The only way that thread can remain open is with strict moderation.
Motion for the demographics thread to be reopened
- Thread starter 00CuriousObserver
- Start date
- Status
I am of the opinion that it inevitably regresses towards some rather crazy and obnoxious ideas and very emotional posts (no matter the position it comes from).
It does of course have bearing on military and strategic matters, but there are a bunch of topics which also have relevance to such matters which we have found to be non productive.
This forum doesn't exist to entertain all topics of "military and strategic" relevance -- it is conditional on having a sufficient signal to noise ratio.
And the signal to ratio for this topic tends to be miniscule, historically.
I believe keeping a wide berth from this topic is still useful. And this is as someone who has some opinions on the matter as well -- but I also know sharing opinions on it is not really useful and just contributes to generalized useless discussion without any outcome.
It does of course have bearing on military and strategic matters, but there are a bunch of topics which also have relevance to such matters which we have found to be non productive.
This forum doesn't exist to entertain all topics of "military and strategic" relevance -- it is conditional on having a sufficient signal to noise ratio.
And the signal to ratio for this topic tends to be miniscule, historically.
I believe keeping a wide berth from this topic is still useful. And this is as someone who has some opinions on the matter as well -- but I also know sharing opinions on it is not really useful and just contributes to generalized useless discussion without any outcome.
Note, I would add that I am not fond of triumphalism and smugness on this forum either, and there are some other topics we discourage or omit for the purposes of not turning this place into a circle jerk.
But even for approved topics and threads, there are still some posts by members who should know better, that enjoy themselves a bit too much and use language which is too coarse, and phrasings which are too vulgar.
In general people here would benefit from avoiding emotional extremes of "it's so over" and "we are so back" to geopolitical and military developments.
My advice is to treat geopolitical and military developments with a sense of "okay, whatever".
Use flooding (the psychological method to treat anxieties and phobias) by envisioning highly distressing (and also "positive") geopolitical possibilities and forcing yourself to be at peace with it. Practice it a few times a day, and you'll probably be in a better state of mind to constructively engage in broader discussions in the forum.
If everyone were able to practice that adequately to a state of appropriate symptom control, then I might consider reopening the thread. Of course there is a higher probability for pigs to fly, so alas.
I understand it's a bit unrealistic to expect members to achieve a degree of existential peace for contentious matters of geopolitics, as a floor of entry for certain topics, but I do think it's a positive aspiration -- and I definitely do not think a discussion about demonstrable controversial topics like the geopolitics thread is something this forum can handle without that baseline.
But even for approved topics and threads, there are still some posts by members who should know better, that enjoy themselves a bit too much and use language which is too coarse, and phrasings which are too vulgar.
In general people here would benefit from avoiding emotional extremes of "it's so over" and "we are so back" to geopolitical and military developments.
My advice is to treat geopolitical and military developments with a sense of "okay, whatever".
Use flooding (the psychological method to treat anxieties and phobias) by envisioning highly distressing (and also "positive") geopolitical possibilities and forcing yourself to be at peace with it. Practice it a few times a day, and you'll probably be in a better state of mind to constructively engage in broader discussions in the forum.
If everyone were able to practice that adequately to a state of appropriate symptom control, then I might consider reopening the thread. Of course there is a higher probability for pigs to fly, so alas.
I understand it's a bit unrealistic to expect members to achieve a degree of existential peace for contentious matters of geopolitics, as a floor of entry for certain topics, but I do think it's a positive aspiration -- and I definitely do not think a discussion about demonstrable controversial topics like the geopolitics thread is something this forum can handle without that baseline.
Funny, during my PhD in epidemiology, we are required to take a population health class on demographics, it was a very serious academic field, backed by peer-reviewed literature and data. On the other hand, I've never seen any serious analysis in the Demographic thread.
What you see in Demographic thread is an overly simplified linear extrapolation of 1 person = 1 unit of economic productivity, so China doom = collapse if population is "too low" (always undefined quantity over undefined period of time, based on feeling). There is no nuanced discussion on dependency ratio citing any published literature. It's devoid of any nuanced or serious academic debate and attracts trolls who think population alone is a single determinant of a country's fate.
It inevitable devolves into emotions, not premised on any framework for consistent and transparent discussion. It would also be a nightmare to moderate.
Just leave population and demographic alone to public health experts who can assess the impact and model long-term outcomes, not arm-chair geopolitics pundits who believes whatever news an English literature major journalist regurgitated from ChatGPT.
What you see in Demographic thread is an overly simplified linear extrapolation of 1 person = 1 unit of economic productivity, so China doom = collapse if population is "too low" (always undefined quantity over undefined period of time, based on feeling). There is no nuanced discussion on dependency ratio citing any published literature. It's devoid of any nuanced or serious academic debate and attracts trolls who think population alone is a single determinant of a country's fate.
It inevitable devolves into emotions, not premised on any framework for consistent and transparent discussion. It would also be a nightmare to moderate.
Just leave population and demographic alone to public health experts who can assess the impact and model long-term outcomes, not arm-chair geopolitics pundits who believes whatever news an English literature major journalist regurgitated from ChatGPT.
I have pretty much stopped paying attention to posts on demographic topics ever since I saw some participants demanding China to keep growing economy faster than the collective west, increase population above the current level, and have less to no competition for the youth all at the same time.
I respect everyone's say in the matter, including the final decision to avoid it, but I do think it is sad we can't talk about certain things here.
CNKI and Wanfang are filled with recent publications on numerous population-related topics, and they are fascinating. It is an extremely active field in academic journals all over the world and in China. There is a vibrant discussion going on whether this forum choses to tune-in or not.
Likewise, people's attitudes to these changes, observations and theories as to causes, impacts, and implications are in constant flux. For instance I have never heard many of the arguments raised by other posters and believe they are a recent development. To be honest don't share their pessimism or mistrust of other forum members' capacity for self-control.
In my view the present state of global demographic change is a confluence of a great many very complex factors, not a "China vs The West" issue. Nor is it clear at this point whether or not decreasing populations is actually a problem at all and not a boon to societies.
These are all issues that could be made more clear if we followed the current academic discourse, and I am sure we are all mature enough to do so without injecting our own biases in the process.
CNKI and Wanfang are filled with recent publications on numerous population-related topics, and they are fascinating. It is an extremely active field in academic journals all over the world and in China. There is a vibrant discussion going on whether this forum choses to tune-in or not.
Likewise, people's attitudes to these changes, observations and theories as to causes, impacts, and implications are in constant flux. For instance I have never heard many of the arguments raised by other posters and believe they are a recent development. To be honest don't share their pessimism or mistrust of other forum members' capacity for self-control.
In my view the present state of global demographic change is a confluence of a great many very complex factors, not a "China vs The West" issue. Nor is it clear at this point whether or not decreasing populations is actually a problem at all and not a boon to societies.
These are all issues that could be made more clear if we followed the current academic discourse, and I am sure we are all mature enough to do so without injecting our own biases in the process.
The bolded part is grossly unrealistic, which is why the thread and topic (among other topics) have been considered unwelcome to begin with.
Don't be sad over the topic itself, be sad over the fact that the forum's userbase just seem to be unable to help themselves.
To add to everything that's been said, Xi Jinping himself has introduced the notion of demographic security, and that demographic changes can lead to rise and fall of nations.
In the new thread, what can be discussed are the policies that the Chinese government is bringing. There are already some mumblings of more monetary incentives in the offing.
In the new thread, what can be discussed are the policies that the Chinese government is bringing. There are already some mumblings of more monetary incentives in the offing.
No citations, and you have a history of concern trolling and not even understanding the fundamentals of basic terminology you are peddling. (i.e., Tokyo Electric does not produce 'lithography machines', corrected multiple times).
One who lacks domain-specific knowledge yet refuses to engage or answer in good-faith with corrected multiple times. And you want to reopen Demographics? Hah.
It's pretty weak if the only fault you can find with me is me writing the wrong Japanese company for lithography.
As for citation, here it is:
Quoting directly from the piece:
Population security is the bottom line requirement for high-quality population development. The rise and fall of great powers are often profoundly affected by their population conditions; therefore, population security must be included in the overall national security framework for planning.
- Status