|
I've never seen 'trade war with china' or even 'unequal trade with china' anywhere in a list of top 10 issues for either conservative or liberal voters in any poll
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:03 |
|
|
There is no significant pro-China lobby in the USA. Even big business has cooled on China notably more than they once were in part thanks to shifting public opinion along with the fact that they keep getting screwed by China, and those businesses that haven't written off China entirely are hedging their bets and reducing their exposure to China. Not to mention I think that 2016 is a good demonstration as to how big business campaign contributions are not the sole guarantor of political success. That's my fundamental point and the problem with how the CCP interacts with other countries, particularly the USA. They don't know how to do anything but throw money at problems and their foreign policy ultimately comes down to "We can do what we want as long as we grease the right palms" and their strategy vis-a-vis the West for the past couple of decades has been to foster close relationships with prominent businesspeople and politicians under the (not inaccurate) presumption that this would lead to quid-pro-quo when Chinese interests were at stake in the media and political worlds. Trouble is that when it comes down to it though, this only gets you so far if you not only fail to get enough of the public on your side or at least apathetic towards you, but actively antagonize them like China does with South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Australia, Canada, and increasingly Europe and the USA. This is the inevitable result of a foreign policy based entirely on transactional opportunism. Herstory Begins Now posted:I've never seen 'trade war with china' or even 'unequal trade with china' anywhere in a list of top 10 issues for either conservative or liberal voters in any poll Yeah like I said it's not even really a campaign issue for 2020 because there is bipartisan consensus that China is a problem that needs to be solved and so if the CCP hopes that getting rid of Trump will make their problems go away they are delusional.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 03:41
|
|
|
In actual news, Joshua Wong was arrested again
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
I think there's a consensus that the US needs to challenge China, but there's a lot of disagreement over how. I think it likely that the next President will seek to deescalate. Instead of these broad tariffs they may pair back to more targeted sanctions, and try and coordinate more with allies. However I wouldn't underestimate the forces arrayed against the trade war. Charles Koch doesn't just oppose tariffs because it is bad for his business. People like him and Grover Norquist are deeply ideologically opposed to tariffs on principle, as they are to all taxes. They might not be able to move Trump on the issue, but they absolutely have sway in Congress, the Senate, and they have the ear of aspiring Presidents too. Like i don't know if you'd call this a "pro-China lobby," but I think the position of Americans for Free Trade on the trade war is clear enough. As long as Trump is President these groups opinions don't much matter, but they are going to do their damnedest to get the next one to promise to stop messing with them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:In actual news, Joshua Wong was arrested again 3 key members of Demisisto and the founder of the HKNP
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 04:50
|
|
|
So rough drafts of The Bear and the Dragon by Tom Clancy aside, the idea that business has "cooled" on China is kinda crazy when businesses know only greed and short sighted desires for endless unsustainable profits. Is China destined to become the next Hegemon? Probably not, it has *many* internal/domestic and foreign challenges that present robust obstacles for such a rise. But I think the breathless insinuations that this is some kind of turning point are premature; the idea that the next Post-Trump President wouldn't be a marked improvement over Toddler in Chief is delusional no matter how hawkish they may be; because even a hawkish government is capable of negotiating in good faith. Obama was specifically laying the groundwork for a China Focus foreign and military policy realignment and he wasn't nearly as destabilizing. I also don't think China's relations are particularly as bad with some countries; China's relations with Canada are far better than say, Canada's with Saudi Arabia's; and SA isn't in danger of imploding. China's relations with South Korea are actually pretty decent outside of touchy issues like Missile Defence because overall Korean-Chinese history is not particularly fraught to lend itself to nationalistic pique. China's alliance with Pakistan is also conveniently left out, as is the relatively improved relations since the Cold War between China and Russia, so I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
The fear is a bipolar world. Currently the US has global hegemony for the most part. The existince of this had long been challenged by the USSR, with its failure China utulized the ideas in a much more temperate climate with more resourceful areas. Now we are here. China is flexing on a US equivalent with a lot less global military assets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 04:55
|
|
|
There has been a real shift on China in the American political elite. Especially in the GOP. Look at Rubio, Cotton, Scott, and Cruz’s recent statements. Look at Huawei. In the age of Trump the free market Uber alles Koch types don’t swing the big dick that they used to. “Business will always want money!!” is a reductive analysis. The GOP are more complex than that. Still bad, but in a more nuanced way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:02
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I also don't think China's relations are particularly as bad with some countries; China's relations with Canada are far better than say, Canada's with Saudi Arabia's Holy poo poo are you insane
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:07
|
|
|
Thinking more about it, if Beijing could pick American leaders, I guess they would prrroooobabbbllyy want dems? Being a China hawk is very much in vogue on the right, although Trump is far more likely than any other American President to let them get away with Tianmen part 2, and they might like the current isolationist strain in the GOP. But this all kinda irrelevant because the world is not that well run. The PRC elite are cack handedly reacting to events like any other politician does. They’re subject to their own politics, biases, etc. that anyone else is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:18
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:There has been a real shift on China in the American political elite. Especially in the GOP. Look at Rubio, Cotton, Scott, and Cruz’s recent statements. Look at Huawei. In the age of Trump the free market Uber alles Koch types don’t swing the big dick that they used to. “Business will always want money!!” is a reductive analysis. The GOP are more complex than that. Still bad, but in a more nuanced way. The political elite aren't going to stop jockeying with their chinese equivalents for advantage. It's just that the way Trump is doing it hurts powerful interests in both countries -- interests which are going to push both sides to cool it with the mutually assured destruction trade barriers. Instead expect politicians to promote alternative means of containing China. When the Obama administration made its turn towards China, the preferred instrument of the political elite was the TPP. That is the kind of tool the elite favor. There is of course one important constituency that supports tariffs. Midwestern working class whites, who are kind of important. The next President is going to need their votes, and if Trump wins I expect he will continue the present policy. Democrats are more wishywashy though, and will probably try to avoid taking a hard position. See what this Democratic strategist had to say on the subject. https://newrepublic.com/article/153907/democrats-tariffs-trade-war quote:“There will be virtual unanimity that tariffs are bad, but there will also be a strong view that we have to get tough on China and that going forward we need better trade deals,” one Democratic strategist told the Financial Times in March. “On both of those propositions, Democrats will be saying things that at least on the face [of it] don’t sound too different from Trump.” But the answer to this conundrum is in front of them. If Democrats want to challenge the president on trade, they should look to the Rust Belt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:23
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Holy poo poo are you insane Canadian-Saudi relations used to be friendly but really soured over the past year, apparently. "Not as obnoxious to other countries as Saudi Arabia" is a pretty low bar, though. Silver2195 fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Aug 30, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
Saudi Arabia hasn’t threatened to 9/11 China so it’s pretty uncontroversial to say that KSA-China relations are better than KSA-Canada
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:41
|
|
|
It's difficult to put into words just how bad the current state of Sino-Canadian relations are but to put it bluntly the current Canadian government came into office embarassingly eager to get in China's good graces to the point that they were gunning for a free trade agreement with China, were clearing sales of large amounts of Canadian natural resource infrastructure to Chinese firms, joined the AIIB, and were even proposing the possibility of an extradition agreement at Beijing's request. The Chinese basically had the opportunity to build a large and lasting economic and political relationship with Canada and gain a tremendous geopolitical foothold in North America and it was basically offered to them on a silver platter. So what happened since then is, off the top of my head, the Chinese ambassador berating Canadian journalists during a joint conference with the Canadian foreign affairs minister for asking hard questions about Chinese policy, targeted harassment campaigns against Chinese-Canadians who didn't toe the party line, Chinese companies pillaging Canadian companies they bought into bankruptcy, coordinated campaigns from Chinese consulates to mobilize student organizations to police each other, and demands that we use Chinese suppliers for infrastructure. And then December happened, when Meng Wenzhou was arrested in Vancouver on an extradition warrant for bank fraud in the United States, and instead of doing the smart and logical thing and just cutting this oligarch loose the Chinese government absolutely flipped their poo poo and did the diplomatic equivilant of tearing down a Canadian flag, dropping trau, and taking a giant watery poo poo on it. They arrested two Canadians in China, including one that is a former Canadian diplomat, enacted tariffs on Canadian exports, and have publicly insulted Canada essentially weekly ever since with claims ranging from Canada is racist against Chinese to outright refusing to speak with Canadian political figures. Now the current government HAS to take a tough stance on China. All the rosy plans and opportunities that they had on coming to power have been rendered moot because all this has turned public opinion in Canada (which used to be among the more pro-China in the West) so far against China that not getting tough would be political suicide. Sino-Canadian relations are unironically the worst they have been since Mao and it's because China did every single thing wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 05:53
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:It's difficult to put into words just how bad the current state of Sino-Canadian relations are but to put it bluntly the current Canadian government came into office embarassingly eager to get in China's good graces to the point that they were gunning for a free trade agreement with China, were clearing sales of large amounts of Canadian natural resource infrastructure to Chinese firms, joined the AIIB, and were even proposing the possibility of an extradition agreement at Beijing's request. Would you say that China has hurt the feelings of the Canadian people?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 06:09
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:Would you say that China has hurt the feelings of the Canadian people? Yes, and the feelings of the Canadian people actually matter for how Canada is run.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
Meh, just wait for the conservatives take back Canada like every western countries. And it will be business as usual.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 06:36
|
|
|
My ability to read Chinese is terrible, so I only have English news media sources. However, my understanding is that there is even some (carefully coded) internal criticism in the mainland over Xi's overly aggressive foreign policy. If he had been more patient instead of crudely asserting China's great power status so quickly, the PRC could have enjoyed much better economic relations with other countries and more time for the mainland companies to technologically develop before they head into a showdown against the US. Xi certainly lucked out with Trump in the presidency though. Trump may be a China hawk, but he's also incompetent and bungling US relationships with other countries in ways that advantage China.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 07:56
|
|
|
Police are arresting Pro Democracy protestors ahead of the planned protest: https://www.npr.org/2019/08/29/7556...Q__R0sIDzM-7PgY
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 14:07
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Yes, and the feelings of the Canadian people actually matter for how Canada is run.  It's pretty difficult to put into words the extent that Fojar mixes things with a kernal of truth, with his own opinions, biases, conjecture, conflating various disparate and time separated events and trends, along with baseless speculation to derive a narrative where this time for sure China's house of cards will oh so finally come tumbling down. It's all ridiculously droll. Many of those sentences in Fojar's post can be responded with "Says who?" and "And what has actually happened?" Because I for one has not have heard of any significant "tough on china" foreign policy stances by either the liberals or the NDP in the numerous campaign phone calls and emails I get. Even if we take it all true at face value it would still be premature to really attempt any kind of long term prediction as to how much worse or better a post-Trump or post-2019 Canadian election would be or if it would matter for current Chinese policy, economic stability, or their ambitions. Again what is pretty clear that its just common sense that they would prefer a consistent and stable "tough on China" hawk they can actually cut a deal with where they do reach a mutually beneficial agreement with, then someone like Trump who waffles back and forth to game the stock market. The idea that all of their chickens are coming home to roost *now* is just laughable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 14:41
|
|
|
You claimedRaenir Salazar posted:I also don't think China's relations are particularly as bad with some countries; China's relations with Canada are far better than say, Canada's with Saudi Arabia's; And after I outlined the myriad of ways in which Sino-Canadian relations are in the toilet your only retort is "I personally haven't gotten any campaign material about it therefore none of that matters?" Come on dude.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:You claimed What are you claiming is wrong with what I am claiming? Saudi Arabia threatened to attack us and had every single student that was studying in Canada withdrawn back, some of them stayed as refugees and claimed asylum. China hasn't done anything comparable to that. You're claims as to relations being in the toilet are cherry picked, infected by your own exaggerations and speculation as to what you mean, again, as I said, kernels of truth wrapped around by breathless exaggerations to form a narrative in order to justify your claims/predictions earlier this thread. It isn't that your individual claims are untrue, but many of them are unverifiable editorializing in the context your attempted to create around them. It isn't credible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 20:38
|
|
|
I really don't know what to say to someone who seems to genuinely think that Sino-Canadian relations are fine right now. You live in an alternate reality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I really don't know what to say to someone who seems to genuinely think that Sino-Canadian relations are fine right now. You live in an alternate reality. Unsurprising strawman or lack of reading comprehension, it doesn't really matter which, it's ignorance either way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
Fojar confuses rich Chinese buying up Toronto suburb as tension between two countries.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 22:29
|
|
|
No actually I believe all those things that I listed constitute sources of tension between two countries and I cannot believe that people who claim to know anything about Sino-Canadian relations don't know about a thing that has been front page news for half a year. Like holy poo poo it involved the Canadian ambassador to China being fired by the PM and Canadians in China being tortured and handed death sentences. Trump commented on it and Bolton and Trudeau talked about it nonstop on his most recent visit. How are you this ignorant to the point that you think comparisons to Saudi Arabia are even remotely comparable. We're still selling the Saudi's military gear for fucks sake.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 22:37
|
|
|
Some reading: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canadians-negative-impressions-harden-toward-china/ https://abacusdata.ca/sour-canada-china-relations-canadians-blame-china/ https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3019233/two-thirds-canadians-reject-closer-ties-china-and-want-huawei https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-canada-analysis/china-dispute-casts-shadow-on-canadian-election-and-on-trudeau-idUSKCN1UY24K
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
tino posted:Fojar confuses rich Chinese buying up Toronto suburb as tension between two countries. He's not wrong, relations are pretty poor and trending worse right now politically speaking, and it's partly being driven by HK, as well as tension over Chinese money in the housing market in places with large Chinese populations like Vancouver and Toronto And all of this is aside of the Huawei poo poo which is a big deal for both sides
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
Does any know when will Canada make a decision on Meng or she is living there for the rest of her life?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
tino posted:Does any know when will Canada make a decision on Meng or she is living there for the rest of her life? When her case finishes making its way through the courts. Until then she will tragically have to suffer the horrible fate of only having 3 multimillion dollar mansions to choose from at any given time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 01:02
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:No actually I believe all those things that I listed constitute sources of tension between two countries and I cannot believe that people who claim to know anything about Sino-Canadian relations don't know about a thing that has been front page news for half a year. Really telling that you jump to conclusions of "How could you not know", nothing about my post indicated that those events didn't happen or didn't know about them, again, you seem to be arguing with some sort of strawman and not me; it's a really delusional way of thinking. You're reading what you want to be reading, not what is actually written there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 01:44
|
|
|
I think some of you folks dream just a little too much. I truly believe that whoever the next POTUS is, all those tariffs that she inherits will stay in place. The nasty decision was done by the previous regime, the camels nose is already in the tent now. Politically it's an easy, smart move - this is done all the time at the municipal level FFS - to keep the tariffs in place, and let Chinar squirm some more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 04:59
|
|
|
I can't imagine any politician doing worse than Trump on China. So basically anyone else would be an improvement as far as the IS having a halfway sane policy. I have no clue how China will respond to whatever that policy will be however. They me be too entrenched in their position by then to open things back up very much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 05:15
|
|
|
Nucken Futz posted:I think some of you folks dream just a little too much. I truly believe that whoever the next POTUS is, all those tariffs that she inherits will stay in place. The current Trump tariff basically hurt the US companies more, because it force them to either choose between the China market or the US market (the China market is usually bigger), or move just the US destined portion to Vietnam to avoid tariff, or give up the supply chain they build up in China. Light manufacturing that doesn't require a supply chain such as T Shirt and sneakers already moved out of China before the tariff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 08:57
|
|
|
Nucken Futz posted:I think some of you folks dream just a little too much. I truly believe that whoever the next POTUS is, all those tariffs that she inherits will stay in place. The tariffs violate basic principles of free trade and possibly violate the US's obligations at the WTO. Additionally foreign relations is more than just one dimensional chess; there are multiple facets to US-Sino relations and desiring a reset and a return to normal is desirable quality in of itself; the trade war with China isn't actually popular, as tino mentions it just mainly hurts US businesses, introduces uncertainty in the markets; and so on. There are plenty of reasons for an incoming POTUS to as one of their first major acts if a Democrat, to return to the Obama era normal and build up political capital. China's cooperation is essential for reaching any kind of resolution on North Korea; they are the world's presumptive #2 power right now and detente and collaboration is necessary for the good of the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 14:15
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The tariffs violate basic principles of free trade and possibly violate the US's obligations at the WTO. Additionally foreign relations is more than just one dimensional chess; there are multiple facets to US-Sino relations and desiring a reset and a return to normal is desirable quality in of itself; the trade war with China isn't actually popular, as tino mentions it just mainly hurts US businesses, introduces uncertainty in the markets; and so on. There are plenty of reasons for an incoming POTUS to as one of their first major acts if a Democrat, to return to the Obama era normal and build up political capital. China's cooperation is essential for reaching any kind of resolution on North Korea; they are the world's presumptive #2 power right now and detente and collaboration is necessary for the good of the world. (EDIT - that's me, I bolded those two statements) The above quote all sounds soooo reasonable. "a return to normal" - what does this mean to you???? Your normal allows one side to lie / steal / cheat / kidnap with no consequences. THAT's what hurts US businesses, introducing uncertainty in the markets; and so on. There is always "plenty of reasons" to change things back to what they were. None of them are valid or in any way good reasons though. Even you couldn't call them "good" while expounding on this theory. One more thought ...................... "China's cooperation" Hahahahahahahahahaha. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Might I ask when this Chinese cooperation has ever existed, and if it has .....Where and when??? So how come y'all spouting this fantasy forget that only a few weeks ago the U.S.Ehhhhh and Chinar had a trade agreement in principle, but when they all went to sign it Winnie the Pooh's minions - some say it was Winnie himself - had redacted a big huge chunk of it, effectively gutting the whole process. Then, the topping on the taco. Pooh's toadies proclaim that America wasn't dealing in good faith. I ain't no fan of that manbaby, but it's certainly great entertainment to watch a country refusing to Kow-Tow to the bullshit negotiating tactics that the Celestials specialize in. RS, I mostly lurk here, I'm aware of your postings throughout this dead gay forum , and for the most part I learn and enjoy from your contributions. You seem like a smart dude (dudette??), so I type this with a modicum of respect. I hope you don't become offended. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
At this point the onus is on people advocating a "return to normal" to provide some evidence that the prior tactics of "engagement and building up political capital" have ever actually worked in getting China to not be poo poo. Because last I checked, we have had decades of "normalcy" and that got us Xi Jinping and a hyper-nationalist, expansionist China that has broken every diplomatic promise they have ever made and that now has a ton of money and technology that they wouldn't have had if not for decades of Western engagement. Advocating its continuation is advising Charlie Brown to keep trying to kick the football because maybe he'll get it next time. Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Aug 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Nucken Futz posted:I ain't no fan of that manbaby, but it's certainly great entertainment to watch a country refusing to Kow-Tow to the bullshit negotiating tactics that the Celestials specialize in. Uh, maybe don't do this. Fojar38 posted:At this point the onus is on people advocating a "return to normal" to provide some evidence that the prior tactics of "engagement and building up political capital" have ever actually worked in getting China to not be poo poo. We get you have an axe to grind but maybe blind incoherent hawkish rage is unbecoming when you're spouting largely untrue gibberish. Has China actually broken every promise? More promises than the United States, Canada, or any other major country? This seems doubtful to me. During the height of the Cold War the US engaged with the USSR on a plethora of foreign policies of mutual concern to great benefit of each other and the world. Maybe you don't believe in a liberal world order in which nations can cooperate on a multitude of concerns, and everything is an anarchic struggle for dominance of zero-sum games where for every winner there is a loser; and its fair to hold that view, that paradigm, sometimes neorealism weltpolitik has its place in analysis. But it isn't the only valid paradigm and you walking in here pretending its the only valid one is not productive. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Aug 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:03 |
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:We get you have an axe to grind but maybe blind incoherent hawkish rage is unbecoming when you're spouting largely untrue gibberish. Has China actually broken every promise? More promises than the United States, Canada, or any other major country? This seems doubtful to me. You're doing a great job arguing that you are mad at me but a poor job of arguing why returning to engagement with China is a good idea. Again, the onus is on you to provide if not evidence, then at least some specifics as to how and why re-engaging with China would have a positive effect on China's behavior. I've provided a ton of examples referencing China's past and current behavior while you haven't done poo poo aside from dismiss every example off-hand for no given reason. Explain how you would deal with China and what sort of assurances you'd have that it'd work. Give us an outline of how you would engage with China. Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Aug 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 23:23
|
|