what "democracy" might be from a Chinese perspective. — Banno

Not, apparently, Democracy. And far enough from it to disqualify the adjective.

Do the Chinese do what they think they have to do to have a country? I'll yield on that. But surrender unconditionally the language? Nothing gained there, and much lost.

@ltlee1's participation here is welcome, and important if we are to develop any understanding of what "democracy" might be form a Chinese perspective. — Banno

I did think that might be the purpose of the thread.

BTW the bat soup comment was meant as a joke. @ltlee1 didn't complain. Maybe he isn't Chinese?

Still calling you out. Start with 1900. And take care we're distinguishing between territorial acquisitions and protecting interests. And I am not going to defend all US efforts to "protect" interests.

It's a conceptual puzzle. How can a country that ranks near the least democratic nevertheless think itself democratic? Not stupidity; that's a naive, unthoughtful response from @Apollodorus.

I don't believe you. You can't be that naive.

Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States

I didn't say it is stupidity. I said it is ignorance and lack of political experience which is to be expected after living in a dictatorship since 1949.

But if the thread is intended to promote the Chinese view, that's fine by me.

You can't be that naive. — Banno

Simple question: where on the surface of the globe does the US flag fly? Of the places it flies, how many were seized by force or threat of force since 1900?

Above I was specific - you seem not to have noticed - in distinguishing conquest from protecting interests. Further, that I would not defend US protection of interests, some being defensible, some indefensible. And you come back with "interventions"?

No, Apo, its' not promoting the Chinese view. It's critical of it, form the start.

where on the surface of the globe does the US flag fly? — tim wood

Come on Tim; That's just sad. What is "protecting our interests"? You are too intelligent to buy into that spin.

OK I was just wondering how @ltlee1 came across the thread and whether he/she is actually Chinese or something else. But it isn't a major problem either way.

Yeah, I commented on that previously. @ltlee1 appeared soon after this thread. Is that suspicious? If they are a part of the 50 Cent Army, they are pretty inept. But then, if I were being paid 50cents a post I wouldn't be putting my effort into quality, but into quantity.

Seems that it might be so.

Hence the approach of coaxing a substantive post from them.

@ltlee1 appeared soon after this thread. — Banno

I thought it was lightning quick. But as you say, if a substantive post can be coaxed from them, why not?

Come on Tim; That's just sad. What is "protecting our interests"? You are too intelligent to buy into that spin. — Banno

You're evading/destroying the original question, thereby avoiding it. Unworthy and annoying. It also implies a complete lack of an ability to make a distinction. These are what's sad. Shall I illustrate the distinction?

The distinction - between conquest of land and cultural annexation - is moot. It's you trying to rig the game. Do you doubt the hegemony of 'merican culture? Then you are kidding yourself.

You keep changing the question.

The distinction - between conquest of land and cultural annexation - is moot. — Banno

All right, I'll illustrate:

1) I come to your house with a gun and if I don't kill you outright, then I tell you you're leaving either the easy way or the hard way. You choose the easy way and I escort you down the road, perhaps even to oblivion. I return, take possession, change things as I like, and inform all that I thought it was mine all along.

2) In violation of zoning laws you're operating an illegal pig farm. I summon police - who have guns - and they tell you the pigs are leaving, easy way or hard way. And you're subject to fines, penalties, forfeitures, perhaps prison. But yours is still yours, and nothing appropriated except under operation of law.

Can you tell the difference between 1 & 2?

The US from 1900 was mainly isolationist. What territory did the US take after 1900? It negotiated some military bases and established presences where it seemed a good idea to establish them, and kept some to this day. But there are also our "acquisitional" practices of WWI, WWII, The Marshall Plan, The Korean War, support of Israel, & etc. And the result of those? Prosperity and freedom.

US all good? No one says it is. US all bad? Absurd. US all bad because not all good? Absurd. You seem to lack any sense of proportion.

Do you doubt the hegemony of 'merican culture? — Banno

And what the F does that mean? For some years after WWII, 'murican stuff was good stuff, in many cases the best stuff, and people voted with their money. Now the best stuff is a world product, some of it even from China. And the world's people are still voting with their money. So what the F are you on about?

Psss. You're thinking with your patriotism, perhaps.

Here's my point, just to be sure: Americans complaining about Chinese expansionism is the pt calling the kettle black.

Americans complaining about Chinese expansionism is the pt calling the kettle black — Banno

I'm not sure it's about "complaining". If German and Japanese expansionism was bad, why is Chinese expansionism good?

That's such an extraordinarily twisted response that it doesn't warrant a reply.

China mainly needs to ease over to something more democratic because of the expansion of their economy.

The richer people get, the more it takes to pacify them. This leads to social unrest which has been allowed to play out to blow off steam, but eventually they'll have to do something about all the disenfranchised people in Chinese cities. These people don't enjoy any sort of communist benefits because they left their villages. If you leave your village you're in your own. These people are coming to expect help from the government. This is something China has no experience with, so they're winging it.

This is all from a series on China from Curiosity Stream, so I can't share it.

Non sequitor. You're all over the place and have become incoherent. Bottom line. if the pot is being called black, then what matters is if the pot is black, right? Yours an ad hominem of such proportion that sense is destroyed by it.

Set out the non sequitur for me. Make it explicit. Otherwise it's a bland accusation.

The topic here is the odd nature of Chinese democracy. Defensive Americans are pretty irrelevant - that's the non sequitur here; the notion that the only choice is between the US and China.

Yeah, that's a common view, but it is a view from the West. It seems to me to be entirely possible that the Chinese do not want the sort of representative democracy we take for granted. (understatement intended.)

That perspective was from a Chinese guy.

That's such an extraordinarily twisted response that it doesn't warrant a reply. — Banno

I wonder why that is. British colonialism was bad, German and Japanese expansionism was bad, American hegemony is bad, but Chinese colonialism, expansionism, and hegemony is good?

It seems to me to be entirely possible that the Chinese do not want the sort of representative democracy we take for granted. — Banno

Sure. But I think the real issue is China's foreign policy, i.e., militarism, expansionism, and neocolonialism. Unless the thread is pro-China, after all.

Cool. SO now the question becomes, how representative is that view?

Where have I written anything that you might have interpreted as support for Chinese expansionism?

What I have written was explicitly the opposite.

Cool. SO now the question becomes, how representative is that view? — Banno

I think you misunderstood it. It's not that Chinese people are yammering for democracy. It's that the Chinese government needs to become responsive to the needs of the people who are getting richer and expect more than they once did.

They're already experiencing protests and they know they won't be able to continue forever ignoring them.

Ignore this view if you like. I have no intention of looking back at that video to see who that Chinese guy was.

It is true, though. When people are in grinding poverty, they're too tired to protest. Their minds are numb.

Give them education and hope for a better life: now you have a problem.

Surely, Chinese "democracy" is directly linked to Chinese militarism and expansionism?

1. In order to keep the populace under control, the regime needs to guarantee a certain standard of living.

2. For this it needs a stable and rapidly expanding economy, and this means economic and political expansion abroad.

3. In turn, this needs to be backed by military power, hence militarism, expansionism, and neocolonialism.

In addition, the West is putting pressure on Russia, driving it closer to China, thus increasing Chinese power on the global stage.