Random Politics 2

[md0]

Seems like there's finally some progress made in the negotiations
https://politis.com.cy/politis-news/die ... on-polemo/

Apparently they are no discussing an "Austrian model" for Ukraine's future. The Ukrainian side will nevertheless insist on effective military guarantees.

[Yasna]

Hopefully the fact that China isn't a declining power, but a rising one that is able to sate its bourgeoisie with access to markets in Africa, Latin America and Asia, would make any invasion of Taiwan completely unnecessary. I would be more worried at seeing the US lashing out as it continues to slide into second-power status.

China's demographics (dependency ratio) are looking pretty bad, and its totalitarian governance limits its potential for economic prosperity (cf. the CCP's indiscrimate crackdown on its own tech industry), so China might actually start declining soon.

[vijayjohn]

China's demographics (dependency ratio) are looking pretty bad

How so?

[mōdgethanc]

I was going to say that the PRC today isn't totalitarian like it was under Mao and it's just authoritarian, but upon thinking about it now I'm not sure. There isn't a solid cutoff between those words anyway so it's a nitpick.

Either way I agree with the broader point that authoritarian regimes tend not to last. They're not as stable or adaptable and can't handle crises as well. China's economy can't keep growing forever, and its people will get fed up with the CCP's rule at some point and demand more freedom like they did in 1989. I doubt the CCP can stay in power forever. It might not be soon but I bet within our lifetimes it will be gone.

[Car]

Hopefully the fact that China isn't a declining power, but a rising one that is able to sate its bourgeoisie with access to markets in Africa, Latin America and Asia, would make any invasion of Taiwan completely unnecessary. I would be more worried at seeing the US lashing out as it continues to slide into second-power status.

I'd also hope that the fact that China is so intertwined with Western economies, especially in light of the economic consequences Russia is suffering over the invasion of Ukraine, means that the PRC's ruling class would see more costs than benefits in invading Taiwan. But who knows, I also didn't think Russia would go any further than the Donbass and here we are.

Which leads to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thucydides_Trap I read the book mentioned in the article and can recommend it.

We thought the same about Russia. That's what our Wandel durch Handel (change through trade) was based on and it clearly didn't work.

[vijayjohn]

I was going to say that the PRC today isn't totalitarian like it was under Mao and it's just authoritarian, but upon thinking about it now I'm not sure. There isn't a solid cutoff between those words anyway so it's a nitpick.

I have read (if not also heard) that Xi is attempting to emulate Mao, but at least the economic situation in China is far better now than it ever was under Mao.

China's economy can't keep growing forever,

That's only because no economy keeps growing forever. I think the US's economy has already been sinking a lot faster than China's over the last few decades.

and its people will get fed up with the CCP's rule at some point and demand more freedom like they did in 1989. I doubt the CCP can stay in power forever. It might not be soon but I bet within our lifetimes it will be gone.

Just as no economy keeps growing forever, no one can stay in power forever, either. I'm not at all confident that the CCP will be gone within our lifetimes, though that's probably in part because I'm pessimistic about how long our lifetimes will be to begin with (I don't expect to live all that long myself, and the age range of this forum is pretty large anyway). It's also in part because it has lasted longer than any state that claims to be socialist other than North Korea (and only because North Korea was formed one year earlier than the PRC).

[Saim]

Seems like there's finally some progress made in the negotiations
https://politis.com.cy/politis-news/die ... on-polemo/

Apparently they are no discussing an "Austrian model" for Ukraine's future. The Ukrainian side will nevertheless insist on effective military guarantees.

I always wonder about these negotiations. Often both sides will present absurdly maximalist demands, but then again who knows what they’re actually saying behind closed doors?

[Yasna]

Hot off the press: Revising Down the Rise of China

The future of China’s ongoing global rise is of great importance to both China and the rest of the world. Predicting long-term economic performance is inherently difficult and open to debate. Nonetheless, we show that substantial long-term growth deceleration is the likely future for China given the legacy effects of its uniquely draconian past population policies, reliance on investment-driven growth, and slowing productivity growth. Even assuming continued broad policy success, our projections suggest growth will slow sharply to roughly 3% a year by 2030 and 2–3% a year on average over the three decades to 2050. Growing faster, up to say 5% a year to 2050, is notionally possible given China remains well below the global productivity frontier. However, we also show that the prospect of doing so is well beyond China’s track record in delivering productivity-enhancing reform, and therefore well beyond its likely trajectory. China also faces considerable downside risks.

Our projections imply a vastly different future compared to the dominant narrative of China’s ongoing global rise. Expectations regarding the rise of China should be substantially revised down compared to most existing economic studies and especially the expectations of those assessing the broader implications of China’s rise for global politics. If China were on track to grow at 4–5% a year to 2050, as many seem to hold, it follows that China would be on course to become the world’s most dominant economy by far. With 2–3% growth, China’s future looks very different. China would still likely become the world’s largest economy. But it would never establish a meaningful lead over the United States and would remain far less prosperous and productive per person than America, even by mid-century.

[Yasna]

"Poutine s'adresse aux Russes dans un stade de foot rempli"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJ6wzGb6F-I

[vijayjohn]

Hot off the press: Revising Down the Rise of China

I think most of the quoted text here seems reasonable, but I'm more skeptical about the conclusion. The idea that China will never surpass the US seems like nothing more than wishful thinking to me. In some ways, I think it already has.

I'm no fan of either the CCP or the way a lot of Americans portray China as either a threat (of course its rise is a threat for American neo-imperialism, but a lot of Americans seem to have fears, many if not most of which I find silly at best and racist at worst, that China intends to do something much more nefarious than this) or a country not to be taken seriously or even both.

[mōdgethanc]

Chinese imperialism is also a threat though, for its neighbours at least. My friend from the Philippines was talking to me about this not too long ago. It could easily wind up becoming like Russia and invading its neighbours, or at least bullying them.

I have read (if not also heard) that Xi is attempting to emulate Mao, but at least the economic situation in China is far better now than it ever was under Mao.

I don't know in which way, since their policies are very different. Maybe in personality cult?

Just as no economy keeps growing forever, no one can stay in power forever, either. I'm not at all confident that the CCP will be gone within our lifetimes, though that's probably in part because I'm pessimistic about how long our lifetimes will be to begin with (I don't expect to live all that long myself, and the age range of this forum is pretty large anyway). It's also in part because it has lasted longer than any state that claims to be socialist other than North Korea (and only because North Korea was formed one year earlier than the PRC).

North Korea has also lasted this long largely because of China, which is also I guess how they've been able to keep their state-owned economy while China has moved toward capitalism.

The CCP has been rather resilient because it's kept the economy growing and the country fairly stable. Still, there was a pretty good chance of them being overthrown in 1989 and that could happen again. I think that authoritarian regimes are at the core less stable because they don't give their people any outlet for dissatisfaction with the government in power other than to get rid of it.

I'm pessimistic about how long our lifetimes will be to begin with (I don't expect to live all that long myself, and the age range of this forum is pretty large anyway).

Now this is just doomer talk. I understand where it's coming from, but there's no rational reason to believe that we will all die before our time. We are not the ones that are going to suffer most from problems like climate change, disease and war.

[vijayjohn]

Chinese imperialism is also a threat though, for its neighbours at least.

Yes, of course. It always has been.

My friend from the Philippines was talking to me about this not too long ago. It could easily wind up becoming like Russia and invading its neighbours, or at least bullying them.

I think bullying them has already been happening.

I don't know in which way, since their policies are very different. Maybe in personality cult?

Maybe. Something like that, probably. It's been a long time since I've read about this, unfortunately.

North Korea has also lasted this long largely because of China, which is also I guess how they've been able to keep their state-owned economy while China has moved toward capitalism.

Yes, although North Korea in practice has also become at least slightly more capitalistic over the decades (not nearly as much as China, of course).

Still, there was a pretty good chance of them being overthrown in 1989 and that could happen again.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it could have been overthrown in 1989, but there was at least some chance of democratic reform at the time (until, of course, Deng chose to crush the protests and purge Zhao Ziyang). Overthrowing the government was never the point of the protests in the first place. IIRC it didn't even start out as a protest.

I think that authoritarian regimes are at the core less stable because they don't give their people any outlet for dissatisfaction with the government in power other than to get rid of it.

This I think is true.

I'm pessimistic about how long our lifetimes will be to begin with (I don't expect to live all that long myself, and the age range of this forum is pretty large anyway).

Now this is just doomer talk. I understand where it's coming from, but there's no rational reason to believe that we will all die before our time. We are not the ones that are going to suffer most from problems like climate change, disease and war.

No, that's not what I mean at all. I don't think we'll all die before our time at all, but I'm already 33 years old, and it's unusual in my family to live past the age of, say, 75. I really don't think the CCP is going to be overthrown within the next 42 years.

[Yasna]

Mit dem Ende des Widerstands endet der Terror nicht

Moskaus Drohungen an die „Nationalisten“ in Mariupol zeigen zudem, dass ein Ende der Kämpfe kein Ende des Terrors brächte. Die vielen Menschen, die in Politik und Zivilgesellschaft aktiv waren oder sich sonst öffentlich als Anhänger einer unabhängigen Ukraine zu erkennen gegeben haben, müssen sich nach einem russischen Sieg auf das Schlimmste gefasst machen. Und es ist zu befürchten, dass das Vorgehen der Besatzer umso brutaler wird, je mehr Widerstand ihnen zuvor entgegengeschlagen ist.

Allein für die in Mariupol verübten Kriegsverbrechen müssten Wladimir Putin und seine Mittäter vor Gericht gestellt werden. Die Aussichten, dass es je dazu kommt, sind leider sehr schlecht. Denn noch ist es so, dass an Gesprächen mit dem russischen Herrscher nicht vorbeikommt, wer ein Ende des Blutvergießens erreichen will. Doch je brutaler Russlands Kriegsführung wird, desto drängender stellt sich die Frage, wie sinnvoll es ist, mit dieser Führung im Kreml zu reden. Der Westen und die Ukraine sollten es natürlich dennoch versuchen. Aber die Sprache, die Putin am besten versteht, ist militärische Gegenwehr. In ihr liegt die größte Chance, sein Schreckensregime in die Schranken zu weisen. Dazu benötigt die Ukraine mehr Unterstützung aus dem Westen als bisher.

[h34]

https://youtu.be/tevYY3rN4o8
https://www.4freerussia.org/buryats-against-war/

[md0]

Of all the things to become a huge political issue in Cyprus, they chose to spend the last two weeks arguing over printing the father's and mother's names on ID cards.

Cyprus is one of the few EU countries which list the parents' full names on the human-readable part of the card. When a parent is unknown or refused to recognise the child as theirs, the field remains empty (in the past, it would have said "Unknown").

This was always considered excessive personal information that does not serve any genuine identification need and it only stigmatises some family situations further. In the past, the father's name was printed on school diplomas but the practice stopped due to complaints.

This time, the topic was brought up by a female MP who is a single mother and the biological father is a sperm donor (it's not clear to me if he is unknown, but in any case he is not a guardian). She was quite viciously attacked in the past and now about her choice to willingly become a single mother ("ending up" a single mother has been normalised in the last two decades - single parenthood by choice though is not).

She's saying that the empty field under Father's Name will lead to her child being discriminated against.
The police is saying that they don't need that information to uniquely identify people anyway, since there's a population registry database they can consult on-demand, and everyone in Cyprus has a stable and unique ID number also printed on the ID card.
The Commissioner for the Rights of Children is also in favour of removing those fields.

And on the other side, the argument is "It is [...] our right to claim continuation of our family history to know who we are, otherwise we will only be numbers". My dude, if you need to check the backside of your ID card to remember who your parents are, then you need to consult a neurologist.

Of course, I know why in the end they will remove parents names. CJEU ruled that EU member states are obliged to recognise same-sex parents under the principle of "a parent in EU member state is a parent in all member states".
I guarantee you that the moment a same-sex couple sues to get a Cypriot ID card for their child where both of their names are listed, the Parliament will amend the ID card design within a week.

[linguoboy]

As expected, the US Supreme Court released a decision today overturning Roe v Wade, the landmark case which found a Constitutional right to legal abortion. Because older laws remain on the books, abortion is now completely banned in five US states (South Dakota, Missouri, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma) and severely curtailed (illegal after 24 weeks) in 20 more--and it will get worse, as state legislators throughout the country are scrambling to introduce new bans and restrictions. In addition, one of the judges authored an opinion which outlined how the same arguments could be used to overturn Federal rights to contraception and same-sex marriage.

It's really a tragic day in this country. The difference between living in a "blue state" (with Democratic leadership) and a "red state" (dominated by conservative Republicans) has never been starker and will only get worse. Will we now start seeing people prosecuted if they cross the border from my home state of Missouri to my state of residence of Illinois to terminate a pregnancy? If I am fortunate enough to remarry, will my legal protections vanish the moment I take a trip to visit my family? These are questions I didn't think I'd be asking at this point in my life.

[Johanna]

I think Canada has very sensible laws when it comes to abortion. That is, they don't have any at all.

Instead it's a purely medical decision between the pregnant person and their doctor, and yet the number is typical for any country with comprehensive sex-ed and decent access to contraceptives. Even third-trimester abortions aren't more common than in places where you have to get it greenlit from some sort of government medical board first.

It's almost like doctors are taught to conduct their work according to certain ethical standards regardless of whether there is a law micromanaging their options every single moment or something.

[md0]

In what honestly seems like an intentional move to call out the US backsliding on abortions, the German Parliament yesterday repealed the law which prevented medical providers from informing the public that they offer safe abortion services (so called "abortion advertising"). Abortions remain criminalised in Germany, but through some mental gymnastics, if it's less than 12 weeks from conception and you get three people's signatures, and you are made to wait for three days after getting those signatures, then neither you or the doctor will be prosecuted.
So, it's not more entrenched as a right than it was in the US. The current government coalition was to properly decriminalise abortions, but people I've talked with aren't too optimistic that it's going to happen in this term.

This US-German podcast had an episode on the legal developments in both countries last week: https://commongroundberlin.com/podcast/ ... abortions/

[mōdgethanc]

I think Canada has very sensible laws when it comes to abortion. That is, they don't have any at all.

Instead it's a purely medical decision between the pregnant person and their doctor, and yet the number is typical for any country with comprehensive sex-ed and decent access to contraceptives. Even third-trimester abortions aren't more common than in places where you have to get it greenlit from some sort of government medical board first.

It's almost like doctors are taught to conduct their work according to certain ethical standards regardless of whether there is a law micromanaging their options every single moment or something.

I saw this discourse a little while back. After Roe v. Wade was overturned, there were some takes here like "we must pass a new law to strengthen abortion rights". Which made sense as a reaction, but the counterpoint to that was simple: "Don't try to make it a legal issue again at all." It's already been decided by the courts. It's legal. We literally don't have to do anything. Abortion works fine the way it is, because we trust professionals to know what they're doing.

This died down rather quickly after everyone saw that reopening the abortion debate was a bad move that could backfire horribly. Not even the Conservative Party wants to do it.

There are a lot of things about this country that need fixing but our abortion policy does not. I truly think it's a model every country should follow.

[Johanna]

There are a lot of things about this country that need fixing but our abortion policy does not. I truly think it's a model every country should follow.

Yep.

Our laws are reasonable, but looking at you, I really don't understand why we even have any.