Expansion makes a country weaker, not stronger. It’s not profitable. The “Little Englanders” turned out to be right, though they were often derided as defeatist pests. There was an English economist named Hobson who figured that out around 1900, when the British Empire was at its height.
Let them expand. They are welcome to it, though the consequences will be a net loss to most Chinese. Post-Vietnam, when the Soviets were able to expand their influence in several places, the sheer drain of doing so hastened the demise of that regime. The best way to fight the Cold War would have been to not fight it at all.
One would have to be pretty stupid to put military bases everywhere, and otherwise expand an empire through local satraps and other indirect means. Yep, pretty foolish. This sounds so familiar…
I select “other” and will pencil in “ego”, as it relates to the perception of self-importance in people, and extend that to include most of their beliefs, ideas, and opinions. There are a number of other main items, but books could be written about the subject.
It’s also mostly a problem as a person, group, or entity possesses more influence/power, in whatever form it may be for a time period.
In addition to what others have already said, China exports approximately a billion shit-tons of consumer crap every year, and the rest of the world buys it. China is also the single biggest holder of US debt. Add that to the fact that one in six people in the world is Chinese, the Chinese government are big fat liars and cheaters, and China as a whole never plays nicely with anyone else, and I think you have a formula for a whole lot of problems at some point.
It just stands to reason.
People are the main source of conflicts and wars.
China has a lot of people.
Lorem ipsum dolor:
China is a source of conlict an wars
If I had to give one cause for the lack of world peace? Selfishness. The biggest problem, specifically, is people who refuse to get involved. A lot of bad things are just none of their business. Worse are the people who just aren’t concerned with helping others–those who don’t care about trying to make the world more fair.
That’s right: I believe peace and fairness are pretty much inseparable.
But there sure were a lot of battles. I would not consider the animal kingdom to be very peaceful. The plant kingdom, maybe. But that would mean the problem is having to go out and get food.
But are plants really peaceful, since they lack the ability to comprehend peace? Our brains exist because of adversity. I just hope that doesn’t mean that adversity is still needed.
I think a lot of these ideas are overthinking it. Violence is obviously the biggest threat to world peace. No violence, BOOM instant peace. Ideas like “people” and “greed” still miss the mark, I mean what if we created a race of immortal killbots that wipes humanity out? Then there’d be no people (all dead) and no greed (killbots have only one desire: TO KILL) and yet we’d have worse war than anything seen before in history, forever. That doesn’t sound like global peace to me!
What utopia do you imagine we could make? It’s in the nature of all animals on planet earth to be violent towards the other species ( even eating vegetables is inflicting violence on them ).
There has never been peace on earth and never will be.
BTW, you may have missed it, but scientists are, as I write, working on the “killbots”.
Well if we ban violent video games and violent movies (and the RAP MUSIC :smack: ) then there won’t be any bad influences to give people bad ideas. Really this is so simple I don’t know why it hasn’t been tried before!
The only problem will be getting all those other countries to go along with, especially China because they don’t want to listen to anybody but they’re the worst with all the kung-fu movies they put out. It’s like, HELLO! Not only are these movies a very bad moral influence, but they also show EXACTLY HOW to do the most deadly moves!
Also I guess we’ll have to ban robots, just to be on the safe side.
