Same can be said about Ukraine. Crimea population primarily consists of Russian and Turkish speaking Tartars, Russians and Ukrainians. All of their business is related to Russia and Turkey. Southern and eastern half of Ukraine is populated with ethnic Russians while central, northern and western parts with ethnic Ukrainians.
Not paying attention to this small but very important detail could undermine any possible peace agreement longterm, no matter who "wins" or "loses".

This post was edited by babun1024 on Aug 3 2023 10:25am

Sorry I'm a bit confused, what same thing can be said about Ukraine?

And you didn't answer any of my questions lol

1. First quote, you sounded like any country who randomly puts "democratic" in its name has got a claim to be democratic. My answer was to underline what a democracy consists of. China and Russia are dictatorships, no questions asked.
2. Then you asked why Swiss type democracy isn't feasable everywhere. I answered you, it has to do with size of a country.
3. I also told you the best way to rule is to divide those regions into common ground ethnography/culture etc. Then I made a relation to our thread here. Ukraine isn't a homogen population like Japan or Korea. Any peace solution after the war has to pay attention to those details otherwise lasting peace/prosperity won't be possible.

This post was edited by babun1024 on Aug 3 2023 10:37am

1. The point was there are various interpretations of what a democracy is and how it should function. China and Russia are not "dictatorships" that is a ridiculous oversimplification, as is saying Swiss democracy is " the best"

2. If it has to do with the size of the country then obviously the Swiss style isn't "best"

3. Best is subjective here as well, best for who? And who does the dividing? These things are more complicated than simply copy/pasting whatever form of government you think is most efficient.

I agree that Ukraine isn't a homogen population but I don't think that is a particularly new or startling discovery.

One of the key advantages of western systems over China which imo seriously hampers China is how we and they treat entrepreneurship or wealth. it’s an argument that I heard recently and find really compelling in why I’m less ‘bullish’ China compared to as before. We in the US have a really good environment for entrepreneurs to strive and succeed, that’s one of the primary reasons why so much high tech is here, why we have so many startups, etc. there it’s not like that. So what happens is if you’re a very smart Chinese inventor is you have incentive to go to the west and develop your idea. They suffer from huge human capital leakage primary because of their regulatory environment and how they treat wealth. Jack Ma is a decent example of that.

Also if you’re wealthy it’s objectively better to have your wealth parked in the west versus a place like China that has various capital controls or if you’re too critical of the power structure you can have your wings clipped quiet fast.

They would benefit greatly to have better developed business rights, stronger regulatory protections to protect IP, stronger incentives to invent and develop, etc, basically stronger property rights so the cream of the crop wants to stay there and feels secure. It’s antithetical to communism though and it’s something that will take them a long time to iron out.

Response is kind of tangent but my point is there is a huge benefit if Chinas political structure looked more like the west, but obviously that would imperil the current power structure.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Aug 3 2023 11:42am

I cannot agree more. Lee Kuan Yew said something very similar to you in 1999 or 2001.
But there is a catch, due to the current Geo Political environment those that went to the United States, stayed there, studied there , worked there, created patents , inventions etc etc for America are going back to China due to how they have been treated. Those that were born and raise in the US for a few generations will probably not.
But first generation and new green card holders will be consider so.

They don't exactly want to end up in a internment camp like the Japanese when shit hits the fan. That is my opinion.

I think nobody denies that Ukraine would stand no chance against Russia if they had to fight on their own, without Western support.



Case in point: when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, their largest military campaign of the past 50 years, three of their most important allies (Canada, France, Germany) outright refused allegiance and basically told them to pound sand. And in the case of Germany, there were still tens of thousands of US troops stationed on their territory at the time.

So yes, there is plenty of historical precedent to support the claim that US allies generally enjoy a much larger degree of sovereignty and autonomy than the Soviet/Russian satellites.




It was also a gigantic propaganda victory for the US/capitalism to have images of East Germans fleeing to West Berlin in droves, to the point that the socialist regime had to build a literal wall to lock up its own people and prevent it from switching over to the capitalist side. The West became the moral and ideological winner of the Cold War the day the Berlin Wall started being built back in 1961. From that point onward, it was clear that the Eastern bloc/communism could only be sustained by naked force. It took another 30 years, until 1991, before they fully collapsed, but the competition between the two systems, between capitalism and communism, was settled.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 3 2023 02:50pm

Right, so the disparity thing is pretty meaningless?

About sovereinity, Ukraine cannot exist without the help of the west now economically and militarly. That's the definition of a true vasal.

Ukraine isn't even a country anymore much less sovereign. Basically every major US ally is a vassal state at this point, with varying degrees of control of course.