I’ve been puzzled for a while as to the considerable animus felt and directed towards China but a recent conversation between Stephen W. Carlson and the Black Horse provides a bit of background that is clarifying. Since Nixon went to Beijing, then largely an effort to distance China from the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence, the US/ Global American Empire (GAE) has sought to integrate China into an international order of which it has largely controlled. From the Most Favored Nation status and the development of open cities/ special economic zones, reintegrating Hong Kong into China, hosting the 2008 Summer and 2022 Winter Olympics, offshoring manufacturing to mainland China, and the like, the effort has been one of attempting to integrate China into the global economic order in which the GAE holds the whip hand.
The overt hope was that rising Chinese incomes would Westernize the demos and elite, but the Chinese elite have largely resisted efforts to undermine their influence, whether through NGOs or other non-local institutions that are not directly or indirectly under their control. Along with this, it has resisted efforts at economic integration into the Western economic sphere that could led to its vassalization. The development of institutions and relationships like the Belt and Road project, BRICS, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, and the like, should be all considered efforts at the establishment of alternatives to Western integration without which it would be vulnerable to Western interference. If Xi’s reign has involved any principal aim it has been the determination to reaffirm and buttress Chinese sovereignty.
The GAE’s project of vassalizing China under the auspices of democratization and economic integration has now failed. The 2000s represent the last decade in which this remained a plausible prospect. Events since then, not least the economic and financial sanctions visited upon Russia, have simply confirmed the prudence of China’s decision to establish parallel organisations, markets, and relationships that would allow it to resist pressure exerted on it by the GAE. I dare say that the venom directed at the Chinese, and in particular, Xi, is largely because of this failure.
…..but a recent conversation between Stephen W. Carlson and the Black Horse provides a bit of background that is clarifying. Since Nixon went to Beijing, then largely an effort to distance China from the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence, the US/ Global American Empire (GAE) has sought to integrate China into an international order of which it has largely controlled.
That’s true but was silly. Prior to Xi’s Presidency there was Hu (2002-2012) and prior to him there was Jiang (1993-2002). Both were committed communists and, in any event, the CCP was in full control. Neither Hu nor Jiang offered anything that looked like they might bring China into the Western tent. More, they recognised the opportunity to rejuvenate China, increase national wealth, expand their military and global footprint whilst maintaining their communist ideals. The West was played for fools.
Separately, we can draw parallels to the hope that what remained of the Russian Federation after the collapse of the USSR would further collapse into 12-13 independent nations. Yeah, nah, that was never going to happen. In fairness, the West was more successful in curtailing Russian growth but that has come to zero with the China/Russia alliance.
It seems to me that some of these grand plans are thought up by analysts who sell the idea to gullible politicians, but they lack any reality or understanding of the target nation.
Finally comes out in full blown support of the Chinese Communist Party.
Utterly demented.
No shit you’re puzzled. Bewildered might be the better description.
There’s no way with you. You’re gone.
Sorry, but I’m far more concerned about Western elites than I am about the CCP.
Not sure I share those concerns.
I think its pretty clear that many centre-right people are pretty happy with their own elites however much they grumble.
The 90s were a heady period for the GAE. They had grand plans in various theatres. The plan itself worked on other nations but it was always going to be difficult with a nation as large and as socially distinctive as China, and one with an elite that was still independent of the West.
Perhaps that was a rationalization allowing corporations to take advantage of lax labour laws and other regulations to maximise profits.
The program failed because prediction is difficult. Often the best we can do is place our bets. China is doing the same and will face the same risks. The venom is because China is continually threatening Taiwan which is also a threat against the Philippines, Japan, and Vietnam. China wants to do what the USA did. It wants to be a global power that can intimidate nations at will. The big difference is the USA did that at a time when no nation had any possibility of militarily intimidating it. Now China is trying to emulate that position.
The big difference is the USA did that at a time when no nation had any possibility of militarily intimidating it. Now China is trying to emulate that position.
IMO, it’s only a matter of time. China is flexing her regional muscles and has her eyes on a far more widespread sphere of influence. She stills lags behind the USA in some military aspects but once that final hurdle reaches parity or exceeds the USA, there will be no stopping her. The West, even as a collective, will have very few options.
Dover
I think it’s time for an intervention.
The thing about Taiwan is that we made them think that Taiwan was part of China, that at some stage in the future when China was ‘democratized’ and integrated into the West that (i) this would be accomplished; or (ii) the mainland Chinese would simply recognize that too much time had passed since the Civil War and they would simply recognize the status quo.
That isn’t going to be the case any longer.
We didn’t make them think that, they always thought that. Japan took it from them in 1895, recent history for the Chinese. It may be more about emotion, the traitors escaped there and it does amazingly well with a standard of living the majority of Chinese can only dream about. There are strategic reasons, the straits around Taiwan are probably littered with SOSUS preventing easy movement of Chinese submarines and surface vessels. Japan controls an island very close to Taiwan, providing early warning and intervention capability for the land and sea.
We didn’t force industrialization upon China. That was their choice and it suited Western interests to move manufacturing there. That initial movement had nothing to do with democratization, it was purely commercial with the democratization rationalization kicking in later.
What the hell are you talking about?
The arrogant attitude of the CCP.
Sure, but we certainly made them think we accepted what they always thought.
On the last point, I don’t think the two are clearly seperate. Moving manufacturing there was certainly in our commercial interests but I don’t think this ever occurred without a geopolitical interest involved. ‘Democritization’ was for demos, but the elite understood that this could provide the means by which the West could tether China.
You have to be a Marxist to believe that industrialisation is some form of “tethering”.
This is the same stupidity that causes libertarians to say “no one wants those low value factory jobs”.
This crazy, Marxist idea that societies can develop past the coarse, dirty, ugly Industrial Age into some ridiculous paradise where goods and services magically appear from somewhere else and everyone is f*cking “nice”.
Windmills, unicorns and lawn mowing gigs. Meanwhile, all the actual goods are made in factories, still today, mainly by the same combination of manual labour and clever automation that Ford invented and worked to perfect.
Henry Ford and Thomas Edison invented modernity. Without mass production, systematic research into the properties of materials and their suitability for industrial use, the assembly line and mass factory labour there would be no middle classes, there would be no comfort, no universal claims to rights, no mobility, no universal suffrage, no real democracy.
That is what China was given by the West when it made the astoundingly stupid decision to open China up to suicidal, stupidly favourable trade agreements. They did this at an accelerating rate long after the CCP, in Tiananmen Square, proved itself to be completely unwilling to risk power by embracing those parts of industrial modernity that make life worth living for the working masses.
Instead it would implement history’s most complete surveillance state, and as soon as it perceived it had salvaged as much from the hollowed out shell of Western as it could, would then turn on it’s Western “partners”.
To buy into the cynical CCP position that this was Western exploitation is to miss the entire story of the last forty years.
Long ago most of the global “brands” that sought profit from exploiting Chinese labour have in fact been bought out by Chinese capital that was produced by this massive reallocation of the world’s productive industrial capacity.
The tethering wasn’t industrialisation per se, it was being drawn into a economic arrangement that would favour the US more than China if no alternative arrangement was available.
I don’t think WSJ op-eds, Daily Wire videos, and the like are going to help. If anything, they will make me more contemptuous of their positions.
Dude, you’re just making it up as you go along. It doesn’t matter what the infamous and evil “GAE” thought and said. It’s what the Taiwanese people think and want.
At least, I have to say, you’re consistent. You support Putin’s land grab but unlike others, you also support China’s future attempt. That’s consistency at least.
Foreign Affairs magazine is Okay though? 🙂
How can I be making it up as I go when I’ve stated this position before? Still, on the substantive issue, it will be a matter for the Chinese on the mainland and the Chinese that fled to the island of Taiwan.
Hit and miss.
Eh?
Define China.
The cause of the animus is the CCP. As the ruling dictatorial regime, they represent the public face of China.
Until you have sat in a bus in Shanghai and seen the unadulterated hatred of the military aged men sneering into the window it is hard to understand…
my definition… scum.
I don’t spend a lot of time in Asia anymore, just holidays but interactions I’ve had with drunk Chinese in hotel bars I know the feeling exactly.
The ugly face of nationalism is what you experienced and since the devotion to the party has waned it is now the instrument of control. Problem is it isn’t as stable as the previous instrument.
The Western liberal conceit of invincible & irresistable cultural superiority.
Very dangerous and not just in regard to the CCP.
100%.
The entire world has gone insane.
I think covid has perturbed some minds and revealed others as always being somewhat lacking.
This alternative history shit which allows people to act like progressives always did and ignore the truly horrific nature of Mao and Stalin and pretend we aren’t dealing with their direct descendants or that there is any, ANY correspondence between the nature of the communist bloc and the Western peoples of the twentieth century is both astonishing and disturbing.
Very well put, Arky.
It’s pretty clear what I mean by China above.
The 90s were a heady period for the GAE. They had grand plans in various theatres. The plan itself worked on other nations but it was always going to be difficult with a nation as large and as socially distinctive as China, and one with an elite that was still independent of the West.
Indeed. And perhaps we should add that not only were the Chinese elite (CCP) independent of the West, but they were also suspicious. Those individuals didn’t live in a vacuum. They were well aware of other American activities globally and, I suspect, examined the opportunities and options.
What are the long-term national goals bearing in mind we will never allow our power to be diluted? How can the Western offers be leveraged without compromising, and in fact enhancing, our ‘glorious national destiny’.
The rat cunning of individuals, and especially when acting as a communist government collective, can never be underestimated.
I can’t recall anything about Kristofferson, I have heard about Johnny Cash of course, who hadn’t?
Anyhow here is a tidbit, he was apparently a janitor before he became famous.
———————–
Here’s an interesting read: Johnny Cash Once Demanded that Kris Kristofferson, who was a janitor at the time for Columbia Records, be allowed to sit in on one of his recording sessions.
And it all started with Kristofferson being banned from Johnny’s recording sessions…Kris in his own words.
Kristofferson: “I almost got fired one time because a couple of songwriters crashed the session, and they were trying to pitch him a gospel album.
And for some reason the woman who was the secretary to the producer blamed me for letting them in there and tried to get me fired.
And so the next night my boss came down and said, “I don’t think you should go to John’s session tonight,” which was heartbreaking for me because I lived for those recording sessions….But I understood it.”
Johnny was not happy to hear that Kris wouldn’t be sitting in on the recording session.
Kristofferson: “I hid down in the vault of the recording studio and was erasing tapes down there or doing some kind of busy work, and John appeared down there in the basement.
He said, “I understand you’re not coming to the session.”
I said “No, I’ve got a lot of work to do down here, I can’t.
He said “Well I just wanted to tell you I’m not gonna record until you come up there.
So, I had to go up there and sit on the floor.
Kristofferson: “And here I was, the janitor, and I’m sitting on the floor and this woman who tried to get me fired was watching me and the whole session. It was the most uncomfortable I’ve ever been in my life.
But I thought it was the measure of the man. He always stood up for the underdog…. And that’s something I’ve tried to live up to. He’s been a good example.”
Kristofferson said this whole experience was an example of who Johnny Cash really was.”
Arky
July 10, 2024 1:17 pm
I don’t have much time to watch videos, but when I do, I like to watch industrial processes, how things are made.
It is amazing how much manual labour is still employed in the most sophisticated, automated factories.
Wrong thread, sorry.
Seen.
Raising one billion Chinese out of poverty but it unequally favoured the US. Chinese GDP was probably the size of NSW before it began the industrialisation push, but as you say, it favoured the US more. Not mutually beneficial but just one sided.
No dissonance showing here at all.
dover0beach
This makes it sound as if the central committee of the CCP is made up of a bunch of blushing virgins.
The reality is that the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party has a very strict Marxist view of the world, it’s place in it and a definite view of how history will be progressed through the various stages Marx outlined. Industrialisation is a necessary step.
The relationship with the USA was required for industrialisation when the Soviets cooled on them, then even more so when the USSR fell apart.
Communists believe, and have believed for the last 120 years, that the capitalist world we live in will end, it will end because of the greed of the capitalists and that if they, the communists, are in control of the process the coming society will be a paradise on Earth.
In other words, the ideology is insane.
They have proven over and over again that they are prepared to sacrifice almost anything and anyone (except themselves) in order to bring about this progression of history.
That various communist leaders may be corrupt gangsters prepared to sell out part or all of their beliefs for personal gain, does not negate the underlying ideological movement driving its decisions, and the foolishness of those who thought it a good idea to pander to them.
Absolutely. Especially: “That various communist leaders may be corrupt gangsters prepared to sell out part or all of their beliefs for personal gain, does not negate the underlying ideological movement driving its decisions, and the foolishness of those who thought it a good idea to pander to them.”
We (the West) did this to ourselves. The CCP played a better game and our belief in our invincibility and native superiority blinded the West.
None at all. I never argued that the arrangement did not involve mutual benefit. I said that it was one which the US held the whip hand. Given this, any nation that was concerned about its sovereignty would establish and cultivate arrangements that mitigated this threat.
The US had no whip hand and the benefits while being mutual proportionally favoured China because of where they were and compared to now.
Let’s imagine this were true. Congratulations, US, you played yourself.
Dover, if only you had a time machine able to warn the “regime” at the time.
I recall discussions about China early on and none were of the zero sum type that you describe. The US, or rather , the “regime” believed that a prosperous China embedded in the global security system was a forced for good.
Your problem appears to be that you’re looking back and thinking the knowledge we have now was available at the time.
With Xi, China truly became antagonistic. Although previous leaders weren’t exactly Thomas Jefferson resurrected, they weren’t nearly as evil as this prick.
Not at all. I’m not even describing a zero sum situation. What you fail to register is that nations aren’t obliged to judge a global security system under the leadership of the US must be considered a force for good.
All this means is that China went its own way and openly so.
The difference between China and Taiwan pretty well says that China went the way the Communist Party wanted. The people of China didn’t have a lot of say about the Glorious Future their Overlords wanted, as the slaughter of their protesting students in Tiananmen Square showed.
Oh yeah, not following global security systems such as threatening to land grab your neighbor, in this case Taiwan. You really have a warped view of things when you can’t see something wrong here. But, I’d bet two or even three to a dozen that with you all roads lead to Putin love.
You talk about the “regime” in the West as though ossified regimes doesn’t exist in Russia, China, Iran and north Korea. Who are you kidding.
If going your own way means attempting to take over neighbors and trying to claim an open sea as your own. Sure, we agree.
Well, actually the only person doing that is you, but in reverse. Everything the West does is bad, while everything kloptos and dictators do is pretty, pretty good.
If anyone is obsessed by Putin it’s yourself. You are unable to talk about anything with me without at some point bring up Putin. But on the ‘global security system’, never heard of it, and so far as Taiwan is concerned, its status is ambiguous given the history.
Why even bother putting regime in scare quotes? Just weird unless you buy into the liberal view that the term is pejorative.
Taiwan isn’t like Vietnam, it is literally where the opposing national forces fled to as the Chinese Civil War came to its end. As for the South China Seas, when the Taiwanese make the same claim over the same area what can be said.
You know f*ck all about it.
Best to leave it to them then.
“Them” is my extended family and friends.
Does “them” also extend to the Phillipines?
Does it extend to Japan?
Does it extend to the rest of Eastern Europe?
What about when Fiji’s turn comes?
How about when it’s our turn?
Is it all that it takes the ebb and flow of politics and some particularly silly people with big mouths and stupid ideologies they don’t understand temporarily in positions they never deserved for you to turn your back on long held alliances upon which the lives and freedoms of so many depend?
Is the remedy for progressive anti- Western bullshit to espouse our own anti Western sentiment?
That’s retarded.
If the West is acting idiotically I’m going to call it out. If it doesn’t like the abuse, it should stop acting like an idiot.
The West doesn’t even know you exist never mind care what you think.
What is to occur will occur whatever you I, or JC or anyone think or say.
What is the problem is this whirlpool of contra- Western ideology a previously respected and liked person has fallen into.
I am gobsmacked by how far you have taken this.
Questioning every Western involvement in each and every war is admirable, even a civic duty.
Being against the woke nonsense is correct and good.
Questioning the current state of democracy after 2020 is understandable.
Being pissed at the demonstration of authoritarianism over covid: right on.
But you have crossed over into something else entirely.
Something serious that questions the very basis for the system that sustains you, me and provides security for billions of people.
You have crossed over to the commie side.
That’s a little harsh. We don’t have crystal balls but we must make plans. It’s a quandary.
China is now trying to what the West had been doing for centuries. We can’t blame China for arming up. A South American diplomat was asked by an American ambassador why the USA is despised in Latin America. “We read history.” The USA has problems but it remains dominant and China, despite having x3 the population, is still scared of it. For example, China still hasn’t built a genuine stealth aircraft, the USA already has hundreds and is now building data linked stealth missiles with a range of 1000ks that can be released in large numbers from transport aircraft. China has nothing comparable and importantly China has never fought a modern war.
We’re a difficult people, us Westerners.
Those who have travelled in traditional Eastern places know they are much more polite, compliant and likely to defer to authority.
Whereas we spend much of our time trying to f*** each other over in every conceivable way.
Which is why we have a system designed the way it is.
Is an adversarial system.
It’s a system which rewards those willing to stand up for themselves.
At its best it mediates between competing interests in a fair and reasonable way. At it’s worst it is gamed by arseholes.
You can’t untangle those, it’s inherent to the system.
I’ll admit it seems complicated.
But it really isn’t, it’s like three card monte.
It’s a trick.
The trick:
The East was commie but now they like capitalism. The West was free and democratic but now they seem Marxist and authoritarian.
Or so it seems.
But really, you just have to keep your eye on who is who and what is what.
They don’t hide it.
The people who call themselves communists are communists.
Whether they are the CCP or some KGB colonel or some university professor.
That stuff is obvious. They’re the bad guys. They don’t hide it because they want their followers to know who and what they are. Maybe with a bit of distraction thrown in like “Democratic Republic of whatever” and “here is our human rights charter”. Whatever. Everyone should know what they are. At home or abroad, those jokers aren’t hard to work out. They want the final triumph of the party, the abolition of private property rights and for you to work for free at the pleasure of the state.
If you can’t spot them straight away, you can once you hear what they propose. They are the decedents of the horror show that was 20th century communism: the gulags, the secret police. The disappearing people in the small hours. The murders. The spying on citizens. Forced labour.
The difficult bit comes with the useful idiots.
Those who have been through a corrupt education/ indoctrination system without questioning what they were told. Most of us are guilty of this to some degree. The last forty years, that’s just been in the air we breathe and the water we drink, due to systematic indoctrination and the long March through the institutions. Many of these people now inhabit previously “conservative” parties and institutions.
So that gets confusing. Because you end up with a free and Democratic system which contains a lot of fools mouthing Marxist rhetoric, and because it’s a free system there isn’t anything that can be done about it except present the contra case.
Meanwhile, the Soviet Union has fallen apart and Communist China has a problem: how do you progress the people from feudalism into capitalism so that you can fulfil the Marxist prediction of a utopian post- capitalist society, when your one and only source of industrial expertise has just collapsed? Well, how amusing! You get the capitalists in the West to build it all for you.
It is exquisite! You get the capitalists to build your industrial empire, meanwhile you keep your communist party, flag, anthem and ideology: the capitalists don’t care about that, the only care about making money. You also get to send hundreds of thousands of your children to be educated in top tier Western universities, who, being capitalist, are quite happy to take the money and bend to most of your ideological requirements.
In short: the West is still free, democratic and capitalist. But it is being gamed and ideologically undermined by commies. The commies are still commies and still want to enslave or kill you. But the CCP commies had to industrialise to fast forward their societies through the capitalist phase. They WILL kill off all their local “capitalists” once they have progressed far enough.
The person who appears obsessed is you, offering up every sad excuse you can think of—that it was the “regime” that made him attack a sovereign country. It’s a coincidence then that every dictator he sucks up to, you appear to support in their confrontation with the West. I’m just calling it as I see it.
The one big difference that you refuse to acknowledge is that even if Taiwan makes similar ownership claims, it does not harass shipping going through the South China Sea. China does.
It’s not scare quotes, but quotes to show that I’m not adopting this term when referring to the West. I notice you avoided elaborating if you considered that Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea are also run by “regimes.”.
Neither the post nor the prior comments were about Putin but you couldn’t help yourself.
The Chinese doesn’t harass shipping. There are issues between it and other parties with their own disputed claims in the same area.
Given I don’t use regime in the pejorative sense why would I have to say anything?
China is now a close Russian ally and so it’s not out of context to point out its relevance to your arguments. In any event, what exactly is the big deal as I don’t quite get the opposition? The reason why I brought it up is that you appear to support anyone allied to the Russian regime.
We’ve been through this before, and it hasn’t been just me who has explained to you that your claim is incorrect. China does harass shipping in an open sea by pretending they own it.
LOL.
It was a reference to Putin love. Just admit you couldn’t help yourself.
They’re not stopping cargo ships on the open sea.
Given you’re the one that expresses opposition to the use of the word I think you may be projecting here. Even in this post I refer to the US as either the US or the GAE.
I kind of find it hard to believe that you find him the good guy in all this.
They are asking for ID and information as to what they are carrying as cargo. It’s none of their fcking business requesting this info on what (you also describe) as the open sea. You mentioned earlier that even Taiwan makes claims to the South China Sea. Taiwan doesn’t demand ID and cargo information. As I said, we’ve been through this before and it looks like you want to revisit this again, which I believed was a closed case.
I don’t think I’ve expressed any opposition as it’s your blog and can do what you like. You could also recognize the other regimes. Those I mentioned earlier that you appear to be avoiding.
I hadn’t intended to comment on this thread since it’s a messy area. However here’s an article that I’ve just read which is pretty topical.
China: The Helpless Giant (11 Jul)
So far Beijing hasn’t found a way to get women to have babies again, so the demographic crisis remains on the cards. The vast amount of debt hidden in the provinces and the malinvestments that are starting to bite, with a number of construction companies failing lately. Add this all up and the edifice does look a bit shaky.
The economic and demographic problems makes the CCP more dangerous, not less.
It makes the timetable shorter and the need to act more desperate.
But the factories, equipment and the trained labour remain largely on Chinese soil.
Even the factories moving to Vietnam or elsewhere are still often Chinese controlled and within the CCP sphere. They aren’t making the same mistake the US made of moving production to a geopolitical enemy state.
Arky – yes. I’ve mentioned the ‘use it or lose it’ temptation a few times.
The article mentions mass female infanticide. Which suggests the PLA has plenty of single guys to draw from recruitmentwise.
China isn’t evil, but it’s run by some of the evilest people that have ever lived. Worse, they are giving our evil bad ideas.
We are facing a boot on the face of humanity forever. China should’ve been allowed to languish in its filth until its own people rose up. Now we are all going to pay for our folly.
Chinese history and culture are fascinating.
Mao destroyed as much of it as he could.
His party should not be allowed to get their commie mitts on the last remnants of that culture in Taiwan.
Now, until the early 2000s Taiwan was a somewhat autocratic nation. Under the Chinese Nationalists, although a much freer and betterer place than China, it wasn’t perfect.
But Taiwan over the decades has become a nation. Taiwanese no longer think of themselves as the opposition to the CCP in exile. They think of themselves as Taiwanese.
As Australia is a fusion of influences, with the original English colonial influence still a major component, the same is true for Taiwan, It is a unique fusion of Chinese, Japanese and native Taiwanese. With also American influences.
It’s a great country.
I kind of find it hard to believe that you need to take about good guys and bad guys rather than just looking at the situation as it is.
All I would conclude from that difference is that Taiwan doesn’t take their claim seriously, doesn’t want to anger the US, and/ or simple lacks the means to pursue that claim materially.
Then why are we discussing the term ‘regime’?
Have you read your own comments and thought about what you’re saying? In your universe, the bad guys always appear to be in the West.
All I would conclude from that difference is that Taiwan doesn’t take their
What a silly conclusion. Taiwan can make claims as much as it likes, but it’s never attempted to curtail the use of the waterway like China has.
I’m confused, if you use it then why can’t others.
Lastly. I’m amused by how you’ve said looking back, that if you had your time again, you’d be against the Iraq invasion. How does that square with your support of the Russian invasion and the potential invasion of Taiwan, which you’ve implied you also support, seeing as you’ve said in the past that Taiwan belongs to China? This is an intellectual mess, Dover. It’s a quagmire.
I’ve not only read them, I’ve written them. Putting that aside, why are you still talking about good guys and bad guys?
It’s actually a sensible conclusion.
Who is saying you can’t use it? It was you at the outset making a mountain out of ‘regime’ when I’d never even used it in this post.
The intellectual mess is all your own. Would you be offering the above objection if my view re Iraq was the same as earlier, the result being no ‘inconsistency’ between my earlier support for the Iraq invasion and the Russian invasion of Ukraine? And what of your ‘inconsistency’ being pro-invasion re Iraq but anti-invasion re Ukraine? Quagmire?
Moreover, I haven’t expressed support for any potential invasion of Taiwan. What I’ve expressed is an understanding of the mainland Chinese’s position re Taiwan, given the history. Similar position also re Russia and Ukraine, the only difference between them is that the passage of events has inclined me to the Russian position increasingly.
The problem I have with that argument is that the people have chosen to be Taiwanese and Ukrainian. I’d prefer that individuals take precedence over history. Trying to restore a historical status that involves killing millions of people is morally suspect.
The people in both instances didn’t ‘choose’ anything. If you take the situation in Ukraine, there was a coup involving Right Sector supported by the GAE, followed by a series of elections in which peace was promised but in which war was the end. Now you have political opposition criminalized and elections deferred. But setting all that aside, I said I understood, not that preferred. My preference in both cases would have been a modus vivendi, much like there is now between China and Taiwan.
Listen, where’s the “political opposition” in Moscow or Beijing?
I’m highlighting the fact that there is good and evil in the world, and you appear to have chosen to side with some pretty awful people. Dreadful, dodgy human beings. If a time machine were available, they’d make the case for post birth abortion in adulthood.
It’s a patently silly, delusional conclusion. Taiwan can make any silly claim it wants. The problem isn’t the claim per se. It’s about actions taken to support the claim, which is something you avoid discussing.
Well, you’ve been suggesting Taiwan belongs to China. What other conclusion can be drawn from this sinister view?
Taiwan also makes the claim that it’s the one true government of China, so equally, Taiwan has a point—even a more legitimate one, seeing that a Taiwanese takeover of the Chinese government could mean people would likely have the right to vote and be included in the process of choosing their leadership. Certainly more likely than now.
The Iraq invasion = now considered really bad.
The Russian invasion = really good and deserved.
A potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan = considered really good.
Restricting the use of a vital waterway is considered = really good, and the Chinese have a point.
As I said, this is an intellectual mess of quagmire proportions.
Would you feel better if we used the term ’empire’?
Except, I haven’t that at all.
And the GAE has some pretty awful people in it too, especially within the regime.
No, its imminently sensible. But, look, your argument now is just strange. You’re now arguing, by implication, that you have no problem with the Chinese claim re the South China Sea, you only have a problem with its actions that give effect to that claim. Or are you only saying this because you are tendentiously trying to defend Taiwan.
No, I said there was a history between the two forces that fought for control of China which included both the mainland China and the island of Taiwan which has yet to be fully resolved.
Yes, Iraq invasion a calamity.
No, Russian invasion also a calamity but understandable and unavoidable in the circumstances.
No, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would also be a calamity and I urge just sticking to the current modus vivendi, but again, signs the US want to abandon their previous prudent policy there and Pelosi’s visit a couple of years back was indicative of that.
No, Chinese aren’t restricting use of the South China Seas whatever neocon shills in the media say.
So, again, no intellectual mess here at all.
I have no problem with either. It was you repeatedly using regime in scare quotes above, not me. Regime is a perfectly good word to describe a system of power that includes more than just the government of the day, while empire is a perfectly good word to describe a nation that dominates other nations. Again, I have no problem with either word. As you know, this was never about how I felt about these words.
Sure.
It would be a massacre on a scale not seen since WW2.
Taiwan consists of highly urbanised areas inside heavily vegetated mountainous regions. Deep valleys of dense jungle.
If the US cannot break a Chinese siege, 24 million humans trapped in a cauldron, under bombardment.
The civilian death toll would be enormous, and if the result was a successful invasion, that death toll would probably go untold.
We have had a preview of what the communist bloc does, how it conducts war. We see the bombed out remains of Ukraine’s towns and cities. Utter devastation.
After the US marines cleared Fallujah of insurgents the city was largely intact. Civilians were evacuated ahead of operations. Intelligence efforts were made to identify insurgent strong points and reduce civilian casualties. Western militaries are painfully aware that outcries over civilian deaths can stop operations. The communist bloc does not wage war that way. In the Korean War The Chinese used refugees as human shields.
Where did you get this GAE term from anyway? Was it a Russian or Chinese bot?
Is the Putin regime awful? Iran’s or China’s CCP? How about North Korea? For the past few years, you’ve been harshly critical of the West, but not once have I ever seen you critical of any of these thugcracies. You’re actually lucky you reside in the West, because if you tried to set up a blog like this critical of those earthly paradises, you’d be deadsky along with every other commenter on here.
Again, you try to avoid the difference between cheap talk and real action. There are real actions that the CCP wants to dominate the South China Sea and continually tries to take, which you patently deny.
Actually, yes, you made the claim in an earlier exchange that Taiwan is part of China, and by implication, the CCP has a right to make the claim. As far as the free world is concerned, it is resolved.
So what you’re saying is ROC engage in cheap talk and the PRC in real action. OK.
Yes, the island of Taiwan is historically a part of China, so its understandable given the history of the previous Civil War that both the ROC and the PRC made reciprocal claims against the other as putative legitimate heirs to territories previously under the control of China. What the ‘free world’ thinks here is tangential.
I know. The evidence is simply the conversation above.
The first time I’ve ever read that Taiwan has made claims on the South China Sea, you mentioned it. No one has ever taken it for real. Unlike China, they have never acted on it by attempting to claim that an important sea passage is theirs with real intent.
Tangential, in your opinion. Perhaps you should go ask the Taiwanese, and while you’re in the vicinity, taking a poll, you should also ask the Hong Kong Chinese how things are working out under the jackboot of the CCP. Oh, forget the last part, as you’d be arrested.
Show where.
I see you’ve avoided making any negative comments about the newly formed axis. You’re far down that hole; you really need an intervention.
Dover Beach:
Then what would you describe the Phillipines resupply runs to one of their islands being attacked by Chinese vessels as? Especially an area where “ the Hague ruled in favor of the Philippines, concluding that China has no legal basis to claim historic rights to the bulk of the South China Sea.”
I’m not surprised that was the first time. Why would regime media actually inform their readers of facts that complicate their anti-China narrative?
‘Asking the Taiwanese’ doesn’t actually defend the free world isn’t tangential claim. Also, plenty of expats living in HK. They seem to be having no problem. This jackboot claim is a little thin.
You started mentioning “regime” even though I’d never mentioned it. Then I tell you I have no problem with the term or ’empire’ and you say ‘Sure’. Who are you kidding here?
Why must I make negative comments against X simply to please you?
Was that the incident a month or so back when a Phillipine ship bumped a Chinese ship? We call drivers like that chancers. Even so, they are interested parties to the dispute. Global container traffic through the South China Sea is very high and yet I can’t recall a single instance in which their ‘freedom of navigation’ has been diminished.
That’s a red herring.
None of the nations involved – China, Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan – has a right to invoke the 12 nautical mile rule on foreign warships transiting through the region because it is not their territorial sea. In this instance, the US is perfectly within its rights acc. to international maritime law to conduct freedom of navigation operations.
No one takes their claim seriously and more importantly no one believes for a second they would act on it. China is claiming 90% of the South China Sea, which also includes water in between islands belonging to archipelago countries.
The right to self determination isn’t important to you. Nice to see who you’re running with these days. “Plenty of expats” doesn’t mean both expats and locals aren’t leaving permanently. They are. Hong Kong is dead, but that obviously doesn’t matter to you because China is Russia’s new ally and that’s all that counts.
Excuse me, but if you refer to someone’s comments as whiny, because I disagree with you, I’ll use any word in quotes that I think is appropriate, so stop whining about the use of “regime”.
It’s impossible for you, isn’t it.
LOL “regime” media.
It’s not a red herring if the claim is that they intend to impending international shipping.
This is dissonance of huge scale. China sets up bases and creates artificial island through the waterway, which in turn forces commercial shipping to avoid because of the 12K barrier.
Also
But no, China doesn’t harass commercial shipping. Not one bit.
You only just heard of it so it’s hard to take this assertion seriously.
You’re just emoting now, JC.
You’ve but at me this whole post, JC. Your first comment was that I need an ‘intervention’, and it did stop there, and your shitty because at some stage I called you whiny? Really?
Yes, I’m not going to sit or roll over at command.
Nope. It’s because they have never acted on it, as I’ve said several times, which you avoid because it’s the right assessment.
You made the false claim everything is fine and dandy in HK, when it’s anything but and people, who can, are leaving.
I find you calling me whiny funny. You’re the one actually whining about “regime”, which I will continue to use because it so relatively preposterous with you’re support of Russia and its allies.
Sounds emotive and kind of whiny.
How’s that Chinese “regime” media working out for you?
The others do precisely the same thing.
No I haven’t, JC. You are pretending people can’t look upthread and see you using it in scare quotes when it had not even been mentioned. This switcheroo your trying on is ludicrous.
LOL. Only China is attempting to control the S China Sea. I get it, like Iran and NK, allied to Wussia, China can do nothing wrong.
I hope they look upthread and they”ll find you whining about something as unimportant as placing quotes around the word regime.
But look where this cul de sac has taken you. You’re now supporting the CCP’s attempt to take over the S China Sea, and the only regime media that exists is in the West.
You talked about bases and artificial islands which all the relevant countries are creating and now you shift to ‘control the South China Sea’.
Dare I say it.
Stop this nonsense Dover. We’ve been through this before. Others aren’t creating islands to take over and militarize 90% of the waterway. They’re now doing it in reaction to China’s action. And yes, we know China wasn’t the first to create an artificial island. But that omits the fact that China is now doing it to claim almost all the waterway including waters in between islands belonging to other countries.
And this:
You’ve claimed China hasn’t impeded commercial shipping. Then there’s this.
It’s not just naval shipping.
Really, there’s no need.
Look, I acknowledge how you’ve really put in a great effort to defend the CCP’s actions and done so tooth and nail, but you have a dreadful client here and it would be far better if you went for s plea bargain.
They were doing it before China began doing it. The PRC was late to the party.
That impedes commercial shipping?
This isn’t a defense based on ideology. If the ROC had defeated the PRC we would very likely be facing the same scenario in which the same claims to the South China Sea were defended by the ROC, but now controlling both the mainland and the island of Taiwan, against the same rival claimants and against the GAE which would also want to contain the ROC.