Hacker News Reader

Comment by patrickaljord | Hacker News Reader

Google is technically superior to baidu in many areas, specially for a developers. It gives better answers in many subjects, not just the censored ones. Besides who are we to decide for the Chinese what is best for them? Sounds a bit condescending and paternalistic. Here here, baidu is enough for you to play with, don't bother with google.

View on HN

This argument is backwards - Google isn't the one preventing Chinese people from using Google! Nobody has said that China isn't allowed to have Google except the CCP.

Google has already provided China with a product: uncensored search. If the Chinese (for the sake of argument, naively assuming that the CCP acts on behalf of its citizens) don't think that's what's best for China, fine. They don't have to use it.

> Besides who are we to decide for the Chinese what is best for them?

That's exactly the issue people have. Censorship. No one should be deciding what others can search.

> Besides who are we to decide for the Chinese what is best for them?

You do realize that the "people" do not have a voice in China right? It is not a democracy...

The Chinese appear to think, collectively, that authoritarianism is better than democracy. They could revolt. The Chinese military is under funded with failing equipment, though they are trying to improve in areas. The sheer size of their military makes it difficult to have common weapons and gear available. 100 million citizens throwing themselves against that machine, would wear it down quickly. They don't do this.

The Chinese had a century or more of bloody civil war recently, within historical terms. They don't like regime change.

They historically were fine under the emperor, who was authoritarian. They are use to autocratic, central government. Unless things get extremely bad, I don't see them thinking that democracy is better than their current stability. If Xi Jinping does a decent job of getting rid of corruption and improving the air quality, I doubt you'll see a revolt even with a depression in China.

Edit: for those downvoting, how about a dialog? Democracy is not a native idea for the Chinese. Their major philosophical systems support a rigid hierarchy, which is not compatible with the democratic norm of anyone can attempt to run for office. They've lost millions to wars before Mao calmed everyone down. Even with Mao's major famine, there wasn't a revolt. 45 million died, and no uprising. If 100k died at the hands of the US government, there would be blood in the streets. Probably true with 1k. The Chinese do not care about authoritarianism.

The military equipment is irrelevant; they are still far more coordinated than the civilians are permitted to be. Suppressing collective action is one of the central goals of authoritarian censorship.

Democracy is no more a native idea for western culture; 250 years ago every state was a monarchy, and political ideologies based in hierarchy still regularly win elections.

I think your notion here is naive. Assuming a majority of people in China is fine with the way the government runs, does not negate the fact that many people are not. In a country of a billion people, we are speaking of millions of people. For this, as a first step, you just need to look at minorities like Uighurs, Tibetians, Mongolians. It does not end there.

Also, you cannot use the word "choice" when no options were ever given. A large chunk of people can be unhappy with how the government operates while still not marching the streets. The world is not binary. People living in China also know that the government went to extreme lengths when it came to ending protests in the past: shooting at their own citizens.

The joy of market processes is that those who like Pepsi more and those who like Coke more can both be satisfied at the same time, unlike the Republican voters of San Francisco or the Democrats of Utah.

It's only condescending in a nationalist sense. I look at my own government and how well it chooses what is best for me, and I have to ask, who is the Chinese government to decide what is best for the Chinese people?

Unless you're an anarchist, that's exactly what the government's job is: decide what's best for people. That's why you have prescription only drugs, anti-vice laws, securities. All these things exist because the government think the people are too dumb to decide things by themselves. Not saying I agree with it, just saying you would need to argue for anarchism if you were to argue "who is the X government to decide what is best for the X people?".

I think the government's job is to provide the goods and services that the free market can't effectively provide or wouldn't provide to most citizens. Roads, military defense, healthcare, etc. I'm no anarchist but I very much disagree the government should be deciding what is best for people. Areas where it tries to are a mistake.

> that's exactly what the government's job is: decide what's best for people.

Wrong. The government’s Just is to protect life and liberty and ensure a legal framework for the enforcement of contracts. It’s just is most certainly not deciding what is best for people. Protect my rights and otherwise stay out of the way.

Why could we not protect ourselves? Many ancaps or ancoms would argue that would be possible. The government assumes they know better than you do on how to enforce contracts or protect yourself and impose a monopoly on force by force to make sure you can't build alternatives. So yeah, it is based on the premise that they know better than you do on certain areas of life. People just disagree how wide these areas should be. I may be mistaken though so feel free to prove me wrong.

Also, Baidu is completely in the pocket of the Chinese government. They are happy to censor anything and everything they're asked. Google is not beholden in this way and will censor the minimum amount possible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com