generic_user

> The world trade order is tilted in favor of the US, as are IP rules (favoring the incumbent power, with a head start of several decades).

This is not a US only issue.

the only incentive to create IP whether its scientific, technology, or the arts is that the creator can monetize there creation through copyright, patents etc. IP is the foundation of growth for this century for the entire industrialized world. I doubt the EU or anyone else supports Chinas IP theft, it has ill effects on all IP holders including EU companies.

> I for one support the Chinese in this conflict, if for nothing else, simply for the possibility of putting some restraint on the out-of-control Hegemon.

your entitled to your opinion. but I don't support the tariffs and other measures because I support the President of the US. I think the strategy behind China 2025 if implemented would lead to a destabilization of the global economy. that could very quickly lead to a serious war.

> You are not, and the rest of the world is pretty much not in agreement with the US

On some of your points Iran etc, sure there is a lot of the world that disagrees with the US position. including many US citizens. but on the issues of China's trade abuses and the Huawei ban I think most of the the world including those in the EU, UK, Japan etc, want to see China move away from there current ambitions.

> What are those issues?

The issue is certainly not that China wants to advance there local industries. The US has spent the last 40 years+ helping china develop its industry and technology.

The Issue is that China was obligated to develop reciprocal free trade like the rest of the WTO members. Over the last 20 years they have been moving farther away from that into a state socialist mercantilist expansionist power.

A few of the issues includes the Theft of intellectual property, Industrial espionage, Lack of market access and state monopoly domination of there internal markets. Dumping of steel and other commodities. Currency manipulation, etc.

there is a very long list.

the EU has had been putting tariffs on Chinese steel for years due to aggressive dumping of steel which has harmed EU industry and distorted prices.

I think that this confrontation has been building for a long time. and now there is a consensus, a global consensus among the liberal democracies including the EU members that China 2025 is step to far away from the normalized reciprocal free trade system.

The fundamental issues surrounding China 2025 which has prompted a shift in trade posture between the United States and China affect every other developed manufacturing nation in the world. Including Germany and the rest of the EU Nations.

Just because the EU has not gotten publicly involved does not mean that they are not involved privatively in negotiations. Europe along with Japan, Korea etc have the luxury to stay quiet because the US is taking a very public and direct strategy.

The US is the only Nation that can take that very public role.

thats a good summation, it's important to note that the "Made in China 2025" is the explicit Official policy issued by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang. So this is not interpretation or exaggeration. The official policy of The Peoples Republic of China is to raise the domestic sourcing of essentially all high-tech high-value goods to 75% domestic production. And also export these goods into other markets.

They may not state it publicly but I think all the industrialied producer economies Fron the US to Europe and Asia are scared to death of the implications China 2025 has for there own high-tech high-value industries.

Its not objective criteria that is the problem. Its the interpretation and misrepresentation by ideologues that is inadequate.

'just having the right parents will push your sores up on average'

That has little to do with the objectivity or subjectivity of the test. There can be a wide variation of social development between racial groups, economic classes, religious communities, geographic regions etc. Not to mention individual IQ and ability.

A standardized test in say, mathematics is objective. The same tests that demonstrate competency are administered all over the world in every country and culture in the world. You can objectively determine the level of ability of any given student regardless of race or culture.

To simply say that because disparity exist we should therefor abandon standards and objective criteria in favor of a set of morphological corrective fictions that look good on paper but do nothing to fix the disparity is diminishing for everyone.

The problems are simply much harder and more complicated then peoples egos will let them admit. Its very easy to propose a grand theory that fixes all the problem of the world quickly and completely.

The idea of 'Over representation' of a certain racial group based on there percentage of the population is entirely subjective and racist.

At Cal Tech Asians are roughly 50% of students. Cal Tech does not consider race in admissions. Those students rightfully earned there places base on merit and objective criteria.

To make the suggestion that they should be systematically denied those positions because of there race and percentage of population is regressive. Who gets to decide what percentage of what race is a good percentage?

Harvard is desperately trying to cover there criteria because it more then likely runs contrary to the 1964 Civil Rights Act and they are going to louse this law suite if it goes to trial.

Lets see the exact formula that Harvard is using for race vs percentage of the population so we can apply the same formula to all races they admit. Lets compare European, Jewish, Asian student percentages based on the same formula.

I think that administration at Harvard is scared to death of that type of scrutiny but that is exactly what they are going to get. And it could seriously stigmatize the school for decades. And set some significant legal presented so Schools can not use these sort of behind closed doors racist regressive policies any more.

The promise of a post industrial society was always that western countries would be able to have smaller families with more highly educated children who were more productive and innovative. Future generations could reduce resource usage but improve the standard of living given there continued scientific and educational progress.

Somewhere along the like that seems to have been thrown out the window and the idea of a 'consumer economy' took its place. Now we have a model of low education low wage consumers who keep the economy going by buying endless plastic junk. Perpetually distracted with entertainment and unhealthy unsustainable lifestyles.

I think Japan is making a wise choice.

It only takes one lawsuit that goes to the supreme court to turn this whole debate into a federal legislative debate about civil rights or some other expansive constitutional issue.

When your in a situation where domain registrars and other core infrastructure are making judgements about what political speech they will allow on the internet then I would imagine your very close to a whole host of issues that cut the core of fundamental rights. That's why CloudFlare is so skittish, they know where this could go.

Eventually this rough shot approach is going to hit someone with the resources to fight back. Lets imagine Breitbart gets nuked what then? It's only a matter of time before there is an incident like that. And when it happens its already to late to turn back.

Ok then, lets give Trump, the DOJ and Jeff Sessions the impetus to start drafting legislation to fight 'internet hate speech' and see what they come up with.

edit: > That's a slippery slope argument

Its not. These discussions will be taken over by the political establishment and the courts very quickly with very real consequences.

We have to be steadfast to the idea that defending the free speech that you might find repulsive is defending your own right to free speech.