> And this is such a problem that you think the US should take actions to try and overthrow their government?

I didn't say that. Judging by the successes of forced regime changes in recent history, I'd say there's little actual practical value in doing so. I'm a pragmatist as much as I am an idealist. There are other options to counterbalance China's growing influence and power. The TPP was the most obvious option, but the US scuttled it and abandoned all the Asian countries who were relying on them to protect them from encroaching Chinese pressure.

> I'm not thrilled at the prospect of a Chinese super power either. However, I also view the US as a rather terrible superpower, and unlike in China I have some amount of agency to change that.

Believe me. I'd like nothing more than for the US to gain even a tiny fraction of the moral values and character that they traditionally pretended to have. Still, I prefer a world order where the US is in charge. As abhorrent as they may be, they're the lesser evil here. Unfortunately, Trump and the Republican party are eroding what little faith (and it's miniscule at this point) I have in the US ... if there were any other, better option, I'd be really fucking happy.

You don't think there is any moral difference between the two?

For many people worldwide, the difference is that China is not bombing them, isn't overthrowing their governments and creating & fueling a civil war in their country.

I'm quite certain that China will do those things if they ever become the world's single global super power, but so far they haven't. Not because they wouldn't for moral reasons, but for lack of opportunity. Still, in practice, the worst China is doing to other countries somewhere across the world is blocking some website or creating tariffs, not level a city.

Is that true? Seems they are doing a lot in Africa. And even if it were, it's hard to believe they'll treat foreigners any better than their own people.

They are buying Africa via development aid, that's quite different from bombing Africa. The Chinese will certainly leverage their power, but they tend to do it in more subtle ways, at least where their power isn't overwhelming. Their posturing in the South China Sea certainly looks different from their behavior in Africa or South America. But as I mentioned, I don't believe that it's because they care about human rights, the sovereignty of countries etc, it's that they can't get away with openly bombing random countries on the other side of the globe yet. The US -for the most part- can, so they don't care for subtlety and just do.

Who is bombing Africa? It seems a lot of moral outrage against the US stems from false equivalence.

The US has been routinely bombing both Libya and Somalia for around a decade.

Yes but for what reason? Just for fun? To take them over? To combat terrorism?

Ostensibly it's combating terrorism, but basically American imperialism.

I must have missed when we colonized Somalia and Libya. Thanks for the update.

American imperialism has never been about traditional colonialism, so I'm not sure what you mean.

As you asked originally, I find neither the US nor China to be moral, but I can't understand the outrage over China's acts while ignoring and trying to justify US acts.

No matter what difference you see between them now, trying to topple their government would make the US far more immoral.

Sure it depends on what manner, but what is wrong with a regime change? I am sure there are plenty of Falun Gong, Muslims and Christians who would not mind a freer government. I think only US business would mind because they would not have such easy access to cheap labor and electrical and human parts.

>Sure it depends on what manner, but what is wrong with a regime change?

The incredibly bloody events that are likely to happen enacting a regime change that wouldn't ensure a freer government.

Yes I agree. Revolution is not the way. That's how China for into the current mess. But I see no problem with assisting with regime change from within.

So you want to replace Xi with some other member of the Politburo? Pulling that off seems unlikely to help much, and failure would strengthen his position.

I don't know any other internal regime change that isn't a revolution.

I think the biggest is from the rest of the world. We are complicit because we happily buy goods from such a horrible regime. We need an international boycott on China until they shape up.

Ideological. Communism and human rights violation are seen as acceptable due to a specific worldview. Demonstrating the error with the worldview can change people's minds and lead to internal regime change.

>. We need an international boycott on China until they shape up.

Right, so you want to economically cripple China over human rights abuses. Not only is this likely to end in war, millions would likely die from supply shortages.

>Demonstrating the error with the worldview can change people's minds and lead to internal regime change

The capitalist societies banding together to starve China out is unlikely to convert them to your side. It didn't the last time we tried.

Ah, yes. We should continue the status quo, where China continues to perpetuate human rights abuses, as well as utilizing their economic power to influence and control international companies.

We're enabling and funding this. We should stop.

Probably there's a bit of a continuum here between starving China and not batting an eye as they scoop the living eyes out of some poor Falun Gong after they slice him open and cut out all his organs.