|
So Asia starts at France?
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:19 |
|
|
fishmech posted:So Asia starts at France? Asia starts with the mod. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
http://supchina.com/2017/10/20/xi-jinpings-thoughts-price-booze/ "leave it to the markets" - xi jinping, famurs marxist
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:http://supchina.com/2017/10/20/xi-jinpings-thoughts-price-booze/ Makes him about as much of a Marxist as Lenin then.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 11:59
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Makes him about as much of a Marxist as Lenin then. yes i agree that post-civil war russia is exactly the same as modern day china (lenin agreed that the NEP was a retreat from socialism but considered state capitalism a temporary necessity to rebuild the country)
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:yes i agree that post-civil war russia is exactly the same as modern day china And Marx thought a bourgeoisie revolution was necessary before a socialist one. Lenin isn’t the be all end all when it comes to Marxist thought
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:yes i agree that post-civil war russia is exactly the same as modern day china You could make the argument that modern-day China is basically what would have happened if the first half of Lenin's plan worked.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:And Marx thought a bourgeoisie revolution was necessary before a socialist one. Lenin isn’t the be all end all when it comes to Marxist thought His general model of history was based around that but in the letters he wrote to Vera Zasulich he talks about how Russia could become socialist without going through the capitalist stage of history: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/zasulich/index.htm posted:Theoretically speaking, then, the Russian “rural commune” can preserve itself by developing its basis, the common ownership of land, and by eliminating the principle of private property which it also implies; it can become a direct point of departure for the economic system towards which modern society tends; it can turn over a new leaf without beginning by committing suicide; it can gain possession of the fruits with which capitalist production has enriched mankind, without passing through the capitalist regime, a regime which, considered solely from the point of view of its possible duration hardly counts in the life of society. But we must descend from pure theory to the Russian reality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Most of it seemed his comments seem pretty boiler-plate as far as Xi goes, but it doesn't seem like there will be a rapprochement with the West anytime soon. That said, the general tone of the article seemed generally as negative as WaPo stories about Russia, which shows the general attitude towards China atm. It will be interesting to see how the middlebrow Anglo commentariat develops in terms of its opinion of China. It's starting to turn uncomfortable and even hostile in a way that it hasn't been for the last 20 or 30 years. There's still nothing like the vitriol that Russia inspires though
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:It will be interesting to see how the middlebrow Anglo commentariat develops in terms of its opinion of China. It's starting to turn uncomfortable and even hostile in a way that it hasn't been for the last 20 or 30 years. There's still nothing like the vitriol that Russia inspires though Granted, I think part of it is still the hope that China will "realize the errors of its ways" and somehow Xi will get kicked out in an inter-party coup. In contrast, I think everyone has accepted that Putin isn't going to be going anywhere. That said, I can't help but expect the coverage will only become more negative as time goes on as it becomes clearer that China isn't going to stop or collapse on itself. I think there is still hope there will be a credit collapse, but a lot of it seems bank'ed on ignoring that most of the debt that piling up is owned by local governments/SOEs and is essentially a form of inter-government debt. Oh yeah, and China has made it clear there are going to be actively cooperating with the Russians on a regular basis and if anything it looks like they is now an unspoken alliance. I expect to hear a lot about the "Beijing-Moscow Axis."
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Putin will eventually die, but can one have any such certainty about a Chinaman?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
I'd even say that a lot of the political discourse forgot about China a bit post-election, except as a wedge against Trump. I work at a tech company and it's angst about Russian social engineering all day every day, which is kind of surprising considering Chinese hacking used to be the more common angle. I'm against Trump as much as anyone else but the insistence that democracy must have been co-opted by a materially tiny amount of Russian ads is kind of unnerving, and denies all the agency to the American voters. At what point are we going to see a witch hunt for foreign agents?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
From my discord:quote:The communist ideology has bred a contempt of cultural history in many ways An interesting game of telephone here; how can you be both patronizing and racist as an American lets find out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
gently caress you
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Putin will eventually die, but can one have any such certainty about a Chinaman? Liberal warhawk types don't have a tenth of the hostility towards the Chinese as towards the Eternal Slav
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:From my discord: if racism is power plus prejudice, none of us can be racist in china, because as foreigners none of us have a single iota of power
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Granted, I think part of it is still the hope that China will "realize the errors of its ways" and somehow Xi will get kicked out in an inter-party coup. In contrast, I think everyone has accepted that Putin isn't going to be going anywhere. It's very unlikely to collapse but I think that you are underestimating the magnitude of it's internal problems, particularly economic. Remember, the other half of the liberal commentariat narrative regarding China over the past couple of decades has been the "China's unstoppable rise" narrative, and I think people are going to have trouble letting that one go too. Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Oct 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Redmark posted:I'd even say that a lot of the political discourse forgot about China a bit post-election, except as a wedge against Trump. I work at a tech company and it's angst about Russian social engineering all day every day, which is kind of surprising considering Chinese hacking used to be the more common angle. Orange Turd being elected is a symptom of the middle class being hallowed out in the last two decades. Pointing the finger at the Russians is the quickest way to remove the symptom. The middle class can vote in another anti-establishment again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Redmark posted:I'd even say that a lot of the political discourse forgot about China a bit post-election, except as a wedge against Trump. I work at a tech company and it's angst about Russian social engineering all day every day, which is kind of surprising considering Chinese hacking used to be the more common angle. Agree with you on the Facebook thing but isn't the more serious allegation that the Russias probably gave the DNC e-mails to Wikileaks? The drip feed of leaks put her campaign on a back foot in the final weeks before voting day and likely contributed to her eventual loss.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
there's a lot of different ways you can shift blame here but what it basically came down to is that hillary lost because she is absolutely terrible. the emails of course didn't help but it shouldn't have been even remotely close. all the Dems had to do was pick a decent candidate to run and they should have steamrolled trump. blaming Hillary's loss on the emails is like blaming a sporting event outcome on one bad call. sure it played a part but she had a year and a half to explain to Americans why she would be a better president and to set up a battle plan to get to 270. she failed, in the biggest way possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Well I agree that's why I said contributed rather than caused her defeat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
cloudchamber posted:Well I agree that's why I said contributed rather than caused her defeat. yeah I just wanted to rant about how terrible Hillary Clinton is for a second or two
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
The main thing that's upsetting to me about the Russian angle is that it plays into the classic authoritarian argument against democracies. People already make the argument (no comment about how accurate it is) that ruling classes like the CCP or Gulf monarchies keep a lid on an even wilder populace. That if China was a democracy, people would be voting for war with Japan or whatever. Or alternatively with failed interventions in Iraq or Afghanistan, that the people there are too ignorant and not ready for "real" democracy. When the leading narrative is that a malicious actor can spend like a couple million dollars, 5 good hackers, and one paranoid Swedish dude to bring American politics to its knees, that's basically vindicating these arguments. Because what hope then is there for political reform in China? Why would the CCP ever let go of power when the US can apply the same tactics 100 times stronger?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
I'll admit that recent events have made me look back at Orson Scott Card's vision of the internet in Ender's Game as probably a harbinger of what's to eventually happen to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
The Great Autismo! posted:if racism is power plus prejudice, none of us can be racist in china, because as foreigners none of us have a single iota of power lol white people are the real victims 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Liberal warhawk types don't have a tenth of the hostility towards the Chinese as towards the Eternal Slav Granted, part of it is probably also there is a ton of money still being made by American corporations in China while trade with Russia is pretty limited (although oil companies are so doing a fair amount of complaining as well). Also, the script flipped on the China due to them being on "our side" back in the 1970s/80s while honestly the Russians were never really portrayed in a positive light. At best they are drunkards, but most of the time they're portrayed as mobsters/spies/prostitutes/generic villains. As for the Chinese economy, I think the more likely scenario is growth slowly declining as infrastructure investment is getting less of a return and the government starts to deleverage local governments/SOEs. A 2008 systematic collapse isn't going to happen because it is just not how Chinese banking is structured, and the most likely scenario is that the central bank will continually buy bad assets from local governments/SOEs and "print" new debt in exchange. This is likely going to add some inflation, but it is vastly preferable to shock therapy. That said, China may be able to avoid a Japanese style deflationary spiral though continued stimulus and more importantly by promoting birthrates.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:lol white people are the real victims just trying to be intellectually consistent bud. hope you've been well man!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
US has always treated Soviet/Russkies much worse than to the Chinese. After collapse of the Soviet Union, the US market was never opened to the new Russia Federation, unlike to the Chinese which Clinton basically rewarded China the most favorable nation status after Tiananmen (to quote Robert Kaplan, when US's ideological interest is at odd with her national interest, the ideological interest always lose to the her national interest.) The US also kept expanding NATO up to Russian's front door, which they didn't do in east Asia. They didn't expend the alliance systems with Japan and Taiwan. I can see the Russians have some unsettled score to get even. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
A liberal democratic capitalist China with open markets has been an American foreign policy goal for over a century is why. The reason this is extended to China and not Russia is a combination of China's sheer size and also orientalism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:US has always treated Soviet/Russkies much worse than to the Chinese. After collapse of the Soviet Union, the US market was never opened to the new Russia Federation, unlike to the Chinese which Clinton basically rewarded China the most favorable nation status after Tiananmen (to quote Robert Kaplan, when US's ideological interest is at odd with her national interest, the ideological interest always lose to the her national interest.) Well the whole irony is that China played the long-game, industrialized, and then return started to cooperate with the Russians again anyway....and in the end, we are still mostly focused on the Russians. That said, I think Xi has figured this out and is happy to keep on buying up the rest of the Eastern Hemisphere while we lose our poo poo about facebook ads. Yeah, we got the worst of both worlds, we made sure a democratic Russia fail and become revanchist while we made sure CPC, which never had and will never have any interest in democracy, would become of most powerful political bodies on the planet. The whole US-China strategy past 1989 was one of the greatest geopolitical mistakes of the latter half of the 20th century/21st century...and it has some serious competition. Anyway, Chinese influence extends past the Philippines at this point, and even Taiwan is surely being pulled into the Mainland's economic orbit. Even Vietnam has recently backed down over drilling in the South China Seas and that is not to mention Chinese influence in Africa and parts of Latin America. The US is completely asleep at the switch. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:US has always treated Soviet/Russkies much worse than to the Chinese. After collapse of the Soviet Union, the US market was never opened to the new Russia Federation, unlike to the Chinese which Clinton basically rewarded China the most favorable nation status after Tiananmen (to quote Robert Kaplan, when US's ideological interest is at odd with her national interest, the ideological interest always lose to the her national interest.) There *are* some groups, particularly in Republican circles with an axe to grind with China; they just peddle their stuff in 5$ bargain bin books that get rather unhinged complaining about the Clinton conspiracy to sell nuclear secrets to CHINA. The US didn't really *need* to actively expand those alliance systems; China at least for a time seemed content to just suck in foreign investment and was for that time period, vastly reducing military spending. The alliance structures needed were in place. The big difference between now and then is the US gained Vietnam and maybe possibly lost the Philippines. I'd argue that the US was getting what it wanted out of China and China was getting what it wanted out of the US and screw ups like the bombing of the Chinese Yugoslav embassy were embarrassing for both parties. I think to an extent the thinking on both sides is that they can afford to wait and try to outlive the other; while Russia feels more desperate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Well the whole irony is that China played the long-game, industrialized, and then return started to cooperate with the Russians again anyway....and in the end, we are still mostly focused on the Russians. That said, I think Xi has figured this out and is happy to keep on buying up the rest of the Eastern Hemisphere while we lose our poo poo about facebook ads. In 1 or 2 decades people are going to dig Deng up again and write about how smart he was.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:A liberal democratic capitalist China with open markets has been an American foreign policy goal for over a century is why. YTs butt devastated China isn't a strip mine for them to exploit, you mean
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
The thing is is that China has pretty much no soft power or reach beyond its immediate borders, other than loving up some small garbage commonwealth country's real estate market and some babbys first african imperialism everything horrible china does is contained to its own borders. Russia on the other had are pros at soft power and propaganda and are actively invading, infiltrating, and corrupting other countries. Russia is actively challenging and undermining NATO and europe, China isn't, so China gets treated better than Russia. China also has huge economic relevance to the west, Russia doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The thing is is that China has pretty much no soft power or reach beyond its immediate borders, other than loving up some small garbage commonwealth country's real estate market and some babbys first african imperialism everything horrible china does is contained to its own borders. Russia on the other had are pros at soft power and propaganda and are actively invading, infiltrating, and corrupting other countries. Russia is actively challenging and undermining NATO and europe, China isn't, so China gets treated better than Russia. China also has huge economic relevance to the west, Russia doesn't. lol look at this hot trash liberal take
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:In 1 or 2 decades people are going to dig Deng up again and write about how smart he was. lol people have been doing this already for at least a decade and a half while completely ignoring that he was in fact a piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
China can't keep printing money indefinitely before hyper-inflation kicks it's door in or the economy implodes. It's not the world's default currency. Nor are people buying Chinese RMB or inputting real money into the system like the USD where people buy their debt. The US does print money but they also remove chunks it as it was ghost money that didn't exist in the first place. There is a massive shadow banking sector that no one really knows the size of which will collapse no different from the official system. Local government is doomed to fail as they don't have any other means of income other than one off sales of land while racking up huge debt to boost GDP on equally doomed building projects. They get no support from national government yet have to follow orders no matter how asinine. It's no different than when Mao ordered massive boosts in steel/iron production for no other reason that to gain Face which resulted in equally massive amounts of collateral damage. Everyone is FYGM money now while the rich GTFO resulting in capital flight. Everyone is betting on the system won't implode when every economy always has a downturn. It is impossible not to. Lucky so far every time in China something "Corrects" losing alot of value the world at large has felt no repercussions as the internal economy is very insulated from the world as mentioned above where no one is buying Chinese assets or debts as there is little confidence that China will act in good faith.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:China can't keep printing money indefinitely before hyper-inflation kicks it's door in or the economy implodes. It's not the world's default currency. Nor are people buying Chinese RMB or inputting real money into the system like the USD where people buy their debt. The US does print money but they also remove chunks it as it was ghost money that didn't exist in the first place. Guys China's collapse is right around the corner this time, I promise
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:China can't keep printing money indefinitely before hyper-inflation kicks it's door in or the economy implodes. It's not the world's default currency. Nor are people buying Chinese RMB or inputting real money into the system like the USD where people buy their debt. The US does print money but they also remove chunks it as it was ghost money that didn't exist in the first place. I think China producing tonnes of stuff lets them get away with deficit spending compared to say, portugal. And Hyper-inflation is recoverable, it isn't a death spiral. Baronjutter posted:The thing is is that China has pretty much no soft power or reach beyond its immediate borders, other than loving up some small garbage commonwealth country's real estate market and some babbys first african imperialism everything horrible china does is contained to its own borders. Russia on the other had are pros at soft power and propaganda and are actively invading, infiltrating, and corrupting other countries. Russia is actively challenging and undermining NATO and europe, China isn't, so China gets treated better than Russia. China also has huge economic relevance to the west, Russia doesn't. China has soft power, it's expat community is huge and China has *much* greater pull now than it did a decade ago and has been making less mistakes on how to appeal and influence the overseas Chinese community for geopolitical goals. Plus that Confucius Institute and other efforts. Plus the economic investment overseas isn't something to underestimate either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:19 |
|
|
oohhboy posted:China can't keep printing money indefinitely before hyper-inflation kicks it's door in or the economy implodes. It's not the world's default currency. Nor are people buying Chinese RMB or inputting real money into the system like the USD where people buy their debt. The US does print money but they also remove chunks it as it was ghost money that didn't exist in the first place. Source your quotes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:21
|
|