China, Not our Friend.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by SpencerH

The entirety of chinese history shows the cultural/attitudinal differences between China and the West.

What are those differences exactly?

[GePap]

Why shouldn;t China develop ICMB's and Anti-satelite weapons if the US and Russia both have spy satelites and ICBM's? Are the Chinese to sit there unarmed, so that xenophobes here don;t view them "the enemy"? Why shouldn;t China try to be a regional power? Last tiem I checked, the Us claimed the right to interven in Dozens of weaker states that heppen to be south of it without asking anyone in those states if they agreed..but no, no one should consider the US a threat..it is only if tohers try to have what we have! Lord goodness me, EVIL!!!!

Hyprocrasy can go only so far..this thread is trying to push it's limits.

For those that hate China, or see it as our great enemy, simple solution, don;t buy anythingmade in China or made with parts from China. There, you do your bit! That the cost of what you buy will go up, well, your bit to save America from the evil yellow hordes, no?

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler


What are those differences exactly?

Disregard for the rights of individuals is probably the biggest.

[GePap]

The entirety of chinese history shows the cultural/attitudinal differences between China and the West.

I would agree. Even when they had the chance, the Chinese did not seek global world hegemony, they didn;t install great overseas empires to rule directly and plunder (they created trade colonies with thier people). They also did not invent the modern notion of sovereing nation states competing in great games for regional power and notions of balance of power and so forth. So if we assume the Chinese don;t think like the west, that should reassure us, based on China's history, that they don't care to, or plan to be a world hegemon, as they have never tried, even when they had the chance. So the only problem anyone here can post is over a small Island of the Coast of China called Taiwan, with a complex hisotry of relations with the Mainland. Wow, what a threat.

[mindseye]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
I disagree. If they were our enemies, then we should do everything possible to undermine their economy, incite conflicts between China and its neighbors, and provide active support for all its internal dissidents. The fact is that we had tried this approach for 3 decades, only to create a China that was far more militaristic and dangerous to us.

Through business dealings, we MAKE China's economy DEPENDENT on ours, we MAKE China's youth worshipping our junk food culture (McDonald is the favorite restaurant among Chinese youths), we MAKE China's elites by educating them in our universities, and we MAKE China's leadership see that their very survival depends on the well-being of the US.

This is a far better alternative than pushing China into the same boat with the Islamic Fundies and Anti-American Eurocommies.

Couldn't possible have summed it up better.


These days, many, many Chinese really like America. Here in Shanghai, everyone wants to learn American English, study American management practices, eat American junk food, wear American clothes, watch American movies, etc. There's a great thing going, why ruin it with jingoistic drum-beating.

[mindseye]

oh those pesky human rights eh, god wouldn't we all be so much better off if people just stopped whining about things like basic legal rights,forced abortions attempted state control of religion and torture and abuse in prisions. after all, if we did all these wonderful things then maybe a few less people would get mugged, and at the end of the day that's what matters, right mindseye?

Cockney, your post would be a little easier to accept if you had some arguments, but I guess it's just easier to spout a few generalisms wrapped in snarky comments.

We've been through this in other threads, so, I'll try to summarize:

(1) Your idea of Chinese "human rights" is pretty different from what average Chinese think about "human rights". Typical Chinese think western ideas of "human rights" may be suitable for developed, western nations, but not the completely different cultural, economic, and political situation of China. Most Chinese also resent western efforts to force their views about "human rights" onto them.

(2) Forced abortions are absolutely against government policy. The stories you read are invariably the actions of local (usually countryside) officials, who can be far removed from the sphere of Beijing. As I've pointed out many times, China is not nearly as monolithic as you and many others would have it. (By the way, you should check your single source story, it doesn't hold up very well to a careful reading).

(3) In China adherants of many religions (e.g. Moslems)worship freely and openly. Christians who want to worship can do so freely in the state church, which is virtually identical in practice to the Catholic Church (including sacraments). Believe it or not, here in Shanghai there are many churches, temples, synagogues and the like.

Regarding Tibet, before you utter another word, you should (A) try to find out what the situation was really like under the Lamas, and (B) take into consideration what Tibetans currently think (hint: a little different from Hollywood's version)

(4) Torture and abuse (not just in prison) is a big problem here, but probably nowhere near as bad as you think. For instance, recently the Chinese press publicized a killing by some local Guangdong police, who were harshly punished (the killer prison guard got the death penalty). Did you read about that?

[mindseye]

Originally posted by Defiant
Here is the difference as I see it Lord. If the situation was reversed or China got ahead of us in advancement of weapons as we are to them, now, do you think China would move against Taiwan? I believe they would, and in doing so negate your argument of being non-aggressive, yes?

Did they move against the Philippines or Vietnam during the Spratleys squabble? Woops, I guess that negates your conjecture, yes?

[DinoDoc]

I don't really see what the big deal is. China is still far away from being able to make a run at the status of regional hegemon. So there is no reason to go off half-cocked with fear of rampaging yellow hordes just yet.

On the other hand I fail to see what is wrong with seeing China as a strategic competitor of the US.

[Defiant]

Did they move against the Philippines or Vietnam during the Spratleys squabble? Woops, I guess that negates your conjecture, yes?

Oooopsss did they help North Korea against the South and North Vietnam against the South. Not really a, "defend only policy".

[mindseye]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
Disregard for the rights of individuals is probably the biggest.

Actually I think most Chinese would see it more in terms having a different view on the relationship between the rights of the individual versus the stability of society.

Westerners place a higher premium on the individual, Chinese lean relatively more towards social stability. They have had quite a long period without much of it, and now they are willing to pay a higher price.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Defiant
Did they move against the Philippines or Vietnam during the Spratleys squabble? Woops, I guess that negates your conjecture, yes?

Oooopsss did they help North Korea against the South and North Vietnam against the South. Not really a, "defend only policy".

How did they "move against Vietnam or the Phillipines" for the spratley's? How many people died? And who has the rightfull claim to those islands?

Oh my God, they helpde two neighbors in wars against others! perish the tought! IN Korea, China became involved only after the US came up to its border. In vietnam, it provided logistivcal support for an ally: goodness me, the imperalitis overloards. Of course, they ended up fighting a war with Vietnam in 1979, so maybe the Chinese and the Vietnamese weren't so friendly.

I did not say China is only defensive. But China's foreing entanglements pale to those of the US, Russia, UK, France and host of other states who have been far more involved, and not only in their immidiate neighborhood.

[mindseye]

Oooopsss did they help North Korea against the South and North Vietnam against the South. Not really a, "defend only policy".

Um, you don't think that during a period of harsh anti-Communist and anti-Chinese rhetoric from Washington that they were maybe a little worried about having the US military right on their border?

Compare the actions of the US and China in Vietnam. Which seems more like a global aggressor?

Question: do you think the US would have reacted differently if China had invaded Mexico?

[mindseye]

dp

[mindseye]

How did they "move against Vietnam or the Phillipines" for the spratley's? How many people died? And who has the rightfull claim to those islands?

GePap, Defiant forgot to quote me saying that, hence the confusion. He was actually responding to it (in the "Oooopsss" comment).

My point about the Spratleys was that it was an ideal situation for the Chinese to demonstrate their alledged imperialistic aggression. Next to nothing came of it.

[Defiant]

I am not arguing that we wounldn't have made a move on any power in a Mexican incident, however, you keep saying they are not the aggressor, we were not in China, but they still pushed us all the way to the tip of the Peninsula in Korea(outside the borders of their country) until we push half way back and called a truce.

It's funny how the US comes in on the part of "invaded" countries side and we are considered aggressors.