Jump to content

China


seven

Recommended Posts

On 12/21/2020 at 2:57 AM, seven said:

So the Wuhans are enjoying themselves while we are struggling with their virus:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/photos-wuhans-vibrant-nightlife-show-173453193.html

  • People in Wuhan, China, are out in the streets and partying without masks, which makes it look like life is basically back to normal in the city.

Isn't this exactly what happened in major UK, US and European cities when lockdown measures were eased? Then the 2nd and 3rd infectious peaks came by. It is human nature to celebrate when strict measures are lifted - and we will wait and see if their celebrations will cause another round of outbreaks in Wuhan. China is closely monitoring the situation so they should be able to localize any outbreaks quickly without more widespread infections.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rxpharm said:

Isn't this exactly what happened in major UK, US and European cities when lockdown measures were eased?

Yes sure, but (do you) you fail to see the irony and how upsetting this behaviour is to the rest of the world who got their virus. Or do you still not admit it came from China?

4 hours ago, rxpharm said:

China is closely monitoring the situation so they should be able to localize any outbreaks quickly without more widespread infections.

I don't believe that, sorry. Why would they do better than Europe or US?  Its f**king mayhem here because of China.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, seven said:

Why would they do better than Europe or US?  

They will wear masks, seal off infected areas, impose lockdowns, use mobile phones to track and trace, bring in hundreds/thousands of medical staff from all over China, and build new hospitals if needed. As they did in Wuhan.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an article published in the editorial section of the British Medical Journal, October 19, 2020. It has not been externally peer reviewed and is an opinion work, but still has value in the opinion expressed.

Quote

Covid-19’s known unknowns

BMJ 2020; 371 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3979 (Published 19 October 2020)

Cite this as: BMJ 2020;371:m3979

  1. George Davey Smith, professor in clinical epidemiology1,  
  2. Michael Blastland, writer and broadcaster2,  
  3. Marcus Munafò, professor of biological psychology1
  4.  
Editorials

Covid-19’s known unknowns

BMJ 2020; 371 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3979 (Published 19 October 2020)Cite this as: BMJ 2020;371:m3979
 
 
  1. George Davey Smith, professor in clinical epidemiology1,  
  2. Michael Blastland, writer and broadcaster2,  
  3. Marcus Munafò, professor of biological psychology1
  1. Author affiliations
  1. Correspondence to: G Davey Smith PA-ieudirector@bristol.ac.uk

The more certain someone is about covid-19, the less you should trust them

In 2019, the medical historian Mark Honigsbaum concluded his book The Pandemic Century by saying: “The only thing that is certain is that there will be new plagues and new pandemics. It is not a question of if, but when.”1

Look around and you might wonder if he was hopelessly wrong. Not about the pandemic, which turned up almost before his ink was dry, but about there being only one certainty. In the “science” of covid-19, certainties seem to be everywhere. Commentators on every side—academic, practitioner, old media or new—apparently know exactly what’s going on and exactly what to do about it.

We are not talking about those who insist that hydroxychloroquine will save us all, or who call face masks “muzzles” or “face nappies,” or who declare that many detected covid-19 cases are false positives. We can also leave aside those who sidestep reality to suggest that we’ll have a world free of covid-19 within months if we simply follow their advice.

Rather, we are thinking of the many rational people with scientific credentials making assertive public pronouncements on covid-19 who seem to suggest there can be no legitimate grounds for disagreeing with them. If you do, they might imply, it’s probably because you’re funded by dark forces or vested interests, you’re not evidence based, you’re morally blind to the harm you would do, you’re ideologically driven (but I’m objective), you think money matters more than lives, your ideas are a dangerous fantasy . . . . On they go, duelling certitudes2 in full view of a public desperate for simple answers and clarity—even when, unfortunately, these may not exist.

Conveying “certainty”

The certainty can be explicit or implied. In just one area—infectious disease modelling—there are many examples. One is the use of precise numbers to convey certainty, often with faux qualification. In the foundational Imperial College model, the authors predicted “approximately 510 000 deaths”3 for an unmitigated epidemic in Great Britain. With any reasonable uncertainty, such an approximation would be expressed as “half a million.” The shifting denominator between Great Britain and the United Kingdom used when communicating this figure would in itself make a difference of considerably more than 10 000. The need to appropriately convey uncertainty—in infectious disease models and more generally—has been emphasised by statisticians for decades.45

Another example is the added traction that claims achieve because of the reputation—institutional or personal—under which they are advanced, and which would receive little credence if advanced by others. For example, the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation—which produces the authoritative Global Burden of Disease reports—released a curve fitting model with strikingly low estimates of the future burden of covid-19 in the US.6 Although popular with President Trump, the model was rapidly revealed as misleading.16

A third example is the creation of a new argument while quietly ignoring an earlier claim that has since been discredited. Models produced from two opposing camps in discussions on covid-19—Independent SAGE and the instigators of the Great Barrington declaration—both suggested that a high proportion of the UK population was infected during the first wave of covid-19.78 Substantial serological survey evidence showed that this was probably not so. Both sides then produced models that embraced work by others,910 showing that heterogeneity in contact or susceptibility in the population could dampen infection trajectories, but without explicitly acknowledging their earlier conclusions.1112

We could find similar examples for every aspect of covid-19 science—discussions of whether viral mutation is changing SARS-CoV-2 infectiousness or virulence, the extent of personal immunity to SARS-CoV-2 generated by previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 or another endemic coronavirus, the infection fatality rate, the value of different testing strategies, the effect of school closures, what we can learn from international comparisons, and so on. Strongly contrasting but apparently equally authoritative statements are made about all of these and more.

Of course, overconfidence about our understanding of covid-19 comes in various guises. One is when the evidence changes little but conclusions based on it harden, as with the value of facemasks in the early stages of the pandemic. Views polarise alongside the increasing certainty with which they are expressed, as if we are in a trench war where giving an inch risks losing a mile.

Another comes in the form of the “armchair epidemiologist” who seems blessed with the astounding ability of star economists and physicists to fully assimilate and transcend within weeks what infectious disease specialists have learnt over decades. The seriousness with which they are received in some circles is likely to be damaging. Similar over-reaching is seen within the broad range of disciplines that are central to epidemic disease management, with some academics who are ubiquitous across every media appearing to have complete and cutting edge knowledge on everything from macroeconomics through sociological and psychological science to stochastic RNA mutation. Dealing with pandemics is an inherently multidisciplinary task, and expertise in one area does not confer expertise in another.

Respecting uncertainty

Acknowledging uncertainty a little more might improve not only the atmosphere of the debate and the science, but also public trust. If we publicly bet the reputational ranch on one answer, how open minded can we be when the evidence changes?

People may worry that acknowledging uncertainty risks a loss of authority, but this seems unlikely to be true13— the government’s trustworthiness or authority has not increased with the confidence of its “game changing” pronouncements.

Similarly, to allege that anyone who speaks of uncertainty is a “merchant of doubt”14 or exposes science to attack from these quarters, is to concede vital scientific ground by implying that only certainty will do. Generally, and particularly in the context of covid-19, certitude is the obverse of knowledge.

Returning to our starting point, two unequivocal authorities have written that “As our understanding of influenza viruses has increased dramatically in recent decades we have moved ever further from certainty about the determinants of, and possibilities for, pandemic emergence.”15 Their point is illustrated by the largely unexpected pandemic of coronavirus disease hitting a world bristling with influenza pandemic management plans.

When deciding whom to listen to in the covid-19 era, we should respect those who respect uncertainty, and listen in particular to those who acknowledge conflicting evidence on even their most strongly held views. Commentators who are utterly consistent, and see whatever new data or situation emerge through the lens of their pre-existing views—be it “Let it rip” or “Zero covid now”—would fail this test.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: We have read and understood BMJ policy on declaration of interests and declare that all three authors have been wrong about covid-19. MM and MB initially believed substantial undocumented transmission meant that a large proportion of the UK population was infected during the first wave. Subsequent seroprevalence surveys indicated that this was not the case. GDS thought that SARS-CoV-2 would be amplified through children and substantial mortality displacement would be observed. Neither has been the case.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh my god... so covid has mutated? never expected that to happen with a virus.

Somebody help me please because as a poor old boy i do get a bit confused and bemused with all this stuff.

so... are we seeing a second wave of the original first wave, or a third wave of the original first wave? or a 2nd wave of the 2nd wave? or are we seeing the first wave of a new wave?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, rxpharm said:

Regarding your point 2 - this is a faulty conclusion - there are other infectious diseases that can have asymptomatic transmission. One of the best documented and known cases was "Typhoid Mary" who carried the typhoid bacteria but never had symptoms. It was estimated she infected 53 people who died from the Typhoid infection. Other examples are: HIV, C. difficile, influenzas, cholera, and tuberculosis.

Mutations of infectious diseases are not uncommon. The statement that one scientist says 800 years before this many mutations could have evolved is not supported by the general scientific community. It also would be beneficial to see just how this scientist was able to come to this conclusion.

 

 

Yes I agree, the 800 year statement can easily be challenged.... its just her opinion/guess..

 

 

But my question to you specifically, do you 100% exclude the virology labs in Wuhan as the source of this virus?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The-Sith said:

But my question to you specifically, do you 100% exclude the virology labs in Wuhan as the source of this virus?

Right now I would say it is highly unlikely. Many experienced and competent scientists from Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Europe and the US have come to the conclusion that this virus is not synthetic/made in a lab. That doesn't rule out the possibility of a lab accident, but makes the theory this is a genetically engineered "bioweapon" unlikely.

As I have posted in the past, there is still a lot we don't know about the virus - the Italians have now found indications that suggest it may be been present as early as September 2019 as antibodies have been detected in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020.  Other countries are also finding that cases were found months earlier than initially thought.

Does that rule out China as the source? Perhaps not - but then it could be indications that the origin MAY have been somewhere else. To focus and promote theories that are not supported by clear evidence distract and inhibit effective control efforts to slow down the spread of COVID 19 before the vaccine is widely administered. The study I posted about attitudes regarding the origin of the COVID 19 pandemic and receptiveness to guidelines/regulation to mitigate the spread of the virus is a concern. It doesn't take a significant percentage of a population to reject these guidelines/regulations to keep a pandemic going. Of course it is made worse when authorities fail to follow the guidelines/regulations as well.

Also it reduces the resources available to reduce established causes of pandemic propagation - deforestation, crowded animal husbandry in developed nations, effective enforcement against illegal wild animal trade, etc.

My question to you is do you want revenge/retribution on China more than your willingness to follow guidelines to mitigate the spread of COVID 19? If so then what good will that do for the people around you?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am no expert or up on the latest medical stuff,  surely with common sense we have to realise there will always be a new desease ( man made or not ) that will kill scores of people .The bubonic plague would have been just as bad as covid if you could travel internationally as easily as we can today and yes there will be a vaccine but you do need the virus/desease before you can make a vaccine .

   So let's all just do the best we can and enjoy the life you have and appreciate the family and friends around you.

 I am super happy with the decision I made to move here but I do miss my family back in Australia. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, rxpharm said:

Right now I would say it is highly unlikely. Many experienced and competent scientists from Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Europe and the US have come to the conclusion that this virus is not synthetic/made in a lab. That doesn't rule out the possibility of a lab accident, but makes the theory this is a genetically engineered "bioweapon" unlikely.

As I have posted in the past, there is still a lot we don't know about the virus - the Italians have now found indications that suggest it may be been present as early as September 2019 as antibodies have been detected in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020.  Other countries are also finding that cases were found months earlier than initially thought.

Does that rule out China as the source? Perhaps not - but then it could be indications that the origin MAY have been somewhere else. To focus and promote theories that are not supported by clear evidence distract and inhibit effective control efforts to slow down the spread of COVID 19 before the vaccine is widely administered. The study I posted about attitudes regarding the origin of the COVID 19 pandemic and receptiveness to guidelines/regulation to mitigate the spread of the virus is a concern. It doesn't take a significant percentage of a population to reject these guidelines/regulations to keep a pandemic going. Of course it is made worse when authorities fail to follow the guidelines/regulations as well.

Also it reduces the resources available to reduce established causes of pandemic propagation - deforestation, crowded animal husbandry in developed nations, effective enforcement against illegal wild animal trade, etc.

My question to you is do you want revenge/retribution on China more than your willingness to follow guidelines to mitigate the spread of COVID 19? If so then what good will that do for the people around you?

Of course there are many studies that show this is not synthetic or lab made. Just as there are studies that say it is.

Studies that show the virus was in patients in Europe several months before it was initially detected doesn't mean the same is not true for China. We do know 100% if they were in China, the government would lie about it and cover it up. Just look at the ridiculous numbers they published of 1500 deaths (and then after criticism they exactly doubled them to 3000 deaths) after having the virus run rampant for minimum 4 months, but likely 8 months or longer. You can be sure of one thing, the information you get from China cannot be compared to the information you are getting from a G8 nation because the Chinese information will be biased, incomplete or fraudulent. Even the first sequence of the virus from China first published was a lie...... then someone got it from Thailand and they had to republish with the right sequence because they new other countries easily could. The nature and instinct of the CCP is to always lie. You cannot use your rxpharm normal methods to make conclusions because the source of this virus is giving you bad (and misleading) data.

Im not saying this is a bioweapon (although I think it probably is). Im saying this came from a leak in a lab in Wuhan.

 

One of the points I am making is that China is bullying Australia for seeking truth.

Knowing the truth about the source will help immensely with vaccines and future prevention. Which i think is one of the main points you are making. So you should also want to have Australia's demands met of an independent investigation, where even the labs, are examined.

Yet this has all the hallmarks of a cover up, which unfortunately, Westerners have bought hook line and sinker. 

So in one paragraph, I sum it up:

If the ONLY level 4 virology lab in China is in Wuhan (true), and the epicenter of bat coronavirus research IN THE WORLD, is in Wuhan (true), I think it requires an immense amount of mental gymnastics to overlook these absolutely 1 in a trillion coincidences and say it is unlikely the virus came from a lab. Its basically denial.

 

By the way, the only level 4 laboratory in your home country is in Winnipeg. If a "one in 100 years virulent virus" started in Winnipeg (and not 50 other cities in North America), then we all might be quicker to understand the basic rationality of connecting the relationship between lab and source.

You probably also know that the Chinese Canadian scientists and interns working at the Winnipeg lab were detained by the Canadian authorities in the summer of 2019 for illegally sending virus samples back to WUHAN CHINA. And that head Chinese Canadian scientist would go back to WUHAN CHINA 3 to 4 times every year to TRAIN the scientists in WUHAN CHINA. 

 

This is not about revenge. Its about finding answers to the worst disaster in our collective memory and preventing the next one. Mental gymnastics to deny will guarantee more of these.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sith, I answered the question you posed to me - why didn't you answer the question I posed to you?

Are you ignoring the mitigation guidelines because you believe the theory of China creating this bioweapon is true - so you don't care about anything else?  Are you going to refuse the vaccine? Do you encourage other people to disregard mitigation guidelines? It isn't mental gymnastics to wait for more information, but certainly continuing viral infection and prolonging pandemic results from ignoring mitigation guidelines.

In time we will hopefully find out more about the virus, and its origins, but as stoolpusher rightly posted, we need to care about our family and friends too.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, rxpharm said:

The Sith, I answered the question you posed to me - why didn't you answer the question I posed to you?

Are you ignoring the mitigation guidelines because you believe the theory of China creating this bioweapon is true - so you don't care about anything else?  Are you going to refuse the vaccine? Do you encourage other people to disregard mitigation guidelines? It isn't mental gymnastics to wait for more information, but certainly continuing viral infection and prolonging pandemic results from ignoring mitigation guidelines.

In time we will hopefully find out more about the virus, and its origins, but as stoolpusher rightly posted, we need to care about our family and friends too.

 

Im not clear, what relationship is there between thinking the source is the Wuhan lab and disregarding mitigation guidelines?

 

If by mitigation you mean wearing a mask and washing hands.... I was doing this by late January. And by February I had supplied masks to many people around me. Notwithstanding the WHO and the CDC told us masks don't work. I used common sense to make my determination. I didnt rely on the statements and studies of groups that had a vested interest in lying to us at that time (I guess the lie about the masks was to ensure the PPE would go to front line workers,  so they told everyone else that they are useless.....which is NOT common sense).

If you mean vaccine, I would prefer not to take something that normally takes 10 years to develop rushed out in 1/10th that time. Thats common sense.

But it will be difficult to avoid getting vaccination by some form of societal, corporate,, governmental pressure that will eventually snare us all. So the answer is yes, I will get the vaccine but as late as I possibly can (so more time and study goes by to improve it). 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am glad to hear that you do follow mitigation guidelines. The belief about the virus origins has an effect on people's attitudes to guidelines on control measures as I posted previously in this thread from a research article posted in Sage

People who believe in alternate virus origins tend to disregard guidelines to prevent virus spread.

Regarding the use of masks - unfortunately many Western countries gave out poor advice due to shortages of PPE - this was not a good excuse, as most Asian countries promoted mask use from the beginning. To give out such advice without giving the reason why led to the problems seen in a few countries with "anti-maskers".

Are you familiar with the argument that milk leads to drug abuse? All drug abusers have drunk milk, so it must be the cause of their addition. There is a direct correlation with the use of milk and drug abuse. It is statistically significant and the odds are a trillion to one that milk is not the cause.

All the facts you have posted are true, but there has not been definite proof. If that proof comes out, then yes, I will believe it.  Until it comes out it is a correlation that is not necessarily a causation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, rxpharm said:

I am glad to hear that you do follow mitigation guidelines. The belief about the virus origins has an effect on people's attitudes to guidelines on control measures as I posted previously in this thread from a research article posted in Sage

People who believe in alternate virus origins tend to disregard guidelines to prevent virus spread.

Regarding the use of masks - unfortunately many Western countries gave out poor advice due to shortages of PPE - this was not a good excuse, as most Asian countries promoted mask use from the beginning. To give out such advice without giving the reason why led to the problems seen in a few countries with "anti-maskers".

Are you familiar with the argument that milk leads to drug abuse? All drug abusers have drunk milk, so it must be the cause of their addition. There is a direct correlation with the use of milk and drug abuse. It is statistically significant and the odds are a trillion to one that milk is not the cause.

All the facts you have posted are true, but there has not been definite proof. If that proof comes out, then yes, I will believe it.  Until it comes out it is a correlation that is not necessarily a causation.

Here is Proof that pathogens were STOLEN ILLEGALLY from your country and shipped ILEGALLY to Wuhan.

 

"Government files reveal new information about shipment of deadly viruses from Canada to China"


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/canadian-scientist-sent-deadly-viruses-to-wuhan-lab-months-before-rcmp-asked-to-investigate-1.5609582

 

Rxpharm.....what i am pointing to, which well meaning people like yourself who like to look at facts and data, and give the benefit of doubt, is that you end up having your analysis polluted when there is subterfuge. Your conclusions are based on warped information. You come from a nation, Canada, where there are concepts like integrity and pursuit of truth. But much of the information out there, and particularly everything that comes from China..... plus what is highlighted from other places by Chinas multi billion dollar international media and social media propaganda machine..... is to distract you from the truth.

You are being tricked by a criminal organization known as the CCP which is a Master in theft and lying. You are assuming that none of the data you have is purposefully altered to throw you off the path.

I just showed in the post above that proves the CCP are criminals. They robbed pathogen samples and IP from your country. And this was occuring in 2018 and 2019, and the Chinese Canadian scientist was busted in the summer last year. This alone should be front page news in Canada and the World, because it is 100% relevant to the most important news story of the past 12 months. But it is not widely disseminated and will never be explored..... unless you spend your own time to dig it.

 

Whats even stranger is what happened to the boss of that Chinese Canadian scientists who was busted is named Frank Plummer. Plummer is the top virologist in Canada and one of the top in the world.... he was heading back from Africa to Canada to deal with Covid in early Feb 2020.....and all of a sudden.........he dropped dead!!!

Probably a coincidence Plummer died at that moment Feb 2020.........

......just like a total coincidence there were stolen pathogens from Winnipeg being shipped to Wuhan the same year when the virus started (2019),

......a total coincidence the criminal Chinese Canadian scientist was training scientists from Wuhan (2018 and 2019),

......total coincidence Wuhan has the only level 4 virology lab in China,

.....total coincidence that Wuhan is the epicenter of bat corona virus research globally.

.....Total coincidence all of Shi Zhengli's papers about how to make bat coronavirus being more transmitable from human to human being developed in Wuhan. 

When nations and scientists all work to find the truth, your method works. Its ok to rely on data.. its ok to give the benefit of the doubt. Its ok to require evidence at the level of a court (reasonable doubt standard) to make a conclusion. Yet when there are billions of dollars working to cover the truth up, these methods don't work. You have to use basic common sense and a much more skepticism.

If you cannot see that the facts i listed above are sufficient to make the labs a primary suspect, then you suffer from what many people in Western worlds and particularly Canada suffer......to naive to see when they are being totally fucked by criminal scammers. Afterall..... your tax dollars already went to helping Wuhan illegally!

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2020 at 5:30 PM, RandiUno2 said:

capitalist elite

Interesting piece: 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-coming-due-china-capitalist-113012069.html

The Bill Is Coming Due for China’s ‘Capitalist’ Experiment

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has re-awoken to a profound truth: Rich, secure capitalists are the natural enemies of authoritarian regimes. In a hybrid autocratic-capitalist model, capitalism is the means to generate wealth, but power is the end goal. Successful capitalists naturally begin to demand that their personal and property rights be protected from authoritarian fiat. Capital in the hands of entrepreneurs is a political resource; it poses a threat to the implementation of centralized plans.

ebe6c001b1d81c4eb8aebfa6a045ea64.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, seven said:

Interesting piece: 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-coming-due-china-capitalist-113012069.html

The Bill Is Coming Due for China’s ‘Capitalist’ Experiment

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has re-awoken to a profound truth: Rich, secure capitalists are the natural enemies of authoritarian regimes. In a hybrid autocratic-capitalist model, capitalism is the means to generate wealth, but power is the end goal. Successful capitalists naturally begin to demand that their personal and property rights be protected from authoritarian fiat. Capital in the hands of entrepreneurs is a political resource; it poses a threat to the implementation of centralized plans.

ebe6c001b1d81c4eb8aebfa6a045ea64.jpg

To have such a rich and powerful authoritarian regime means the world will go in that direction. Many second and third tier nations will determine to rule their populations with an iron fist like a China does....purchase their survelienence equipment, AI and other goods for controlling people.

Western societies have already in the past 20 years become much more controlled. Eg. Patriot Act and NSA. But some non Western countries over past 20 years have become fascist. Eg. Turkey.

Imagine the influence China will have over Thailand over the next 20 years.....especially as it falls out of America's sphere of influence and gets RMB from China.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2021 at 2:45 PM, seven said:

Interesting piece: 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-coming-due-china-capitalist-113012069.html

The Bill Is Coming Due for China’s ‘Capitalist’ Experiment

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has re-awoken to a profound truth: Rich, secure capitalists are the natural enemies of authoritarian regimes. In a hybrid autocratic-capitalist model, capitalism is the means to generate wealth, but power is the end goal. Successful capitalists naturally begin to demand that their personal and property rights be protected from authoritarian fiat. Capital in the hands of entrepreneurs is a political resource; it poses a threat to the implementation of centralized plans.

ebe6c001b1d81c4eb8aebfa6a045ea64.jpg

 

"Rich, secure capitalists are the natural enemies of authoritarian regimes."

Wrote a long reply explaining why Capitalism is not only the enemy of authoritarian governments, but is the enemy of ALL political systems other than a system ruled by major corporations, but I hit the wrong button and the whole message went "poof".

Anyway, in a nutshell - Capitalism is BOTH an economic AND political system.  Any political system whether it be democracy, republic, theocracy, or autocracy, will always face the challenge of the capitalist elite attempting to challenge their political authority. 

I have called it the "Divine Right of Capital"

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RandiUno2 said:

why Capitalism is not only the enemy of authoritarian governments, but is the enemy of ALL political systems other than a system ruled by major corporations,

 

17 minutes ago, RandiUno2 said:

Capitalism is BOTH an economic AND political system

I fully agree. And as always it boils down to one thing: greed.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The American Money Behind Blacklisted Chinese AI Companies

For American investors who have poured money into tech companies that serve at the Chinese Communist Party’s pleasure, it isn’t business as usual despite sanctions. Business, in fact, is booming.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-american-money-behind-blacklisted-chinese-artificial-intelligence-companies?source=articles&via=rss

516e163cfc7fde43a5b72a45f3fa3852.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...