Hacker News Reader

Comment by altmanaltman | Hacker News Reader

Having the British lose the US was a good thing for France, simillarly preventing Russia from just taking over another country is for the best of other countries.

While there is no "job" of a country, it is natural that each one will work for its own best interest and any moves it makes in the global world is due to their own vested interests in some way including helping Haiti, France helpong Us and the world supporting Ukraine.

Why would a country act against its interest or just randomly? Alliances and corporation are a part of politics

View on HN

>Why would a country act against its interest or just randomly?

Because country as an entity is a mental construction for which "interest" is a categorical error. It’s certainly a useful concept, but pretending it has interests like some human individual can have have interests. Sure it can serve as rhetorical facility to sell some arguments.

Countries don’t have interests. Some people willing to take control of other people encompassed in that "country" groups have interests, and they don’t necessarily align with best interests of everyone or even majority in each of these groups.

I mostly agree, but there is some limit to that line of argument: a corporation is also a human, social concept, and we do accept that they act in their own interests (meaning they do have interests, sort of like humans do)

Well, you might agree with that, but on my side corporation are pure legal fictions, they don’t have have any intrinsics will and interest. That doesn’t mean they don’t have any existence, just that that there are have a different ontological status from a human person. Just like novel fictional characters, the fact they don’t map to any actual entity doesn’t mean they can’t entice affects they are supposed to convey between narrators and readers.

> Why would a country act against its interest or just randomly?

So why is the US supporting Russia again?

> Having the British lose the US was a good thing for France

This seems a bit reductionist. Why would they give the Statue Liberty to the US if they were only in it for the British loss?

The US independency war and the statue of liberty are two centuries apart.

Ah yes, I remember when they towed it into the New York Harbour in the early 70s, Richard Nixon was there to dedicate it.

Because Trump blackmailed with Epstein files by Russians.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com