>You seem to be tilting against an imaginary opponent. Perhaps it would help if we went back and examined where this discussion started.

Nope. I'm just trying to teach you.

>Pursuant to what I viewed as a noble discussion about these ideals, I attempted to sidestep your tribalism and focus on what I viewed as the crux of the issue.

No. You don't get it. Your entire argument is tribal. You need to present evidence, you have none. Just statements of your own opinions.

>Central planning requires perfect information to live up to its stated goals. Thus in any centrally planned...

Again another opinion. With no offering of evidence. How about you give me a an example of a perfect system that doesn't need perfect information and then we can talk about the merits of central government. I really can't even cite an example of a government that doesn't require perfect information to be perfect. But go ahead, here's an opportunity for you to give me evidence to show me that I'm wrong.

>In contrast, decentralized systems based upon individualism and free markets are generally more resiliant to errors committed by individuals. Participants who have the _freedom_ to choose for themselves can observe errors committed by others and look for alternate solutions. Similarly, they can emulate successes they observe.

And what makes you say people behave this way? Where's your evidence? Again, another useless opinion because I have a different opinion: People are doomed to repeat history, people as a group mob function with as if they were a single person with an IQ of 80. My opinions differ from yours. Again your useless attempt to turn me requires evidence. There is no tribalism going on here. I am teaching you how to debate because you don't know how. All in all my real opinion is a hybrid of your opinion and mine. People are shades of both creating a story that is far more complex than your simple classifications of behavior. But again, who cares because no evidence.

>In response to these points you provide anecdotal evidence about your friend attending a wedding in China. While I am no mind reader, I could only assume that you were implying that the wedding was not canceled because of the superior central planning of the CCP. This is absurd on many levels.

No. I am presenting to you a piece of evidence. The evidence doesn't prove anything by itself, it just gives more credibility to something. The more evidence I present to you the more credibility is given to my hypothesis. So in total the evidence I presented to you were three in total: Technocratic, Anecdotal, and statistical. Each piece of evidence no doubt has different levels of quality and veracity but all three combined together form a consistent picture. No doubt, if I observe a friend going to a wedding in China it shows consistency with statistical evidence and news articles.

>First of all as I pointed out, China is a large country. There are lockdowns elsewhere. Week to week we see new lockdowns throughout the country. Even Beijing has had entire neighborhoods on lockdown. Head central planner Xi, has fled the capital.

Evidence. Please. Cite your sources.

>We can also look to Sweden, where lockdowns were not manda...

Cite your sources. Give me statistics. Numbers. You could be pulling all of this out of your ass.

>Finally, if central planning equated to competent governance, then why did COVID-19 originate under the reign of central planners?

Why do people have such simple minded views on issues that are startlingly more complex? I know why. It's because of pride. It's US vs. China and the US has to be better. Look, I don't equate central planning to better governance or worse governance or perfect governance. I never said this, you just assumed it. I equate it to alternative governance. If the US was an Orange then China would be an Apple. You're comparing Apples and Oranges.

For example how do you explain the massive growth China has experienced over the past decades where millions and millions of people are pulled out of poverty at a breakneck pace that has not been witnessed in the history of civilization? You're not wrong about about China's failures. But you have blinded yourself to the failures of your own government and the successes of China.

Regardless of your own opinion. China GDP is projected to surpass the GDP of the US within in your lifetime, this is fact.

>The points made are philosophical. They can be challenged or even refuted logically. So far you have failed to do so. You haven't even approac...

So philosophical points don't need evidence? No man. They do.

>They can be challenged or even refuted logically.

If you were actually logical you would know that in all of science and reality as we know it, nothing can be proven. Pure Logic is the domain of abstract maths, but in the real world as we know it, science requires evidence. Your logic must rest on a foundation and that foundation is called an axiom aka evidence.

>Observation can be part of this process, but strictly speaking this is not scientific.

This is not a logical statement. Observation HAS to be part of the process. Basically you're implying that conclusions and opinions can be formulated with ZERO observations about the world as we know it. How do you even know there's a global pandemic going on? You must've observed something.

Statements like the one you made indicate to me that you have an intense lack of logical and scientific maturity.

>Then you go on to hyperbole and debase yourself with ridiculous insults. Much of your rambling follow up is dedicated to the same. The greater part seeks to defend China from an imagined slight. I will entertain this digression.

I have not insulted you. Just stated facts. You take offense to the truth. For that I cannot help you.

I am not defending China. I am defending facts. I'm not blindly supporting China. I'm attacking the blind support of total freedom as if individualism is the perfect answer to the worlds problems. With Americas total fuck up of handling covid-19 we can easily see the price we pay for freedom.

Let me put it this way. My initial post is in support of a balanced narrative between individualism and central planning. The pros and cons of each.

>China is not the CCP. Throughout this discussion you appear to conflate the two. This is an important distinction. You also make several inaccurate assumptions about myself, but I'll leave that to the side for now. In any strictly logical debate, the identity of the speaker should not play a role.

Then we won't reveal our identities. But you need to note all logic rests on foundational axioms (aka evidence) and you have presented none. Therefore you are not acting logically nor are you acting scientifically.

As for China not being the CCP. There's really no point in stating this fact. Obviously the Chinese people are different from the Chinese government. I know this and you know I know this. I conflate the vocabulary but I assume you have the intelligence to know when I'm referring to one or the other. This is more of a jab at me for something that clearly you already know is not true (aka an insult).

>GDP is a self-gratifying statist metric preferred by technocrats the world over. The calculation of GDP justifies further government intervention in an economy. In the case of the west, this can be in the form of credit expansion. In the case of the CCP's centrally planned economy, this is much more direct.

True but unfortunately, it's the best quantitative metric available. It's a piece of evidence that correlates with the rising quality of life in China and is no doubt a slice of evidence that shows the benefits of central government.

>GDP can be increased by simply paying workers to dig and fill holes. While this will increase GDP, it will not add any value to the economy. Similarly in China we see 'tofu buildings'. These kinds of projects may increase GDP, but they decrease the quality of life for market participants. Residents have been injured by these shoddy constructions. Markets are distorted and capital is misallocated, preventing entrepreneurs from contributing actual value.

Doubtful this has much of an impact on overall GDP or the overall story of China. If it does you need to provide evidence. Which you have not.

>From this perspective it would be more fitting to applaud the increase in the standard of living of the Chinese people. The CCP is not responsible for this, they have stood in the way and continue to obstruct. Crediting the CCP for these increases is anti-Chinese. The Chinese people deserve credit for increasing their standard of living in spite of the obstructions of the CCP. Those individual entrepreneurs who have strived, survived and thrived while the party has attempted to milk them at every step deserve our applause.

Now who's going on a tangent? More opinions. Some I agree with some I don't, but again no evidence. So really I can present my opinion but everything will go in circles until someone presents evidence.

In my opinion the CCP and the people participated in the success of China overall. The CCP also, no doubt, hindered progress at times but the same could be said of any government and people. In fact those TOFU buildings you mentioned are the result of the lack of centralized control. Local officials gaming the rules because the central government don't have the power to stop them.

>Yes, I encourage you to travel and see the real China, to involve yourself in an entrepreneurial pursuit anywhere in this amazing world. I think this will give you a different perspective. Thanks for the discussion.

Why encourage me if I have already obviously done something similar (like living in China for years). I'm encouraging you because it appears to me that you have not even visited.