China, China, China!

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/res...rth-investing/rare-earth-producing-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!
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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...na-sea-expansion-neighbors-nervous/711006002/

China vs India:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...s-foes-and-frenemies/articleshow/60152031.cms

https://www.cfr.org/interactives/ch...tes?cid=otr-marketing_use-china_sea_InfoGuide

https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/legal-status-tibet

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

8GjqJ2c.png
[/IMG]
 
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...na-sea-expansion-neighbors-nervous/711006002/

China vs India:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...s-foes-and-frenemies/articleshow/60152031.cms

https://www.cfr.org/interactives/ch...tes?cid=otr-marketing_use-china_sea_InfoGuide

https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/legal-status-tibet

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

8GjqJ2c.png
[/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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Chinese scientists are creating CRISPR babies.
A daring effort is under way to create the first children whose DNA has been tailored using gene editing.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...Xh8pZZed6ByAJKhs5TKKRnTHJIbXEBlWn04idgfUgVMko

they are going to use technology that is considered non-ethical in the west, and I don't see how we can prevent them from doing so

it is important to be more critical about what is ethical and what not
we must be sure our judgment is not clouded by lobbyists of all kinds or by political correctness
or we will be no match for China and the like
 
I just read that in Sweden they have started inserting a microchip in the hand to pay for things, open doors etc.

This isn't the first time I have thought they're quite mad!

Have they no concept that such a chip could be used by the government to keep track of everything they do?

It's beyond me. Was skepticism as well as aggression bred out of them because all their warrior types went abroad? Or is it because these tiny groups on the periphery of Europe were mostly left alone and not very often subject to attempts at control by any government, not even their own?

Yet, even countries like Italy and Germany, certainly no strangers to governments which tried to control them, are remarkably accepting of government control over virtually every aspect of their lives.

Why is it only in the Anglo countries that there is at least in some a healthy distrust of too strong governments and the invasion of privacy?

Both "1984" and "Brave New World" should be brought back to the schools. They should throw in a lot of Jefferson too: "The best government is the least government".
 
Last edited:
I just read that in Sweden they have started inserting a microchip in the hand to pay for things, open doors etc.

This isn't the first time I have thought they're quite mad????

Have they no concept that such a chip could be used by the government to keep track of everything they do?

It's beyond me. Was independence as well as aggression bred out of them because all their warrior types went abroad? Or is it because these tiny groups on the periphery of Europe were mostly left alone and not subject to attempts at control by any government, not even their own?

Yet, even countries like Italy and Germany, certainly no strangers to governments which tried to control them, are remarkably accepting of government control over virtually every aspect of their lives.

Why is it only in the Anglo countries that there is at least in some a healthy distrust of too strong governments and the invasion of property?

Both "1984" and "Brave New World" should be taught in the schools. They should throw in a lot of Jefferson too: "The best government is the least government".

Swedes are authority-slaves, unfortunately. Too Teutonic and soulless, but of course being orderly isn't such a bad thing in the end.
 
Swedes are authority-slaves, unfortunately. Too Teutonic and soulless, but of course being orderly isn't such a bad thing in the end.

You've just earned yourself an infraction. There is no insulting or t-rolling of ethnic groups permitted here.

Not a good way to start.
 
I just read that in Sweden they have started inserting a microchip in the hand to pay for things, open doors etc.

This isn't the first time I have thought they're quite mad????

Have they no concept that such a chip could be used by the government to keep track of everything they do?

It's beyond me. Was independence as well as aggression bred out of them because all their warrior types went abroad? Or is it because these tiny groups on the periphery of Europe were mostly left alone and not subject to attempts at control by any government, not even their own?

Yet, even countries like Italy and Germany, certainly no strangers to governments which tried to control them, are remarkably accepting of government control over virtually every aspect of their lives.

Why is it only in the Anglo countries that there is at least in some a healthy distrust of too strong governments and the invasion of property?

Both "1984" and "Brave New World" should be taught in the schools. They should throw in a lot of Jefferson too: "The best government is the least government".

a cashless society is the dream of many governments, western European in the first place

I agree, it's an open door to Big Brother
in the long run, they'll replace money by a good or bad rating points, depending on your behaviour, which they'll monitor 24/7
 
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.


They Chinese don't need to do much empire building - the countries that they are primarily interested in are gravitating towards China anyway. If they can economically integrate geographically pivotal and resource-rich Russia and Iran that will be a problem for us, as it would entail a huge decline in influence and economic power. They might manage to do just this without firing a single bullet:

16319_168.jpg
 
They Chinese don't need to do much empire building - the countries that they are primarily interested in are gravitating towards China anyway. If they can economically integrate geographically pivotal and resource-rich Russia and Iran that will be a problem for us, as it would entail a huge decline in influence and economic power. They might manage to do just this without firing a single bullet:
16319_168.jpg
Saoudi-Arabia is just as evil as Iran, and Erdogan is just as trustworthy as Putin.
But Saoudi-Arabia and Erdogan are allies and Iran and Putin enemies to the west.
That leaves opportunities for China.
 
Yet, even countries like Italy and Germany, certainly no strangers to governments which tried to control them, are remarkably accepting of government control over virtually every aspect of their lives.

Why is it only in the Anglo countries that there is at least in some a healthy distrust of too strong governments and the invasion of property?

Both "1984" and "Brave New World" should be taught in the schools. They should throw in a lot of Jefferson too: "The best government is the least government".

It may have been true until very recently. I think things are currently changing, and rather dramatically so.

As long as democracy was seen as something better than what there had been before, as long as it meant perceptible social and economic progress ("Les trente glorieuses" - the thirty-year post-war boom), people were prepared to trust their leaders and let things roll on. Then it grew into a habit, and it took some time for people to react.

Now they are gradually becoming aware of the fact that "the state [as an institutionalized body of power] is the fascistic temptation of democracy" (L'état est la tentation fasciste de la démocratie - André Malraux). Once voted in, leaders pursue an agenda of their own, ignoring the aspirations and requests of the people who put them there. They stick to their crazy, suicidal immigration policies, to their suicidal international trade agreements, to their submissiveness to the EU's unelected body of tyrannical technocrats.

Consequences : at EU level, you get the Brexit, Salvini and Orban, the Visegrad group's growing resistance, etc... at state levels, you now have Merkel in trouble, and French people on the streets protesting against stifling tax reforms.

Fingers crossed. I doubt Macron will readily accept the idea that "the best government is the least government", but he may be learning things these days.
 
I just read that in Sweden they have started inserting a microchip in the hand to pay for things, open doors etc.

This isn't the first time I have thought they're quite mad!


Have they no concept that such a chip could be used by the government to keep track of everything they do?

It's beyond me. Was skepticism as well as aggression bred out of them because all their warrior types went abroad? Or is it because these tiny groups on the periphery of Europe were mostly left alone and not very often subject to attempts at control by any government, not even their own?

Yet, even countries like Italy and Germany, certainly no strangers to governments which tried to control them, are remarkably accepting of government control over virtually every aspect of their lives.

Why is it only in the Anglo countries that there is at least in some a healthy distrust of too strong governments and the invasion of privacy?

Both "1984" and "Brave New World" should be brought back to the schools. They should throw in a lot of Jefferson too: "The best government is the least government".
Why would you do that if you can do the same with your phone and more? Seems like a story of one mad scientist or perhaps a fake one. But you know Swedes, so socialistic that they have to be crazy, right?

Anyway, the only cure against rampant policing of everybody is to make sure we elect smart and honest freedom loving people to run countries. Once we have tyrants, they will use all available technology to control society. And no amount of feet stomping or a civil war will change their minds.

Have they no concept that such a chip could be used by the government to keep track of everything they do?
So if you have a good democratic government, the chip under your skin (implanted at your will) is your convenience, nothing more.
If you have a tyrant, an obsessive and controlling government, you will have the chip under the skin implanted (by order), and AI watching you from camperas, all the time for his convenience.
 
a cashless society is the dream of many governments, western European in the first place

I agree, it's an open door to Big Brother
in the long run, they'll replace money by a good or bad rating points, depending on your behaviour, which they'll monitor 24/7
Funny thing, I have one rather conservative friend with a big dose of conspiracy theorist in him. (You know, they keeping ordinary people stupid and poor for a reason.) Imagine this, he was the first adopter of a debit card. Simply by convenience. He hated to carry a bulky wallet, but now he could walk around with just one card for convenience in his pocket. I was making fun of him that it is not about convenience, but tipping for service. No cash, sorry, no tip. Well, at least back then when debit machines were not that smart.
Anyway, perhaps the simplest explanation is convenience, ease of use, comfort, faster way, technological progress, etc. Actually, western governments are the last adopters of such technologies. Simply, because bureaucrats hate more work. And any change requires initiative, learning and more work. Yak.
 

This thread has been viewed 44072 times.

Back
Top