
“We’re in an economic war with China. It’s futile to compromise.” - cs702
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/steve-bannon-were-in-an-economic-war-with-china-its-futile-to-compromise/2019/05/06/0055af36-7014-11e9-9eb4-0828f5389013_story.html
======
cs702
I'm posting this on HN somewhat reluctantly, a bit worried that the discussion
might degrade into ideologically-driven arguments.

On the other hand, this is the first time I have come across a short list of
coherent, well-written arguments that seek to defend the current US
administration's antics in its trading negotiations with China.

At a minimum, I feel this opinion piece provides _insight into the thinking of
people who support such antics_ , which otherwise seem arbitrary and
irrational.

If the discussion degrades, I will be the first person to flag the thread.

~~~
cmurf
Ideological arguments are central to understanding the issues and effective
diplomacy. The problem is when people use combinations of ad hominem attacks
and moral arguments (inherent or absolute rightness or wrongness of
ideologies).

China does not have the same culture or philosophy as the U.S. of course they
have a different ideology. Those must be explored in order to understand their
consequences. If we're very good at that, we can predict the consequences and
produce effective counter measures. They obviously would try to do the same.

Regardless of ideology, any abrupt changes are inherently destabilizing,
reduce trust, increase stress, and historically often have lead to conflict.
This can be economic conflict, or warfare. So it is very important to make
ideologically driven arguments, to thoroughly understand the most important
issues, many of which can be cultural and emotional, not just about money.

