undefined | Better HN

0 pointspjc506y ago0 comments

> To use a perhaps extreme example: there's lots of injustice happening right now in China, and not a lot can be done directly to fix it.

Well, that's fundamentally the tradeoff that China (and quite a lot of the other Asian states e.g. Singapore) have made; their ruling class picked stability over freedom, and hoped that the economic growth would keep everyone happy while at the same time preventing organisation outside the party.

I agree that needlessly destabilising situations is bad, but also that very large injustices can persist in the name of stability. It's not a simple problem.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

TeMPOraL6y ago· 1 in thread

Yes, and I'm not totally comfortable with their trade-offs. I feel they're on the side of "too much order, too little justice". So this already establishes a ceiling along some dimensions.

> I agree that needlessly destabilising situations is bad, but also that very large injustices can persist in the name of stability. It's not a simple problem.

My point exactly. And I bring this up because I see the MLK quote you pasted, along with Popper, used to rally people to actions seemingly promoting justice, but in practice just turning people against one another, and overall making things worse. I don't like seeing either of the quotes being used as a glorified "if you're not with us, you're against us" line by people extreme in their views.

itronitron6y ago

'too much order, too little justice' is never a conclusion that is made by the people in charge

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse