high-profile, that is, thwarted or captured, terrorists are engineers: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/magazine/12FOB-IdeaLab-t.h...

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#84

Post by ajkessler » Tue, May 17, 2011, 8:04 PM UTC

lionhearted wrote: post #6

But, but, but... they're not democratic! If only they'd put more power in the hands of the common man, they too could enjoy such luminous choices for statesmen as McCain vs. Obama, Bush II vs. Kerry, Bush II vs Gore, Dole vs. Clinton, Bush I vs. Clinton... ...we gotta keep saber rattling that our way is better than theirs. Boo China, boo. Edit: To the downvoter - okay, I'm joking around. But which of these premises d…

I'm not sure China's leadership has shown a more nuanced understanding of policy and statesmanship than America's leadership.

First, America has dominated the world for the last 30 years. We've got a lot of public fingers in a lot of public pies as the world's policeman. China takes no such stance. It wants oil, so it supports Sudan genocide. It wants a buffer zone between it and the West, so it supports North Korea. Just like the honey badger, China doesn't give a shit. It's relatively quiet and has tons of cash and (directly)stays out of other people's foreign affairs, so everybody more or less ignores it. I wouldn't call this a particularly nuanced understanding or implementation of foreign affairs policy.

Turning to domestic affairs, I wouldn't call China's policies nuanced either. Maybe draconian? Their one-child-per-family policy, their restrictions on speech and travel, their widespread confiscation and displacement, (I could go on) I would call evil, not nuanced.

They are booming, and a 10% growth rate will cover up a lot of poor decisions. Their growth is certainly a function of a few smart guys taking the reins and dragging them into the future, but that had a lot to do with last cadre of "smart" guys shackling them to a failed system for 50 years. And it doesn't mean that's the best way forward, either.

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#85

Post by jbooth » Tue, May 17, 2011, 8:21 PM UTC

lionhearted wrote: post #49

Duff wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communist governments have usually attracted intellectuals to higher levels of power -- the results so far haven't been uplifting. I don't think that a comparison of the US system vs. China is going to produce a clear "winner", only a list of pros/cons whose weighting will be shaped by your perceptions and bias. The explosive growth of China hides most of the warts of the system. When you have economic growth so fast…

Nuanced comment here, good analysis. I agree with a lot, but two nitpicks about the first point - 1. I'd say Communist movements attract intellectuals. Communist governments usually do not employ those intellectuals for very long after taking power. 2. Despite the name and symbols, I don't think China is actually Communist any more. I don't know what to call them. If they remain a world power and continue to thrive,…

Thanks lh. Might be worth noting how many communist governments invoked an "Owning books is counter-revolutionary treason" policy after taking power, too. Not really something for the intellectuals.

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#86

Post by forensic » Tue, May 17, 2011, 8:39 PM UTC

patfla wrote: post #53

My reading of the Chinese classics - or rather their authors - is that, historically, the single greatest ambition of China's intellectuals was to advise rulers on better governance. Which didn't seem to me a particularly productive or healthy relationship between the intellectual and political classes.

everybody just wants power, nerds and jocks alike

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#87

Post by lukeschlather » Tue, May 17, 2011, 8:52 PM UTC

lionhearted wrote: post #18

pyre wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's maybe a trade-off? Sure we have bozos for politicians in the US, but in the US government corruption usually doesn't lead to people 'disappearing.' Though we're definitely making great strides in that direction.

The United States still has, overall, a much better set of governance, courts, regulation, etc. than China. But the USA is trending gradually downwards and China is trending quickly upwards. Now it's interesting, countries can catch up a lot faster than they can lead. If a country is a bit backwards, with the right set of leadership, they can very quickly modernize, becoming extremely important economically and geopo…

>But the USA is trending gradually downwards and China is trending quickly upwards.

In population, wealth, etc. sure. But in terms of corruption? Having people who do no harm in power is often better than having people who do great good. If a great leader is just that - great. Not good, but great. Greatness has the capacity for evil and good. The advantage of a less skilled leadership is that they're only really able to do middling things, whether middlingly evil or middlingly good.

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#88

Post by cjoh » Tue, May 17, 2011, 8:54 PM UTC

I'll point out its a rookie mistake to compare what is basically the executive branch of China's government to America's representative branch. It's apples to oranges.

Looking at the executive branch, the United States has:

State, Hillary Clinton, Lawyer

Treasury, Timothy Geithner, International Economics

Defense, Robert Gates, PhD History

Justice, Eric Holder, Lawyer

Interior, Ken Salazar, Lawyer

Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, Lawyer

Commerce, Gary Locke, Lawyer

Labor, Hilda Solis, MPA

Health Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, MPA

Housing and Urban Development, Shaun Donovan, MPA, Masters in Architecture

Transportation, Ray Lahood, B.S. Education and Sociology.

Department of Energy, Stephen Chu, Ph.D. Physics

Veterans Affairs, Eric Shinseki, Masters in English

Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, Lawyer

Vice President, Joe Biden, Lawyer

Chief of Staff, William Daley, Lawyer

Director OMB, Jacob Lew, Lawyer

Administrator EPA, Lisa Jackson, Chemical Engineering

Trade Rep, Ron Kirk, Lawyer

UN Ambassador, Susan Rice, Doctorate in Philosophy

Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, Austan Goolsbee, Ph. D Economics

Better to draw your comparisons with this, than with congress.

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#89

Post by anamax » Tue, May 17, 2011, 9:19 PM UTC

cabalamat wrote: post #55

Duff wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communist governments have usually attracted intellectuals to higher levels of power -- the results so far haven't been uplifting. I don't think that a comparison of the US system vs. China is going to produce a clear "winner", only a list of pros/cons whose weighting will be shaped by your perceptions and bias. The explosive growth of China hides most of the warts of the system. When you have economic growth so fast…

> the results so far haven't been uplifting 10% growth every year for a quarter of a century? I regard that as very impressive. > I don't think that a comparison of the US system vs. China is going to produce a clear "winner" It's likely that one of these two countries is going to end up dominating the world. Of course, it's not so much about countries as social systems: both have their strengths and weaknesses. > An…

> 10% growth every year for a quarter of a century? I regard that as very impressive.

It's not that impressive when you're chasing tail-lights and the folks ahead are (mostly) helping.

Re: Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists

#90

Post by tokenadult » Tue, May 17, 2011, 9:44 PM UTC

cabalamat wrote: post #55

Duff wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communist governments have usually attracted intellectuals to higher levels of power -- the results so far haven't been uplifting. I don't think that a comparison of the US system vs. China is going to produce a clear "winner", only a list of pros/cons whose weighting will be shaped by your perceptions and bias. The explosive growth of China hides most of the warts of the system. When you have economic growth so fast…

> the results so far haven't been uplifting 10% growth every year for a quarter of a century? I regard that as very impressive. > I don't think that a comparison of the US system vs. China is going to produce a clear "winner" It's likely that one of these two countries is going to end up dominating the world. Of course, it's not so much about countries as social systems: both have their strengths and weaknesses. > An…

10% growth every year for a quarter of a century? I regard that as very impressive.

China had the prior example of Taiwan to imitate. And Taiwan had China scared witless by the end of the Cultural Revolution, when it looked like the total size of Taiwan's economy, with only about one-SIXTIETH the population, might exceed the size of China's economy soon.