Do you see china as "the enemy"?

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Zero sum game, zero sum game, zero sum game, zero sum game, zero sum game!!!!!!!!

It is not a zero sum game but the benifits due to inovation are always a small percent of the current income of a country, for a long enough time after the initial innovation that the current market is always CLOSE ENOUGH to a zero sum game, that is is negligable.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Vesayen, try just for a moment to imagine you are from any other country in the world. Say, Brazil.

Now repeat what you said about "enemies".

Every competitor who has the potential to beat us in the marketplace or militarily, is an enemy.

Now apply that from the perspective of Brazil.

USA is our enemy.

Works for every country in the world.

Does the USA really want to be enemies with every country in the world?

Is the political stability and more importantly, military protection we provide Brazil with, worth more then the economic competition we give them?

For now, Brazils independance is guaranteed by american guns and political power.

This offsets our vast economic competition for them.

If we were not on friendly terms with them politically and we still were vast economic competition for them, they should view us as enemies.


A more apt example, how do you think France looks at the U.S.?


If tommorow Germany invaded France(we can only hope) the American people themselves would *DEFINATLEY* not favor intervention and its hard to predict if our politicians would either.

Right now France competes economically with the U.S. and we provide each other with no serious benifits.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Sandman
Obviously the marketplace is of a fixed size, and every Chinese success is at someone's expense.

This should be repeated in every thread where economics are discussed.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Dis
No, and I'm american.

I see neocons as the enemy.

All seven of them are having lunch today at Rummy's house, let's go over there and kick the sh!t out of them!

[Bosh]

I'm always surprised how little India gets mentioned in these kind of threads. India's got a lot of potential and is growing at a very fast clip these days and while large-scale political change is only a matter of time in China (the CCP's monopoly on power won't last forever), I don't think the same applies as much to India. Also I think that India's boom industries have more long term potential than China's...

[BeBMan]

They aren't ruled by a communist party, so there's less hysteria about them.....

[mindseye]

Originally posted by GePap

Widespread eocnomic ollapse in China is a deeply unrealisitc scenerio.

I don't know how it can be "deeply unrealistic" if it has already happened more than once in China in the last century. The economic infrastructure is much more robust now, but there are some serious weak points, such as the banking system and real estate bubble. Personally, I don't see a total economic collapse as very likely, but I also would be reluctant to rule it out completely. I know too many Chinese who lived through one.

Political chaos of the like seen after the collpase of the Empire in the 10's and 20's is also far less likely given the existance of far more powerful instruments of state to wield, meaning whomever contriols them can prevent some collapse of the whole thing.

I would go along with that if the central gov't wielded those powerful instruments, but that's far from true in China. The most common misperception of China is that the gov't is based on a strong central authority. It's not, other players such as provincial gov'ts, large companies, and the military routinely ignore Beijing's edicts. Here is a recent article on this topic written by Zhang Baoqing, a former Deputy Minister of Education. Main idea:

The biggest problem that China faces is that the policies are not being implemented. The policies decided in Zhongnanhai (the CCP's Beijing enclave) sometimes do not get out of Zhongnanhai. For example, the matter of solving the loan problems for hardship students was simply ignored by the lower echelons. If even such a policy is not implemented, what about anything else?

Environmental laws are another good example. China has some of the strictest environmental regulations in the world. But it lacks the ability to enforce them. The structure of the political system, and corruption are the two main obstacles.

I am sorry, but when i hear theories that somehow China will collapse either from corruption or pollution, I have to laugh. I laugh because there is a difference between the fall of the Party and the fall of China.

Hmm, I don't laugh so hard. Other complex societies have collapsed from environmental factors. As for corruption, some of the CCP's more respected leaders (e.g. Zhu Rongji) identify it as the Party's greatest Achille's Heel. It was, after all, one of the central complaints fueling the city-wide uprisings in Beijing in 1989. And corruption is worse now.

But then there is the simple fact that the armed uprisings happening in the countryside of China are invariably sparked by ... yes, corruption, pollution, or both. And sometimes the villagers are winning. That alone leaves me unwilling to laugh off this possibility completely.

What I don't quite understand is your last sentence just quoted above. Environmental catastrophes or corruption issues could affect the Party and State differently, or could affect both in a similar fashion. The Party and the gov't are very, very closely intertwined, although certainly not into one coherent unit. It's more like they are intertwined horizontally at each level, but the levels are only loosely connected vertically. The closer you get to the bottom of the pyramid, the more closely the two are intertwined. At the village level they are more or less indistinguishable.

I guess my problem is that I'm not sure what you are referring to by "China" versus the CCP. The national gov't? The people? The geopolitical entity?

You and mindseye seem to equate a fall of the party and serious political upheavals to some coming end of the conmic growth. I don't.

Here I'm afraid I just don't know what you are referring to. A big economic slow-down could very well spell serious trouble for the CCP. But I personally wouldn't care to guess when or in what form an economic slow-down might come, much less what will happen as a result. There are simply far too many powerful variables at play. It may be more likely that the Party will split apart over some internal idealogical struggle, perhaps one triggered by some sort of crisis. But this is crystal ball territory. Maybe you can remind me of something I earlier claimed about this?

And as for pollution..come on. Pollution hampers economic growth, but it certainly does not end it. Look at Harbin-yes, the City is without running water for who knows how long. Is the city abandoned? No.

It sounds like you are unaware that there are already villages in China that have been abandoned due to environmental problems. Usually it involves water - either vanishing water supplies, or water reaching levels of contamination that agriculture is no longer possible.

In fact, if I had to point to one single environmental danger, it would be China's water supply. China already has far less water per citizen than the world average, and that number is declining rapidly because of multiple factors, especially desertification and out-of-control water pollution. For example, the Yellow River no longer has enough water to reach the ocean in some years. That would be like the Mississippi no longer reaching the Gulf in some years. These are environmental issues never before seen on such scales, so it's harder to apply historic experience with high confidence.

I agree that it's hard to see pollution alone bringing about some sort of major economic collapse, but I would not underestimate it's potential for causing very large and expensive problems for the gov't or economy, possibly amplifying other troubles. For example, a major nuclear accident involving a large city could be the proximate cause for some other larger troubles.

In a few weeks, the water is back, and breakneck industrialization continues. UNspeakable pollution did not end industrialization elsewhere.

Therefore, it never will in the future, no matter what levels it reaches. Amen!

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Bosh
I'm always surprised how little India gets mentioned in these kind of threads. India's got a lot of potential and is growing at a very fast clip these days and while large-scale political change is only a matter of time in China (the CCP's monopoly on power won't last forever), I don't think the same applies as much to India. Also I think that India's boom industries have more long term potential than China's...

Democracies without a history of agression towards other countries(pakistan does not count) which compete for economic rescources are far less threatening then non democratic countries with a history of agression, which compete for rescources.

China has a history of agression and is not democratic.

India has no history of agression and is democratic, though it is not without its problems and while it has its own human rights problems, they are nothing compared to the way the peoples glorious party treads over their human rights.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Vesayen
Democracies without a history of agression towards other countries(pakistan does not count) which compete for economic rescources are far less threatening then non democratic countries with a history of agression, which compete for rescources.

China has a history of agression and is not democratic.

India has no history of agression and is democratic, though it is not without its problems and while it has its own human rights problems, they are nothing compared to the way the peoples glorious party treads over their human rights.

[Patroklos]

If tommorow Germany invaded France(we can only hope) the American people themselves would *DEFINATLEY* not favor intervention and its hard to predict if our politicians would either.

We most definelty would kick the living **** out of Germany, and we would do the same to France if they attacked Germany.

War between first class powers is a totally different sphere than less than war conflicts involving second tier powers. Don't think for a second that France and America have changed their big picture military relationship because of Iraq. I served under a French Admiral in the Gulf in 2004, and I train with French officers here in Norfolk all the time (had lunch with two not even a month ago).

France is not an enemy.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DaShi
Ok, but you said that the fall of the Party won't put a stopper on economic growth. Now you closely link the party to the economy. It's seems that you are abandoning your previous position for a new one: the CCP won't collapse.

Wrong on both counts.

1. never said the CCP won't fall- if that was my point, why compare it to the party in the USSR?? The party probably will eventually fall, maybe even sooner rather than later- the point is that the successful economic reforms mean whomever gets power after the party falls won;t face the same level of chaos that came after the collapse of the Party in the Soviet Union.

2. No, I don;t think the collpase of the party will stop economic growth because I don;t see any logical reason to think that China is incapable of becoming a fully industrialized state and mving well into a post industrial economy. Sorry for not thinking that somehow reaching a post industrial economy only happens in "the West" or to immitators. Political chaos won;t put a hamper on the inevitable growth and transition of the Chinese economy.

First, I don't think anyone but school 1 people are preaching permanent fall. In fact, no one has said anything about permanent flaw that I've noticed. Sure you aren't just making an assumption here? As for provinces breaking off: Taiwan, depending on your view of it. Tibet would if it could. Xinjiang also. If the collapse was big enough, they would break off and Xinjiang would be a terrorist concern if the Chinese tried to resist the split while weakened. Even Chengdu may decide to split without the party controlling it, but that's less likely. Deep down China is a lot more divided that it seems. The CCP is the one constant.

Taiwan was never under CCP control. Tibet;s population is more Han than Tibetan today, thanks to the CCP. The majority of people in Tibet would have no reason to break away. As for Xijiang, the Chinese would be strong enough to keep them in line, even in chaos.

The party has been cultivating Nationalism as its new root of legitimacy-that legacy of the party will be enough to put a huge damper on real separatism.

Wow! What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

That all raidly industrializing countries face pollution. China is simply doing everything in such a much larger scale than anyone ever before..obviously its pollution would be more intense than anyone before.

[Dinner]

I suspect China is not innovating because they are still trying to catch up. Their master plan calls for first copying the west until they get even then innovating to pass them. Japan did this with some success and China will if it can avoid political and civil unrest as well as not provoke the anger of its trading partners with its mercantilist policies.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap


Wrong on both counts.

1. never said the CCP won't fall- if that was my point, why compare it to the party in the USSR?? The party probably will eventually fall, maybe even sooner rather than later- the point is that the successful economic reforms mean whomever gets power after the party falls won;t face the same level of chaos that came after the collapse of the Party in the Soviet Union.

That's because you don't understand how politics works in China. Your scernario is only possible if the party's power is transfered peacefully to a new power. That has never happened in China, rarely in most of the world, and extremely unlikely given the way the party has been lately.

2. No, I don;t think the collpase of the party will stop economic growth because I don;t see any logical reason to think that China is incapable of becoming a fully industrialized state and mving well into a post industrial economy. Sorry for not thinking that somehow reaching a post industrial economy only happens in "the West" or to immitators. Political chaos won;t put a hamper on the inevitable growth and transition of the Chinese economy.

I don't understand you. How can I be wrong when I said that you believed this? You have a strange way of looking at things. Look at this post. It's absurd to think that political chaos won't have a negative effect on the Chinese economy. You also make the assumption that the I think that reaching a post industrial economy only happens in "the West" or to immitators (immitator? this doesn't even make sense). Where have I said this?

First, I don't think anyone but school 1 people are preaching permanent fall. In fact, no one has said anything about permanent flaw that I've noticed. Sure you aren't just making an assumption here? As for provinces breaking off: Taiwan, depending on your view of it. Tibet would if it could. Xinjiang also. If the collapse was big enough, they would break off and Xinjiang would be a terrorist concern if the Chinese tried to resist the split while weakened. Even Chengdu may decide to split without the party controlling it, but that's less likely. Deep down China is a lot more divided that it seems. The CCP is the one constant.

Taiwan was never under CCP control. Tibet;s population is more Han than Tibetan today, thanks to the CCP. The majority of people in Tibet would have no reason to break away. As for Xijiang, the Chinese would be strong enough to keep them in line, even in chaos.

Yes, thanks the executions and import of Han Chinese people by putting them in power of the Tibetans. No way, the Tibetans would want their country back even if they were the minority. You're living in a sinophilic fantasy. As for Xinjiang, China's strength comes from stability. In chaos, China falls apart. Each little leader looks to become a big one. Even Mao in his rise would have settled for a carving a small country out China of his own had fate not taken him in a different direction. Without the CCP to be the be all and end all, the country will erupt in chaos. Until a system is in place to remedy this, China is in serious danger if the government collapses.

The party has been cultivating Nationalism as its new root of legitimacy-that legacy of the party will be enough to put a huge damper on real separatism.

That very nationalism could fuel civil war as several parties vying for power will claim to be the true China if the current government collapses or shows enough vulnerability. This is how it works in China. This is how Mao came to power to rule the country.

That all raidly industrializing countries face pollution. China is simply doing everything in such a much larger scale than anyone ever before..obviously its pollution would be more intense than anyone before.

Yes, obviously. So?

[baronzilch]

Disturbing amount of people that see other nations as enemies for no other reason than that they are other nations in the same global marketplace. I seriously hope you were all kidding .

China seems destined to self-destruct... too many people out of touch with the affluent party members, too lousy a human rights record. You can't keep information out anymore and you can't keep the majority of the population ignorant - at least not in any nation wishing to compete economically. They'll be competetive 'til then.

Barring a global disaster, I can't really see an actual super power military showdown. It'll always be too costly even for the winner.

[DaShi]

Generally, you are looking at China from a purely simplistic standpoint. You just say that this is bigger and that is smaller. You don't understand how things really work in China. You think that nationalism alone will hugely hamper separatism without a historical understanding of how separatism has risen and be squeltched in China. Now mindseye makes a good point that many provincial governments and companies hold sway in many areas of China. They will certainly try to keep up the economic benefits they had, if the government falls. But that would mean they would have to strike out on their own (separatism). It would also mean that they won't have access to the resources that the rest of China has that has allowed it to grow so successfully (economic downswing). Frankly, I can't write anymore, because your stance is simply absurd whether you understand China or not. You seem to think that China is a fairy world that is immune to anything bad happening to it. If a giant meteor crashed into China wiping out the entire population, you'd still claim that it wouldn't affect their economy.