Meditations on Moloch (2014)(web.archive.org)
web.archive.org
Meditations on Moloch (2014)
https://web.archive.org/web/20200516181754/https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
49 comments
While the memes-as-viruses thing can be illustrative, it can also be oversold. We don't actually live in Snow Crash. Putting the wrong text in front of people does not turn them into zombies. The reality is both more banal and more horrifying: people out there genuinely have minds and mindsets that are different from your own, and arrive at conclusions that feel the same to them as yours do to you.
It’s not that people’s opinions are harmful to themselves, per se. Its that they are harmful to society as a whole. Right now, a hundred thousand Americans have died because of the meme factories. Millions more will die from the “climate change is fake” meme.
Anyone can come up with a story about how a policy they don’t like is harmful. That cannot be the bar for censoring its advocacy. What of the families and immortal souls destroyed by libertine sexual mores? What of the crimes committed because the system was swayed by memes about rehabilitation? What of the livelihoods destroyed by immigration? These harms are just as real to your opponents as COVID and climate change are to you.
See, you just assumed I don’t worry about those things, but I worry about all of them. There are thousands, if not millions of people worldwide held in slavery because of loose sexual morals. Some criminals can clearly never be rehabilitated, and separating those who can is a wicked problem. And in the Late Bronze Age Collapse, hordes of immigrants very nearly destroyed Western Civilization. So yes I am freaked out about these things.
The idea that I don’t worry about morals and livelihoods because I’m a liberal is another dangerous meme. Not once in my post did I suggest censorship as the solution; you’re applying the liberals wanna censor meme.
So you’re shutting down thinking because you had preconceived notions from media you saw: thanks for proving my original point.
The idea that I don’t worry about morals and livelihoods because I’m a liberal is another dangerous meme. Not once in my post did I suggest censorship as the solution; you’re applying the liberals wanna censor meme.
So you’re shutting down thinking because you had preconceived notions from media you saw: thanks for proving my original point.
I'd to posit that the "Yes, and.." through-line in this discussion is that there are no narratives/memes which cannot be weaponized into infectious parasitism by Moloch; including the very model of ideas as viruses, the tacit implication that Something Should Be Done About That, stories of censorship, anti-censorship, anti-anti-censorship, on and on.
I certainly don't think it's wise to ignore the problem, and pretend the internet is merely Printing Press 2.0; but neither is realistic to cut it off at the source (even the printing press was not without side effects). The call is coming from inside the house (the human nervous system and its emergent inter-networked social incentives).
I certainly don't think it's wise to ignore the problem, and pretend the internet is merely Printing Press 2.0; but neither is realistic to cut it off at the source (even the printing press was not without side effects). The call is coming from inside the house (the human nervous system and its emergent inter-networked social incentives).
One of the things I wonder about transhumanism and AI is whether we even want to optimize for human values. Or, in religious terms, original sin is real. But what value set we choose to optimize for, that's the problem. And the central question of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, where it never really gets resolved either.
> even the printing press was not without side effects)
Understatement of the Year award, right here.
> even the printing press was not without side effects)
Understatement of the Year award, right here.
I'm sure there's some position you hold that others worry about. If worrying about a thing is enough to treat speech in favor of it as a virus to be quarantined, that's going to come back on you somewhere.
I did briefly consider the possibility of being both left and right authoritarian at the same time, but since this ideology is rarely seen outside the state of Gilead in the The Haidmaid's Tale, took a calculated risk. You're right, my apologies. (And if you haven't seen the Hulu series, it's kind of fascinating: extreme religious conservative sexual repression but with solar panels and EVs and post-money command economy. The show fills this out a little more than the book did).
I did briefly consider the possibility of being both left and right authoritarian at the same time, but since this ideology is rarely seen outside the state of Gilead in the The Haidmaid's Tale, took a calculated risk. You're right, my apologies. (And if you haven't seen the Hulu series, it's kind of fascinating: extreme religious conservative sexual repression but with solar panels and EVs and post-money command economy. The show fills this out a little more than the book did).
[deleted]
If putting the wrong text in front of people can make them attend large public gatherings in the middle of a pandemic, that's pretty powerful and pretty comparably troubling. (Of course, it's not an entirely novel phenomenon either - the stereotypical mob with pitchforks and torches is basically the same kind of thing.)
> If putting the wrong text in front of people can make them attend large public gatherings in the middle of a pandemic,
Are you referring to people who attended the Trump rallies or the protestors against racism?
There are some things that people judge to be more important than the risk of Covid-19. Whether you find that reasonable or not, may say a lot more about your priors and priorities than about the logic of the people gathering.
Are you referring to people who attended the Trump rallies or the protestors against racism?
There are some things that people judge to be more important than the risk of Covid-19. Whether you find that reasonable or not, may say a lot more about your priors and priorities than about the logic of the people gathering.
api(1)
Yes. And some people are illiberal. Some people don't like the conflict and confusion and disruption of a liberal democracy; they'd rather a consensus of "people like us". And bad things happen when they support a leader who promises to make things simple.
This is not a left vs right thing, it's a liberty vs autocracy thing. If the popular autocrats win, they punish the people who have "mindsets that are different from" their supporters.
This is not a left vs right thing, it's a liberty vs autocracy thing. If the popular autocrats win, they punish the people who have "mindsets that are different from" their supporters.
> Some people don't like the conflict and confusion and disruption of a liberal democracy; they'd rather a consensus of "people like us". ... they punish the people who have "mindsets that are different from" their supporters.
I'm sorry but I need to whip out this quote from SSC once again:
"Here is a story I heard from a friend, which I will alter slightly to protect the innocent. A prestigious psychology professor signed an open letter in which psychologists condemned belief in innate sex differences. My friend knew that this professor believed such differences existed, and asked him why he signed the letter. He said that he expected everyone else in his department would sign it, so it would look really bad if he didn’t. My friend asked why he expected everyone else in his department to sign it, and he said “Probably for the same reason I did”.
From SSC, of course
I'm sorry but I need to whip out this quote from SSC once again:
"Here is a story I heard from a friend, which I will alter slightly to protect the innocent. A prestigious psychology professor signed an open letter in which psychologists condemned belief in innate sex differences. My friend knew that this professor believed such differences existed, and asked him why he signed the letter. He said that he expected everyone else in his department would sign it, so it would look really bad if he didn’t. My friend asked why he expected everyone else in his department to sign it, and he said “Probably for the same reason I did”.
From SSC, of course
> This is not a left vs right thing, it's a liberty vs autocracy thing. If the popular autocrats win, they punish the people who have "mindsets that are different from" their supporters.
... Idk why you chose to use liberals in your example when their push for woke political correctness is nothing short of autocratic thought control.
... Idk why you chose to use liberals in your example when their push for woke political correctness is nothing short of autocratic thought control.
He's probably talking about the principal of liberty. Turns out branding works really well to muddy natural language
Parent was using the original meaning of the word "liberal" not the modern mainly US meaning of "left wing" (which was called liberal because a long time ago it was largely about making freedom of thought, religion, and commerce legal)
Define “zombie”. I think there are endless examples of propaganda being completely effective in halting the critical thought of the target.
> people out there genuinely have minds and mindsets that are different from your own
This is true and important (and I'd add that if it doesn't make you uncomfortable... either you haven't taken in the full depth of it, or your mindset is very different from my own).
At the same time, though, there's already research that shows mindsets can be at primed by language, stories, even sensory experience. It's unlikely that people can be remote controlled, but it does appear they can be manipulated and have their mindset moved at least marginally by as minor an intervention as holding a warm drink, and I don't think anyone has a good idea of how far that can go for large-scale long-term information environment efforts.
This is true and important (and I'd add that if it doesn't make you uncomfortable... either you haven't taken in the full depth of it, or your mindset is very different from my own).
At the same time, though, there's already research that shows mindsets can be at primed by language, stories, even sensory experience. It's unlikely that people can be remote controlled, but it does appear they can be manipulated and have their mindset moved at least marginally by as minor an intervention as holding a warm drink, and I don't think anyone has a good idea of how far that can go for large-scale long-term information environment efforts.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Meh, the analogy breaks down too early for it to be useful or scary. Viruses infect you whether you choose to be infected or not. You can choose the type of information you read. You can use your rational thought to process what is in front of you. You can decided whether or not it is valuable, true, helpful, insightful, and so on.
If the point of this "meditation" is to show that freedom of speech is bad, then they need to prove the assumption that a lack of freedom of speech leads to higher quality information and less manipulation of the truth. History has proven otherwise.
If the point of this "meditation" is to show that freedom of speech is bad, then they need to prove the assumption that a lack of freedom of speech leads to higher quality information and less manipulation of the truth. History has proven otherwise.
Responding to your first part,
If that were the case then the entire advertisement industry would be rendered moot.
I do agree with you that certain individuals are "immune" to these sorts of viruses.
If that were the case then the entire advertisement industry would be rendered moot.
I do agree with you that certain individuals are "immune" to these sorts of viruses.
Moloch is game theory. Moloch is emergent behaviors in large groups of agents. We want to stop it, but these things are vastly larger and more powerful than the individuals who make them up. We can't resist any more than atoms can resist the properties of the matter they form.
Or can we? I think there are a few cases where we have, cases where we have used law or religion or spiritual awakenings or technology or bureaucracy to countermand the emergent will of the mindless collective of history, economy, and ecology. But somewhere along the way we listened to those who equate is with ought and gave up on such attempts, or we listened to the cynics who say the whole endeavor was a waste because it was only 70% successful not 100% successful.
BTW I think conspiracy theory is a folklore level awareness of game theoretic and emergent properties. Conspiracy theorists posit invisible canals behind these things. They are right about the effect but wrong about the cause. The agenda is real but the cabal does not exist. The cabal is all of us and none of us.
Or can we? I think there are a few cases where we have, cases where we have used law or religion or spiritual awakenings or technology or bureaucracy to countermand the emergent will of the mindless collective of history, economy, and ecology. But somewhere along the way we listened to those who equate is with ought and gave up on such attempts, or we listened to the cynics who say the whole endeavor was a waste because it was only 70% successful not 100% successful.
BTW I think conspiracy theory is a folklore level awareness of game theoretic and emergent properties. Conspiracy theorists posit invisible canals behind these things. They are right about the effect but wrong about the cause. The agenda is real but the cabal does not exist. The cabal is all of us and none of us.
I also recommend Nick Bostrom's article "The Future of Human Evolution", predating OP by ten years, which contains essentially the same arguments and conclusions.
https://www.nickbostrom.com/fut/evolution.html
https://www.nickbostrom.com/fut/evolution.html
[deleted]
Always glad to see this get some play on HN. As our civilization gets more interconnected and systems-centric, it becomes more and more useful to have a name for the demon in the machine.
I'm glad to see people keeping Scott's writing alive in the general conversation here. He has written so much over the years. It would be a terrible shame to see it fade into obscurity after the deletion of the blog.
Game theory / Moloch should've never let open-source software happen. While not perfect it works surprisingly well despite potentially suffering from all the same coordination problems outlined in this essay: free rider problem, tragedy of the commons, and all sorts of game theory race-to-the-bottom scenarios.
I also notice random acts of kindness from people, spontaneous corporation amongst rivaling tribes or companies, and things a strict self-interested agent-based analysis will tell us it's not possible.
It's an insightful model of the world but it's too simplistic and pessimistic.
I also notice random acts of kindness from people, spontaneous corporation amongst rivaling tribes or companies, and things a strict self-interested agent-based analysis will tell us it's not possible.
It's an insightful model of the world but it's too simplistic and pessimistic.
Part VIII.
> Somewhere in this darkness is another god. He has also had many names. In the Kushiel books, his name was Elua. He is the god of flowers and free love and all soft and fragile things. Of art and science and philosophy and love. Of niceness, community, and civilization. He is a god of humans.
> The other gods sit on their dark thrones and think “Ha ha, a god who doesn’t even control any hell-monsters or command his worshippers to become killing machines. What a weakling! This is going to be so easy!”
> But somehow Elua is still here. No one knows exactly how. And the gods who oppose Him tend to find Themselves meeting with a surprising number of unfortunate accidents.
> There are many gods, but this one is ours.
> Somewhere in this darkness is another god. He has also had many names. In the Kushiel books, his name was Elua. He is the god of flowers and free love and all soft and fragile things. Of art and science and philosophy and love. Of niceness, community, and civilization. He is a god of humans.
> The other gods sit on their dark thrones and think “Ha ha, a god who doesn’t even control any hell-monsters or command his worshippers to become killing machines. What a weakling! This is going to be so easy!”
> But somehow Elua is still here. No one knows exactly how. And the gods who oppose Him tend to find Themselves meeting with a surprising number of unfortunate accidents.
> There are many gods, but this one is ours.
Flowers and free love, just the other side of the coin:
>4. The Malthusian trap, at least at its extremely pure theoretical limits. Suppose you are one of the first rats introduced onto a pristine island. It is full of yummy plants and you live an idyllic life lounging about, eating, and composing great works of art (you’re one of those rats from The Rats of NIMH).
>You live a long life, mate, and have a dozen children. All of them have a dozen children, and so on. In a couple generations, the island has ten thousand rats and has reached its carrying capacity. Now there’s not enough food and space to go around, and a certain percent of each new generation dies in order to keep the population steady at ten thousand.
>4. The Malthusian trap, at least at its extremely pure theoretical limits. Suppose you are one of the first rats introduced onto a pristine island. It is full of yummy plants and you live an idyllic life lounging about, eating, and composing great works of art (you’re one of those rats from The Rats of NIMH).
>You live a long life, mate, and have a dozen children. All of them have a dozen children, and so on. In a couple generations, the island has ten thousand rats and has reached its carrying capacity. Now there’s not enough food and space to go around, and a certain percent of each new generation dies in order to keep the population steady at ten thousand.
> Moloch should've never let open-source software happen.
Maybe Moloch is catching up to open source. We read regularly of open source maintainers who are poor, burned out, and quitting. A lot of the open source work that happens is actually controlled by for profit corporations. Despite Chrome and Android being open source, it is optimized for advertising revenue for Google. Successful open source projects are incorporated in a SaaS offering, often cutting out the original developers. Other open source projects are acquired by large corporations and are shuttered. There still is not a reliable strategy for open source developers to support themselves, other than trying to use that notoriety to get hired by a big corporation, or try to upsell to non-open source add ons.
Maybe Moloch is catching up to open source. We read regularly of open source maintainers who are poor, burned out, and quitting. A lot of the open source work that happens is actually controlled by for profit corporations. Despite Chrome and Android being open source, it is optimized for advertising revenue for Google. Successful open source projects are incorporated in a SaaS offering, often cutting out the original developers. Other open source projects are acquired by large corporations and are shuttered. There still is not a reliable strategy for open source developers to support themselves, other than trying to use that notoriety to get hired by a big corporation, or try to upsell to non-open source add ons.
Moloch does require people willing to sacrifice some values or externalities in exchange for individual benefit. At scale, there's always people willing-to or forced-to or unknowingly doing that. But the examples you write about are mostly related to "individual contributions". You don't need all individual contributions to be like that for Moloch to be able to exist. You only need some, and scale. And then, the more pressure we have in a system, the lower the bar becomes for individuals to be willing to sacrifice certain things. I don't believe what you say points at any real contradiction.
That being said, I do not necessarily agree with Scott about the conclusion that we really can't coordinate unless some super-AI "helps us destroy Moloch".
That being said, I do not necessarily agree with Scott about the conclusion that we really can't coordinate unless some super-AI "helps us destroy Moloch".
Yeah, I think Scott loses his way at the end of that post. He is overestimating the chance that Warg Franklin’s approach is doomed; once you correct for that, it is not clear that trying to construct a values-aligned singleton is the best path forward, though I’m not opposed to research along that line.
> Sure, the Conspiracy program is cruel and demeaning, the cage is cramped and ugly and smells bad, but you can't get out and if you did get out you'd just want right back in again because the thing that is making the situation intolerable isn't in the situation, it's in your head.
NENSLO "hateword" http://www.subgenius.com/bigfist/answers/rants/X0022_Nenslo_...
FWIW, we have simple, easy solutions to all our physical problems. (Ask me about "aircrete".)
NENSLO "hateword" http://www.subgenius.com/bigfist/answers/rants/X0022_Nenslo_...
FWIW, we have simple, easy solutions to all our physical problems. (Ask me about "aircrete".)
> Ask me about "aircrete".
Alright, what about aircrete and how can it solve all our physical problems?
Alright, what about aircrete and how can it solve all our physical problems?
Cheers!
Air-crete is basically foam (like dish soap foam) mixed with concrete. It can't solve all of our physical problems but it's pretty useful: It's fire proof (you can build a furnace out of it), water proof (you can build a boat out of it), also bug- and mildew-proof. It's lightweight, strong, durable, and non-toxic. You can work it with hand tools. It holds nails and screws. It can be formed in blocks or panels or columns or poured into molds. The machinery to make it can be assembled from off-the-shelf parts for a couple of hundred dollars. You can use plain ol' concrete mix and dish soap for the foaming agent.
I heard about it years ago (Christopher Alexander wanted to use it with his Pattern Language generative architecture) but it seems that there's been a recent bloom of interest and applications with the invention of the small backyard-scale foamer/mixers. People can and are using aircrete to make all kinds of homes and other buildings. One group is teaching workshops on making cool spherical homes that cost a few thousand dollars, can be built by a handful of people in a couple of weeks, and will last for decades or even centuries.
This is just one example of a really keen solution that's (as yet) underutilized. I collect ideas the way stamp collectors collect stamps, and I've "seen things you people wouldn't believe." (I.e. ever heard of a phase conjugate mirror? You point your flash light at this mirror and the light is reflected back into the bulb.)
Air-crete is basically foam (like dish soap foam) mixed with concrete. It can't solve all of our physical problems but it's pretty useful: It's fire proof (you can build a furnace out of it), water proof (you can build a boat out of it), also bug- and mildew-proof. It's lightweight, strong, durable, and non-toxic. You can work it with hand tools. It holds nails and screws. It can be formed in blocks or panels or columns or poured into molds. The machinery to make it can be assembled from off-the-shelf parts for a couple of hundred dollars. You can use plain ol' concrete mix and dish soap for the foaming agent.
I heard about it years ago (Christopher Alexander wanted to use it with his Pattern Language generative architecture) but it seems that there's been a recent bloom of interest and applications with the invention of the small backyard-scale foamer/mixers. People can and are using aircrete to make all kinds of homes and other buildings. One group is teaching workshops on making cool spherical homes that cost a few thousand dollars, can be built by a handful of people in a couple of weeks, and will last for decades or even centuries.
This is just one example of a really keen solution that's (as yet) underutilized. I collect ideas the way stamp collectors collect stamps, and I've "seen things you people wouldn't believe." (I.e. ever heard of a phase conjugate mirror? You point your flash light at this mirror and the light is reflected back into the bulb.)
Thanks!
That does sound pretty cool.
But what was the reasoning behind your statement that "we have simple, easy solutions to all our physical problems" (even if not all those solutions come from aircrete)?
That does sound pretty cool.
But what was the reasoning behind your statement that "we have simple, easy solutions to all our physical problems" (even if not all those solutions come from aircrete)?
You're welcome. BTW here's the aircrete dome people: https://www.domegaia.com/
> But what was the reasoning behind your statement that "we have simple, easy solutions to all our physical problems" (even if not all those solutions come from aircrete)?
Thanks for asking! Let me see if I can compress and express the kernel of what I mean.
First, let me specify that, by "physical problems", I mean provisioning food, water, shelter, waste recycling, clothing, transportation, electric power, etc. as contrasted with political, ideological, social, and spiritual problems.
I'm a fan of a school of applied ecology called "Permaculture" (I recently learned of a parallel evolution of the same ideas called "Syntropic" agriculture.) It's been demonstrated in farms and projects all over the world by now. We can transform deserts into forests and meadows.
That accounts for food, water, waste recycling, and clothing, as well as some building material. Also many medicines can be grown in the garden.
If you mine lime, etc., you can make aircrete and that accounts for a tremendous amount of shelter. You also grow wood and bamboo for construction purposes.
If you integrate alcohol fuel production with your food forest you have a carbon-neutral fuel source. That accounts for electric power (along with renewables, solar, wind, hydro, etc.) and your much of your transportation costs. (You still have to mine metal and stuff for the vehicles themselves, of course.) ( http://alcoholcanbeagas.com/sitemap )
To sum up, if we "reboot" agriculture using what we now know about ecology (the science) we can provide for our needs in a way that is ecologically harmonious (and can therefore continue long enough that maybe we can sort out the other problems too, eventually.) Also, it's fun! And you can make money at it. (The Syntropic agriculture founder grows the best cocoa beans in the world, and gets 3x per acre as conventional cocoa farms, with no inputs. He mimics the natural forest.)
> But what was the reasoning behind your statement that "we have simple, easy solutions to all our physical problems" (even if not all those solutions come from aircrete)?
Thanks for asking! Let me see if I can compress and express the kernel of what I mean.
First, let me specify that, by "physical problems", I mean provisioning food, water, shelter, waste recycling, clothing, transportation, electric power, etc. as contrasted with political, ideological, social, and spiritual problems.
I'm a fan of a school of applied ecology called "Permaculture" (I recently learned of a parallel evolution of the same ideas called "Syntropic" agriculture.) It's been demonstrated in farms and projects all over the world by now. We can transform deserts into forests and meadows.
That accounts for food, water, waste recycling, and clothing, as well as some building material. Also many medicines can be grown in the garden.
If you mine lime, etc., you can make aircrete and that accounts for a tremendous amount of shelter. You also grow wood and bamboo for construction purposes.
If you integrate alcohol fuel production with your food forest you have a carbon-neutral fuel source. That accounts for electric power (along with renewables, solar, wind, hydro, etc.) and your much of your transportation costs. (You still have to mine metal and stuff for the vehicles themselves, of course.) ( http://alcoholcanbeagas.com/sitemap )
To sum up, if we "reboot" agriculture using what we now know about ecology (the science) we can provide for our needs in a way that is ecologically harmonious (and can therefore continue long enough that maybe we can sort out the other problems too, eventually.) Also, it's fun! And you can make money at it. (The Syntropic agriculture founder grows the best cocoa beans in the world, and gets 3x per acre as conventional cocoa farms, with no inputs. He mimics the natural forest.)
If someone could produce a book of his writings, I would buy it. Not sure for how much.
Good news. There are free ebooks, one per year: https://github.com/georgjaehnig/webpages-to-ebook/blob/maste...
Also looks like someone combined them into one ebook: https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/hkbfj4/all_...
Also looks like someone combined them into one ebook: https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/hkbfj4/all_...
I'm very pleased to see this. I hadn't thought about Slate Star Codex still being available on the Internet Archive. After seeing this post I was thinking about going through my bookmarks and finding copies of my favorite SSC posts in the Archive. Downloading an ebook is so much easier.
Thank you for posting these links, and thank you to the people who created these ebooks.
P. S. Fuck New York Times for fucking with Slate Star Codex.
Thank you for posting these links, and thank you to the people who created these ebooks.
P. S. Fuck New York Times for fucking with Slate Star Codex.
> As outside civilizations compete against you, your conditions will become more and more constrained.
This explains why I think China is currently "winning at economy" and will do so even more in the future, simply because they can see long term since the removal of the two-term limit of their president[1], and other[2] tactics[3].
From a "god’s-eye-view", countries should not withdraw democracy & freedom from the hands of their citizens. But logically, I think this gives an incentive for all other countries to also take this unfair advantage (become capitalist dictatorships) in order to compete with China. But I'm not sure how logically this will play out in the next few decades.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/26/xi-jinping-chi...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Railway_(1990)
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Hong_Kong_extradition_bil...
This explains why I think China is currently "winning at economy" and will do so even more in the future, simply because they can see long term since the removal of the two-term limit of their president[1], and other[2] tactics[3].
From a "god’s-eye-view", countries should not withdraw democracy & freedom from the hands of their citizens. But logically, I think this gives an incentive for all other countries to also take this unfair advantage (become capitalist dictatorships) in order to compete with China. But I'm not sure how logically this will play out in the next few decades.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/26/xi-jinping-chi...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Railway_(1990)
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Hong_Kong_extradition_bil...
China has instituted a single point of failure in a man who will cognitively decline over the coming decade(s). A man who is so vain and petty that he has instituted a personal cult. (And it should be noted that all advances China has made was made before Xi's coup).
This explains why I think China is currently "winning at economy" and will do so even more in the future, simply because they can see long term since the removal of the two-term limit of their president[1], and other[2] tactics[3].
From a "god’s-eye-view", countries should not withdraw democracy & freedom from the hands of their citizens. But logically, I think this gives an incentive for all other countries to also take this unfair advantage (become capitalist dictatorships) in order to compete with China. But I'm not sure how logically this will play out in the next few decades.
And yet I see articles positing strategic mistakes and unforced errors on the behalf of the Chinese.
Mostly, I am of the opinion that outsiders don't know what's really going on in the country because the truth of China is distorted by propaganda and censorship regime they built up over generations and lack of independent abilities to verify anything.
Maybe even the government don't know what's going on either.
From a "god’s-eye-view", countries should not withdraw democracy & freedom from the hands of their citizens. But logically, I think this gives an incentive for all other countries to also take this unfair advantage (become capitalist dictatorships) in order to compete with China. But I'm not sure how logically this will play out in the next few decades.
And yet I see articles positing strategic mistakes and unforced errors on the behalf of the Chinese.
Mostly, I am of the opinion that outsiders don't know what's really going on in the country because the truth of China is distorted by propaganda and censorship regime they built up over generations and lack of independent abilities to verify anything.
Maybe even the government don't know what's going on either.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/21/nobody-knows-anything-a...
At least everyone is equally in the dark.
At least everyone is equally in the dark.
I especially enjoyed this part:
"The point is – imagine a country full of bioweapon labs, where people toil day and night to invent new infectious agents. The existence of these labs, and their right to throw whatever they develop in the water supply is protected by law. And the country is also linked by the world’s most perfect mass transit system that every single person uses every day, so that any new pathogen can spread to the entire country instantaneously. You’d expect things to start going bad for that city pretty quickly.
Well, we have about a zillion think tanks researching new and better forms of propaganda. And we have constitutionally protected freedom of speech. And we have the Internet. So we’re kind of screwed."