← Back to context

Comment by palmotea

7 hours ago

> Sounds like a loser diatribe. Nobody asked your country to do anything with China. Was your government's and corporations choice and yes they had to pay for the privilege of cheap labor and later for advanced manufacturing capacity.

No, the GP's comment is an attempt to correct the mistake you were so kind to outline. There's no reason we must stick with the approach set by a previous set of leaders who turned out to be short-signed and naive, and course corrections start with outlining the problems and contradictions of the present course.

What's short-sighted and naive is believing that globalism can be reversed, that economic efficiency can be overcome by political will, and that knowledge can be contained to one country. More and deeper international economic and political entaglements are inevitable. How can an adversarial relationship with one of the most advanced countries with abundant production and labor capacity help anything? Economic nationalism and high tech are incompatible.

  • > economic efficiency can be overcome by political will

    It was political will that created that economic efficiency, that you're now trying to convince us is just a fact of nature.

    > Economic nationalism and high tech are incompatible.

    China is economically (and traditionally) nationalist - that's why they subsidize and protect their important industries: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49421633