>>13578Maybe. It's clearly a possible way to react. This would depend on what nation-state that you're currently a citizen of. And your sense of threat depends as well as on your own view of what your citizenship means. Obviously, I shouldn't make any inherent assumptions of you personally. Or anybody else in this thread.
If I'm picking somewhat randomly from either Canada or the U.S. to find a certain John Q. Public who's staunchly supportive either of capitalism or of social conservativism such that he shares the inherent Chinese regime's opposition to Judaism, homosexuality, labor union activists, environmentalists, transgender people, and so on, wouldn't Chinese state success be his success? And his success be their success? For his rational self-interest, wouldn't he want larger business expansion and economic development?
At the same time, I could pick an alternate European dude (a Jesse Q. Public) who's, say, a firmly environmentalist-minded person who wants ever increased global pollution of all waters as well as all other natural lands stopped. He'd be rationally working as an anti-Chinese activist in reaction? Right? Naturally, somebody motivated by French, German, Scottish, etc patriotism would surely seek to prevent foreign financial domination of their homelands, I think we'd agree?
It's complicated. I suppose being able to fall back on 'A' if you're a 'B' (like American patriotism if you're a U.S. military veteran) is a neat framework for debate. Or even just discussion without debate.
