I always found something mysterious and paradoxical about 1) Peter's characterization of China as a (definite?) pessimist. 2)Peter's quip that democracy is incompatible with freedom.
For 1), I'm guessing his characterization is based on "macroeconomic" observations of China's historically high savings rate and the aversion of East Asian businesses to taking on debt. For 2) I'm guessing that he's talking about mob rule, media monoculturization and overzealous regulation , all of which an be said to be enabled by democracy.
My question is thus this: given that the younger people in china are importing western views of debt, and that immigration/leftist dominance may lead to a more neurotic climate in the west, does he imagine that there will be a flip of the global optimism/pessimism division? Ie the west becoming more pessimistic than the east.
Personally, I think the flip is more likely due to the decline (in the west) of and correspondent evolution of technical education (in the east), since it's probably easier to find technological secrets than social zero-days (in the long run).. yes yes, I understand education too is a doubled-edged sword, but in STEM it's much easier to realize your elders are mistaken AND not be similarly mistaken yourself.