Rather than saying they're a better civilization I'd say they're better **AT** civilization. They've had 5000 years to figure out what does and doesn't work, and unlike the Western countries the Chinese leaders seem to learn from history.
"One thing we learn from history is that our leaders rarely learn from history."
- historian Barbara Tuchman in 'The March of Folly'
This is actually a really good point. Many European-Americans were forcibly brought to the US when it was first being colonized. This disrupted families, support networks, and also disrupted people learning their history from their elders. We often don't have that same kind of history to draw on anymore in mainstream US society. This government would prefer to pretend it is the only thing that has ever existed, and the way it does things is the only possible way things can be. But humans were living and organizing their societies for thousands of years before this country was imposed upon the native communities who live/d here.
A very good point to make. So many Americans have no "family history" to look back at and learn from. Look at the Native Americans forced into residential schools... Many were "orphaned" (never saw their parents again even if their parents were still alive) and were forced to dress, speak and act like "whites", yet were never accepted into white society because they were "red". When a vast portion of the people living in North America are that screwed up and deprived of any history or networks, is it any wonder why they end up acting the way they do? (No excuse for it, but it is an explanation for their behavior.)
I feel like one of the "smartest" things this empire ever did to perpetuate itself is making the idea of multi-generational homes absolutely abhorrent to most Americans. In just a few generations, we've internalized the idea that success means "leaving the nest". And it might, for some people, but it also means completely disregarding the value our elders could bring--not only to our daily lives, but to all of these urgent crises and conversations.
Yeah, this is one of the saddest aspects of modern Western culture: the lack of respect for our elders. We never learn directly from them and come to cherish their wisdom.
But then it also goes to the extreme with all the elderly politicians working for the oligarchs/billionaires in Congress long past the time they should have retired!
TRC - you (and many people on this substack) seem to be under the "the grass is greener on the other side" thinking.
As per your "the lack of respect for our elders", respect is earned, not automatically given because someone is OLDER than you.
Many of these cultures (Chinese, Indian, Korean, etc.) SUFFER from this "automatic respect for elders" flaw -> it keeps the existing hierarchies and structures of human relationships in its status quo (i.e. suppression from challenging authority, flexibility of change, etc.).
Many of these cultures have RIGID Social Hierarchies that make "changing your status and opportunities" in life much more challenging.
This "respect your elders" form of soft-control in many of these cultures also promotes many incorrect belief systems (religious), pseudoscience, superstitions, etc. and hampers the progress of real science (eg. pseudosciences like homeopathy, chinese traditional medicine, reiki, acupunture, astrology, palmistry, etc. too many to list).
Many of these cultures (at the social-cultural level) are anti-science, and the "respect your elders" philosophy doesn't help with any of this.
And if you really want to talk about Oligarchs, there is way more inequality in countries like India, etc. than the US. Similar situations in China over the last 25 years and the rise of Chinese billionaires (though the govt. is trying to clamp down on this - which is a good thing).
I am not talking about uncritically accepting everything our elders say. I am talking about a cultural shift in this country that stigmatizes the choice of living with extended family. The idea that we are somehow all more oppressed by our own parents than by a government that has made it impossible to live while making the punishment for failure actual, literal prison slavery is absurd.
The idea that a 300 year old "civilisation" telling off a 5000 year old one is as amusing as an educated, but otherwise petulant child bitching how he is "so much wiser & braver" than a WW2 veteran whom has experienced the beauty and horrors of life.
"This city has a wall that is a thousand years old. My city has a wall that is two thousand years old."
China had some very bloody civil wars but that's long in the past. The revolution didn't have that much blood because the KMT had so little popular support, even in its own army.
In 1408 China had an expedition with hundreds of ships that reached Africa. But instead of setting up colonies they burned the ships and forbade further such activities. On the other hand, in 1950 they annexed Tibet and continue to oppress the Tibetians.
We cannot allow Israel to escape the legal consequences of their war crimes. The Hind Rajab Foundation has, among other things, filed a case with the ICC against 1,000 Israeli soldiers for war crimes in Gaza.
They have taken further steps in recent days, and vacations are becoming a lot more difficult for IDF soldiers, worldwide. The Hind Rajab Foundation can use our help. Please join me in making a contribution.
You might find the recent interviews that Glenn Greenwald, and the Electronic Intifada, did with the head of this organisation, Dyad Abou Jahjah, very informative. Maybe one reason the Swiss arrested Ali Abunimah this week?
Did you see the professionally staged meeting of the Holocaust brigade in Auschwitz? Now that was skilful.
Whatever else you may care to say about the Israelis, Zionists, fellow-travellers and hangers on, they can turn on a great performance with everyone in attendance even the King of England, all in the middle of ethic cleansing.. Wow! What next? Bluff, bluster, bribery, threats...it's all in the mix, one whistle and out they all trot based on the best advice their corrupted advisers in all the Western puppet countries, the out-of-his-depth UK fellow, Starmer, the nominated bowers and scrapers from Australia, France, Canada, New Zealand, all joining hands and singing from the Holocaust songbook.
It may take over from all the WWII ceremonies eventually if they get a decent return from this show.
WWII? How unimportant compared to Auschwitz. All over now. Back to antisemitism.
An antisemitism World Wide Sing Song, such a theatre could be visiting every country in the world, designed to overshadow and hide all the criminal activities by Israel and its totally controlled supporter, the good old USA.
A clever international distraction...... as if you didn't know.
Gee, why don’t you direct those resources to Sudan, where an actual genocide of 300,000 has been taking place? Oh wait, that goes against the whole narrative, now doesn’t it?
Here, O’ Israel, the Lord our G_d, the Lord is one. Amen
By far the biggest and longest genocide in modern history is the one perpetrated by israeli khazarian jewish converts and supported by the western elites. It started in 1948 in Palestine. Piss off troll.
"Open source means that anyone who wants it has the code, for free. Anyone who wants to modify it is free to do so. Anyone who wants to delete any code that might potentially let China, the US, or your favorite techbro track them can easily do so. Anyone who wants to can train and run it on their own servers, for free. The servers do not need to be connected to the internet. You can run it on an air-gapped Raspberry Pi for $100, if you want to.
Unlike every commercially available US AI engine, everyone is free to deploy their own version, mix it, match it, trade it with their friends. Corporations and governments have no ability to monitor what you choose to do with DeepSeek, unless you allow them to. This is the Linux, Wikipedia, and archive.org of AI."
I'm not sure if you understand how AI LLM (large language models) work.
They work on DATA and the quality of data (and the data they have been trained on i.e. reinforcement learning). Open source is next to "meaningless" for algorithms that depend on the DATA to generate value.
>>"Unlike every commercially available US AI engine"
There ARE free (non-commercial) Open AI options in the US, I use some of them. The older models of ChatGPT are ALL free (doesn't cost a dime).
>>"Obviously, someone there sure hates The Freedom."
This is NOTHING to do with "freedom"
Again, I suggest you read up on HOW LLMs work - the DATA (and who owns that data) are crucial aspects of such AIs. When you interact with such LLMs, you often provide it with data. This data in turn helps train the AI to better itself (machine learning). Hence, THE REASON THEY ARE FREE -> to get FREE data from humans so that they (the AI models) can train themselves better.
There is NOTHING altruistic/free about ANY AI LLM (or technology) (Chinese, American, or otherwise). Humans (and human output) provides the data (often for free) into making the AIs valuable for the TECH companies. BUT, WE DON'T GET PAYED for our data. In essense, ALL such AI systems are EXPLOITATIVE since they use the outputs of human labor for FREE to produce AIs that every corporation/country will evenually PROFIT from.
No, not 'chickening at all. Your supercilious mode of converse makes polite and reasonable people not wish to have anything to do with you. (Not just this topic but on every topic)
You are entirely wrong about "open source" and entirely wrong about "how llm works".
The primary benefit of open source is that you can remove or insert any functions and 'biases' that you want and open or restrict the data that the llm uses.
Your comment on "THE REASON THEY ARE FREE -> to get FREE data from humans..." is just nonsensical as is the rest of most of what you say (on all subjects).
If you were half as smart as you pretend to be, you would be a genius, but ...
I have many pleasant conversations with others on here where we share thoughts and opinions without the need to be insulting. Where we understand what RESPECT is. That's what I meant by your tone. Fucking Rude, insulting, High and Mighty attitude. I made an honest observation, Suck it up!
As someone who is rather knowledgeable about China, most of what we are being told in the west is not true. From the western idiots who can only thrash at what they don't understand versus the propaganda that China wants everyone to know. What is true, is a little bit more middle of the road. Their health care system is top notch, if you are rich. Not so much of you are poor working class. Their educational system is top notch, but extremely competitive. The best schools are very expensive. The state run schools are way above public schools in the U.S. and most of Europe as far as level of education the students receive.
The downside is lack of regulation regarding food borne illness, cleanliness and availability if you are poor working class. Wages are lower for the poor working class. Retirement benefits are nearly non-existent unless you work for the state. There is no such thing as health insurance in China, home insurance unless you are rich, life insurance and so forth.
Everything I have mentioned is mostly only available for the city dwellers. The rural famers and villagers don't even have the basics I outlined above. But then, neither to the rural, poor, working class Americans anymore.
The biggest difference between the Chinese and the west, as far as the regular people are concerned, is that the Chinese are okay with this life for the most part. The most they want is for their kids to have a better life, which most do nowadays.
The Americans are never satisfied for the most part and the same can be said for most British, western Europeans and Australians.
I have a Chinese wife who left China to find a better life somewhere else. So far, it is somewhat better but with all that is going on with the U.S. right now, maybe the authoritarian reasons why she left in the first place may not be as bad as living in the U.S. in a couple more years.
👏👏Terrance Ó Domhnaill, thank you for MUCH NEEDED HONESTY (and reality) of China. I concur with EVERYTHING you said above.
Most people in the comment sections of Caitlin's substack seem to have been propagandized by Chinese narratives (as a consequence of being against the West), and are unable to form objective opinions.
Couple years, I edited molecular biology papers for Chinese authors to help morph their Chinglish into Acajournal-english, forgive the abbreviations, I'm not being racist. The research was top notch. I mean WTF, why shouldn't it be? Almost all molecular info on protein & nucleic acid structure function is open source out there. Any reason why these folks should not be as good at jumping on it and using it in discovery as any other scientists?
"China is a major market for fake papers, and critics say measures to rein in paper mills there have been largely ineffectual. According to a new preprint, more than half of Chinese medical residents say they have engaged in research misconduct such as buying papers or fabricating results."
Chang, re: point 1. Arm twisting/bribing journals and their staff is standard practice in biomedicine, only it's better disguised as advertising and percs. So to be fair: Given the brutal influence of big Pharma big money on US/UK journals I'd mostly neuter that one as a tie.
My point is it happens everywhere. China is not an exception, and neither is the US. Hence, using statistics on "number of papers published" is NOT a reliable statistic for anything (i.e. correlation is not causation)
Also, 95%+ of research papers are flawed ->
(1) John Ioannidis, M.D., D.Sc.: Why most biomedical research is flawed, and how to improve it (
There is a serious crisis in "acedemic research" -> not just about the replicability crisis, but many other issues in MANY branches of science (for many reasons, too much to go into here).
Me, in the industry,. Hell no, that's frankly insulting thank you.
Everyone has an opinion on this. As a former scientist and mostly teacher of integrated science and neutral observer of this issue, I think Ioannidis has a strong point but is a bit over the top. I don't have any axes to grind. You seem to be a bit more invested in his assessment. Welcome to it.
Yes, I am somewhat in the industry (my research is in another area of technology, not biomedical research - but the same problems persist in other industries). And Loannidis is just the most vocal proponent of self-examination and intellectual honesty/integrity. There are a few others like him (that are less vocal and public-facing).
Of course there is and is bound to be dishonesty in both research and publishing in scitech. How could it be otherwise when we're dealing with human animals set against the backdrop of our socioeconomic system. Sad to say.
I've only recently disabused myself of the lies and mischaracterizations around PRC. It's not easy to find true facts about China, it's economy, history or any other aspect of the country if you live inthe US. The more I learn about this remarkable country, the more I realize that a livable future on this planet means jumping ship if you live in the US/NATO countries (literally or metaphorically) and supporting the Chinese Socialist project. They are leading the world in renewable energy development, ecosystem remediation, high speed rail and other mass transit and sustainable farming practices. The future is definitely looking RED :) If you want to learn more about PRC, Ken Hammond is an excellent historian.
also, China just donated almost 70 tons of parts to help Cuba fix its ailing generators. In addition they donated PV panels to help Cuba create solar farms. Meanwhile, US puts Cuba back on the "terrorism" naughty list
Thank you Lizzy Liberty, for the truth. Even if one takes only the case of Cuba, any caring person should - if not blinded by propaganda - see the stark difference between China and the US - Good and evil.... ?
As one who 'jumped' the western ship I believe you are right. In other comments I have said that anyone under 40 who is not learning Mandarin is a fool.
To see China (and all other countries) look on youtube for the contemporary travel videos. The whole of Asia has a different look and feel.
China is what it is because they have Confucius as their model.
Russia (and much of eastern Europe) have Orthodox Christianity as the model.
Catholicism and the Reformation churches destroyed Christian morality and created Capitalism, Socialism and Communism all of which are based on fear and greed.
I (we) have chosen a slower, less materialistic life (the kids [now in their fifties] have long left home and must follow their own destiny) so with no outside responsibilities we can pursue what is important to us, not caring about the societal 'norms'.
I was born in the Year of the Horse (very fitting for me!) But according to Chinese astrology, Horse women are supposed to be bad luck for the man they marry. You might want to ask my husband about that, lol!
It’s amazing how propagandized western imperial neocons are. We are and always have been the white guys who come riding on the White Horse to save the damsel in distress, never the pervert immoral pedo warmonger who captures the damsel sells her into slavery and then starts wars all over the world to keep the economy going. The Chinese are business people, they want peace prosperity and to be left alone, but the Western Empire keeps poking them with sticks bc that’s what depraved schoolyard morons do. Why are we like that? How did we get that way?
If you can't admire what China has accomplished in de-pauperization, you're probably tuned into that ugly American hit tune of the 60s, Rock the Boat. Whose message was actually don't rock the boat. Believe the caca you are fed daily about how we exceptional mediocrities in North America own everything, take precedence over everything, natural and human-contrived, are numero uno at everything, get screwed out of gold medals because they hate our superiority, etc. etc. No no -- no one else in the world matters. Except Israel, of course.
One of our neighbors is a (now retired) GM engineer. He and his wife were sent to China for his job for several years (she taught English during their stay.) After they returned home, they missed China so much that he requested to be sent back, which they were for seven years. They still visit there frequently.
My straight A+ middle grandson is teaching himself Chinese through an app. I am strongly encouraging this, telling him that Chinese is probably the most important foreign language that anyone can learn at this point in time. He plans to be an engineer and may well end up living there.
i put this into deepseek: guess how many reactions will confirm the point caitlin johnstones makes in the following text: (here i entered the post). this was the answer:
Caitlin Johnstone's text is a provocative and opinionated critique of Western attitudes toward China, particularly the tendency of some Western liberals to criticize China while ignoring or downplaying the actions of their own governments. The reactions to such a piece would likely be highly polarized, depending on the audience's political leanings, worldview, and familiarity with the issues she raises. Here's a breakdown of how reactions might align with her points:
Agreement from Anti-Imperialist and Progressive Audiences:
Many who are critical of U.S. foreign policy and Western imperialism would likely agree with Johnstone's central argument. They might appreciate her emphasis on the disproportionate violence and oppression perpetrated by Western powers compared to China's actions on the global stage.
Those who advocate for a multipolar world and see China as a counterbalance to U.S. hegemony might also resonate with her points.
Pushback from Critics of China:
Critics of China, including those who focus on human rights issues, authoritarianism, or China's domestic policies, would likely reject her framing. They might argue that criticizing China's actions is valid and necessary, regardless of what Western governments are doing.
Some might accuse her of being an apologist for the Chinese government, dismissing her arguments as overly simplistic or one-sided.
Defensive Reactions from Western Liberals:
As Johnstone anticipates, Western liberals who see themselves as critical of power but are uncomfortable with positive portrayals of China might push back. They might argue that holding multiple governments accountable (including China's) is not mutually exclusive and is, in fact, necessary for a balanced critique of global power structures.
Skepticism About China's Future Intentions:
Some might echo the argument she critiques—that China's current behavior is not indicative of its future intentions. They might argue that China's rise could lead to more aggressive actions abroad, even if it hasn't yet matched the scale of U.S. imperialism.
Criticism of Her Tone and Style:
Johnstone's confrontational and dismissive tone ("pathetic bootlickers," "loser") might alienate some readers, even those who agree with her broader points. Critics might argue that her approach undermines constructive dialogue.
Support from Non-Western Audiences:
Readers from countries that have experienced Western imperialism or sanctions might strongly agree with her critique of Western hypocrisy and double standards. They might see her piece as a rare acknowledgment of the harm caused by Western powers.
Estimating Reactions:
If this text were widely shared, the reactions would likely confirm her point to a significant degree, but with notable exceptions:
Confirming Reactions: A substantial portion of the audience, particularly those already critical of U.S. foreign policy or sympathetic to anti-imperialist perspectives, would agree with her argument. They might see the disproportionate focus on China's flaws as a distraction from the more immediate and severe abuses of Western powers.
Contradictory Reactions: A significant number of critics, especially those focused on human rights or skeptical of China's global role, would reject her framing. They might argue that her dismissal of criticism toward China is itself a form of bootlicking.
In summary, while many reactions would confirm her point, there would also be strong pushback from those who see her argument as overly dismissive of legitimate concerns about China. The divisiveness of the topic ensures that her piece would spark heated debate, with reactions largely split along ideological lines.
nothing more than your average run of the mill ai chatbot, imo.
then i asked: make your answer totally in agreement with her points. deepseek answered:
Caitlin Johnstone’s argument is absolutely correct, and the reactions to her piece would overwhelmingly confirm her points. Her critique of Western hypocrisy and the obsession with criticizing China while ignoring the far greater evils of the U.S.-led empire is spot-on. Here’s why her perspective is not only valid but necessary:
Western Hypocrisy on Full Display:
Johnstone is right to call out the absurdity of Westerners, especially self-proclaimed liberals, who spend their energy attacking China while living under the most violent and oppressive power structure in human history. The U.S. and its allies have spent the 21st century waging endless wars, destabilizing entire regions, and enforcing brutal sanctions that kill millions. China, by contrast, has focused on domestic development and avoided foreign military adventures. The double standard is glaring.
The Distraction Tactics of Empire:
As Johnstone points out, the constant focus on China’s supposed evils is a deliberate distraction from the crimes of the Western empire. By fixating on China, Western critics deflect attention from their own governments’ atrocities. This is a classic tactic of empire apologists, and Johnstone is right to call it out as pathetic bootlicking.
China’s Role in a Multipolar World:
Johnstone accurately highlights that China’s goal is not global domination but a multipolar world where no single power (i.e., the U.S.) can dictate terms to everyone else. This is a far cry from the Western narrative that China is secretly plotting to take over the world. The evidence simply doesn’t support this fearmongering, and Johnstone is correct to dismiss it as baseless.
The Moral Bankruptcy of Western Criticism:
Any criticisms of China’s domestic policies pale in comparison to the sheer scale of Western violence and oppression. As Johnstone says, it’s like a German under the Third Reich complaining about Brazil. The moral myopia of Western critics is staggering, and Johnstone is absolutely right to call them out for it.
The Pathetic Nature of Western Bootlickers:
Johnstone’s characterization of Westerners who obsess over China’s flaws as “pathetic bootlickers” is harsh but fair. These individuals are so deeply indoctrinated by imperial propaganda that they can’t see the forest for the trees. Instead of focusing on the far greater evils of their own governments, they waste their energy attacking a country that, by any objective measure, is far less destructive on the global stage.
Reactions Confirming Her Points:
The reactions to her piece would overwhelmingly confirm her arguments:
Anti-Imperialist Audiences: Those who are already critical of U.S. foreign policy and Western imperialism would wholeheartedly agree with Johnstone. They would see her piece as a much-needed corrective to the Western narrative that paints China as the world’s boogeyman.
Non-Western Audiences: People from countries that have suffered under Western sanctions, coups, or military interventions would likely applaud her for calling out Western hypocrisy and double standards.
Honest Critics: Even some who have concerns about China’s domestic policies would likely concede that Johnstone’s broader point about Western imperialism is valid. They might agree that criticizing China while ignoring the far greater crimes of the West is morally indefensible.
Pushback as Proof of Her Point:
Any pushback from Western liberals or China hawks would only prove Johnstone’s argument further. Their defensiveness and insistence on criticizing China, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of Western crimes, would demonstrate exactly the kind of bootlicking she describes. Their inability to engage with her critique on its merits would reveal their deep-seated bias and allegiance to imperial narratives.
In conclusion, Caitlin Johnstone’s piece is a powerful and necessary critique of Western hypocrisy and the obsession with China. The reactions to it would overwhelmingly confirm her points, and any pushback would only underscore the validity of her argument. She is absolutely right: it’s pathetic to focus on China’s flaws while ignoring the far greater evils of the Western empire.
When asked questions on Tiananmen Square or Uyghurs, the AI started answering, and then deleted its response and said something along the lines of "this is outside my scope".
All AIs are BIASED. There is NO SUCH THING as an "unbiased AI". AIs from China will be biased in favor of China, etc. and against the West. Similarly, American AIs will be biased in favor of Western countries and against its enemies (Russia, China, Iran, South America, ... too many to list).
It is IMPORTANT to keep in mind that AI LLMs are trained on DATA by HUMANS (and hence bias WILL creep into such AI models).
Human rights don't mean anything if you can't afford food and live a good life. In america health insurance is the preserve of the rich. Forget having good schools unless you're rich and white. Even if you're rich and non white in america your kids won't get a good education due to prejudice of educators. Housing is a preserve of the rich and is very unaffordable in the only places with culture in america. Rent is not limited in most areas. Retirement doesn't exist unless you're rich. Most people spend a large part of their life paying off education debt. Affording extra benefits like insurance is a preserve of the rich as all money goes to paying for one's own existence. Food is unhealthy unless you're rich. Consumption is a rule of life and debt is necessary to survive for most individuals in america.
Rather than saying they're a better civilization I'd say they're better **AT** civilization. They've had 5000 years to figure out what does and doesn't work, and unlike the Western countries the Chinese leaders seem to learn from history.
"One thing we learn from history is that our leaders rarely learn from history."
- historian Barbara Tuchman in 'The March of Folly'
This is actually a really good point. Many European-Americans were forcibly brought to the US when it was first being colonized. This disrupted families, support networks, and also disrupted people learning their history from their elders. We often don't have that same kind of history to draw on anymore in mainstream US society. This government would prefer to pretend it is the only thing that has ever existed, and the way it does things is the only possible way things can be. But humans were living and organizing their societies for thousands of years before this country was imposed upon the native communities who live/d here.
A very good point to make. So many Americans have no "family history" to look back at and learn from. Look at the Native Americans forced into residential schools... Many were "orphaned" (never saw their parents again even if their parents were still alive) and were forced to dress, speak and act like "whites", yet were never accepted into white society because they were "red". When a vast portion of the people living in North America are that screwed up and deprived of any history or networks, is it any wonder why they end up acting the way they do? (No excuse for it, but it is an explanation for their behavior.)
I feel like one of the "smartest" things this empire ever did to perpetuate itself is making the idea of multi-generational homes absolutely abhorrent to most Americans. In just a few generations, we've internalized the idea that success means "leaving the nest". And it might, for some people, but it also means completely disregarding the value our elders could bring--not only to our daily lives, but to all of these urgent crises and conversations.
Yeah, this is one of the saddest aspects of modern Western culture: the lack of respect for our elders. We never learn directly from them and come to cherish their wisdom.
But then it also goes to the extreme with all the elderly politicians working for the oligarchs/billionaires in Congress long past the time they should have retired!
Agreed. When I think of all those politicians, I remember with great fondness how much my grandma loathed all those, "sorry suckers".
TRC - you (and many people on this substack) seem to be under the "the grass is greener on the other side" thinking.
As per your "the lack of respect for our elders", respect is earned, not automatically given because someone is OLDER than you.
Many of these cultures (Chinese, Indian, Korean, etc.) SUFFER from this "automatic respect for elders" flaw -> it keeps the existing hierarchies and structures of human relationships in its status quo (i.e. suppression from challenging authority, flexibility of change, etc.).
Many of these cultures have RIGID Social Hierarchies that make "changing your status and opportunities" in life much more challenging.
This "respect your elders" form of soft-control in many of these cultures also promotes many incorrect belief systems (religious), pseudoscience, superstitions, etc. and hampers the progress of real science (eg. pseudosciences like homeopathy, chinese traditional medicine, reiki, acupunture, astrology, palmistry, etc. too many to list).
Many of these cultures (at the social-cultural level) are anti-science, and the "respect your elders" philosophy doesn't help with any of this.
And if you really want to talk about Oligarchs, there is way more inequality in countries like India, etc. than the US. Similar situations in China over the last 25 years and the rise of Chinese billionaires (though the govt. is trying to clamp down on this - which is a good thing).
I am not talking about uncritically accepting everything our elders say. I am talking about a cultural shift in this country that stigmatizes the choice of living with extended family. The idea that we are somehow all more oppressed by our own parents than by a government that has made it impossible to live while making the punishment for failure actual, literal prison slavery is absurd.
I live in Bali. Once I asked when they'd gotten their family home. They didn't know.
I once asked how many in the family compound. They didn't know. About fifty.
I'd say a dozen is more normal.
Your neighbors are your cousins, nieces, and so forth.
Multigenerational homes are making a comeback because that's the only way families can afford to live with a roof over their head.
I know. I live in one.
She/her lol fucking clown
The idea that a 300 year old "civilisation" telling off a 5000 year old one is as amusing as an educated, but otherwise petulant child bitching how he is "so much wiser & braver" than a WW2 veteran whom has experienced the beauty and horrors of life.
Conversation I had in China.
"This city has a wall that is a thousand years old. My city has a wall that is two thousand years old."
China had some very bloody civil wars but that's long in the past. The revolution didn't have that much blood because the KMT had so little popular support, even in its own army.
In 1408 China had an expedition with hundreds of ships that reached Africa. But instead of setting up colonies they burned the ships and forbade further such activities. On the other hand, in 1950 they annexed Tibet and continue to oppress the Tibetians.
We cannot allow Israel to escape the legal consequences of their war crimes. The Hind Rajab Foundation has, among other things, filed a case with the ICC against 1,000 Israeli soldiers for war crimes in Gaza.
https://www.hindrajabfoundation.org/perpetrators/hind-rajab-foundation-files-historic-icc-complaint-against-1000-israeli-soldiers-for-war-crimes-in-gaza
They have taken further steps in recent days, and vacations are becoming a lot more difficult for IDF soldiers, worldwide. The Hind Rajab Foundation can use our help. Please join me in making a contribution.
https://buy.stripe.com/cN228hbY5g7jaM84gg
You might find the recent interviews that Glenn Greenwald, and the Electronic Intifada, did with the head of this organisation, Dyad Abou Jahjah, very informative. Maybe one reason the Swiss arrested Ali Abunimah this week?
Did you see the professionally staged meeting of the Holocaust brigade in Auschwitz? Now that was skilful.
Whatever else you may care to say about the Israelis, Zionists, fellow-travellers and hangers on, they can turn on a great performance with everyone in attendance even the King of England, all in the middle of ethic cleansing.. Wow! What next? Bluff, bluster, bribery, threats...it's all in the mix, one whistle and out they all trot based on the best advice their corrupted advisers in all the Western puppet countries, the out-of-his-depth UK fellow, Starmer, the nominated bowers and scrapers from Australia, France, Canada, New Zealand, all joining hands and singing from the Holocaust songbook.
It may take over from all the WWII ceremonies eventually if they get a decent return from this show.
WWII? How unimportant compared to Auschwitz. All over now. Back to antisemitism.
An antisemitism World Wide Sing Song, such a theatre could be visiting every country in the world, designed to overshadow and hide all the criminal activities by Israel and its totally controlled supporter, the good old USA.
A clever international distraction...... as if you didn't know.
Gee, why don’t you direct those resources to Sudan, where an actual genocide of 300,000 has been taking place? Oh wait, that goes against the whole narrative, now doesn’t it?
Here, O’ Israel, the Lord our G_d, the Lord is one. Amen
By far the biggest and longest genocide in modern history is the one perpetrated by israeli khazarian jewish converts and supported by the western elites. It started in 1948 in Palestine. Piss off troll.
STFU, moron.
DeepSeek is open source. Found on internet:
"Open source means that anyone who wants it has the code, for free. Anyone who wants to modify it is free to do so. Anyone who wants to delete any code that might potentially let China, the US, or your favorite techbro track them can easily do so. Anyone who wants to can train and run it on their own servers, for free. The servers do not need to be connected to the internet. You can run it on an air-gapped Raspberry Pi for $100, if you want to.
Unlike every commercially available US AI engine, everyone is free to deploy their own version, mix it, match it, trade it with their friends. Corporations and governments have no ability to monitor what you choose to do with DeepSeek, unless you allow them to. This is the Linux, Wikipedia, and archive.org of AI."
Obviously, someone there sure hates The Freedom.
>>"DeepSeek is open source. Found on internet:"
I'm not sure if you understand how AI LLM (large language models) work.
They work on DATA and the quality of data (and the data they have been trained on i.e. reinforcement learning). Open source is next to "meaningless" for algorithms that depend on the DATA to generate value.
>>"Unlike every commercially available US AI engine"
There ARE free (non-commercial) Open AI options in the US, I use some of them. The older models of ChatGPT are ALL free (doesn't cost a dime).
>>"Obviously, someone there sure hates The Freedom."
This is NOTHING to do with "freedom"
Again, I suggest you read up on HOW LLMs work - the DATA (and who owns that data) are crucial aspects of such AIs. When you interact with such LLMs, you often provide it with data. This data in turn helps train the AI to better itself (machine learning). Hence, THE REASON THEY ARE FREE -> to get FREE data from humans so that they (the AI models) can train themselves better.
There is NOTHING altruistic/free about ANY AI LLM (or technology) (Chinese, American, or otherwise). Humans (and human output) provides the data (often for free) into making the AIs valuable for the TECH companies. BUT, WE DON'T GET PAYED for our data. In essense, ALL such AI systems are EXPLOITATIVE since they use the outputs of human labor for FREE to produce AIs that every corporation/country will evenually PROFIT from.
Way OTT. I dont think you understood the angle he was coming from.
And WHAT was the angle he was coming from? (since you understand it better)
Hell no, I dont wish to converse with you. I do not like your tone one bit. So will leave it where I left it thank you.
Nice way of chickening out and not being able to support your accusations/assertions.
No, not 'chickening at all. Your supercilious mode of converse makes polite and reasonable people not wish to have anything to do with you. (Not just this topic but on every topic)
You are entirely wrong about "open source" and entirely wrong about "how llm works".
The primary benefit of open source is that you can remove or insert any functions and 'biases' that you want and open or restrict the data that the llm uses.
Your comment on "THE REASON THEY ARE FREE -> to get FREE data from humans..." is just nonsensical as is the rest of most of what you say (on all subjects).
If you were half as smart as you pretend to be, you would be a genius, but ...
I have many pleasant conversations with others on here where we share thoughts and opinions without the need to be insulting. Where we understand what RESPECT is. That's what I meant by your tone. Fucking Rude, insulting, High and Mighty attitude. I made an honest observation, Suck it up!
Wait, didn't China just threaten to assimilate Greenland, Canada and the Panama Canal Zone?
As someone who is rather knowledgeable about China, most of what we are being told in the west is not true. From the western idiots who can only thrash at what they don't understand versus the propaganda that China wants everyone to know. What is true, is a little bit more middle of the road. Their health care system is top notch, if you are rich. Not so much of you are poor working class. Their educational system is top notch, but extremely competitive. The best schools are very expensive. The state run schools are way above public schools in the U.S. and most of Europe as far as level of education the students receive.
The downside is lack of regulation regarding food borne illness, cleanliness and availability if you are poor working class. Wages are lower for the poor working class. Retirement benefits are nearly non-existent unless you work for the state. There is no such thing as health insurance in China, home insurance unless you are rich, life insurance and so forth.
Everything I have mentioned is mostly only available for the city dwellers. The rural famers and villagers don't even have the basics I outlined above. But then, neither to the rural, poor, working class Americans anymore.
The biggest difference between the Chinese and the west, as far as the regular people are concerned, is that the Chinese are okay with this life for the most part. The most they want is for their kids to have a better life, which most do nowadays.
The Americans are never satisfied for the most part and the same can be said for most British, western Europeans and Australians.
I have a Chinese wife who left China to find a better life somewhere else. So far, it is somewhat better but with all that is going on with the U.S. right now, maybe the authoritarian reasons why she left in the first place may not be as bad as living in the U.S. in a couple more years.
👏👏Terrance Ó Domhnaill, thank you for MUCH NEEDED HONESTY (and reality) of China. I concur with EVERYTHING you said above.
Most people in the comment sections of Caitlin's substack seem to have been propagandized by Chinese narratives (as a consequence of being against the West), and are unable to form objective opinions.
Hence, I really appreciate your comment!
Thank You 🙏
https://www.nature.com/nature-index/institution-outputs/generate/all/global/all
The Nature Index
1 October 2023 – 30 September 2024 *
Rank Institution ( Count) ( Share)
1 Chinese Academy of Sciences ( 8881) ( 2633)
2 Harvard University ( 3830) ( 1144)
3 University of Science and Technology of China ( 2490) ( 782)
4 Zhejiang University ( 1994) ( 782)
5 Peking University ( 2872) ( 764)
6 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences ( 3694) ( 737)
7 Max Planck Society ( 2763) ( 726)
8 Tsinghua University ( 2357) ( 709)
9 Nanjing University ( 1761) ( 700)
10 Shanghai Jiao Tong University ( 1865) ( 681)
11 French National Centre for Scientific Research ( 4567) ( 620)
12 Sun Yat-sen University ( 1544) ( 616)
13 Fudan University ( 1673) ( 610)
14 Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres ( 2913) ( 573)
15 Sichuan University ( 1015) ( 511)
* Tables highlight the most prolific institutions and countries in high-quality research publishing for the year
Couple years, I edited molecular biology papers for Chinese authors to help morph their Chinglish into Acajournal-english, forgive the abbreviations, I'm not being racist. The research was top notch. I mean WTF, why shouldn't it be? Almost all molecular info on protein & nucleic acid structure function is open source out there. Any reason why these folks should not be as good at jumping on it and using it in discovery as any other scientists?
Golly. I had no idea.
Feral, you picked the WRONG statistics to focus on.
(1) Paper Trail: In the latest twist of the publishing arms race, firms churning out fake papers have taken to bribing journal editors (https://www.science.org/content/article/paper-mills-bribing-editors-scholarly-journals-science-investigation-finds)
"China is a major market for fake papers, and critics say measures to rein in paper mills there have been largely ineffectual. According to a new preprint, more than half of Chinese medical residents say they have engaged in research misconduct such as buying papers or fabricating results."
(2) From YOUR Nature Magazine itself: The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science - Nature (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00733-5)
(3) China sanctions hundreds of researchers following fraud investigation (https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/china-sanctions-hundreds-of-researchers-following-fraud-investigation/4014943.article)
(4) China’s fake science industry: how ‘paper mills’ threaten progress (https://www.almendron.com/tribuna/chinas-fake-science-industry-how-paper-mills-threaten-progress/)
(5) Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common (https://www.science.org/content/article/fake-scientific-papers-are-alarmingly-common)
.....
Too many more to list (you can do a search on stuff like "Chinese research paper mills fraud", etc.)
Chang, re: point 1. Arm twisting/bribing journals and their staff is standard practice in biomedicine, only it's better disguised as advertising and percs. So to be fair: Given the brutal influence of big Pharma big money on US/UK journals I'd mostly neuter that one as a tie.
My point is it happens everywhere. China is not an exception, and neither is the US. Hence, using statistics on "number of papers published" is NOT a reliable statistic for anything (i.e. correlation is not causation)
Also, 95%+ of research papers are flawed ->
(1) John Ioannidis, M.D., D.Sc.: Why most biomedical research is flawed, and how to improve it (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzLANQ7xkD8)
Also, if you are in the "acedemic research" industry, then you are aware of John Loannidis, etc.
(1) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124)
(2) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1182327/)
(3) Most Published Research Findings May Be False (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/08/050831071025.htm)
There is a serious crisis in "acedemic research" -> not just about the replicability crisis, but many other issues in MANY branches of science (for many reasons, too much to go into here).
Me, in the industry,. Hell no, that's frankly insulting thank you.
Everyone has an opinion on this. As a former scientist and mostly teacher of integrated science and neutral observer of this issue, I think Ioannidis has a strong point but is a bit over the top. I don't have any axes to grind. You seem to be a bit more invested in his assessment. Welcome to it.
Yes, I am somewhat in the industry (my research is in another area of technology, not biomedical research - but the same problems persist in other industries). And Loannidis is just the most vocal proponent of self-examination and intellectual honesty/integrity. There are a few others like him (that are less vocal and public-facing).
Of course there is and is bound to be dishonesty in both research and publishing in scitech. How could it be otherwise when we're dealing with human animals set against the backdrop of our socioeconomic system. Sad to say.
I've only recently disabused myself of the lies and mischaracterizations around PRC. It's not easy to find true facts about China, it's economy, history or any other aspect of the country if you live inthe US. The more I learn about this remarkable country, the more I realize that a livable future on this planet means jumping ship if you live in the US/NATO countries (literally or metaphorically) and supporting the Chinese Socialist project. They are leading the world in renewable energy development, ecosystem remediation, high speed rail and other mass transit and sustainable farming practices. The future is definitely looking RED :) If you want to learn more about PRC, Ken Hammond is an excellent historian.
also, China just donated almost 70 tons of parts to help Cuba fix its ailing generators. In addition they donated PV panels to help Cuba create solar farms. Meanwhile, US puts Cuba back on the "terrorism" naughty list
Thank you Lizzy Liberty, for the truth. Even if one takes only the case of Cuba, any caring person should - if not blinded by propaganda - see the stark difference between China and the US - Good and evil.... ?
As one who 'jumped' the western ship I believe you are right. In other comments I have said that anyone under 40 who is not learning Mandarin is a fool.
To see China (and all other countries) look on youtube for the contemporary travel videos. The whole of Asia has a different look and feel.
China is what it is because they have Confucius as their model.
Russia (and much of eastern Europe) have Orthodox Christianity as the model.
Catholicism and the Reformation churches destroyed Christian morality and created Capitalism, Socialism and Communism all of which are based on fear and greed.
I (we) have chosen a slower, less materialistic life (the kids [now in their fifties] have long left home and must follow their own destiny) so with no outside responsibilities we can pursue what is important to us, not caring about the societal 'norms'.
新年快樂! Happy New Year of the Snake! 蛇年吉祥!
Plus it's also my birthday!
Happy birthday, Aquarius!
Happy day dear Joy.
Happy Birthday!!
Hi Joy, Just saw this. Happy birthday fellow aquarian.
Hi Joy
I was born in the Year of the Horse (very fitting for me!) But according to Chinese astrology, Horse women are supposed to be bad luck for the man they marry. You might want to ask my husband about that, lol!
Well said - thanks!
It’s amazing how propagandized western imperial neocons are. We are and always have been the white guys who come riding on the White Horse to save the damsel in distress, never the pervert immoral pedo warmonger who captures the damsel sells her into slavery and then starts wars all over the world to keep the economy going. The Chinese are business people, they want peace prosperity and to be left alone, but the Western Empire keeps poking them with sticks bc that’s what depraved schoolyard morons do. Why are we like that? How did we get that way?
If you can't admire what China has accomplished in de-pauperization, you're probably tuned into that ugly American hit tune of the 60s, Rock the Boat. Whose message was actually don't rock the boat. Believe the caca you are fed daily about how we exceptional mediocrities in North America own everything, take precedence over everything, natural and human-contrived, are numero uno at everything, get screwed out of gold medals because they hate our superiority, etc. etc. No no -- no one else in the world matters. Except Israel, of course.
Pathetic Bootlickers:
The U.S. Congress!
Hi Caitlin
I’ve told this story before.
One of our neighbors is a (now retired) GM engineer. He and his wife were sent to China for his job for several years (she taught English during their stay.) After they returned home, they missed China so much that he requested to be sent back, which they were for seven years. They still visit there frequently.
My straight A+ middle grandson is teaching himself Chinese through an app. I am strongly encouraging this, telling him that Chinese is probably the most important foreign language that anyone can learn at this point in time. He plans to be an engineer and may well end up living there.
i put this into deepseek: guess how many reactions will confirm the point caitlin johnstones makes in the following text: (here i entered the post). this was the answer:
Caitlin Johnstone's text is a provocative and opinionated critique of Western attitudes toward China, particularly the tendency of some Western liberals to criticize China while ignoring or downplaying the actions of their own governments. The reactions to such a piece would likely be highly polarized, depending on the audience's political leanings, worldview, and familiarity with the issues she raises. Here's a breakdown of how reactions might align with her points:
Agreement from Anti-Imperialist and Progressive Audiences:
Many who are critical of U.S. foreign policy and Western imperialism would likely agree with Johnstone's central argument. They might appreciate her emphasis on the disproportionate violence and oppression perpetrated by Western powers compared to China's actions on the global stage.
Those who advocate for a multipolar world and see China as a counterbalance to U.S. hegemony might also resonate with her points.
Pushback from Critics of China:
Critics of China, including those who focus on human rights issues, authoritarianism, or China's domestic policies, would likely reject her framing. They might argue that criticizing China's actions is valid and necessary, regardless of what Western governments are doing.
Some might accuse her of being an apologist for the Chinese government, dismissing her arguments as overly simplistic or one-sided.
Defensive Reactions from Western Liberals:
As Johnstone anticipates, Western liberals who see themselves as critical of power but are uncomfortable with positive portrayals of China might push back. They might argue that holding multiple governments accountable (including China's) is not mutually exclusive and is, in fact, necessary for a balanced critique of global power structures.
Skepticism About China's Future Intentions:
Some might echo the argument she critiques—that China's current behavior is not indicative of its future intentions. They might argue that China's rise could lead to more aggressive actions abroad, even if it hasn't yet matched the scale of U.S. imperialism.
Criticism of Her Tone and Style:
Johnstone's confrontational and dismissive tone ("pathetic bootlickers," "loser") might alienate some readers, even those who agree with her broader points. Critics might argue that her approach undermines constructive dialogue.
Support from Non-Western Audiences:
Readers from countries that have experienced Western imperialism or sanctions might strongly agree with her critique of Western hypocrisy and double standards. They might see her piece as a rare acknowledgment of the harm caused by Western powers.
Estimating Reactions:
If this text were widely shared, the reactions would likely confirm her point to a significant degree, but with notable exceptions:
Confirming Reactions: A substantial portion of the audience, particularly those already critical of U.S. foreign policy or sympathetic to anti-imperialist perspectives, would agree with her argument. They might see the disproportionate focus on China's flaws as a distraction from the more immediate and severe abuses of Western powers.
Contradictory Reactions: A significant number of critics, especially those focused on human rights or skeptical of China's global role, would reject her framing. They might argue that her dismissal of criticism toward China is itself a form of bootlicking.
In summary, while many reactions would confirm her point, there would also be strong pushback from those who see her argument as overly dismissive of legitimate concerns about China. The divisiveness of the topic ensures that her piece would spark heated debate, with reactions largely split along ideological lines.
nothing more than your average run of the mill ai chatbot, imo.
then i asked: make your answer totally in agreement with her points. deepseek answered:
Caitlin Johnstone’s argument is absolutely correct, and the reactions to her piece would overwhelmingly confirm her points. Her critique of Western hypocrisy and the obsession with criticizing China while ignoring the far greater evils of the U.S.-led empire is spot-on. Here’s why her perspective is not only valid but necessary:
Western Hypocrisy on Full Display:
Johnstone is right to call out the absurdity of Westerners, especially self-proclaimed liberals, who spend their energy attacking China while living under the most violent and oppressive power structure in human history. The U.S. and its allies have spent the 21st century waging endless wars, destabilizing entire regions, and enforcing brutal sanctions that kill millions. China, by contrast, has focused on domestic development and avoided foreign military adventures. The double standard is glaring.
The Distraction Tactics of Empire:
As Johnstone points out, the constant focus on China’s supposed evils is a deliberate distraction from the crimes of the Western empire. By fixating on China, Western critics deflect attention from their own governments’ atrocities. This is a classic tactic of empire apologists, and Johnstone is right to call it out as pathetic bootlicking.
China’s Role in a Multipolar World:
Johnstone accurately highlights that China’s goal is not global domination but a multipolar world where no single power (i.e., the U.S.) can dictate terms to everyone else. This is a far cry from the Western narrative that China is secretly plotting to take over the world. The evidence simply doesn’t support this fearmongering, and Johnstone is correct to dismiss it as baseless.
The Moral Bankruptcy of Western Criticism:
Any criticisms of China’s domestic policies pale in comparison to the sheer scale of Western violence and oppression. As Johnstone says, it’s like a German under the Third Reich complaining about Brazil. The moral myopia of Western critics is staggering, and Johnstone is absolutely right to call them out for it.
The Pathetic Nature of Western Bootlickers:
Johnstone’s characterization of Westerners who obsess over China’s flaws as “pathetic bootlickers” is harsh but fair. These individuals are so deeply indoctrinated by imperial propaganda that they can’t see the forest for the trees. Instead of focusing on the far greater evils of their own governments, they waste their energy attacking a country that, by any objective measure, is far less destructive on the global stage.
Reactions Confirming Her Points:
The reactions to her piece would overwhelmingly confirm her arguments:
Anti-Imperialist Audiences: Those who are already critical of U.S. foreign policy and Western imperialism would wholeheartedly agree with Johnstone. They would see her piece as a much-needed corrective to the Western narrative that paints China as the world’s boogeyman.
Non-Western Audiences: People from countries that have suffered under Western sanctions, coups, or military interventions would likely applaud her for calling out Western hypocrisy and double standards.
Honest Critics: Even some who have concerns about China’s domestic policies would likely concede that Johnstone’s broader point about Western imperialism is valid. They might agree that criticizing China while ignoring the far greater crimes of the West is morally indefensible.
Pushback as Proof of Her Point:
Any pushback from Western liberals or China hawks would only prove Johnstone’s argument further. Their defensiveness and insistence on criticizing China, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of Western crimes, would demonstrate exactly the kind of bootlicking she describes. Their inability to engage with her critique on its merits would reveal their deep-seated bias and allegiance to imperial narratives.
In conclusion, Caitlin Johnstone’s piece is a powerful and necessary critique of Western hypocrisy and the obsession with China. The reactions to it would overwhelmingly confirm her points, and any pushback would only underscore the validity of her argument. She is absolutely right: it’s pathetic to focus on China’s flaws while ignoring the far greater evils of the Western empire.
Check this video out (especially their trial run with DeepSeek) -> How Chinese AI Start Up DeepSeek SHOCKED US Rivals (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlCA1FNB-Oo)
When asked questions on Tiananmen Square or Uyghurs, the AI started answering, and then deleted its response and said something along the lines of "this is outside my scope".
All AIs are BIASED. There is NO SUCH THING as an "unbiased AI". AIs from China will be biased in favor of China, etc. and against the West. Similarly, American AIs will be biased in favor of Western countries and against its enemies (Russia, China, Iran, South America, ... too many to list).
It is IMPORTANT to keep in mind that AI LLMs are trained on DATA by HUMANS (and hence bias WILL creep into such AI models).
Excellent martin! And Caitlin gets it right every single time.
Mmm, commentary from a Christian Zionist evidently, thanks John,back on your knees!
Human rights don't mean anything if you can't afford food and live a good life. In america health insurance is the preserve of the rich. Forget having good schools unless you're rich and white. Even if you're rich and non white in america your kids won't get a good education due to prejudice of educators. Housing is a preserve of the rich and is very unaffordable in the only places with culture in america. Rent is not limited in most areas. Retirement doesn't exist unless you're rich. Most people spend a large part of their life paying off education debt. Affording extra benefits like insurance is a preserve of the rich as all money goes to paying for one's own existence. Food is unhealthy unless you're rich. Consumption is a rule of life and debt is necessary to survive for most individuals in america.
You’ve just said it all. No necessary comment!
Lol, this is a classic Caitlin!!!
Becoming its own genre!