How are more people not talking about the futuristic cities in China?
Look up a video in Shenzhen or Chongqing. Everything looks 2 decades out, and the giant crystal skyscrapers light up different colors. Sometimes the whole thing is a TV.
China surpassed USAmerica in GDP already, but it doesn't look close to tied in development and advanced technologies.
The trains there go hundreds of miles in less than an hour, you could commute across the country every day.
Meanwhile in America the "middle class" is struggling to have some walls and a roof. Record debt and crumbling infrastructure. How is all of this ignored and not talked about everywhere?
The driving narrative is still ghost cities and assorted racism. The idea of a China as a leading tech hub with massive modern planned cities isn't really something that exists in the American noosphere.
Like six companies control everything 90% of Americans see, all the media coming in. Where would people even learn about this shit? Even if they knew someone who had personally been there and said it was cool, that's one voice against the hegemonic false reality of the Demiurge.
Every single US city outside of maybe NYC (and that's a very big maybe) is a complete dump compared with some no-name tier 3 Chinese city. Like, imagine comparing somewhere like Ningbo and Wuhan to Houston and Miami. Honestly, most of East Asia blows the US out of the water, and SEA is catching up too. There will be a time when cities like Hanoi, Bangkok, and Jakarta also surpass US cities, if they haven't done so already. The US really is that much of a dump and it's only going to get worse. It's just that Americans soyface over Japan and South Korea because they're the good honorary white Asians. They don't even give Taiwan enough credit because Taiwan is too Chinese, which I guess is appropriate with Taiwan being a Chinese island and all.
Houston is hell on earth. 80 square miles of unplanned concrete in a swamp, with no life, no hint of earthly nature. Gaia has fled that place, god has condemned it. When storms come it floods, when winter comes it freezes, and in all seasons it's denizens beg for the sweet release of death.
soying out over taiwan is only for the REALLY egregious liberals. you have to have drunken the liberal kool-aid hard to even have an opinion on taiwan i've personally found.
IMO Taipei doesn't look nearly as new or cool as the likes of Shanghai, Tokyo, or Seoul. I visited Taipei a few years ago and my first impression was that it was like Shanghai was 15 years ago. Everything was just very worn down. Infrastructure, buildings, and such just looked old and grimey.
That's what I've heard from most people who have recently gone there. But we're not comparing Taipei to real cities like Shanghai. We're comparing Taipei to dumps like LA.
Some of the cities look like that, but it's a huge country and a lot of it is just really normal and of course the rural areas are still pretty old-fashioned. In my opinion it's still consistently better than the places I've been in the US though.
It's just going to get funnier as time goes on and China's infrastructure and transit only continues to improve. Americans can have fun laughing at the "shoddy chinese cities" they see in some tiktok video while their own bridges and subways are falling apart, lmao.
My uncle is from the US, when I talked about the cities he said that "the Chinese are using up all the resources!"
I was surprised, I had never heard that before. I didn't have a response, what could I have I said? I don't even know how he got to that conclusion, something about ghost cities and poor utilization of resources because of no oversight I guess. Even though he decried planned economies a few sentences before.
Ah well, you see, if the resources of the colonial periphery are being used by the USA and it's hegemons it's good and efficient, if it's being used by China or the third world, it's wasteful.
Ah yes, the trade balance definitely does not betray an enormous imbalance of garbage being imported into the US. Precisely who here is using up all the resources?
I don't see it explicitly done in this thread, but to build on your comment a bit, the "futuristic cities" are a result of the liberalization of the Chinese economy and should not be upheld as a socialist achievement while the inequality still exists imo. The best you could say is that "under a socialist government, you're not necessarily gonna be banned from doing cool shit while we work towards building a socialist economy".
Well, I see videos with artistically lit-up skyscrapers, drone light shows, and modern transit quite regularly, but that's because I follow people that post that sort of thing. Sometimes you'll see this stuff on , but the comments will of course mention how China is authoritarian.
Sometimes you'll see this stuff on , but the comments will of course mention how China is authoritarian.
This bullshit will eventually backfire in terms of people eventually saying "ok, we want that" and then ending up with a fascist theocratic country instead that's 100x worse and wondering what the hell went wrong.
Here in Europe we don't build new buildings, but instead reuse ones from around the 1960s (Marshall Plan and all that). To me it's always screamed "we're too poor to build new stuff". And you know, old buildings can only get older, at some point you're gonna have to make new ones...
it's like we like living in the past it's so unreal.
That’s how I feel about transit infrastructure in North America. We can’t be bothered to spend the required money or effort to solve transit issues properly, but we accept ever-higher costs for constantly having to maintain and build car infrastructure because you can always kick that can down the road, so to speak.
It's pathetic. I was in Minneapolis when the I-35 bridge just up and collapsed. Majorish city, population of millions, I-35 is one of the country's major transit cooridors, and this giant fucking bridge just folds one day.
Having buildings that can last long term is mostly a good thing (The 1920s construction in Vienna for example is great.) But I can't imagine that something thrown up in 3 months in 1952 is going to be particularly well built.
This is a 100% spot on take. I live in one of the supposedly "richest cities of Europe" and every damn building was constructed between 1950 and 1970 (much thanks to the Royal Air Force bomber command).
Nobody builds any new shit, it's just the rent goes up and the cars in front of the buildings get bigger and bigger. I guess that's progress or something.
Some months ago I spoke with a petite bourgeois white boomer who didn’t even know that bullet trains existed. I had to explain them to him, that they’re like airplanes that fly only a few feet off the ground (unlike many Burgerlanders I have used bullet trains many times).
It’s not just centenarians in congress who think that the internet is a series of tubes you can throw in the back of your pickup truck. Many many Americans, including members of the bourgeoisie, are willfully unaware of how far places like China are pulling ahead of them.
Psssh. Who needs forward-looking architecture? Here in Burgerland every new public building has to be made in the same faux Neoclassical style. Literally, Trump signed an EO mandating this style and afaik Biden has never rolled it back.
I hate Neoclassical architecture so much. And I hate it even more because it seems everyone around me actually likes it and when anyone tries to build anything even remotely modern it gets shot down by white NIMBY types who say “lEt’S dO GrEeK cOlUmNs”
[content warning: not answering the given question whatsoever]
I put forth that they are not futuristic. They are present-day, present-time, not pretending to be beyond the present reality, but merely cutting-edge.
To someone who has grown up in a relatively very undeveloped area (consider rural Sudan) or even somewhat undeveloped areas in the West (rural North America), I imagine many Western cities would seem 'futuristic' relative to their life experience. Towering skyscrapers, underground rail networks, animated LED billboards and cameras everywhere, and if you're lucky, slick 'modern' designs for buildings and infrastructure. But, to a person raised in these cities it probably wouldn't be futuristic. Many of these things are kind of common in cities, actually. They'd look at the other communities as 'underdeveloped'. It's all relative!
So, in the same way, I think that China's modern cities aren't futuristic but merely present. The US infrastructure is notoriously underdeveloped given their power and technological capability. I don't see why (political structure aside) they couldn't build such a planned city. In fact, they generally lag so far behind other Western countries when it comes to civil infrastructure, political structure and social services that I think calling the US a developed country is an outdated mistake. China, on the other hand, has rapid development.
China isn't in the future. We're stuck in the past.