|
computer parts posted:Argentina re: The Falklands. Argentina at the time of the Falklands conflict was not a democracy. They were ruled by a military junta and the whole reason they invaded the Falklands was to make the junta more popular.
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:27 |
|
|
computer parts posted:Argentina re: The Falklands. Which is why I said "consistently". Argentina today isn't an "enemy of the West" by any meaningful metric.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Argentina re: The Falklands. Argentina was run by a military dictatorship when it went to war. Nowadays they grumble about it but aren't antagonistic about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
The "the West sucks" narrative is bullshit pushed by the CCP as a justification for political control, HTH. There aren't actually any democracies hostile to the West, even countries like Iran mostly just want to be left alone and don't have any fundamental beef
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:The "the West sucks" narrative is bullshit pushed by the CCP as a justification for political control, HTH. There aren't actually any democracies hostile to the West, even countries like Iran mostly just want to be left alone and don't have any fundamental beef Define hostile, since apparently Russia doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Which is why I said "consistently". Argentina today isn't an "enemy of the West" by any meaningful metric. Economically there has been some pretty nasty stuff between Argentina's creditors and it lately, the IMF certainly seemed like the enemy of the Argentinian people for a while. Don't fall into the trap, that because the CCP says something the opposite has to be true. CCP and the US can be full of poo poo at the same time. Yeah, it depends on how much you want to say "democracy" because you could say Gaza, Russia or Iran. We weren't very supportive of Morsi either in Egypt. Then of course Allende and Mosaddegh. Yeah then there was most of the coups in Latin America beyond Chile including the 2009 one in Honduras. No a country doesn't have to be a puppet of the US to be an democracy, but if anything it would probably be a good idea to steer away from both the ways China and the US doing thing. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
And arguing that adopting democracy automatically makes you a western puppet is precisely the kind of argument that authoritarian regimes including the CCP regularly employ.computer parts posted:Define hostile, since apparently Russia doesn't count. Russia as of 2014 I would say is definitely hostile, what I would question is whether it's actually a democracy rather than a sham democracy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Oh yeah here's another one: Pakistan rightfully elects people and were literally hiding the number 1 wanted individual of the US for several years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
The problem is until the end of the Cold War the only democracies were in the western camp. The deck was stacked. The threat of the Soviet Union, Russia, terrorism, it gives democracies a reason to work together. Can you imagine the kind of government leader the average Henan voter would choose? I'm not saying they shouldn't have democracy, they should, but the average Chinese person's mentality at the moment is a lot more like America in the 19th century, which voted for leaders who expelled the Indians, ignored the constitution and conquered foreign territory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Typo posted:The USSR never exceeded something like 1/3 the size of the US economy in terms of GDP, and that's by Soviet numbers which may or may not be complete fantasy. And yeah, central planning meant that what was produced may or may not actually be useful for anything. How many extra Mambosoks were produced?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Define hostile, since apparently Russia doesn't count. Putin's Russia isn't a democracy? I mean, Russia today is about as democratic as Iran. Even then, Russia's actions are more or less predicated on the expansion of NATO and the EU into former Soviet territories
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Typo posted:The USSR never exceeded something like 1/3 the size of the US economy in terms of GDP, and that's by Soviet numbers which may or may not be complete fantasy. And yeah, central planning meant that what was produced may or may not actually be useful for anything. That said in the early 1920s, the economy of the USSR was a far smaller size and to be honest I don't think the Soviets could have come from the recovery of the Civil War/WW1, industrialization and then WW2 and its recovery without a significant degree of central planning. It started to fall apart in the 1960s/1970s when all the low hanging fruit was taken and the Soviets really couldn't compete with Western technology and the transition from an industrial to a service/information economy, the Brezhnev malaise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Oh yeah here's another one: Pakistan rightfully elects people and were literally hiding the number 1 wanted individual of the US for several years. I was not aware that military and intelligence officials were democratically elected. EDIT: Pakistan's problem is not its government, it's the inability of its government to govern. I'm sure if Pakistan was not a few steps away from a failed state, they would have turned over Osama for more military aid to give them some edge on India. RocknRollaAyatollah fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:The problem is until the end of the Cold War the only democracies were in the western camp. The deck was stacked. The threat of the Soviet Union, Russia, terrorism, it gives democracies a reason to work together. Can you imagine the kind of government leader the average Henan voter would choose? I'm not saying they shouldn't have democracy, they should, but the average Chinese person's mentality at the moment is a lot more like America in the 19th century, which voted for leaders who expelled the Indians, ignored the constitution and conquered foreign territory. Do you think a democratic Chinese government would take the same actions in the South China Sea, or r/e Tibet and Xinjiang? I think democracies tend more towards isolationism than anything, they would be liable to tell Xinjiang to gently caress off and then deport all the Uighyrs out of Real China
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I think democracies tend more towards isolationism than anything 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
The US and faced essentially no consequences of any kind for Iraq, which isn't true for other countries and other wars. If China went to war over the SCS and was embargoed by the rest of the world it would be hurt badly. Worst case scenario with Iraq the US lost nothing, which is essentially best case scenario for China and any wars it provokes. China has nothing to gain by picking a fight with the US, or even with Vietnam or the Philippines, and a democratic government would take actions that reflect that. I think the point is basically that democracies are a much better guarantee of good government. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 05:19 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Well, the US is far and away the preeminent world power, and faced essentially no consequences of any kind for its militarism, which isn't true for other countries. If China went to war over the SCS and was embargoed by the rest of the world it would be hurt very badly. China has nothing to gain by picking a fight with the US, or even with Vietnam or the Philippines, and a democratic government would take actions that reflect that. The US was doing this poo poo long before it was a preeminent world power. There's maybe 20 years of the past 200 years where I would categorize the US as "isolationist". quote:I think the point is basically that democracies are a much better guarantee of good government. And that hasn't been proven. You have at best shown that democracies tend to form around capitalist economies (but as history shows, they aren't required for capitalism).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Do you think a democratic Chinese government would take the same actions in the South China Sea, or r/e Tibet and Xinjiang? I think democracies tend more towards isolationism than anything, they would be liable to tell Xinjiang to gently caress off and then deport all the Uighyrs out of Real China A democratic Chinese government might actually be more aggressive because the average Chinese is pretty nationalistic and might vote in whoever promises to bomb Japan and solve the "Uighur problem" once and for all. It's not like China's actions in the South China Sea is terribly unpopular.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:
In general, I would agree with you, but it's far from a guarantee.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Do you think a democratic Chinese government would take the same actions in the South China Sea, or r/e Tibet and Xinjiang? I think democracies tend more towards isolationism than anything, they would be liable to tell Xinjiang to gently caress off and then deport all the Uighyrs out of Real China I think a democratic China would have democratic government in Tibet and Xinjiang as well, which would instantly open up the idea of secession or true autonomy and limited rights of Han immigrants, teaching all people in local languages ala Quebec, stuff like that which would drive the Han insane. Han leaders would take a hard line against those local governments and presumably curtail their local freedoms or pass constitutional changes which would prevent meaningful local control, you'd have much more of a Spanish federal system from the 80s kind of democracy, where you can vote but not for things which would damage The State. I think the PLC has been chomping at the bit to take the South China Sea and push their weight around, and a democratic China would be much more antagonistic towards the Philippines and Vietnam, I think they'd be constantly at odds with Japan, and tend even more towards brinkmanship and upping the stakes there. Again, I support democracy for any and all people, but to think that a Chinese democracy would not be a rival to the west is silly, it's ignoring the idea of realpolitik completely in favor of lovey dovey 'democracies are friends' nonsense. The UK and France were friends in the face of German threats. Germany and France were friends in the context of the Cold War. Japan and South Korea aren't friends today despite the looming rivalry with China, which must drive US military and political dudes insane.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
Typo posted:In general, I would agree with you, but it's far from a guarantee. Democracies, with supporting institutional structures, are a more accountable form of government. The entire purpose of democracy is to make citizens automatic stakeholders in the stability of the system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:I think a democratic China would have democratic government in Tibet and Xinjiang as well No it wouldn't a democratic China might very well implement democracy for the 98% of so of its population outside of Xinjiang/Tibet and maybe even let those two regions vote for national government but there is no way any autonomy is going to be granted to them because anything that even hints at "independence" would be shot down instantly in the court of Chinese popular opinion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Democracies, with supporting institutional structures, are a more accountable form of government. OTOH, you have the example of India, which is democratic but so broken that Communist China probably does govern better than which ever Indian government is in power at any given time in the last 30 years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I think the point is basically that democracies are a much better guarantee of good government. The Philippines, like 3/4 of Africa, India, Pakistan, Egypt recently, I doubt anyone would say their governments function better than China's. You'd be much better off saying being a rich and stable country is a guarantee of good governance than anything to do with democracy. Now, a good democracy that is not merely playing tribal games of "gently caress your <whatever>, got ours" and is honestly responsive to the needs of the people is probably great, but you know, it's rare and it's hardly a guarantee, and no one is really too interested in setting those up except a handful of NGOs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
It obviously depends entirely on the system of government, but China has a lengthy tradition of strong central government and it'd be a surprise to me if a democratic China was set up to be a federation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
After Israel, the most democratic country in Middle East is Iran, and it got the shittiest treatment from the US.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Bloodnose posted:It obviously depends entirely on the system of government, but China has a lengthy tradition of strong central government and it'd be a surprise to me if a democratic China was set up to be a federation. Yeah I seriously doubt de jure federation would ever survive even a democratic Chinese political process because it remands people too much of the era of the warlords.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:After Israel, the most democratic country in Middle East is Iran, and it got the shittiest treatment from the US. You've really drunk the mainland kool-aid if you think Iran is democratic at all. It's exactly as democratic as the proposal for Hong Kong's 2017 election. Like that election proposal looks totally modeled after Iran's election model. And it's undemocratic enough to cause an umbrella revolution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:After Israel, the most democratic country in Middle East is Iran, and it got the shittiest treatment from the US. They did kinda storm the US embassy, which is technically an invasion of American soil. So yes, you get lovely treatment by nations you invade. What did you expect?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
Bloodnose posted:You've really drunk the mainland kool-aid if you think Iran is democratic at all. It's exactly as democratic as the proposal for Hong Kong's 2017 election. Like that election proposal looks totally modeled after Iran's election model. And it's undemocratic enough to cause an umbrella revolution. The difference is that the clerics have allowed relative moderates to hold power in the past/present that Beijing probably wouldn't allow. Democracy in Iran is managed obviously but at the same time there is a unspoken degree of compromise that doesn't exist in a regime like Sisi or Assad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:After Israel, the most democratic country in Middle East is Iran, and it got the shittiest treatment from the US. Not just Iran's cool-aid but Israel's as well, why do people ignore Tunisia, Lebanon, Turkey, Azerbaijan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Turkey is generally considered Europe, Azerbaijan could debatably fit there in the Caucuses. I was also thinking about Lebanon but don't know enough about it and I thought Tunisia didn't turn out that well after their revolution but is decidedly in Africa anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:After Israel, the most democratic country in Middle East is Iran, and it got the shittiest treatment from the US. Speaking of I would've thought Israel and Palestine would be enough to disabuse the whole "democratically elected governments are all friendship and hugs and rainbows with each other" myth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:Not just Iran's cool-aid but Israel's as well, why do people ignore Tunisia, Lebanon, Turkey, Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is basically North Korea light, it is a strict authoritarian state with election results announced before they even happen. Georgia or Armenia would be much much better examples. Also, Turkey is really part of the Middle East culturally and so are the Caucasus. I could see at least the Caucasus being called its own separate region though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Even Russia got poo poo from the US during the Yeltsin years. The US market was never open to Russia. And the Russia Georgia war was basically war between two democratic countries. I don't consider Russia a democratic country now but it was for a few years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Azerbaijan is basically North Korea light, it is a strict authoritarian state with election results announced before they even happen. Georgia or Armenia would be much much better examples. Turkey by definition is within the Middle East. The term was created to describe the Ottoman Empire relative to Western Europe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
RocknRollaAyatollah posted:Turkey by definition is within the Middle East. The term was created to describe the Ottoman Empire relative to Western Europe. This is not at all correct. Most of Ottoman Asia was considered the Near East, with the Middle East belonging to Iraq-Persia-Afghanistan. The Turkic steppe totally counts, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
Lol shut the gently caress up you turtledove fantasists
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
Getting back to the Chinese economy, someone mentioned long-term forecasts for Chinese GDP versus American GDP. You have to take into account that China's population growth is set to become negative soon as its population pyramid inverts and the Cultural Revolution generation* starts to die off, while America's immigration and large first and second generation immigrant families will keep America's population growing quite steadily. You might see China's gross GDP not make large gains on US GDP while China's per capita GDP makes large comparative gains as population growth stops and then reverses. *a generation of motherfuckers if ever there was one, the 80s and 90s generation Chinese netizens have a saying "It's not that old people have become bad, it's that bad people have become old." Also, someone mentioned the CPC cooking China's economic numbers. It's not that the CPC cooks the numbers, it's that everyone in the chain reports false numbers to each other for their own ulterior motives. The CPC doesn't know their own numbers because they can't trust their colleagues. Li Keqiang (Premier of the PRC State Council a.k.a. Xi's Number One) was caught on mic saying "China's numbers are all man-made" but he wasn't gloating that his government manages to fool the rest of the world but saying that he himself, China's #2 man, doesn't pay attention to the statistics because he knows they're rigged. In other words, China's #2 man doesn't have an exactly accurate number himself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 12:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:27 |
|
|
MODS CURE JOKES posted:This is not at all correct. Most of Ottoman Asia was considered the Near East, with the Middle East belonging to Iraq-Persia-Afghanistan. The Turkic steppe totally counts, though. Near East and Middle East are interchangeable terms.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:59
|
|