Can China Be Contained?(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Can China Be Contained?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/can-china-be-contained-1434118534
7 comments
I don't know how much truth there is to this, but from the point of view of the several hundred Chinese netizens I know, a lot of China's current international policy decisions are arising out of desperation. For the past couple of decades, China has experience about 10% growth to its economy per year which has led to a wealth gap that makes ours look small. While the tide was rising, I suppose the average Chinese citizen had hope that perhaps he too can make it big... but with Xi's crack down on corruption (which, for good or evil, was just how business had worked in China), the economy slowed down considerably.
With that slow-down, the feeling of hope that the young unmarried men of China depended on to buoy up their spirits (it needed buoying up because there is tremendous societal pressure for them to find a good wife, but they outnumber girls their age by as many as 17 to 1 in certain cities) just vanished, leaving in its place restlessness and frustration. And if you get a bunch of young, restless, and frustrated men together, you have the historically tried and true recipe for destruction. I guess China's leadership, fearing for government stability, is looking to turn that sentiment outward via war, rather than take it inward via civil disobedience / revolution.
With that slow-down, the feeling of hope that the young unmarried men of China depended on to buoy up their spirits (it needed buoying up because there is tremendous societal pressure for them to find a good wife, but they outnumber girls their age by as many as 17 to 1 in certain cities) just vanished, leaving in its place restlessness and frustration. And if you get a bunch of young, restless, and frustrated men together, you have the historically tried and true recipe for destruction. I guess China's leadership, fearing for government stability, is looking to turn that sentiment outward via war, rather than take it inward via civil disobedience / revolution.
I don't know why you were downvoted but you've hit a lot of points which is fairly correct to assume.
Given that core East Asian familial, I'm not surprised by the tremendous societal and materialistic pressure on men of East Asian descent. Seriously....places like Korea and China men are regarded as just...fucking money making machine and nothing more.
Downturn of Chinese economy is a serious threat to the stability of the regime. The Chinese Dream or Zhonguo Meng, is uniting force. Everyone is out chasing money. It's like a giant ponzi scheme with someone on the other end always getting fucked while enriching those before it. When the flow of money stops so do these societal hierarchies built on money and power (easily purchasable with money in China), and suddenly 500 million middle class citizens who wants to stay that way become a very big force.
Given that core East Asian familial, I'm not surprised by the tremendous societal and materialistic pressure on men of East Asian descent. Seriously....places like Korea and China men are regarded as just...fucking money making machine and nothing more.
Downturn of Chinese economy is a serious threat to the stability of the regime. The Chinese Dream or Zhonguo Meng, is uniting force. Everyone is out chasing money. It's like a giant ponzi scheme with someone on the other end always getting fucked while enriching those before it. When the flow of money stops so do these societal hierarchies built on money and power (easily purchasable with money in China), and suddenly 500 million middle class citizens who wants to stay that way become a very big force.
Meanwhile, in China, a headline reads "Can the U.S. be Contained?". On its face this rings of ethnocentrism.
* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnocentrism
* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnocentrism
It's less ethnocentrism and more realism (the IR theory) and realist scholars proposing a different tack with how the US deals with China going forward.
What would mean "be contained?"
Can US prevents China's influence to grow and keep bombing and destabilizing governments all around the world while the chinese invest so much in Latin America, Africa and Asia? I don't think so.
Can US prevents China's influence to grow and keep bombing and destabilizing governments all around the world while the chinese invest so much in Latin America, Africa and Asia? I don't think so.
The view from the other side: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/06/chi...
It will require a much different strategy than with the Soviets. We don't have a fundamental political difference in belief with the Chinese. The Chinese are ultra-capitalists with a technocracy leadership (although the u.s. is more lead by lawyers than engineers, so maybe there's a conflict there). It's not even clear if a conflict is necessary.
The Chinese mostly care about resources and economics in China - they are determined to have a minimum percentage of economic growth in order to continue pulling their population out of poverty. They have brought something like 500,000,000 Chinese into the middle class and want to continue doing so, and this requires economic growth. Their military is mostly run by officers that are running factories - not even on the side, it's just normal.
Granted, there's friction in places like in the South China Sea. But the real conflict will be in Africa - there are entire Chinese cities in Africa as they move engineers and resources to take on large engineering projects and exploit the vast resources of the area. But the u.s. has seemingly abandoned Africa (and South America) and instead is putting all of their money into the middle east and Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran.
I wonder if the u.s. will just concede Africa to the Chinese or if there will be conflict in the future.
(If you do a google search you'll come across articles about chinese ghost cities in Africa, but keep in mind that all of these ghost cities, even in china and mongolia, are eventually filled with chinese)
The Chinese mostly care about resources and economics in China - they are determined to have a minimum percentage of economic growth in order to continue pulling their population out of poverty. They have brought something like 500,000,000 Chinese into the middle class and want to continue doing so, and this requires economic growth. Their military is mostly run by officers that are running factories - not even on the side, it's just normal.
Granted, there's friction in places like in the South China Sea. But the real conflict will be in Africa - there are entire Chinese cities in Africa as they move engineers and resources to take on large engineering projects and exploit the vast resources of the area. But the u.s. has seemingly abandoned Africa (and South America) and instead is putting all of their money into the middle east and Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran.
I wonder if the u.s. will just concede Africa to the Chinese or if there will be conflict in the future.
(If you do a google search you'll come across articles about chinese ghost cities in Africa, but keep in mind that all of these ghost cities, even in china and mongolia, are eventually filled with chinese)
Thank god there are Chinese cities in Africa. If they follow the western way and put high paid management there only, there will never be roads. For years western can always go to Africa and say 'oh, so poor, we can help them' to top up their compassion credit.
I think the closest historical parallel is Britain and its efforts to contain Germany in the early 20th century. Nuclear weapons will probably prevent a calamity like WW1 though.
China has an authoritarian government that produces pollution that threatens the entire world, uses the great firewall to attack tech companies in other countries, prints up to 282% of GDP [1] in order to buy their way into other countries real estate and companies, ignores human rights and free speech, and supports dictators in Russia and Africa. If China gets anymore powerful, the world is doomed. We need to curb commerce with China.
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/02/11/c...
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/02/11/c...
I don't know if you realize it or maybe the sarcasm is lost in this medium. However many of the things you just said about China, with the exception of being an authoritarian government, could also be said about the US.
It's even worse than that. The u.s. has been in constant warfare for the last 25 years and have killed ~600,000 people in that time.
What countries have the Chinese been bombing, killing in that time?
The u.s. is fighting an ideological war while the Chinese are fighting an economic war. The u.s. doesn't care if they wipe out a population as long as they defeat their ideas, while the chinese want to develop economic ties.
I don't know what more to say. The u.s. will lose if they don't change their thoughts.
What countries have the Chinese been bombing, killing in that time?
The u.s. is fighting an ideological war while the Chinese are fighting an economic war. The u.s. doesn't care if they wipe out a population as long as they defeat their ideas, while the chinese want to develop economic ties.
I don't know what more to say. The u.s. will lose if they don't change their thoughts.
You can't be serious either; an authoritarian government is no way the same as a democracy. There are forced disapperances [1], outright censorship [2], state enrichment vs individuals [3], and on and on. US has courts and 3 separate branches of government and elections and debates. You can be cynical, sure, if the democracy isn't working well, but we still have a democracy. Do you honestly think a government controlled by a small secretive group of old men is better than elected government?
[1] https://news.vice.com/article/forced-disappearances-brutalit... [2] http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=4707107 [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_State-owned_enterprise...
[1] https://news.vice.com/article/forced-disappearances-brutalit... [2] http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=4707107 [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_State-owned_enterprise...
I would rather have US as an authoritarian government than China. I mean do you see how China treats it's own people? It's fucking horrid. the 500 mil Chinese pulled out of poverty line is classic propaganda CCP would love to have you spewing.
It seems pretty clear that china has done a better job in raising the overall circumstances of the poorest of its citizens than many other developing countries over a similar time span. I'm not just talking about a bunch of African basket cases either. Look at India; for all the progress they have made, the poorest of their people live in horrible circumstances, the likes of which one doesn't find in the same enormous magnitude. I'm sure china could have done much worse. I know which country I'd rather be destitute in. Now how much of that is attributable to something like the one child policy where the have essentially mortgaged their future in exchange for fantastic present growth? We will find out eventually.
India is different because they don't embrace the same communist party ideology and leadership structure. Unfortunately, the government has no power because all the money in India is flowing to private anonymous banking friendly countries and they can't tax it.
> I mean do you see how China treats it's own people?
Do you ? Because you seem to be mixing up China and North Korea. Today's China is not Mao's China. It's not the best thing ever, but to think that it's so different that the US is just wrong.
Do you ? Because you seem to be mixing up China and North Korea. Today's China is not Mao's China. It's not the best thing ever, but to think that it's so different that the US is just wrong.
The West has been in this position before. Optimism about the prospects of transforming an ancient civilization through engagement, followed by deep disillusion, has been the pattern ever since early Jesuit missionaries sought to convert the Chinese to Christianity. Those envoys adopted the gowns of the Mandarin class, grew long beards and even couched their gospel message in Confucian terms to make it more palatable. The 17th-century German priest Adam Schall got as far as becoming the chief astronomer of the Qing dynasty. But he fell from favor, and the Jesuits were later expelled.
More like disillusioned with "the West." The lesson learned on the other side (which took a really long time with wars, revolutions, and capitalist reforms to un-learn) is to not trust 'the West' because they'll try to hook your citizens on opium while trying to convert you to their religion. And if you ban opium and deport opium dealers, they'll kidnap your emperor, start a war, and burn/loot your ancient civilization.
What the author of the article seems to forget is that there are elderly people alive today who lived through that. My grandfather was sold into indentured servitude because of his parents' opium habit.
Moreover, for a nation with China's current levels of import/export and the rate at which cargo ships get attacked by pirates (as they go around Somalia to reach the Mediterranean), what's wrong with building up a navy? That's reducing dependence on local infrastructure and has got nothing to do with the U.S.