You're all over the shop.

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

Correct. And China's communist rulers know this. Hence the regime needs economic, political, and military expansion abroad to keep the developing internal tensions as well as international pressure under control.

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. — frank

Again yes, I understand. That's a standard liberal attitude - everyone will want democracy at some stage; when their economic needs are met, they want political autonomy.

It ain't necessarily so, and that's the question in this thread.

You're all over the shop. — Banno

Shop? What are you selling?

Those who complain about Chinese expansionism but have nothing to say about America's ringing of the Earth with military bases and material support for dozens of genocidal regimes around the world cede their right to talk about anything at all, ever, for all time.

when their economic needs are met, they want political autonomy. — Banno

The American says it's government of the people, by the people, for the people.

China takes out the middle part. It's of and for, not by.

Read the damn article you posted.

Correct. And China's communist rulers know this. Hence the regime needs economic, political, and military expansion abroad to keep the developing internal tensions as well as international pressure under control. — Apollodorus

They're becoming a regional power on their way to superpower. The US is moving out of their way, so there will be two superpowers, which the political realist favors as the most stable global scenario.

As if the only contrast were the US vs China.

If you want to understand China better, just look up. That's China's thumb.

You might be right, but as it stands that statement is uncritical and unhelpful.

You seemed to want to say that there's just no fathoming the Chinese heart unless you're staring out of Chinese eyeballs.

Since they own a fair portion of Australia outright, I think you'll soon gave that internal perspective.

It ain't scientific socialism anymore, honey.

You're a piece of work, Banno, I had not until now realized.

The topic here is the odd nature of Chinese democracy. — Banno

The topic of the thread? If you say so. But not the topic between us.

You're a piece of work, Banno, — tim wood

Thanks. I do what I can.

The US is moving out of their way, so there will be two superpowers, which the political realist favors as the most stable global scenario. — frank

I do agree that ideally, there should be an international balance of power. Unfortunately, China is applying the Maoist principle of defense, equilibrium, and offense, according to which (1) you start from a position of strategic weakness, then (2) you increase your own power until it matches that of the opponent, after which (3) you go over to the last phase in which you overpower and finish off your opponent.

There is not going to be a balance of power because China is spreading its influence in the Pacific, Europe, Mid East, and Africa and this will put the West in a defensive position. This is already the case economically. We are now in the phase where economic influence begins to be backed by political and military influence and power.

There are two sides to that, though. I'm not sure how to explain this.

Weaker entities congregate around stronger ones voluntarily. It's the nature of human social structure. Tribes, cities, states, regions, etc. are created this way.

If your bitch is that China is marxist, I disagree.

Weaker entities congregate around stronger ones voluntarily. — frank

I think the "voluntary" bit is the key to the problem. It is hard to imagine Tibet voluntarily submitting to Chinese occupation, suppression of its religion and culture, exploitation of its resources, etc.

The same applies to Hong Kong, Taiwan, "disputed" parts of India, and other places. I know very few Americans, Australians, and Europeans that would be happy to "voluntarily" submit to Chinese rule.

China has been accused by many countries of deploying hundreds of fishing vessels in large-scale operations that are illegal under international law. So, not everything that China does is happening with the approval of other nations concerned.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/02/fishing-fleets-go-dark-suspected-illegal-hunting-study

https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/china-illegal-fishing-fleet/

I agree that sometimes smaller nations may congregate of their own accord around larger ones, but other times they may do so under economic, political or military coercion. This is the main distinction I would make, not that China is "Marxist", though it is officially run by a Marxist-Leninist party.

Weaker entities congregate around stronger ones voluntarily. — frank


I think the "voluntary" bit is the key to the problem. It is hard to imagine Tibet voluntarily submitting to Chinese occupation, suppression of its religion and culture, exploitation of its resources, etc. — Apollodorus

Sure. There are exceptions. I think it's still true in the main.

I know very few Americans, Australians, and Europeans that would be happy to "voluntarily" submit to Chinese rule. — Apollodorus

And that's why it's fun for me to pick on Banno about China's dominance of Australia. I don't have to worry about it. Beijing will look like a moon crater before I live under Chinese control.

China has been accused by many countries of deploying hundreds of fishing vessels in large-scale operations that are illegal under international law. So, not everything that China does is happening with the approval of other nations — Apollodorus

Yea, my point is that China will become the regional lawmaker. That benefits everyone.

agree that sometimes smaller nations may congregate of their own accord around larger ones, but other times they may do so under economic, political or military coercion — Apollodorus

And that's the other side of human nature. Some entities are just obstructionist in any situation. They just love chaos. They're going to grandstand until somebody breaks their necks.

And that's why it's fun for me to pick on Banno about China's dominance of Australia. — frank

True. That's why I thought they started the thread to promote the Chinese view for the sake of a bit of controversy. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like we've got too many genuine Chinese to discuss the issue with ....

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like we've got too many genuine Chinese to discuss the issue with .... — Apollodorus

That would be nice. I work with a Chinese woman. She explains stuff about Hong Kong to me, although I have a really hard time understanding her, especially when she's wearing a mask.

:grin: Yeah, that has been my experience, too. Their accent can be hard to understand sometimes which makes discussion rather difficult. The ones I speak to tend to see the Hong Kong situation, for example, as "stirred up by the West". And in general, I think there is a certain degree of national pride that makes it difficult for them to see or admit any faults that to Western eyes may seem obvious. I doubt that will change any time soon though. Maybe, as others have said, we'll just have to start seeing things through Chinese eyes rather than the other way around.

The ones I speak to tend to see the Hong Kong situation, for example, as "stirred up by the West". And in general, I think there is a certain degree of national pride that makes it difficult for them to see or admit any faults that to Western eyes may seem obvious. I — Apollodorus

The lady I work with just says there's 0% chance China will back down regarding Hong Kong.

Maybe, as others have said, we'll just have to start seeing things through Chinese eyes rather than the other way around. — Apollodorus

True, but I was kind of shocked when I brought up the Weegers on this forum. Nobody objected. They just said China's solution was for the best. British people said that. :scream:

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like we've got too many genuine Chinese to discuss the issue with .... — Apollodorus

I'm Chinese. I'd love to discuss this topic with you, but you know, my accent gets in the way. Oh wait. I don't care about this topic. OK. Never mind then.

Look what you did. You offended the fuck out that person.

Oh wait. I don't care about this topic. — Ying

I fully understand that you don't care. If I were you, I wouldn't care either. However, Frank and I do care. Indeed, we are very caring are careful people. And I suspect, so is Banno. So, let's suppose for the sake of argument, you did care. What would your considered (and caring) view be on this particular topic?

I fully understand that you don't care. — Apollodorus

No, I don't think you do.

Crikey! Did I really do that? I only commented to try to make polite conversation and because I know how much Banno appreciates my comments. But now that I will be banned shortly for posting comments, I'd better stop before they ban me.

But now that I will be banned shortly for posting comments, I'd better stop before they ban me. — Apollodorus

ok. Take a break.

It seems to me that posting a link would trigger moderation.
I won't post the link. Search youtube with
v=_tOtVQ7cNWY

The video clip was made by the US government during WWII entitled
Why we fight: Battle of China 1/5

The clip clearly shows the Tibet was considered part of China.

It's OK to post video links, so long as they contribute to a conversation, and that they are not the whole content of an opening post.