Stovo

@Opo Revolutions are a game of cat and mouse between the revolutionaries and the government, which start off mild and gradually get worse as each side tests the limits of the other side. The revolutionary leaders are usually young, well-educated, leftists, but not always. It's not usually clear when a revolution starts until you are in the middle of it, or it's over. The objective of the revolutionaries is to change the system, whilst the government wishes to maintain the system. If the revolutionaries are successful then a new order begins, and big changes occur to the system. If the government is successful then the existing system continues, sometimes with small tweaks. The winning side often punishes the losing side by imprisoning them or killing them. The government has a choice of how to handle the revolutionaries. They can either crackdown on them violently, or engage with them peacefully. Both have risks, for example, if you continue to allow the protests then the protests could get bigger as more people join the revolution. If you crack down on the protests you risk angering the people even more. China chose to crack down on its protests in 1989, which resulted in a victory for the government.

@blueberries By the fact, we actually prioritise and teach critical thinking, encourage debates, give students the independence to think for themselves. Eastern culture has more emphasis on hierarchies and discipline. Questioning authority is less acceptable.

@snowyowl Yes, you are probably correct there, but I've never met a minority-race Chinese person.

@Opo Ray Dalio's work, particularly The Changing World Order: https://www.principles.com/the-changing-world-order/ is a fantastic stage yellow analysis of these types of themes. The government's choice at Tiananmen was either to crush the protests violently, or engage with them peacefully. Both were risky options.

@Etherial Cat Are you sure in hindsight that you didn't take too much risk?

@snowyowl Oh, you're from England, me too. We are extremely fortunate to live in the UK, an island country surrounded by allies and no enemies remotely close to us. I speak with a bit of authority on China, because I lived there for half a year, have many Chinese friends, and dated Chinese women - one for 2-3 years. Almost no Chinese person I have spoken to wants to overthrow the government. There was only one girl, who spent a significant amount of time in Hong Kong, that was quite open with the fact that she wants democracy in China. The others, including my ex, are practical people. They feel this is the best government for this period of time because they feel that there are too many uneducated Chinese people, particularly in rural areas, and they feel that they're not ready to have democracy yet. @Opo Yes

They were number 1-2 mostly because of massive populations. They only dropped in recent history because the west's industrial revolution put them so far ahead of the east technologically that much smaller European countries managed to overtake the economies of India and China temporarily. In terms of average living standards, this has varied. In some parts of history, Chinese & Indian people have been relatively wealthy, in other parts relatively poor. I don't think eastern education is superior, or they are smarter, it's just different. They tend to perform better at tests but then lack certain important life skills. Western education teaches critical thinking far better, for example. There are pros and cons to both approaches. I'd also be interested to hear more about India, it's not a country I am overly familiar with. My hunch is, however, that they're really a stage blue country overall, but their traditions have enabled many much higher developed people to emerge.

@roopepa Maybe... I'm not sure that Myanmar is experiencing a stage orange revolution, they're too underdeveloped for stage orange. China, however, I could see it happening this century.

Why do they need to have free elections or opinion polls? Their system works for their culture in their slice of history. When it stops working they will have a revolution. The CCP has bought stability to an otherwise dangerous part of the world. Would you prefer stage blue CCP, or stage purple/red Afghanistan?

Only because of their extremely large population. What matters is the living standards for the average citizen. They can easily have a period of being at number 1, but experience stagnant or declining living standards for most people with widening wealth gaps. This is what's happened in the US for the past 50 years, hence the extreme political polarisation in the US today.

The "success" part of stage orange and stage yellow is radically different. Stage yellow types are seeking to maximise their potential as a human being. Stage orange just wants money, sex, status. Stage orange will buy useless crap like designer clothes, fancy cars, etc. Stage yellow is usually less materialistic, and more minimalistic.

@Etherial Cat In Leo's latest video he mentions that getting rich quick doesn't work if your castle is built on pillars of sand, maybe this is what he means.

Hahaha, sorry forgot to put a link to my investing course, which (of course) is discounted 99% today only

They actually DO have a mandate. Most Chinese people either support their government or are apathetic to politics. Their government has given them 40 years of economic prosperity, why would anybody oppose them? This is probably why the last significant protest in mainland China was about 40 years ago. You are right about the economy though, one day the boom will end and they will have worse economic times as always happens in every civilisation. This is the time when revolutions happen, but I'd give them another 20 - 40 years before that happens. Increasing levels of stage orange, plus bad economic times, plus a motivated youth, could be the right combination for a revolution. Because China is large and powerful, and Korea is not. Western people, especially Americans, find China threatening as they're potentially going to supersede them as the global power. The global superpower doesn't have to have the most developed people, however, otherwise, Scandinavia would rule the world.

The stage blue people in China, which is most people, will probably think this is sensible. The stage orange people, mostly younger people in cities, may feel it's a bit silly, but I can't imagine they'd be overly bothered to make a fuss. For those in the US and Europe, you could think of China today like the US and Europe 100-200 years ago. If video games existed back then I could imagine the government implementing similar restrictions alongside the ethics of Christianity.

Have you heard of the 4% rule? Supposedly, if your capital is invested sensibly and diversified, you can withdraw 4% per annum safely without affecting the capital long term. In other words, work out how much money you need to live per year and times that by 25 - that's how much capital you need to feel secure. There's still risk. There could be a war, an economic depression, a revolution, or big tax changes such as wealth taxes. That's why it's important to be well diversified across different asset classes and countries.

I just watched Biden's speech regarding the Kabul airport attacks today. I noticed he said the following: "We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will hunt you down and make you pay." I wasn't sure what to make of it from a spiral dynamics perspective. Is he regressing down the spiral, because of the emotion of the event? It sounds very stage red to me. Or is it a healthy and appropriate use of stage red in self-defence? I'm a Brit, so I won't know Joe Biden as well as many Americans, but I always thought of him as more compassionate and empathetic than that... Or maybe it would just be political suicide to say on live TV: "I forgive the terrorists".

No problem. I may go back one day, I just find their culture fascinating. Yes, although China does compensate for that by implementing capital controls, banning dual citizenship, or instilling "Xi Jingping Thought" into the education system. Basically their reaction to it is more authoritarianism, which is funny because if they just became a democracy with human rights, rule of law, and more freedoms, then more people would be attracted to live there.

I subscribe to his channel, but I realised over time that he has a heavily skewed right wing bias. A lot of his beliefs, whilst interesting, are a complete misunderstanding of the left. He raises some good points in both videos, but imo it's far too negative. He underestimates man's ingenuity to fix problems.

Dating is up to you, nobody can know your individual preferences. I'm comfortably single right now, because I'm prioritising other things in my life, but I may seek a partner later.

Happy birthday!

Well said. @Synnergy All cultures believe they are superior to all others, whether morally or on any other criteria. It takes relatively conscious people to realise this is not the case.

Never had a problem with him at all. You must recognise in all relationships, are you the student, are you the teacher, or are you of equal competence? In the context of what we're discussing on this forum, I consider myself as the student and Leo as the teacher. He's literally put in thousands of hours of work on this stuff, and I have not, who am I to debate him or tell him he is wrong?

@Leo Gura Where would you place Biden on the spiral? You've said a lot about Trump's ego development, but less about Biden, so I would be curious to know your thoughts. Does he basically have to act in a manner that is lower than his own ego development, in order to appeal to voters at lower stages? @PlayOnWords Yes, I noticed when I've met red people that they will actually act very macho and intimidating, and if you don't act equally as tough back then they won't respect you.

These sorts of polls are challenging. You can ask people their opinion, but it will never replicate how people would vote in an actual election after months of campaigning.