• تحريرها كلها ممكن@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    A nation of 330 million cannot control a nation that has 1 billion more people. Nations should also be free to choose their own destiny. A logical fallacy many in the West fall for is assuming the rest of the world wants to be like them and should be like them. If I have a 3000 or 4000 year-old civilization why should I take marching orders from a baby state that’s not even 300 years old like the US?

    • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      You don’t need to invoke irrelevant arguments like the age of the civilization. Today’s China is nothing like the China of 3000 years ago.

      The US and the collective West should just look at its past and its actions to realize it’s not a good model.

      It’s even truer today with its support of Israel. It’s not in a good position to give anyone lessons about anything.

        • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          When China had its socialist revolution, it threw away some of its principles in an instant. While its history has an influence on its current reality, it’s far from being the main thing that explains why China is China and why it shouldn’t aspire to be the US.

          This is essentializing nonsense, that only helps to further narratives that cement things in time, and fail to explain the changing reality of China.

          There are much more solid arguments to be made against the West being seen as a model.

          • تحريرها كلها ممكن@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I really can’t speak for China, a Chinese would be better informed here. But if I were to draw parallels to the discourse here [Arab and Muslim world], history plays a huge role, not just as a model to follow. As socialism is clearly a break from the past for China. But lessons to learn from and shape your world view.

            For the Arab world Islam was the midpoint of our history and a new beginning. But we still carry on things that even predate our ethnogenesis as a distinct Semitic people, as past lessons.

            it’s far from being the main thing that explains why China is China and why it shouldn’t aspire to be the US.

            China is China because of its economic model. I do believe socialism is a better model than capitalism. But even some capitalist countries are closer to China than the US because the culture emphasizes things like harmony and shared prosperity, and places a greater burden on the government’s responsibility towards the people and their welfare. Things like this are motivated and informed by our own history and culture, at least for Arabs.

            Source: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/state-owned-enterprises-global-economy-reason-concern

          • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Western people with 500 years of culture have no idea what role millenia old civilisation plays for some places, like Indian, Chinese or Egyptian civilisations. Please do not speak without experience and learn humility.

            I am from India.

            • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Not every westerner comes from the US. Quit being so condescending.

              You’ve been proven wrong anyway 🙄

              I am a shoe.

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      The British Empire and basically the world was controlled by a single city of ~1million. And besides the historical and current examples of smaller cities controlling much more land and people then they had themselves, the statement doesn’t make sense. Why can’t a nation of 330 million control a nation of 331million?