China is like the US was in the first decades of the previous century.
China has too much pride over stupid things and paranoia over breakaway republics. I’m glad they’re fairly non-intervention, but only because I don’t consider them especially moral to be a good thing spreading their morals around
What I do expect that is good, however, is for them to be fairly consistent in their support/opposition to conflicts outside their spheres of influence. The US’s policies are subject to the whims of whatever liberal or conservative group that’s in power. China is happily predictable due to their one party system, and their leaders are a degree more insulated from public opinion and opposition pressure. Such predictability promotes stability, even if at the hands of tyrants, but at least they won’t be fucking around in conflicts that’s not their own
To put it in real world terms, I don’t see them creating an Iraq like we did, nor calling for war in Iran. I see them allowing Saddam to fuck his people, and making a quick buck by selling weapons to Iran. Since neither of those things raise much hackles with me, I favor their approach over ours.
I like the practicality of the Chinese-they keep bringing up Taiwan, but its all a sop to the few people to whom it matters-they continue to trade with Taiwan and accept Taiwanese investment. In a way, they are just like the Imperial Government of the Old Chinese Empire-pay tribute (token) to the emperor, acknowledge your fealty to the Throne of Heaven, and you are left alone. China needs two things from the world:
- Raw materials. they will do business with anybody, and pay a fair price.
- Markets: they will do business with anybody, and undersell to gain market share.
China is completely understandable-they don’t thrust their ideology on anybody, and do not indulge in “nation building”(that particular idiocy has gotten us into several worthless wars).:smack:
What are you talking about?
No nation building you say?
Tibet?
Their own Islamic problems in the west from grabbing and trying to colonize Muslim lands/peoples? You do understand that there is much more Islamic terror in China than in the West, right?
Stop trying to understand/define China through US experience, please.
Quite the opposite, actually. They didn’t try to build a nation in Tibet but instead tried to absorb an existing one.
Nope. They flooded Tibet with Han Chinese in an attempt to build a new Chinese majority province. They made absolutely no attempt to ‘absorb’ Tibet.
Absorb in this context means to simply overtake it organically through not war and conquest, but simply more people of your own living there. And they built no nation there, they simply strolled in and declared themselves rulers. Besides, there’s a huge difference between nation-building on the scale of the US, trying to force our democratic model on nations half a world away, than China extending its borders across some smaller border countries
First of all, Tibet was always a tributary of the Chinese Emperor. True, the Chinese have been (occasionally ) brutal in Tibet, but the fact is, Tibet was a backward, primitive country. The Chinese have brought development and modern life to Tibet. Before the Chinese came, there were no hospitals and almost no schools-the people lived in a feudal system of serfdom.
I am not defending what the Chinese have done in Tibet, but it is simply wrong to think the Tibet was a haven of peace and contentment-the average life expectancy was probably less than 50 years. Disease and starvation was common.
How 19th century if you.
It was within living memory of many Chinese when millions if Chinese starved to death through willful government incompetence during the Great Leap Forward. To say that the Chinese are a beacon of civilization and progress is absurd.
The notion that Chinese leaders are pragmatic by nature forgets the entire 20th Century. You know, the whole Communist Dictatorship thing, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, the war with Vietnam where they got spanked handily, and on and on.
China is in the enviable position of a man who has stopped hitting himself in the face with a hammer, and is amazed at how good it feels. China has now become a normal country that can muddle through problems like most other countries, rather than a basket case. This is commendable, it is much better to live in a normal crappy country than a basket case.
But China has a long way to go before they reach parity with economic powerhouse countries like Mexico, Kazakhstan, or Gabon, all countries that have nearly twice the per-capita GDP of China.
China hasn’t had an emperor for almost a century. Tibet clearly does not want to be part of China and the despite the problems of Tibetan society, it’s also true that the Chinese government is trying to wipe out its culture. I guess you’re not interested, but this is basically ethnic cleansing. If there’s a lesson to be learned here from the U.S. treatment of Native Americans or U.S. imperialism in the late 19th century, China is obviously not interested in learning it.
Here’s the problem: the Chinese government has very little regard for human rights and working conditions are often horrible. And their ability to undersell competitors might have something to do with the crushing poverty most of their population still lives in. AK84’s comparison to the U.S. during the gilded age is apt.
Yet China has a stronger civil society and higher life-expectencies than countries like Kazakhstan or Gabon. Both of those countries are basically one-trick ponies dependent on their oil industries unlike China which has a diversified economy and a strong heritage.
Plus Kung-Fu, you forgot Kung-Fu. We’ll roundhouse anyone in the face for like no reason at all!
To say that would be absurd indeed. Good thing no one said it.
(The Internet is clearly the world’s greatest exporter of straw.)
If their economy grows at 9% a year they will be at 12k per capita in about 8 years. Despite China’s per capita poverty (they are slightly ahead of Thailand in per capita income) they are the 2nd largest economy in the world (almost as big as the UK, France & Germany combined), the 2nd strongest military which is advancing rapidly and they are becoming a major contributor to science and technology. The PPP R&D spending of China is almost $300 billion (160 billion nominal roughly). That PPP spending on R&D is about equal to all of western europe.
China will start taking a leadership role in inventing and manufacturing many energy, communications, medical and transportation technologies soon. They seem (to me at least, I could be wrong) trying to transition from an economy based on low skill manufacturing for export to an economy based on domestic demand, high skill manufacturing and innovation. It is relevant to what happens in nations like Africa, because the US competes with China over African natural resources. I think last year China and the US tied in renewable energy spending, about 50 billion each.
They may not have per capita status and they seem fairly isolationist militarily anymore, but their economy, role in global R&D and role in geopolitics is growing rapidly.
It depends on how you define superpower. I don’t think China will become an aggressive military superpower anytime soon. But their role in global trade, science, diplomacy, etc. will continue to grow from their current #2 position until they are at parity with the US in a decade or two.
And the internet is also home to those who have really poor reading comprehension.
Ealph claimed that Tibet deserved to be gobbled up by China because in was backwards and China was so much more advanced and civilized.
Most countries don’t like the U.S either.
That seems unlikely at this time. Projected growth for this year is 7.5% and slower growth for next year seems likely.
Indeed the fiscal policy here in China is now to allow growth to slow, because there has been a long period of overinvestment and there was a risk of an economic bubble.
As I said, China has made it to middle income status, which, because of its size and population, already means it ticks many of the superpower boxes. But now the target path is from middle-income to western style living standards. And many nations have floundered at this point.
You said “repeat our mistakes” not “wars”, so, as far as mistakes per se go- yes, they will, plus loads of their own.
IMO the thing that might cause them to go to war would be if they can’t get the resources they need for their population, just as Japan went to war to get resources, and attacked the US because they were a threat to their resource supply.
What do you think will allow China to reach western standards and what will change about the country, politics, policy and people to allow that? The definition of western standards varies drastically too, in places like the US, Canada or Sweden per capita income is about 50k per person. In South Korea or Greenland it is about 20k. All the nations are considered western middle class despite per capita income varying from 20-60k. I assume the cutoff for OECD is around 20k per capita with low inequality, something around there.
Even if China’s economy drops to 6% growth a year that is still a doubling in 12 years. Here in the west the term ‘made in China’ is associated with low quality products that break easily. I am guessing that mentality is going on in other nations too. If China wants to transition to a higher middle income country or a western nation they have to find a way to associate China with innovation and quality manufacturing IMO. Right now I don’t see those things coming from China. Even with all the R&D investment going on there, I don’t know what all innovative ideas are exported from China. I know the e-cig (which is actually a nice device, I’ve bought one for a smoker I know) was invented in China. But for their R&D budget you’d assume they’d be pumping out more energy and medical advances for the west to buy considering their R&D budget is much higher than Japans.
As I said, what interests me the most is how China will play a role in solving global medical, energy, poverty and technology problems as their economy grows. They are already playing a huge role in setting up cell phone infrastructure in Africa, which is helping the economies there grow. They also do a lot of energy and other infrastructure projects there. I’m hoping Chinese investments and inventions are what lift Africa out of poverty.