China, China, China!

[LABERIA]

Also, i will suggest you to watch this documentary:
When China Met Africa


Here are the trailers:

WHEN CHINA MET AFRICA (Bullfrog Films clip)


When China Met Africa: Mr Liu

[Angela]

Still think China's a threat only to its neighbors?

"Today @Reuters published my investigation into how Chinese telecoms giant ZTE is helping Venezuela build a system that monitors citizen behavior through a new ID card, known as the “fatherland card.”

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/venezuela-zte/

[bicicleur]

Still think China's a threat only to its neighbors?

"[FONT="]Today [/FONT]@Reuters published my investigation into how Chinese telecoms giant ZTE is helping Venezuela build a system that monitors citizen behavior through a new ID card, known as the “fatherland card.”

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/venezuela-zte/

now you got me worried

[LeBrok]

International trade does not necessarily benefit all parties involved; there are often winners and losers.

It is a false statement. It benefits both sides. Thanks to increased trade and move of capital, in both countries prices of goods are lower and natural resources and food more available, which benefits every person in both countries. However, it is true that not everyone benefited equally. Some people lost their jobs, and had to re educate or were displaced in search for work. Some businesses coulnd't compete and went under. Having said that, even these unfortunate people benefited with lower prices for goods.
Remember these things:
Trade between countries makes competition more intense, and it always benefits all people. More competition is always good.
Both countries GDP grew nicely for last 30 years with minimum unemployment. Except few years after 2008 crisis, though it wasn't caused by trade with China, but self inflicted wounds by US.
Every time in history when countries tried insulationist trading policies and tariffs on imports it badly beckfield for them. Best example is 1929 Great Depression and effect of tariffs which deepened and prolonged it.

[Salento]

It is a false statement. It benefits both sides. Thanks to increased trade and move of capital, in both countries prices of goods are lower and natural resources and food more available, which benefits every person in both countries. However, it is true that not everyone benefited equally. Some people lost their jobs, and had to re educate or were displaced in search for work. Some businesses coulnd't compete and went under. Having said that, even these unfortunate people benefited with lower prices for goods.
Remember these things:
Trade between countries makes competition more intense, and it always benefits all people. More competition is always good.
Both countries GDP grew nicely for last 30 years with minimum unemployment. Except few years after 2008 crisis, though it wasn't caused by trade with China, but self inflicted wounds by US.
Every time in history when countries tried insulationist trading policies and tariffs on imports it badly beckfield for them. Best example is 1929 Great Depression and effect of tariffs which deepened and prolonged it.

Unless you’re from Detroit, Michigan!

[Groninger]

It is a false statement. It benefits both sides. Thanks to increased trade and move of capital, in both countries prices of goods are lower and natural resources and food more available, which benefits every person in both countries. However, it is true that not everyone benefited equally. Some people lost their jobs, and had to re educate or were displaced in search for work. Some businesses coulnd't compete and went under. Having said that, even these unfortunate people benefited with lower prices for goods.
Remember these things:
Trade between countries makes competition more intense, and it always benefits all people. More competition is always good.
Both countries GDP grew nicely for last 30 years with minimum unemployment. Except few years after 2008 crisis, though it wasn't caused by trade with China, but self inflicted wounds by US.
Every time in history when countries tried insulationist trading policies and tariffs on imports it badly beckfield for them. Best example is 1929 Great Depression and effect of tariffs which deepened and prolonged it.

Well yes, you could say that both sides benefited since China was allowed to develop, while the US consumer was allowed to buy cheaper goods. In terms of power, however, the exchange has been entirely in China's favor. As a result of this free trade policy, China transformed from a more or less agricultural society into a industrialized, technologically advanced nation, and an economic and military superpower. The USA is faced with a declining industry, a destabilized society, and its most dangerous rival since the war of 1812.

Also, your notion that tariffs always backfire fore the nation that imposes them is simply wrong. The USA used tariffs in the 19th century to protect its own emerging industry against British competition, and that worked out pretty well; there are more such examples of successful protectionism, such as Bismarck's Germany and Cromwell's England.

[markod]

Chinese companies lack the spirit of innovation and often copy the results of companies in developed countries such as the United States. In addition, there is no freedom of speech in China.

Companies aren't where real innovation takes place. Particle research, space reconnaissance, nuclear power, alternative energies etc. is where the Chinese are surging ahead.

[LeBrok]

Unless you’re from Detroit, Michigan!

"Unless"? You should notice that I covered this too.

However, it is true that not everyone benefited equally. Some people lost their jobs, and had to re educate or were displaced in search for work. Some businesses coulnd't compete and went under. Having said that, even these unfortunate people benefited with lower prices for goods.

[LeBrok]

Well yes, you could say that both sides benefited since China was allowed to develop, while the US consumer was allowed to buy cheaper goods. In terms of power, however, the exchange has been entirely in China's favor. As a result of this free trade policy, China transformed from a more or less agricultural society into a industrialized, technologically advanced nation, and an economic and military superpower. The USA is faced with a declining industry, a destabilized society, and its most dangerous rival since the war of 1812.

Also, your notion that tariffs always backfire fore the nation that imposes them is simply wrong. The USA used tariffs in the 19th century to protect its own emerging industry against British competition, and that worked out pretty well; there are more such examples of successful protectionism, such as Bismarck's Germany and Cromwell's England.

Nobody says that a country can't develop and prosper by itself. The argument is that countries and societies can develop economically faster in economic cooperation. The bigger the market, the faster the growth. That's why free trade, or as close as possible to it, is being embraced by pretty much the whole world. The evidence is staggering and not difficult to spot. Only people with strong tribalism, nationalism and lack of economic knowledge or logical thinking and propensity to conspiracies can claim otherwise.

Also, we shouldn't ignore other benefit of economic growth. Poverty breeds tribalism, slavery, crime, nationalism and dictatorships. Economic growth is crucial to building open, inclusive, democratic and free societies. In not so distant future China will turn democratic and will join western countries in guarding same values. They just need Gorbachev/Eastern Europe moment. Chinese people are already ready, they have money and long all the freedoms we have. Well off people don't do revolutions, no need to keep them enslaved. Just a matter of time and positive political changes will come.
See, this would be impossible if China stayed poor, locked in a cycle of communist regimes or some other form of dictatorship forever. Thanks to US/world capital, exchange of ideas and trade, now they have a chance. Help the world to develop economically and you will "produce" more strong friends than enemies and more peaceful world.

[Groninger]

Only people with strong tribalism, nationalism and lack of economic knowledge or logical thinking and propensity to conspiracies can claim otherwise.

Well, this quote clearly demonstrates that you do not treat this as a matter of logic but as an article of faith.

[Groninger]

In not so distant future China will turn democratic and will join western countries in guarding same values. They just need Gorbachev/Eastern Europe moment. Chinese people are already ready, they have money and long all the freedoms we have. Well off people don't do revolutions, no need to keep them enslaved. Just a matter of time and positive political changes will come.
See, this would be impossible if China stayed poor, locked in a cycle of communist regimes or some other form of dictatorship forever. Thanks to US/world capital, exchange of ideas and trade, now they have a chance. Help the world to develop economically and you will "produce" more strong friends than enemies and more peaceful world.

Again, this has nothing to do with logic or knowledge, but with a religious belief. Travel to China, talk to Chinese people and you will see that the desire for liberal democracy and human rights there is not as widespread as you think. Chinese people are mainly very nationalistic. Were China to become a democracy, that would be a dangerous thing; I suspect that would bring a hyperaggressive government to power.

[markod]

Again, this has nothing to do with logic or knowledge, but with a religious belief. Travel to China, talk to Chinese people and you will see that the desire for liberal democracy and human rights there is not as widespread as you think. Chinese people are mainly very nationalistic. Were China to become a democracy, that would be a dangerous thing; I suspect that would bring a hyperaggressive government to power.

Similar attitudes prevail in Russia, Iran, the Central Asian countries etc. . It doesn't necessarily follow that an illiberal country must also be particularly belligerent one. The threat that China poses in a geopolitical sense is a classic case of Thucydides trap, i. e. the impending supersession of the dominant power by another. This was bound to happen as the countries occupying the Eurasian landmass are becoming economically integrated. With the development of OBOR which is particularly welcomed by Russia the geopolitical center of the earth will necessarily shift towards the east, which of course entails the relative diminishing of power for us and the Americans. One might call this a 'threat', but save for war there's no stopping the process. Even tariffs would probably backfire as the world would become even more wary of European influence. We can only make the best of the situation.

[LeBrok]

Well, this quote clearly demonstrates that you do not treat this as a matter of logic but as an article of faith.

You are "almost" right. Both. Don't you know that most of people take complicated things as beliefs? If one can't understand, one needs to believe. Some people understand, but the rest just believes. If one can't understand, one has to believe if things are right or wrong, true of false, work or not. However, it is not too bad if one knows who is smart and understands, to believe what he says.
I believe people who base their knowledge on empirical evidence, replicable experiments, statistical observations, and logic in general, etc.

[LeBrok]

Again, this has nothing to do with logic or knowledge, but with a religious belief. Travel to China, talk to Chinese people and you will see that the desire for liberal democracy and human rights there is not as widespread as you think. Chinese people are mainly very nationalistic.

It doesn't matter. Giving a choice all people want to live in free country where they can speak freely, believe freely, travel freely, decide about their lives freely. The fuller the belly, the more other things matter, freedoms including, and people are more prone to being giving, sharing and inclusive. They relax and are less likely to attack others to get their stuff, like it used to be for ages. It is a trend and will continue together with all the world getting well off.

[Boreas]

China also is dependent in energy sources. Ones oil and gas stops flowing to China they have nothing to cook their food, so they have to start eating raw food. I can count more but I am lazy...

Does Europe have enough energy sources??? They have easy access to Central Asia Sources. They are in pact with Russia&Iran. They don't care Human Rights etc so MiddleEast countries like Saudi Arabia, will always be their good customers...

Without Chinese Rare Element Source, Europe can't even use solar energy. They are the leader and they are close to other exporter countries
https://investingnews.com/daily/reso...ing-countries/

--------------------------------------------------------

About Chinese&Innovasion

Japan was also same. Japon products were seemed as today's Chinese products: cheap and nasty.

----------------------------------------------------------

But China has limitations as well, but it hasn't yet reached the top

[LeBrok]

Does Europe have enough energy sources??? They have easy access to Central Asia Sources. They are in pact with Russia&Iran. They don't care Human Rights etc so MiddleEast countries like Saudi Arabia, will always be their good customers...

Without Chinese Rare Element Source, Europe can't even use solar energy. They are the leader and they are close to other exporter countries
https://investingnews.com/daily/reso...ing-countries/

--------------------------------------------------------

About Chinese&Innovasion

Japan was also same. Japon products were seemed as today's Chinese products: cheap and nasty.

----------------------------------------------------------

But China has limitations as well, but it hasn't yet reached the top

Great examples how it works and how trade benefits all. More free the better.

Japon products were seemed as today's Chinese products: cheap and nasty.

And let's mention how the world was afraid of Japan buying properties and businesses in their countries, and producing cheap stuff, the new Japanese imperialism! I could hear old generation complaining "F.. Japs this and that." So much hatred.

What the heck happened to this unsubstantiated claims and fears?!!! Now Japanese are well off, peaceful and respected nation! Remember this!

[Angela]

Nazi Germany was perfectly happy to live under an authoritarian regime with no freedom of speech, press, or even much freedom of religion. They sat still for the euthanasia of their less than "perfect" children, the dependent elderly, homosexuals (when they weren't party leaders), as well, of course, of Jews and Poles, changing their laws to accommodate it. I know of no protests and no lack of resistance of any kind.

It didn't work so well in Italy; we're far too anarchic by nature, so maybe "ethnic" genetic differences play a part. Of course, since the first thing the fascists did was to confiscate all weapons, violent resistance was, in fact, impossible until the British clandestinely provided the weapons. The resistance had to be in nonviolent ways.

Japan was much the same. The difference is that they experienced the use of the atomic bomb at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Much has been written about the scars on the Japanese psyche from that event.

Every situation has to be looked at individually.

What I do know is that if the U.S. was more skeptical and pessimistic about Japanese intentions they might have discovered the war preparations going on for years, perhaps decades, and not only would the U.S. have suffered the destruction of life and naval equipment at Pearl Harbor, but the Battle for the Pacific would not have dragged on for so long, with terrible human costs for both the U.S. and Japan.

I think all of this boils down, imo, to whether one sees human beings and groups with clear eyed realism or prefers an unrealistic optimism.


See:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...by-end-of-2020

"China’s plan to judge each of its 1.3 billion people based on their social behavior is moving a step closer to reality, with Beijing set to adopt a lifelong points program by 2021 that assigns personalized ratings for each resident.

The capital city will pool data from several departments to reward and punish some 22 million citizens based on their actions and reputations by the end of 2020, according to a plan posted on the Beijing municipal government’s website on Monday. Those with better so-called social credit will get “green channel” benefits while those who violate laws will find life more difficult.

The final version of China’s national social credit system remains uncertain. But as rules forcing social networks and internet providers to remove anonymity get increasingly enforced and facial recognition systems become more popular with policing bodies, authorities are likely to find everyone from internet dissenters to train-fare skippers easier to catch -- and punish -- than ever before."

"Hangzhou rolled out its personal credit system earlier this year, rewarding “pro-social behaviors” such as volunteer work and blood donations while punishing those who violate traffic laws and charge under-the-table fees. By the end of May, people with bad credit in China have been blocked from booking more than 11 million flights and 4 million high-speed train trips, according to the National Development and Reform Commission.
According to the Beijing government’s plan, different agencies will link databases to get a more detailed picture of every resident’s interactions across a swathe of services. The proposal calls for agencies including tourism bodies, business regulators and transit authorities to work together."

You can't even get phone access without a government ID.

[bicicleur]

we can make lengthy discussions about authoritarian and dangerous regimes all around the world, and there are a lot of them
but in the end we have to be pragmatic and acknowledge there is very little we can do about it
Trump has showed it again by his stance toward Saoudi-Arabia
I don't agree with him, but at least he is open and honest about it, which none of his predecessors were
this Saoudi regime is dangerous as well, they've sent and financed imams to European mosques to preach hatred, we all know what were the consequences
in this country there is an undertone which has created Al Qaeda
at first they were even considered allies by the west to fight the Russians in Afghanistan
they are causing famine in Yemen with starvation for 85.000 children, but killing one reporter causes more outrage
yet the Saoudis are still considered western allies
we are powerless against evil all around this world
the only alternative is to protect ourselves within our own territories

[Angela]

we can make lengthy discussions about authoritarian and dangerous regimes all around the world, and there are a lot of them
but in the end we have to be pragmatic and acknowledge there is very little we can do about it
Trump has showed it again by his stance toward Saoudi-Arabia
I don't agree with him, but at least he is open and honest about it, which none of his predecessors were
this Saoudi regime is dangerous as well, they've sent and financed imams to European mosques to preach hatred, we all know what were the consequences
in this country there is an undertone which has created Al Qaeda
at first they were even considered allies by the west to fight the Russians in Afghanistan
they are causing famine in Yemen with starvation for 85.000 children, but killing one reporter causes more outrage
yet the Saoudis are still considered western allies
we are powerless against evil all around this world
the only alternative is to protect ourselves within our own territories

I agree with everything you said. The point is that we must be wary and prepared. Should China go the way of Imperial Japan and catch us unprepared, this is what we would have to look forward to, just as, if Iranian and Saudi Arabian Fundamentalist Islam were to take over the west, we must look to their cultures to get a forewarning of our fate.

[LeBrok]

Imperial Japan was simpler to judge. The give away was their aggression of neighbours, way before they attacked USA. Same with Germany, Italy or Soviet Union. They all started with smaller prey before moving to global war. The Modern China didn't. There are no indication of such plans either. Why should we worry about non existent problem?
To my knowledge poor China was more aggressive towards its neighbors and more cruel and controlling towards its citizens.

[Angela]

Imperial Japan was simpler to judge. The give away was their aggression of neighbours, way before they attacked USA. Same with Germany, Italy or Soviet Union. They all started with smaller prey before moving to global war. The Modern China didn't. There are no indication of such plans either. Why should we worry about non existent problem?
To my knowledge poor China was more aggressive towards its neighbors and more cruel and controlling towards its citizens.

I think you're forgetting about Tibet, for one thing, and Taiwan, and the Muslim minorities, and the "Stans", and even, in the past, Russia itself. Plus, whatever its mythology, China didn't become a vast empire without aggression.

"Why this desire to recreate past glory? In a piece I published recently in the New York Review of Books Daily, I argue that it’s part of Xi Jinping’s adoption of the “classic nationalist-authoritarian-traditionalist playbook.” Part of this is the obvious strategy of diverting attention away from current problems, such as a dangerously slowing economy."

"I argue in my book that there are strong echoes of these very idealized narratives that persist in China’s dealings with its neighbors today. China would like to be preeminent in its neighborhood. It would like to attain such a position through peaceful means, using its assumed powers of attraction. But especially because this was never a consistent reality in the past, one must be ready for the possibility that China is prepared to use non-peaceful means to attain its aims in the region, and indeed there are already signs suggesting preparations for just such a thing. See, for example, recent Chinese behavior in the South China Sea."

"China’s plan for “one belt, one road” is wholly native to the 21st century. The ambition to encircle India by land and sea; to create a financial and resource exchange system for infrastructure development engaging Central Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Africa; and to construct interlocking trade and security relationships that will block the American reach across the Pacific all are completely novel in Chinese and in global history. The Xi Jinping government may be designing the post-globalization pattern of managed trans-national spheres, and pioneering a financial and strategic role that few other countries seem even to envisage. China has no need to draw on any distant past for a template of its ambitions, attitudes, or enterprises."

"What happens when the inevitable challenges the exceptional? If China’s aggressive assertion of territorial claims leads to conflict again with its neighbors in the present-day, how will that be squared with the collective self-image of timeless pacifism? Will future wars be explained as a preemptive defense of inherent Chinese territory, as in the case of the border wars with India in the 1960s, or will they be intentionally and conveniently forgotten, like the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979?"


China in the South China seas:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ous/711006002/

China vs India:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/60152031.cms

https://www.cfr.org/interactives/chi..._sea_InfoGuide

https://www.culturalsurvival.org/pub...l-status-tibet

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-14533879

[IMG][/IMG]

[LeBrok]

I think you're forgetting about Tibet, for one thing, and Taiwan, and the Muslim minorities, and the "Stans", and even, in the past, Russia itself. Plus, whatever its mythology, China didn't become a vast empire without aggression.

"Why this desire to recreate past glory? In a piece I published recently in the New York Review of Books Daily, I argue that it’s part of Xi Jinping’s adoption of the “classic nationalist-authoritarian-traditionalist playbook.” Part of this is the obvious strategy of diverting attention away from current problems, such as a dangerously slowing economy."

"I argue in my book that there are strong echoes of these very idealized narratives that persist in China’s dealings with its neighbors today. China would like to be preeminent in its neighborhood. It would like to attain such a position through peaceful means, using its assumed powers of attraction. But especially because this was never a consistent reality in the past, one must be ready for the possibility that China is prepared to use non-peaceful means to attain its aims in the region, and indeed there are already signs suggesting preparations for just such a thing. See, for example, recent Chinese behavior in the South China Sea."

"China’s plan for “one belt, one road” is wholly native to the 21st century. The ambition to encircle India by land and sea; to create a financial and resource exchange system for infrastructure development engaging Central Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Africa; and to construct interlocking trade and security relationships that will block the American reach across the Pacific all are completely novel in Chinese and in global history. The Xi Jinping government may be designing the post-globalization pattern of managed trans-national spheres, and pioneering a financial and strategic role that few other countries seem even to envisage. China has no need to draw on any distant past for a template of its ambitions, attitudes, or enterprises."

"What happens when the inevitable challenges the exceptional? If China’s aggressive assertion of territorial claims leads to conflict again with its neighbors in the present-day, how will that be squared with the collective self-image of timeless pacifism? Will future wars be explained as a preemptive defense of inherent Chinese territory, as in the case of the border wars with India in the 1960s, or will they be intentionally and conveniently forgotten, like the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979?"


China in the South China seas:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ous/711006002/

China vs India:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/60152031.cms

https://www.cfr.org/interactives/chi..._sea_InfoGuide

https://www.culturalsurvival.org/pub...l-status-tibet

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-14533879

[IMG][/IMG]

Exactly my point, China was more aggressive and invasive when poor, and less aggressive since 90s when opened to capital and economic development.
About the first slot in above table. Recently we had a meeting of Duterte and She about cooperation and investments between China and Philippines, but no declaration of war. I'm not a fan of either "strong man", but a nice development for the region nevertheless.

Before 90s the list of China conflicts is rather long: South Korea/USA and the world, Vietnam, India, Russia, Taiwan/USA and of course the Tibet. In comparison, last 25 years is very peaceful for China and neighbors.

[Angela]

Exactly my point, China was more aggressive and invasive when poor, and less aggressive since 90s when opened to capital and economic development.
About the first slot in above table. Recently we had a meeting of Duterte and She about cooperation and investments between China and Philippines, but no declaration of war. I'm not a fan of either "strong man", but a nice development for the region nevertheless.

Before 90s the list of China conflicts is rather long: South Korea/USA and the world, Vietnam, India, Russia, Taiwan/USA and of course the Tibet. In comparison, last 25 years is very peaceful for China and neighbors.

I suggest you read the links I provided. They are all about very recent events.

Plus, China was at its most expansive at its richest periods.

[bicicleur]

I agree with everything you said. The point is that we must be wary and prepared. Should China go the way of Imperial Japan and catch us unprepared, this is what we would have to look forward to, just as, if Iranian and Saudi Arabian Fundamentalist Islam were to take over the west, we must look to their cultures to get a forewarning of our fate.

Si vis pacem, para bellum.
There are many candidates from all over the world.
I don't think China has the ambition to build a world empire by force, but that can change in future.
Certain fractions of fundamentalist Muslims actualy do have that ambition, but they are lacking the force as long as the west continues to put enough pressure on them.

[martinmkp]

China is doing its work - to be an Empire again. Every little chinese childs knOws memorize their own severalthousand old poems. Do our three years olds perform Esops works? So why suddenly we are surprised the one billion people nation wishes to be the ruler of the world again?
Our task is to rceive the challenge - and defend our western values and style of life. And learn how tolive with China side by side. Because we and dying China will face new billions subsaharan African immigration to Eurasia in the 22nd Century. Maybe all this will be enriching to Europe as every attacks in the past, starting with Homo sapiens sapiens against our forefathers Neanderthals.
Take my words with humour - I am also too scared by chinese (Big brother) ownerships of VPN apps we are using on daily basis in the Far East.