Maybe this is fodder for a different thread, but how exactly is China a “threat”? Any more that the US and western ideals is a “threat.” They may be a threat to the US enjoying cheap consumption largely subsidized by the rest of the world, as well as our ability to force/coerce others to act in a manner consistent with our interests. But to the world as a whole?
I’m reminded of the bully on the block. He might feel threatened when another bully moves in. But I’m not sure it makes all that much difference to the rest of the kids (could even be to their interest to have 2 bullies to play off each other) - or to how the entire block functions as a whole.
Not saying it can’t be the case, just that I’m not willing to accept it without some elaboration.
Probably does need it’s own thread for this one. Briefly, China is a different kind of threat…more of an existential threat, really, than the Soviets, who really were always about overt physical threat. Basically, it’s a battle of ideas and world view with respect to China. What you put in there about ‘US and western ideals’ is pretty much the reason. Those things ARE a threat to anyone who doesn’t have a western, liberal democracy viewpoint. China, or specifically the CCP is a threat to anyone who does have such a viewpoint, as their worldview and outlook is completely different. And they have deliberately been threatening the west on this for years now. You even know at least one instance of this with the recent NBA dust up. You, perhaps, haven’t put that together with all the other instances of them doing exactly the same thing that didn’t make the news, and perhaps you haven’t thought through the implications, or thought about the fact that it’s not just corporations who are dancing to the CCPs tune.
This isn’t about an overt military threat of China in a similar vein to the US/USSR cold war. China is and has been building it’s actual military up, especially from an asymmetric perspective wrt it’s capabilities juxtaposed with the US’s (since it sees the US as it’s major adversary), but that is just a China/US issue. From the worlds perspective, at least the western world, it’s what the CCP is doing wrt western political, economic and media related organs that should be the most concern. China has actively infiltrated all of those things in multiple countries. You can look up a lot of this yourself if you are interested, as it’s not really that much of a secret…it’s just something that isn’t discussed that much on this board and isn’t in the news as much unless it’s something that catches the public’s eye, briefly, such as the NBA thingy.
What I wanted to get out of this thread was a feel for what 'dopers were thinking with respect to China. It’s kind of what I expected to see…a lot of 'dopers are worried about the more overt things China is doing…or aren’t worried at all, and don’t see anything wrong. To many, this is just the same old same old. The British Empire supplanted earlier powers, and was supplanted by the US. Now it’s China’s ‘turn’. yawn. Or even that this is a good thing, as China is no different than the US, and what the US does is equally bad to what China is or has done…or much worse. China doesn’t invade other countries, after all (well, leaving aside Tibet) or try and take their lands (leaving aside their stated goals in Taiwan or annexation in the South China Seas region), while the US does. The US is MUCH more destabilizing, etc etc. Except it’s apples to oranges. Just like thinking China is a threat like the old USSR, and if they aren’t, well, they aren’t any real threat at all.
That seems to be where most people are at wrt China. A lot of negative views by 'dopers (some positive and many meh, which I also expected), which isn’t surprising since a lot of the stuff they have done recently HAS been in the news (even John Oliver did an episode on China recently). But that’s all internal to China…no threat to anyone, certainly not the same level of threat the US to everyone.
I’m loving how committed you are to this “NOT debating” thing…
And there aren’t a million Tibetans in camps, so yeah, they would.
Pretty much, yeah - or can you give another reason why one group of separatists is in camps and two other prominent ones aren’t?
Note I’m not saying it’s a good response, or defending the camps at all. But fighting back is why they are. That’s observation, not approval.
Aah, you seem to have misread me somewhere saying *all *the people in the camps are Uyghur jihadists. In fact, I did not say that.
Yes, Han regularly go beserk and stabby too. That doesn’t change the actions of the Uyghur jihadists.
Yes, I don’t think oppression justifies driving a truck into a crowd of civilians, or stabbing kids. I’ll happily stand by that apparently extremely controversial stance.
It means I’m well aware that the drive here isn’t just *secular *separatist rebellion. That I’m aware the Uyghur are laregly Muslim and that’s part of the reason they’re being oppressed by the Chinese. But like you said, too subtle for you.
Re-read what I *actually *wrote. I said recent invasion and territorial annexation by Russia was what concerned me. 1950 is not recent. Yes, I’m aware there is ongoing occupation and Hanification of Tibet, and I don’t approve at all. But it concerns me a bit less than Russia’s more recent actions in Ukraine, Georgia and the Caucasus overall. Or its general irredentist tendencies in the Baltics too. I quite like Estonia, and would appreciate it being free.
I’ve done you the courtesy of assuming you know what you’re talking about, I’d appreciate it if you’d do the same and stop the little digs you’ve been making in this “Not” debate.
Lovely strawman.
I haven’t said at any point that anything China does doesn’t count. It just counts less, FOR ME, than what some other countries do. Specifically, at this very moment, Russia and the USA.
Yeah, the structural adjustment policies of the World Bank and IMF are sooo much better. That’s not economic colonialism at all.
Or they should all exercise their wonderful third choice of…absolutely nothing.
Fair enough, XT. I guess I’m taking the long view that the jury is still out as to the merits and desirability of western democracy. I’m not at all sure what “western ideals” are. Here in the US, I’m not sure how much closer we are to democracy than China is to communism.
I’m less “worried” about China, than I am disappointed in my country. And if China gains influence and the west loses same, well, we get what we deserve.
And man, I feel like linking the post immediately above mine to the ongoing discussion of how GD could be improved…
And that was why I made this thread, to gauge where 'dopers were (and weren’t) on China. I’m not here to debate what YOU (or even MrDibble’s) views, I wanted to see what they are. I have to admit, I’m a bit shocked at MrDibble’s response…I’m not sure he sees his response the same way I do, but frankly I’m horrified by some of what he said in his post above yours. But what I wanted was to get those sorts of views. Appreciate your response…and his too, as well as everyone else who participated.
Well you may be right. But currently, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, Singapore (and I’d guess Hong Kong) would rather have the U. S. bully in the Pacific rather than the China one. Why would you suppose that is?
I’d imagine they prefer the type of influence the US exerts over China’s flavor. But I don’t know whether military vs economic/cultural control by China is more likely.
They are wealthy nations, vested in the status quo. But I imagine they would be able to sell their wares and remain wealthy under China’s influence as well as under the US - in all but the most extreme, military invasion/annexing scenario.
Absolutely they would (well, assuming prosperity continued unabated under a Chinese hegemonic world…which isn’t all that far fetched but not a sure thing either). The problem would be they would have to toe the CCP line or risk dire consequences. You can see this dynamic with all the countries that recently decided to withdraw support and acknowledgment of Taiwan, for instance, as well as companies (international, non-Chinese) companies that either had to change web sites or maps to reflect the ‘fact’ that Taiwan is, in fact, just a province of China. This is just one small, vertical issue, but it’s a good view of how things would be (and actually are, to a certain extent even today) under a Chinese dominated landscape.
Taiwan, of course, would be fucked, but a lot of other countries would be substantially less free, even if they did remain prosperous, under a Chinese world. That’s probably more relevant to what spifflog was getting at.
You make that sound as if it’s a bad thing as if all “influence” is created equal.
Yes, they’d like the influence of a democratic state largely supportive of free and open ideals as opposed to a brutal dictatorship, with an oppressive government and poor human rights record, focused on the intimidation of it’s neighbors at best and invasion and subjugation of one of it’s neighbors at worst.
I’ve kind of come to that same conclusion myself. I used to think that a lot of their stuff was just pragmatism combined with a sort of “if all you have is a hammer…” sort of situation.
But in the last decade, it seems like they’ve shown a much more ambitious side of themselves that’s unfettered by ethics or morals. They’re basically picking a fight in the South China Sea… just because they know that we’re not willing to get into a shooting war over little speck islands like the Spratlys or Paracels. And they’re willing to turn a blind eye to all sorts of nefarious bullshit if it turns them a profit. And they’re willing to crack down in an absurdly brutal fashion on ethnic minorities. And erect the “Great Firewall”.
And most perplexing of all, threaten other countries, companies and people when they criticize them them for doing evil stuff. I mean, what exactly will China do to Sweden if the Swedish don’t quit honoring an author they’ve imprisoned for political reasons? Or all that professional video gaming business with Activision, or the NBA business a while back Completely unacceptable in the modern world, but we (the Western world) don’t take a hard line and draw a boundary.
They seem to have gone off the deep end with respect to their totalitarian nonsense and seem to be expecting the rest of the world to respect it or something now.
I always thought that China’s leadership was made up of a bunch of Communist thugs. But I bought into the notion that expanding trade and access to the internet would help liberalize them and lead them into a transition to an eventual market economy as the influence of the West on their society grew.
Now it’s beginning to look like the opposite - the rise in Chinese economic clout is allowing them to export authoritarianism to the rest of the world. And their growing economic might means growing military might, and this is translating into Chinese military and economic imperialism. These are dangerous trends.
So my view of China hasn’t changed, but my hopes for a future, better China are diminishing daily.
Yeah, I’d like to agree with you, but we could easily have greater influence over China if we were’t so addicted to our cheap goodies, and if we weren’t looking to others to bankroll our future. And if we were turning our back on trade and climate agreements. Tough to blame a bully for getting away with what you let him.
All fine and dandy to bemoan evil China, but the tiniest bit of hypocrisy if you are posting from your iPhone…
I am lower on China because they are being more effective on the world stage. Their internal censorship is reading outside of China due to companies wanting to do business with them. Blizzard is willing to shut down people for supporting democracy. Movie studios are backing away from LGBT things because China doesn’t like them. Talking about Chinese atrocities is being removed from their works. All of it is about avoiding offending the Chinese audience.
I’ve always before thought that democracy would win out, but I’m seeing those in democratic countries giving into the demands of an authoritarian one because they have managed to hold together long enough to become a desirable audience. I had thought that there was no way to become an economic powerhouse and also stay authoritarian, but they are pulling it off, and thus their ideology is spreading.
China’s threat is ideological. If they have more money, they can push their ideas on the world. I had hoped before (or even assumed) that China’s rise to becoming a bigger player would weaken their authoritarian control. But such does not seem to be the case.
Sure, Hong Kong is bad, but it is an improvement on things in the past. They actually seem to have made a lot of headway, getting the government to back down on the Chinese extradition laws, and now having voted against that government in elections.
It wasn’t Hong Kong that made me think China was more of a threat. It was Blizzard supporting China. It’s no longer just meaningless pandering by the Western businesses to get Chinese money.
It’s not in the nature of the powerful or the institutions they lead to give up power. How often in history does that happen willingly? That’s what always puzzles me about those willing to cede more and more power to the state or its official and unofficial agents.
Worse, for the reasons a bunch of other posts have given. I’m really not interested in moral equivalence type arguments about who caused how many deaths. Xi’s China’s adaptation of technology to reach a new level of totalitarian control is scary to me as a human inhabitant of earth. It’s not an endorsement of everything the US or West does. It’s just Brave New World in sight if that country and regime dominated the world. And for now at least it appears still on the rise, which is as others said the silver lining to Putin’s mafiaocracy, it’s sits on top of a basically rotting country. Which could present real dangers as Putin struggles to reach peaceful death in his own bed, and what replaces him could be worse. But Russia has no chance of dominating the world.
Ten years ago there was more residual hope for an evolution to a freer China. Or at least a self stabilizing committee of equals type arrangement. Now as a personality focused dictatorship it’s moving in the wrong direction for freedom or stability.
I look forward to china’s contributions to solving climate change and contributing to global medical, science and technology development. And I hope China helps lift Africa out of poverty. A world with a rich and educated China is a world where we can solve big problems faster.
But their use to big data to support totalitarianism, their treatment of Hong Kong and the Muslim minority makes me realize they will export and tolerate a lot of evil globally.
Money wins out in the end, ironic that it’s a “Communist” country proving it.
Which makes economic pressure as Trump is doing (hate him or love him, doesn’t matter) the only way to move things into a better direction because moral appeals are just not going to register with the Chinese regime.
Well I have lived in China for 6 years, before that I didn’t even know “nihao”, so there is much I can talk about learning about the culture, people and much that I admire.
In terms of China as a government, and a superpower though, actually it is similar to many of the responses so far. I’m appalled to hear about Hong Kong and Xinjiang (and to not hear anything about these issues within China. e.g. the HK council elections were bascially not mentioned at all in mainland news. One brief mention was mainly to paint Trumpian conspiracy theories).
I remember a few years ago on the Dope ISTM that almost everyone belonged to one of two extreme camps: (1) China’s prosperity was some kind of trick and it would all collapse any day now. Or that (2) China would very soon far eclipse the US economy and would drive innovation with Western companies following in their wake.
Living in China, I knew both of these extremes were unrealistic, and I think they are not common views on the Dope now either.
Some might still lean towards the latter view, but be more realistic on the timeframe.
Disagree with this sentiment. Frankly, Whataboutism is bullshit. X can call out Y’s bad behavior and if X also has actions to call out, then sure we can talk about that afterwards.
There are no shortage of threads criticizing American, British etc foreign policy.
I evaluate my feelings on China as a global threat by comparing it to other countries I view as larger global threats. That’s not whataboutism, that’s just using a relative basis for threat assessment.
Outside the global threat issue, which seems to be a lot of people’s concern, China’s been as bad as it ever was.