Rones said:
Which is better for the common Chinese citizen? A world with no google or a world with a slightly censored google?
Personally I think a world with no Google would be better for them. A censored Google creates contempt, a la "well yeah, it's censored, but we can still use it, sort of". A world without Google would raise questions, and in my opinion ultimately discontent:
"Why no Google?"
"Because Google didn't want to put up with censorship."
"grumble grumble, fuck the government, grumble"
Rones said:
Rones said:
If you own stock and vote on company actions in a moral way, then I don't see you at fault.
Where is the problem with that?
Legally you are not at fault, we have established that. Of course you are morally at fault, how couldn't you be. Your money continiously supports activities that are not acceptable based on your morals (since you did vote against them). By keeping your stock you choose your own profit over your own morals, as you do have the option to sell your stock if decisions do not go your way.
Rones said:
If by efficiently you mean an economy that bombed without protest...then yes it ran efficiently. Mass killings are not a moral solution for overpopulation, nor even an effective solution. To say this just after you criticize the morality of google is rediculous.
I am not saying that mass killings are a solution for overpopulation, but considering the situation from a dictator's point of view it is perfectly acceptable to kill 20M if you have another 160M to work with. BTW, the 20M deathtoll is about as accurate as anyone's guess. Numbers vary widely from 4M to 50M.
In addition it is not like those were mass killings, many deaths occured in forced labor camps where people died because of the conditions they were living in. While it certainly never was the intention to save those people, thier death was at times more of a burden as things just didn't get done because not enough people were around to do the work (i.e. Kolyma mines etc).
I think it's pretty undisputed that in the first 10 years of Stalin's rule the country achieved huge economic growth, which some argue did continue throughout his rule and even peaked after his death where people were temporarily putting in extra effort "for comrade Stalin".
Rones said:
was actually refering to the transition of West Germany under Hitler to West Germany post WWII.
I am sorry, but that just made me LOL. What transition? Germany was bombed into the stone age. Allies snatched all the good brains and applied them to their own programs. Then there was the Marshall plan. This "transition" is not something that happened on it's own, nor could it have happened unassisted.
In regards to China we could argue that free trade with them is just one big Marshall plan without that they call it that way. If we do that, we are still missing the part of bombing China into submission.