But we do have a moral high ground, and to lose it means to have lost our way. And we certainly have lost our way before. The fact that you and I can speak freely about it, and turn around and critique our own nation in order to make it better, is a sign that all is far from gone.

If you’re talking about the US, it’s a delicate thing.

Books are being removed from classrooms and inconvenient history is being rewritten by the state in Florida and other states. However Florida’s governor seems to be eying a run at the White House.

It seems unlikely to succeed, but the unlikely has happened before.

You’re comparing a mountain and a molehill. Some conservative US states are attempting to curtail freedom of speech in schools and will likely fail ultimately. China arrests people’s family members who speak out against the regime.

We are very definitely better than them.

When I read comments like this, I am reminded of how deeply ingrained nationalism is for Americans. Where even if one admits something is a problem, it's simply a temporary problem not worth paying any mind, hey look, China is doing something!

Hopefully soon more Americans realize how similar your country and China are, the differences are minor, not major.

The US government shouldn’t have invaded Iraq, toppled most of the regimes in the Cold War, interned Japanese citizens, or dropped the nuclear bombs during WW2. They should have never had slavery or poor treatment of indigenous tribes. Today we need better election laws, gun laws, separation between church and state, tort reform etc. My username is my real name and I live in Toledo, Ohio. typing that gives me no pause or concern.

So if you’re a Chinese citizen, go ahead and type out your name and where you live, along with a list of things you feel your government is wrong about.

> My username is my real name and I live in Toledo, Ohio. typing that gives me no pause or concern.

The issue isn't that you aren't writing this post with no pause of concern.

The issue is that after writing it, and, presumably, comprehending what you, yourself wrote, you still harbor the delusion of maintaining some moral high ground (as are some other posters in this thread)

The US maintains a lot more freedoms for its citizens simply due to exerting vast military power to siphon resources from the entire planet (with exceptions to China/Russia, obviously). Otherwise, it's entirely unknown and hypothetical as to whether it would or could be a "shining beacon of democracy" as so many would like to believe it currently is (which it very well may be, compared to CCP/Russia, which is not a very high bar)

If freedoms are maintained due to resources how comes China and Russia aren’t the freest countries around? They have more resources than anybody.

"more Americans realize how similar your country and China are, the differences are minor, not major."

I think this is the perfect problem for you not us - to work that out. You're not gonna end where you think.

Stuck for an approach? Look at the 2015 Nobel prize in literature and try that in china then in the US.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/2015/summary/

Yep, people love to "whatabout" it but qualitatively speaking there is an argument to be made for a rather magnificent piece of moral high ground.

Even inasmuch as it annoys a lot of people who don't appreciate this perspective--they tend to overrate it as if it must equate to perfection, a nation without problems, etc.

>Yep, people love to "whatabout"

Americans sure love "whatabout". Every time when pointed to their problems you would hear but look at China / Russia / etc.

>"rather magnificent piece of moral high ground"

I guess crusaders are not yet extinct

> Even inasmuch as it annoys a lot of people who don't appreciate this perspective

It annoys everyone because it's based on a false pretense.

In terms of morals, the US didn't turn up any better than the USSR, judging by how it acted when it became uncontested.

Every group believes they hold the moral high ground. Mortality is subjective and perception flawed.

There are plenty of dictators out there who just want to hold power at any cost regardless of morals. Sociopaths exist.

Oh c'mon! Typing a two liner on HN like you're saying something is twaddle.

Most guys try to gauge the relative stupidity or goodness of things by reading history, and getting some sense of the state of play from real people and facts.

For most of us belief alone isn't good enough.

>"But we do have a moral high ground"

No, just killed slightly less people (maybe) while chanting "they asked for it" and "we are the good guys" mantras.

> But we do have a moral high ground

No, you don't. You have an excellent propaganda and a totally chauvinistic attitude.

Relative to Putin-Russia and CCP-China? The US maintains moral high ground.

Try asking people outside the western bubble. Relative to Russia/China, you just tell yourselves and everyone around that you are the good guys more often and much more stubbornly.

To put it simply, you are just biased because you can't see yourself from the outside.

I am from outside that bubble, and you are wrong.

One could, of course, ask memebers of one of the following groups of what they think about Western moral superiority: Afghans, Pakistanis living in the border region to Afghnistan, Iraqis, the Shiit minority living in Southern Iraq, Palestinians, people Lebanon and Lybia... The list of wars the West (TM), as in NATO and various allies, have started over the last decades is way too long to claim any moral superiority when it comes to foreign policy. And the way we, especially in Europe, treat refugees from various countries differently certainly doesn't help. One group is allowed to drown in the Mediteranean, while certain other grouos get easy entry and extended stay visas.

Nothing againstvthe latter, thaz was quite necessary, bit entities as rich as the EU could offer the same thing to all people in need, right?

Where are you from exactly? Would you deny it being a rather common opinion?

SPB.

Good guys? I don't think I said that, nor would I. The corporate greed of the West should not be denied.

But freedom of speech, human rights, and climate change are areas where BRICS stands in a morally compromised position, relative to the West.

> Good guys? I don't think I said that, nor would I

> BRICS stands in a morally compromised position, relative to the West.

So, specifically what did you mean by all that when compared the west to... what exactly, an economic pact of completely culturally different countries?

I find that self-assigned supremacy in matters of climate change to be somewhat contrary to the fact that the West had pushed all the dirty production to the so called "third world states" (some happen to be BRICS) while still remaining the largest consumer, and then when faces with practical issues, engaged in fracking and reopened the coal mines. Do you honestly think you are the only ones who are bothered?

This attitude is counterproductive and dangerous. I am legitimately scared when western folks start that superiority trope.

I thought whataboutism belongs to Russians /s

We should be looking into the a mirror, not greeting ourselves with the thoughts that there are worse places. This way inevitably leads down, not up, if we are talking "high moral"

The country that invaded Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan , destabilized countries on 3 continents, and dominates the world economy, all at the cost of millions of lives, doesn’t have so high a moral ground. We only look good compared to China if one chooses a recent slice of history and ignores foreign wars and intervention.

As compared to a nation that killed thousands of student protesters, ran over their bodies with tanks until they turned to mush, flushed it down the drain and then banned anyone from mentioning it for 30 years I'll take the good old US thank you very much.

>"ran over their bodies with tanks until they turned to mush"

Can I have more details please

>"I'll take the good old US"

I would choose the US as well. Because the US treats their own citizens better (at least for now). Not because it stands on "high moral ground" - it does not.

"They had orders that nobody in the square be spared, and children and young girls were slaughtered, anti-personnel carriers and tanks then ran backwards and forwards over the bodies of the slain until they were reduced to pulp, after which, bulldozers moved in to push the remains into piles which were then incinerated by troops with flamethrowers."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-03/bob-hawke-tiananman-c...

I love a lot about China, love Chinese people, but we have to be realistic about the differences in governance and its capacity for acts like this. We (non-Americans) are very lucky that the US became the world hegemon after WW2 and the sole superpower after the fall of the Soviet Union. For all its faults and mistakes, it usually recognizes them eventually and tries to improve over time. So, while it annoys me a bit that young Americans are so anti-US, it's a very healthy sign that there is so much criticism.

What about a nation that was committing systemic genocide from coast to coast over the course of 150+ years, and after that put the people it didn't manage to kill in reservations?

If we really get advanced AI then I can’t imagine the US will use oil for fuel very much longer. Too messy geopolitically. Can you imagine if we didn’t have to care about the big oil producers of the world? But you know whatever little known mineral will be needed to run the new generators - you better sell it to them