China geopolitics

[Tigranes]

Please also elaborate on how the study of Japan could lead you to be against China. There is mongering fear between Japan and China which is true but it's the result of the Japanese invasion and occupation. China and Japan had a much longer history of peace and exchange. We are closely related in culture, language and religion and enjoyed many centuries of mutual love and respect. Even after the horrible war between us, there are still many that are working hard to rebuild that relationship. Sure there had been bumps on that road but China had showed only less hostility in that regard than

South Korea and other Asian countries. Remember South Korea even kicked the Japanese emissaries out of their country once in protest of Japan's new edition of history books and China only sent students to protest in the streets.

 

I think China can be very pragmatic when it comes down to it, which works to their advantage; the Chinese leaders might sometimes get flak for being 'hypocrits' or 'without principle' when it comes to such pragmatic policy decisions, but in the end it can be very effective. The problem with South Korean politics is that it is to dominated by polemic, and the last few decades of amazing economic growth, together with the previous period of Japanese domination, has resulted in a sort of overinflated national pride with the undercurrent of a complex in the national consciousness; thus, when Japan does something like edit their textbooks to inaccurately obscure their imperial history (which, by the way, is a very silly thing to do anyway), Korea is going to be a lot more reactionary.

[Sand]

^If China is gonna dominate the world, that's not how we gonna do it. We are simply gonna marry our sons and daughters to you guys and outproduce everyone genetically. We defeated all the minority tribes this way and have gotten quite good at it. (Marrying foreigners is very popular in China these days.)

 

Yeah, but what right minded foreigner would want to live in an oppressive country like China? A country that has no problem on sending its own military to shoot and kill its own unarmed people.

[Azarkon]

National history is the result of geo-politics. The identities of all people are formed and broken within that crucible. Even so, most people are not political, and simply do their best to live from day to day. This is the reason people prefer to discuss world issues through the lens of morality, which, after all, is the only real perspective that most of us have any real stake in. But it's still good to keep in mind that at the end of the day, whether a Tibetan is a Tibetan or a Chinese a Chinese depends not on some intrinsic notion of ethnic solidarity, but the geo-political history of that region. It is subject to interpretation, manipulation, and, ultimately, change. This is why I said earlier that it's not about whether the Tibetans "deserve" independence based on their cultural differences from "Han" Chinese (which, far from the homogeneous collective that Westerners seem to perceive it as, is in truth comprised of groups once just as distinct), but about how they (and the Chinese) play the geo-political game - that will be the determining factor (the same is true for Taiwan, and Xinjiang, and everywhere else). No anthropologist is ever surprised at the deaths of cultures and identities - half of the world's languages are predicted to become extinct by the turn of the century. If we assumed that ethnic identities are somehow static and pure, history would be incomprehensible.

 

Nations are not intrinsic. They are built and destroyed according to shared interests, social trends, and geo-political maneuverings. Most people would like to be left alone, it's true, but they are no less part of this process because of that desire. Ultimately, we all belong to some identity (or set of identities), and those identities are always changing. Only by accepting this, I think, can we even begin to imagine a post-ethnic society.

Edited March 26, 2008 by Azarkon

[julianw]

^There u go, Sand. I can try to give you solid examples on how all nations are losing their identities slowly and the world merging into one nation but Azarkon just explained it better than I can ever dream of.

[Sand]

Its not an issue of Tibet deserves independence or not, but how the Chinese government choose to react to the protests that I have a problem with. Killing defenseless people is bad, Azarkon.

Edited March 26, 2008 by Sand

[Azarkon]

No doubt, and you're probably right in saying that the Chinese government could've handled the situation better. That said, the rioters were killing defenseless people, destroying property, and committing arsony. What should have been the response?

[Tigranes]

"Here now, angry mob. Now why don't we just sit down for some nice tea, and we can talk this out. Perhaps with a poetry contest."

[Gorth]

But... but... they were using Kung-Fu!

 

Why ruin a good story by hearing both sides of it?

[SteveThaiBinh]

No doubt, and you're probably right in saying that the Chinese government could've handled the situation better. That said, the rioters were killing defenseless people, destroying property, and committing arsony. What should have been the response?

Let the foreign press have unlimited access. If the Tibetans are doing what you say, then give them enough rope to hang themselves (so to speak).

[Nick_i_am]

Yes, China is big on freedom of press right now.

[Azarkon]

No doubt, and you're probably right in saying that the Chinese government could've handled the situation better. That said, the rioters were killing defenseless people, destroying property, and committing arsony. What should have been the response?

Let the foreign press have unlimited access. If the Tibetans are doing what you say, then give them enough rope to hang themselves (so to speak).

 

My impression is that the West will side with Tibet regardless of whether China's allegations are true. In fact, I've seen multiple sources that acquit the Tibetans because "when nothing else works, violence is the only answer for a desperate people." If foreign press was allowed unlimited access, this outlet will be given free reign, and it'd set a precedent for other groups to adopt similar tactics so that they could get similar coverage from Western press - bad news for China.

[Humodour]

No doubt, and you're probably right in saying that the Chinese government could've handled the situation better. That said, the rioters were killing defenseless people, destroying property, and committing arsony. What should have been the response?

Let the foreign press have unlimited access. If the Tibetans are doing what you say, then give them enough rope to hang themselves (so to speak).

 

My impression is that the West will side with Tibet regardless of whether China's allegations are true. In fact, I've seen multiple sources that acquit the Tibetans because "when nothing else works, violence is the only answer for a desperate people." If foreign press was allowed unlimited access, this outlet will be given free reign, and it'd set a precedent for other groups to adopt similar tactics so that they could get similar coverage from Western press - bad news for China.

 

It's always the press's fault.

 

Chinese man convicted for 10 years in jail for divulging "state secrets". He was a journalist who published a message from the Chinese government warning against reporting on the 15th 'anniversary' of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. That's it; that was the state secret:

 

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=14884

 

Chinese man sentenced to 5 years in prison for rallying public support of the message "We want human rights not the Olympics". Reason: subversion of state power:

 

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/350435

 

It's a shame China doesn't have a proper legal system with things like due process.

[Brdavs]

China will give press unlimited access when press gets unlimited acces to Guantanamo.

 

China will provide full due process to all dissidents when west provides it for the sobs in secret prisons across the globe.

 

China won`t use leathal force against its poppulus once law enforcment in the west is issued battons instead of shotguns and once trespassors cant be legally shot dead for showing up in your living room.

 

China will turn ito civil rights lovefest once the west gives a toss about rights of ppl not their citizens AND once the west stops trampling civil rights on account of the "war on terror".

 

China will respect all human life once the west stops blowing up people all over the world to promote their interest.

 

 

 

 

 

SOmehow I cant see it happening heh... Come to think of it... wth are we to judge and set our governments as standard anyway lol?

[Humodour]

China will give press unlimited access when press gets unlimited acces to Guantanamo.

 

China will provide full due process to all dissidents when west provides it for the sobs in secret prisons across the globe.

 

China won`t use leathal force against its poppulus once law enforcment in the west is issued battons instead of shotguns and once trespassors cant be legally shot dead for showing up in your living room.

 

China will turn ito civil rights lovefest once the west gives a toss about rights of ppl not their citizens AND once the west stops trampling civil rights on account of the "war on terror".

 

China will respect all human life once the west stops blowing up people all over the world to promote their interest.

 

 

 

 

 

SOmehow I cant see it happening heh... Come to think of it... wth are we to judge and set our governments as standard anyway lol?

Well, I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure everybody values their human rights.

 

As such any government which maximises those, such as liberal democracy, can claim higher moral ground.

 

And any government which actively violates them likewise deserves to be demonised.

[Gorgon]

China is both ass backwards and very evolved. I find it really strange that you should be able to get away with having a state controlled propaganda machine in this day and age. The only conclusion I can draw from that is that the Chinese at large are just indifferent about liberty and unaccustomed to challenging their own institutions.

[Nick_i_am]

China will give press unlimited access when press gets unlimited acces to Guantanamo.

 

China will provide full due process to all dissidents when west provides it for the sobs in secret prisons across the globe.

 

China won`t use leathal force against its poppulus once law enforcment in the west is issued battons instead of shotguns and once trespassors cant be legally shot dead for showing up in your living room.

 

China will turn ito civil rights lovefest once the west gives a toss about rights of ppl not their citizens AND once the west stops trampling civil rights on account of the "war on terror".

 

China will respect all human life once the west stops blowing up people all over the world to promote their interest.

 

Possible thread win.

[Humodour]

China will give press unlimited access when press gets unlimited acces to Guantanamo.

 

China will provide full due process to all dissidents when west provides it for the sobs in secret prisons across the globe.

 

China won`t use leathal force against its poppulus once law enforcment in the west is issued battons instead of shotguns and once trespassors cant be legally shot dead for showing up in your living room.

 

China will turn ito civil rights lovefest once the west gives a toss about rights of ppl not their citizens AND once the west stops trampling civil rights on account of the "war on terror".

 

China will respect all human life once the west stops blowing up people all over the world to promote their interest.

 

Possible thread win.

Not really. Brdavs really only described America, which certainly has problems too... but nowhere near to the extent China does.

 

And anybody claiming two wrongs make a right as Brdavs is is an enigma to me.

[Azarkon]

China is both ass backwards and very evolved. I find it really strange that you should be able to get away with having a state controlled propaganda machine in this day and age. The only conclusion I can draw from that is that the Chinese at large are just indifferent about liberty and unaccustomed to challenging their own institutions.

 

Thing is, state controlled propaganda seems to be working pretty well for China. Why would they rock the boat?

 

You guys are still thinking about this in simplistic terms - free press GOOD, no free press BAD. But institutions don't exist in a vacuum. A free press has tremendous political power, especially if it also controls the flow of information (ie the TV stations, radio stations, newspapers, etc.), as it does in the West. In an authoritarian regime like China's, such a press can easily compete with the government for influence, and will also be subject to bribes from various forces, which will attempt to shape events in their favor. At the worst, such a press will become a mouthpiece for corporate and business interests, and that's no different than how China is now except it'll be even more indifferent to the desires of the poor.

 

In order for a free press to actually be to the benefit of China's people, it will need to remain objective, apolitical, and incorruptible. How do you create such an institution without any means of ensuring its accountability? Remember, in the US the free press grew out of our political culture. Chinese political culture is very different - it's not a constitutional democracy; it doesn't have such a tradition. If the government simply stopped censoring everything and allowed reporters free reign, various interest groups will scramble to fill the power vacuum and push out their own versions of events. Now, you might argue that this competition will ensure objectivity, but the truth is, most people in China don't have acess to anything beyond a television set, so in reality only the big reporting stations have any real clout. They will then basically shape Chinese perception, and thus its policy. Why would the government create such a rival to its power?

[Azarkon]

Well, I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure everybody values their human rights.

 

Here's the thing - that's not true. In fact, depending on your definition of human rights, most people in the world likely don't give a damn - because most people don't care about politics. As such, anything that has to do with politics (ie freedom of speech, which basically just means freedom of political speech) is likely to be pretty low on people's list of priorities, whereas anything to do with the quality of life (ie the economy) is likely to be very high. Any government that maximizes the things that people really care about is going to receive mass support. That's why the Chinese government has such a free hand to do as it pleases with political dissent - the Chinese people don't care so long as it doesn't affect their quality of life. That's the bottomline, and so far, the CCP has read its people well.

 

A successful democratic evolution in China requires that the CCP fails, somehow, to maintain its mandate of economic progress. Massive unemployment, reduction in the quality of life, economic depression, etc. - those are the signs that China is in trouble. Then the government will be forced to change, or face the prospects of having to repress 1.4 billion people. That's the benefit of a democracy - it gives you the option (or at least the illusion) that transitioning between one set of leaders and another set is easy; therefore, if one government screws up the economy, another can be brought in to fix it. I believe that the CCP is smart enough to recognize this, and that they will make the democratic plunge when necessary. That is not now, however, when China's economy is booming.

 

Again, why would they rock the boat?

[Azarkon]

An article that explains a bit of what I'm getting at:

 

http://atimes.com/atimes/China/JC28Ad01.html

[Shryke]

In order for a free press to actually be to the benefit of China's people, it will need to remain objective, apolitical, and incorruptible

 

agreed, but it applies to more than just china

[walkerguy]

@Walkerguy: Yes. China has always been active militarily. Actively being invaded all the time hence the fear of foreign powers and the urge for isolation and self-preservation. Imo, China should never be leader of all nations even if we grow stronger than the US. Simply put, we just wouldn't care enough to be a good leader. We are the quiet kid in the class only concerned about his own grades and never participate in class activities. Even though we are a member of the UN's security coucil, we are always the relatively quiet one. We forfeit our votes on key issues and only does small talk all the time. We strongly condemned US for its involvement in Kosovo and got our embassy bombed (I don't know if it's accidental or on purpose) but a wave of news editorials blamed it on the Communist government overstepping the boundary and getting itself tangled up the world affairs not related to us.

 

Ever since the border conflict with Vietnam, China has never sent one soldier to foreign territory. Compare that to how active US, UK, Japan and even Iceland (which sent one soldier to Iraq) are doing militarily.

 

Please also elaborate on how the study of Japan could lead you to be against China. There is mongering fear between Japan and China which is true but it's the result of the Japanese invasion and occupation. China and Japan had a much longer history of peace and exchange. We are closely related in culture, language and religion and enjoyed many centuries of mutual love and respect. Even after the horrible war between us, there are still many that are working hard to rebuild that relationship. Sure there had been bumps on that road but China had showed only less hostility in that regard than

South Korea and other Asian countries. Remember South Korea even kicked the Japanese emissaries out of their country once in protest of Japan's new edition of history books and China only sent students to protest in the streets.

 

Please also elaborate on how the study of Japan could lead you to be against China.

Just that they've always been rivals and I'm not seeing the whole picture from the Chinese side. This is my #1 used material:

Walkerguy's studies (I use the book edition not online but its the same)

Its not 100% up-to-date (1994 or so) but its just one of my resources.

 

Yes, China is big on freedom of press right now.

 

I was under the impression this would get you cookies, no?

 

China will give press unlimited access when press gets unlimited acces to Guantanamo.

 

China will provide full due process to all dissidents when west provides it for the sobs in secret prisons across the globe.

 

China won`t use leathal force against its poppulus once law enforcment in the west is issued battons instead of shotguns and once trespassors cant be legally shot dead for showing up in your living room.

 

China will turn ito civil rights lovefest once the west gives a toss about rights of ppl not their citizens AND once the west stops trampling civil rights on account of the "war on terror".

 

China will respect all human life once the west stops blowing up people all over the world to promote their interest.

 

Somehow I cant see it happening heh... Come to think of it... wth are we to judge and set our governments as standard anyway lol?

 

No win! None!

 

Well, I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure everybody values their human rights.

 

Here's the thing - that's not true. In fact, depending on your definition of human rights, most people in the world likely don't give a damn - because most people don't care about politics. As such, anything that has to do with politics (ie freedom of speech, which basically just means freedom of political speech) is likely to be pretty low on people's list of priorities, whereas anything to do with the quality of life (ie the economy) is likely to be very high. Any government that maximizes the things that people really care about is going to receive mass support. That's why the Chinese government has such a free hand to do as it pleases with political dissent - the Chinese people don't care so long as it doesn't affect their quality of life. That's the bottomline, and so far, the CCP has read its people well.

 

Thats a good point:

...depending on your definition of human rights, most people in the world likely don't give a damn ... whereas anything to do with the quality of life (ie the economy) is likely to be very high ... on people's list of priorities.

[Azarkon]

Walkerguy, a quick browse through that book seems to indiciate that it goes up to about 1995. Alot has changed since then with regards to China-Japan relations, including the entire administration of Junichiro Koizumi

[walkerguy]

Its not 100% up-to-date (1994 or so) but its just one of my resources.

 

I can't rely on any of the statistics in this book but for information 1990 and before its

For my more... recent histories I have to use other titles.

Edited March 27, 2008 by walkerguy

[Brdavs]

China will give press unlimited access when press gets unlimited acces to Guantanamo.

 

China will provide full due process to all dissidents when west provides it for the sobs in secret prisons across the globe.

 

China won`t use leathal force against its poppulus once law enforcment in the west is issued battons instead of shotguns and once trespassors cant be legally shot dead for showing up in your living room.

 

China will turn ito civil rights lovefest once the west gives a toss about rights of ppl not their citizens AND once the west stops trampling civil rights on account of the "war on terror".

 

China will respect all human life once the west stops blowing up people all over the world to promote their interest.

 

Possible thread win.

Not really. Brdavs really only described America, which certainly has problems too... but nowhere near to the extent China does.

 

And anybody claiming two wrongs make a right as Brdavs is is an enigma to me.

 

All the rest follow USA like puppies which sorta makes us accomplices.

 

And nowhere did I state that two wrongs make a right. I marely stated that we should start by marching agains our own "order of things" or atleast against what it`s turning into.

 

 

Well, I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure everybody values their human rights.

 

As such any government which maximises those, such as liberal democracy, can claim higher moral ground.

 

And any government which actively violates them likewise deserves to be demonised.

 

 

Every country in the world firstly and foremostly cares about the rights of it`s citizens. And every induvidual firstly and foremostly cares about hisown rights. The value of a life varies dramatically depending on your passport. Let us not be twofaced now...

You can get an exact number of coalition casulties in Iraq, a war (supposedly) fought over 2974 deaths. Howmany of us know the number of palestinians killed prior or post to that? Or how many Iraqis have died? All you get are estimations of "somewher in between 200k and 1mil" lol. And that`s lives we`re talking about, chew on that one for a sec. Speaking of mortgage crisis; how many millions of palestinians are displaced and howmany Iraqis?

Nobody givess a toss cos they`re them, and we`re us. Nor does any1 really give a toss about Tibet tbh, but that gets on the agenda cos we like to stick it to China. Sorta like how Kosovo was only sticking it to Russia. The Bear and the Tiger that threathen the mighty Eagle...

I wonder what the response will be the next time native amercans declare all past agreements violate and ergo null and void, + cry genocide while declaring an independant territory in the middle of the USA. Oh yea, that`s a local news joke to be laughed at.

 

 

 

 

 

In essence: any "moral high-ground" (some think) "we" are having in lecturing China is merely a Tibetan plateau worth of BS. Atleast they`re being honest. I as an induvidual can condemn what`s happening there but then agin I condemn a lot (more) of that`s happening right here.

To have a "Sand like" stance of how our righteous lberal governments and nations should disown and if possibly topple the "evil" PRC is sorta humorous conisediring the respective track records as of late (and not so as of late) - my only real beef in this conversation.

 

Stop thinking you/we are somehow fundamentaly better. We`re better off. Mostly on theirexpense. But that`s sorta it.

 

 

Mind you that is no reason to preserve a bad status quo. It is however a reason to tell our politicians to go to heck everytime they say they`re dropping bombs for freedom and to help people and when they`re being hypocritical to the border of having us for fools. China will change on itsown merrit to more suit our (and through for now superior force global) standard.

Thoe it does seem like we`re gonna meet them more than half way. But that`s a whole new topic.

Edited March 27, 2008 by Brdavs