Ha? This is even dangerous! You're basically yearning for an authoritarian regime. With simplistic argument and some false assumptions you conclude it's more efficient bcz it does not waste basically trial/error. However, this has been proven times after time that such "alternative political philosophy" will defeat its purpose and become highly corrupt. Furthermore, we're in a incomplete information game, evolution is a must, and you can not 'design' things apriori.
Western societies, at least when it comes to political philosophy, are far more efficient than their eastern counterparts if you meant it.
wholeheartedly agree, just it's not "getting better at representing what I thought". Instead, it's a tool of thought process, which is dynamic. These to interwoven in a dynamic relation and it's hard to separate them.
Many justify a long-term, sometimes subtle (even vague) concept that has been codified through years of education, culture, propaganda, and tangible massive on-the-ground benefits. That concept and the reason people on the east coast (Hans) support exploiting, manipulating, and projecting power on the west (Tibet, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, etc.) is determined by geopolitics. In one case, China's water resources and long-term economic stability depend on controlling the highlands in the west. The rest is just fabricated reasoning sugarcoating their strategy to cover this strategic vulnerability. A typical Han Chinese with roots in the developed east might not think in these terms transparently. Still, it has years of education and the harsh reality of its region to transform this into an assortment of (un)justified reasoning. They need it to control and secure their stability.
This has also been the case in many other regions, for example, the Middle East, where such harsh geopolitical realities have been codified in different nationalistic and sectarian fractions.
Agree but I'm not sure, if my comment understood correctly.
1. I didn't talk about should, I describe the problem with parent comment i.e. immorality of normalization. I have heard such justification before which goes to similar next step. That next step was what the normalizers might say.
2. It's from the point of white washers not the moral stand point that you depicts
3. As a proof, just check the comment in this section by @dirtyid which describe the 'next' I talked about:
> Behaving like a "savage" has very little to do with time but where countries are in their development.
~~(fun fact, I didn't saw it the first time and it was delightful seeing a proof in next step above)~~
Again, If it wasn't clear originally, What I liked to bring attention to is the white-washing (normalization) of tyrannies. It has been done for Nazis and it's currently being done in western journalists and lobbyist. Look at any sort of authoritarian atrocity and you'll see a white washer in NY or DC normalizing it.
You know what is wrong with this statement? This is normalization: "Yes, it's bad, but you've done it too". Probably, the next is "This is part of development and we go through it..., as well!". Anyway, this sort of rationalization are one of the tricks that authoritarian regimes do and interestingly often then recruit western journalist white wash them and with a diverse assortment of such rationalizations, and much more delicate and elaborate.
Bitwarden is free for individuals and couples. So, it's free user-friendly (WAF!!) wise [0] in comparison to 1pass [1]. But much more important thing is the fact that bitwarden is open source and 1pass not. Closed source is deal-breaker for me.
Western societies, at least when it comes to political philosophy, are far more efficient than their eastern counterparts if you meant it.