Define sabre rattling.
I don’t think they are going to attack, but every Taiwan straits crises has seen the initial crises defused in favour of the ROC/US, but in the years that followed, the military balance began to shift in PRC’s favor.
The fifties criseses saw China embark on its nuclear weapons program.
The current PLA modernization dates to the 1996 crises.
What they will do is keep of rising the states for the ROC/US.
Exactly.
China isn’t stupid. There’s no way in hell they’d start a conflict with the U.S. over Taiwan.
White. European. A church-led kleptocracy that act like gangsters on the international stage. And you’re baffled about why conservatives are aligning with Russia?
But you can also turn that the opposite way:
Almost everything China has done recently are things that Conservatives seem to respect at the moment: authoritarian leader for life, jingoistic, anti-gay / trans, anti-muslim, throwing military weight around, basically “Make China Great Again”.
That’s why I think they have to call it Communist China. Because otherwise maybe some viewers might wonder why Putin / Orban are the good guys and Xi is bad.
I feel like this is overthinking it. They call it Communist China so that their criticisms of it won’t be seen as colored. Russia is white, China isn’t. If the CCP dissolves, they’ll find another reason to hate it, or more likely insist that the CCP is still pulling the strings.
You think they’re concerned about appearing racist?
Anyway, I think our positions aren’t so different. You’re agreeing that calling it Communist China, despite the fact it is not very Communist, is just a slur word so the audience knows to boo.
We’re just disagreeing on what the need is for the slur.
(NB: In case anyone thinks I am trying to defend China, I agree that China is an antagonist to the US right now. I’m just saying, with the way that countries like Russia and Hungary are currently depicted on RW media, there’s a need for something to differentiate China as the wrong kind of authoritarian, human-rights crushing state).
Lets don’t fool ourselves, China has always been and plans on continuing to be an antagonist to the US. What we fail to grasp is that they actually do long term planning. They only embraced capitalism in order to advance their goals of China domination of their region.
Well yes and no.
China is an antagonist, but it’s not their primary aim. This is just the framing we like in the media right now, as having a main enemy is compelling.
I lived in China for 8 years. I was initially surprised by how little people there generally knew or cared about the US. State news media is formed of something like 80% developments in China, 10% good things China is doing around the world, and 10% world events, with the latter largely focused on south-east asia.
China doesn’t really care about the wellbeing of people outside of China, and of course in some ways they are already attacking the US (e.g. cyber warfare).
But overall, I don’t think they see it as zero-sum. They want to be the best, but they very much see that as them rising up rather than the US falling down.
They are not the good guys. But I don’t think their central aim is the fall of the stars and stripes.
I agree with that, the last thing they want to do is become a real enemy of the US but they do envy our control of our surroundings and would like to emulate that by taking control of the Sea of Japan (or is it China?) and taking back Taiwan. Which is against our interest with Japan and Taiwan. And then there is that fucked up thing they got going with North Korea. So we continue to do this antagonistic dance . . .
Other than that I just see them wanting respect on the world stage and prosper in their relationship with the US, but the means on how they achieve that are questionable, like cyber war and stealing technology.