US officials: "We realize that efforts, implied or explicit, to shape or change the PRC over several decades did not succeed" : worldnews

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Just a few weeks ago, Taiwan held historic elections without any major cross-Strait incident, in part because all sides — Washington, Beijing, and Taipei — worked to reduce miscommunication and misperception about their respective intentions. That is an outcome few may have foreseen in August of 2022, when most expected the cross-Strait situation to grow more tense, not less. But it’s no guarantee of future trends, and the risk remains real.

This approach has been the hallmark of Biden's foreign policy. They're working behind the scenes subtly and competently, making progress in ways that doesn't really track with the 24-hour news cycle and clickbait journalism. It's good to see the efforts paying off, but they really, REALLY need to work on their messaging.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

LMFAO imagine describing Biden's foreign policy as subtle and competent while this senile dumb fuck is driving the world towards WW3. 😂

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Your premise is the more ignorant of the two.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (13 children)

It's not a premise, it's an objective fact. Biden's support for the genocide that Israel is conducting is literally leading towards WW3. Anybody with even a couple of brain cells to bang together can see that.

load more comments (13 replies)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Beijing has never cared much about the result of this Taiwanese election because the majority of Taiwanese support improving relations with China (see: votes for KMT, TPP). This entire claim of "tense cross-Strait relations" is a manufactured concern so Biden can knock a win.

The most significant recent tension in cross-Strait relations has been the declaration of the Taiwan Strait as international waters (induced largely by FONOPS declaring it as such) and the ending of some of Taiwan's special economic statuses for trade with China (induced largely by increased arms trade with foreign powers). Everything else is just posturing to save face on both sides.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

Yeah because you outsourced the crap out of them and then acted surprised when they leveraged that economic power.

On the other hand, China is also probably the one country where they successfully kept the CIA out. Can't coup your way put of this one.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (3 children)

In summary, he is saying China is not there yet, but they are going to get big enough to eat our lunch and we can't do shit about it, so we might as well start getting on their good side or we'll get fucked in the long term.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

"... holding in one’s head multiple truths at the same time and working iteratively to reconcile them."

That sounds really hard, have you tried cognitive dissonance?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (12 children)

A nation of 330 million cannot control a nation that has 1 billion more people. Nations should also be free to choose their own destiny. A logical fallacy many in the West fall for is assuming the rest of the world wants to be like them and should be like them. If I have a 3000 or 4000 year-old civilization why should I take marching orders from a baby state that’s not even 300 years old like the US?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The British Empire and basically the world was controlled by a single city of ~1million. And besides the historical and current examples of smaller cities controlling much more land and people then they had themselves, the statement doesn't make sense. Why can't a nation of 330 million control a nation of 331million?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

Those days are long past and were a historical anomaly. We live in a world where Afghanistan defeated the US-led coalition forces.

[+] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Those are relevant arguments to people with ancient civilizations with a long history of political and social development and philosophies. They are certainly relevant to me and many like me in the Arab world.

Influence of Confucianism on the Chinese Political System: A Case of Social Credit System and Socialist Core Values

[+] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (3 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I really can’t speak for China, a Chinese would be better informed here. But if I were to draw parallels to the discourse here [Arab and Muslim world], history plays a huge role, not just as a model to follow. As socialism is clearly a break from the past for China. But lessons to learn from and shape your world view.

For the Arab world Islam was the midpoint of our history and a new beginning. But we still carry on things that even predate our ethnogenesis as a distinct Semitic people, as past lessons.

it’s far from being the main thing that explains why China is China and why it shouldn’t aspire to be the US.

China is China because of its economic model. I do believe socialism is a better model than capitalism. But even some capitalist countries are closer to China than the US because the culture emphasizes things like harmony and shared prosperity, and places a greater burden on the government’s responsibility towards the people and their welfare. Things like this are motivated and informed by our own history and culture, at least for Arabs.

Source: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/state-owned-enterprises-global-economy-reason-concern

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (10 replies)

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Imagine if US spent all that effort changing itself and improving the lives of the people living in US. Maybe it could be half as good a country to live in as China today. 😂

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

That's a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie for you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

But why would it do that, that'd be silly. The system is working fantastically for those who run it

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago

indeed it is, rich people are making money hand over fist

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If the US had embraced FDR's vision of democratic socialism instead of letting Capitalists be unfettered Capitalist, I think we would have more people be way better off then China today since we wouldn't have out-sourced anything to China to begin with (Unions and DemSocs wouldn't have allowed the outsourcing.)

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Thing is that US did embrace FDR's vision and then capitalists dismantled it. As long as the country is ruled by capitalists then socialism is never going to be a long term option. You might get brief periods of sanity, but people at the top will work hard to revert these gains back.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I'm aware, but that's why it's a whatif. And honestly the Capitalists got way ahead of the Socialists before the 30's so Communism was never going to take root as long as the "evil" USSR existed. The best we could have hoped for was a more robust FDR style Social Democracy which has a high probability of leading to what you are saying.

But who knows, maybe things could have been different. Maybe Karl could have moved to Texas in the 1800's and the communist revolution could have kicked off once oil was discovered.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago

I'm sure history could've played out in many different ways. Capitalists at the time were smart enough to realize that they would have to give workers concessions to avoid a Soviet style revolution. It's not clear that the current crop of capitalists have that level of self awareness. The whole green new deal thing Bernie was proposing was a necessary measure to keep the system going in my opinion. Yet, the idea never got traction with the ruling class and things continue to spiral out of control now.

load more comments (1 replies)

[+] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[+] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[+] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

This will be downvoted by some of the authoritarians who dominate this sub but China is not a socialist country. It is state capitalist. Maybe this will help you understand why it is not a good place to live unless you belong to the upper echelons of society. It’s not so different from the US, despite all the propaganda to convince people otherwise.

Actually you could argue that many Western countries are closer to socialism because they have stronger unions. Not that that makes them socialist on their own but it is at least in line with socialist ideals.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It helps to learn about the subject you're opining on. Here's a book you can read that explains in detail how China is very much a socialist country https://redletterspp.com/products/the-east-is-still-red

And if China was capitalist as people like you argue, then we'd expect China to follow the development path of actual capitalist countries.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (6 children)

I’m not spending 25 dollars to win an internet argument but I would consider reading it if you have a free way. But from my experience debating you previously, you have a tendency to post sources that do not support your claims at all, and often contradict them.

China is following the essentially the same development path as other capitalist countries so I’m not sure what you mean by this. In recent years it has become increasingly nationalistic, imperialist, expansionist, and staggering wealth inequality continues to develop and entrench. Barring a real bottom-up movement for equality I expect these types of governments to gradually slide towards fascism.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

If you can't figure out how to get the book for free on your own then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe ask your friends to teach you what bittorrent is. There are however plenty of other free resources explaining how Chinese system works. It's interesting that you decided to slander me here though. It suggests to me that you're not interested in having an constructive discussion.

Nevertheless, I'll address your misinformed claims for other people reading the thread. If China was following the same path as other capitalist countries than it would look like India or countries in Latin America today where standard of living isn't improving for workers in any meaningful way. China is pretty much the only developing nation where the standard of living is rapidly improving for the majority. This does not happen in any capitalist country. Here are a few concrete examples of what I'm talking about.

The real (inflation-adjusted) incomes of the poorest half of the Chinese population increased by more than four hundred percent from 1978 to 2015, while real incomes of the poorest half of the US population actually declined during the same time period. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w23119/w23119.pdf

From 1978 to 2000, the number of people in China living on under $1/day fell by 300 million, reversing a global trend of rising poverty that had lasted half a century (i.e. if China were excluded, the world's total poverty population would have risen) https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/China%E2%80%99s-Economic-Growth-and-Poverty-Reduction-Angang-Linlin/c883fc7496aa1b920b05dc2546b880f54b9c77a4

From 2010 to 2019 (the most recent period for which uninterrupted data is available), the income of the poorest 20% in China increased even as a share of total income. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.DST.FRST.20?end=2019&locations=CN&start=2008

By the end of 2020, extreme poverty, defined as living on under a threshold of around $2 per day, had been eliminated in China. According to the World Bank, the Chinese government had spent $700 billion on poverty alleviation since 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/world/asia/china-poverty-xi-jinping.html

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/04/01/lifting-800-million-people-out-of-poverty-new-report-looks-at-lessons-from-china-s-experience

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

[+] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Well, feel free to suggest a term you think fits better, but I think it fits, even if it is clearly a different flavor of capitalism than the US or other similar economies.

The point is that socialism means the economy is managed by and for the benefit of workers and ordinary people. In all major imperialist countries like the US, China, and the Soviet Union, the economy is managed by and for the ruling elite, whether that may be private owners as in the US, party leadership as in the Soviet system, or a blend of these two as in modern China. That is why I feel they are similar and belong in similar categories, despite some differences.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Actually Existing Socialism

Actually existing socialism (AES) is a term commonly used to refer to socialist states, that is, states governed by a dictatorship of the proletariat.

The five predominantly recognized AES states are China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and, Korea, while examples of former AES states include the Soviet Union, Mongolia, and the Warsaw Pact countries of Eastern Europe.

load more comments (1 replies)

[+] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Isn’t it though? If the goal of China’s economic policy is to avoid the accumulation of capital, they are failing miserably. China has more billionaires and more economic inequality than almost any country on earth—including classic capitalist countries like the US.

Even if we agree to disagree on whether China is capitalist, it just doesn’t resemble socialism in its original conception in any way. Working people have no control over industry or the government, and both exercise repressive controls on any movement towards such a system. Recent reforms have moved things further in that direction by enabling loyal party capitalists to accumulate huge amounts of wealth at the expense of workers, and as Xi Jinping continues to strengthen his control of the state apparatus. It’s hard to see how this will lead to socialism unless you are an accelerationist.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

So which is it, are the Chinese capitalists in control of the State, or is the “authoritarian” Xi Jinping in control? Or do Chinese workers actually have more effective democratic control than workers in bourgeois democracies?

BBC, 2014: Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page.

Working people have no control over industry or the government, and both exercise repressive controls on any movement towards such a system.

This is what we’re constantly told by our governments and our corporate media that parrot them. I would suggest that your understanding of China comes from imperial core propaganda for the purposes of Cold War II.

load more comments (2 replies)

World News

Rules: