Hacker News Reader

Comment by zozin | Hacker News Reader

The thought of living in a China-centric world during the twilight of my life on Earth (2050+) makes my hair stand on end. I do not want to be treated as a second class human because of the color of my skin or my ethnicity. I do not want to lose business and professional opportunities because I am not Han. I do not want to live in a world where freedom of speech and expression are long lost memories, where even the rich and powerful have to pay fealty to the emperor or face the ultimate consequence. I do not want to live in a world of ultranationalism and jingoistic ethnocentrism, of repressive regimes that eliminate rights and protections on a whim. I don’t know what the solution is, I do not want war, but that is looking more inevitable than ever at this point.

View on HN

Where do you live now?

I think that war is much more likely than a peaceful transition to a China-centric world.

I also don't think that war will be a "hot" conflict. China's economy would collapse if the developed world abandoned it.

What will continue is the "cold wars" being waged right now through the internet. Russia, China, and Iran are all actively trying to destabilize the US. All have had some success, with Russia seemingly having the most success (although the relevant intelligence briefings are still classified for now).

There's no reason for countries successfully waging digital wars (with no casualties or loss of business) to suddenly start firing missiles in a world of mutually-assured destruction.

War is unlikely because of mutual destruction guaranteed by Nuclear weapons.

What's most likely is information erosion, brain washing, espionage and political upheaval caused by CCP actors. Be careful what you write on the internet. You'll see the full wrath of CCP cancel culture like you've never seen before in the year 2050. Also, keep an eye on whichever country you belong to and how its government is not influenced by CCP. It might be a little too late for Australia [1].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/world/australia/politicia...

War is almost guaranteed at this stage.

Why?

Because the US won’t want to relinquish their global hegemony and PRC has been slowly preparing for the moment when they can make their move.

Both have nuclear weapons.

If the war is going to happen it will happen somewhere close to China, because the reverse isn't possible.

But if you are talking about winning a war that is close to China, against China, you are not in the right mind.

Truth to be told, not even US can afford to total war against China on its own. You need a WW3 to drag everyone into the battle.

Interesting. China was just doing its own thing in the mid-1900's. Sure it was no paradise to live in, but they were pretty much irrelevant on the world stage. Then all these multinational corporations come along, pump steroids into the Chinese economy (and by extension, the CCP) while fattening their own pockets, and after a few decades, play dumb and whine about how China hasn't been playing fair. Am I wrong on any of this or am I going to get a bunch of anonymous downvotes?

Now some basement-dwelling armchair generals want to go to war with the consequences of our own making. If humanity ends in a cloud of fallout, it'll be hard to say we didn't deserve it.

Pretty spot on.

Edit: if your last paragraph was relating to me I never advocated for it. Why is it you can’t say how you see things panning out without people thinking that you want it to be that way? I noticed it a lot on social media these days. For example I dislike Trump but predicted his election and was crucified for it. I was right.

I don't think we're going to go to war -- at least not in any conventional sense. But if I'm wrong, it would prove that we're little more than baboons who happen to be able to understand some advanced math.

Looking at the historical record, an implosion of the CCP and infighting seems equally likely.

I remember both "islamofascism" and "weapons of mass destruction". Those were not only historical, they were even this century.

I'm not sure what that has to do with my comment.

The problem with whataboutism is that even if you can establish equivalence (you haven't) it doesn't refute the underlying statement.

Furthermore, in this case it may assume that I have some desire to defend the US's former middle eastern policy. It is not impossible to dislike both in varying degrees.

Although it is illogical, it is an effective way to derail the discussion. I admit that much.

It was agreeing with your comment.

As your comment points out, the current $BOOGEYMAN is probably not as strong as sold. My comment was intended to say that, with hindsight, not only have all the recent @BOOGEYMEN not been existential threats (for the US in particular, let alone "The West" in general), a recent one was even fabricated.

Rumsfeld on looting as a sign of freedom:

> "While no one condones looting, on the other hand, one can understand the pent-up feelings that may result from decades of repression and people who have had members of their family killed by that regime, for them to be taking their feelings out on that regime, ... I don't think there's anyone in any of those pictures ... [who wouldn't] accept it as part of the price of getting from a repressed regime to freedom."

Historically, China has never been an aggressively expansionist actor. Don't know if the CCP China would abide by the same values though

China was the dominant power in East Asia for the best part of 2 millennia. It expanded aggressively during periods when it was strong, absorbing many native cultures in the periphery, and had many neighbouring states paying tribute and aligning with its values (e.g. Confucianism). It was an Empire, but the difference (compared with European Empires) being it was not a naval power that established colonies across oceans.

Invoking dystopian fantasies to rally cry for war? Seriously?

Same thing happened during most other wars, older population calls upon the younger population to defend their rights and riches. No war is better than peace.

> Same thing happened during most other wars, older population calls upon the younger population to defend their rights and riches. No war is better than peace.

Seriously, the clearer we see that boycotts and economic isolation are far more favourable than preserving the Wealth of a Boomer generation the sooner this via War that mentality can fade from Human consciousness.

I'd sooner see all of the boomers have their wealth stripped and lost before even a proxy war take place with drones.

This isn't entirely generational conflict, I have worked with some amazing people who happened to be Boomer aged, but given how collectively calloused they've been to all other generations to support an unsustainable path I want to see a massive correction in their standard of living and quality of Life so they get a wake up call to the true costs what what they have imposed upon the World. More of a rigid confined mental state that has been upheld for so long that they cannot escape it without a real kick to the head. Most of Greta's followers of notoriety are all Boomer Age or older, but seldom actually do anything: Merkle being a prime example of this.

As a millennial, I have it very clear in my mind how Gen Z will likely be the first generation to totally abandon any filial/paternal loyalty left in decision making when they truly understand the gravity of not just the Political/Economic damage (which has always been transient) that they are gong to inherit the dire Environmental situation.

I hope we see a massive diaspora of Humans to rural under populated places as a result, and given my conversations with many who seem disillusioned with their prospects in both the East and West that seems to be already happening; many HKers are fleeing to Taiwan or the UK, and others have been in Canada for some time but they're also moving to Australia, and the US.

These are highly skilled, highly educated migrants with Western values that are being competed for. Taiwan is offering them a form of UBI for those that arrive from HK die to political reasons, and the UK is making lots of accommodations for BN(O) passport holders.

This is what disruption looks like, its never pretty and almost always pretty damn messy, but I'm glad we're here as the CCP has to be stopped.

For many of us with privilege, it has been a long summer.

You’re describing Latin America and for that sole reason that you don’t see the irony of your argument, I think, what you described, will happen.

I don't believe the odds of China #1 are 100%, but...

>I do not want to lose business and professional opportunities because I am not Han.

I don't think this will be as big of a problem as you expect it to be. Do you have any western Han friends who do business in China? Being Han isn't going to stop others from trying to screw you over, even if you aren't Western.

If you're actually worried, then your main concern should be learning Mandarin.

I think only a few demographics will experience the racism that you fear.

Unlike the US, China hasn't been interested in exporting its form of government since the Cold War. If anything, they'd prefer if their rivals stayed more democratic and free, so it's easier to make money and spread propaganda there.

Also keep in mind that China is making way more enemies than friends these days, so there is no way the world is going to be China-centric to the extent that you're worried about.

"If anything, they'd prefer if their rivals stayed more democratic and free, so it's easier to make money and spread propaganda there."

We see no evidence for that. In fact, that's part of their current propaganda as well, if you read their news.

See their reactions to the BLM protests and banning of TikTok in India and the US. Of course they'll tell their citizens that their government is the best and other countries should copy that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com