Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Phillydog

People's Republic

Is the People's Republic of China a Geniune Threat to the USA?   34 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think that China will unseat the USA as the planet's dominate power?

    • Yes, and it's not a bad thing
      12
    • Yes, and it is bad thing
      9
    • No
      12
    • Another country will challenge the USA's global hegemony
      1

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

35 posts in this topic

Should the world fear the fall of the USA and its replacement at the top of pecking order by the People's Republic of China?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


id like to view the positive side of this and think that the more china grows the more its policies reflect that of the rest of the world. i think it may be 30-50 years, but once china becomes a democracy that really stabilizes that side of the world creating a balance to the west/east

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are definetly two factions fighting for control of China's future right now. Those that would be friends and those that would be foes. Either way I believe that China will be the next world's superpower, the question is will it be like an English or American superpower, or along the lines of a Nazi or Soviet superpower bent on conquest. Not that one kind is perfect and the other totally evil but there is a huge difference with having a superpower that wants to do business and one that wants to kill and dominate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's the people that determines how China will be like if it it to become a super power.

The Chinese people, having been influenced greatly by confucianism idealogies, are very unlikely to be the Nazi or Soviet type of state. The Chinese people, however, generally have negative attitudes towards to west but mainly due to the fact that China itself was invaded and robbed by virtually almost every imperial states in the passed 100 - 150 years all so. If the Americans, same for some of the EU nations, are willing to build good relations with China and so as to its people, I see China's rise as possitive to the US.

If you look back the Chinese history, China did not have a tradition of conquerring and invading other countries, the neighbours generally became attached to China though, but merely because of China's military might but rather its achievements in the technological and phylosophical fields. So, no worries. -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure that the US owes a lot more money to China than they do to the US... and when China gets enough power/money, they will demand payment and the US won't be able to cough it up. That might cause some problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good call.

The US-Sino trade deficit rarely gets discussed, and has sort of become the giant, pink elephant of international relations. It's growing every day, and shows little sign of slowing down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look back the Chinese history, China did not have a tradition of conquerring and invading other countries, the neighbours generally became attached to China though, but merely because of China's military might but rather its achievements in the technological and phylosophical fields. So, no worries. -_-

Russia also was a very peaceful nation until the communists took over, I too would like to believe in the Chinese people, but most of one side have been relegated to prisons for their belief in democracy since '89 Tsquare. Much has changed and a younger more open generation is taking over, but the recent news of China closing off whole internet sites is a reminder that the militants are still gripping too much power there. I hope your theory comes to pass though, I would love to have China as a world leader not just a world superpower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia also was a very peaceful nation until the communists took over, I too would like to believe in the Chinese people, but most of one side have been relegated to prisons for their belief in democracy since '89 Tsquare. Much has changed and a younger more open generation is taking over, but the recent news of China closing off whole internet sites is a reminder that the militants are still gripping too much power there. I hope your theory comes to pass though, I would love to have China as a world leader not just a world superpower.

Thanks for your reply, :thumbsup:.

However, Russia was not a peaceful nation before the communists took over. Russia committed murders, robberies and rapes in the northeast part of China after the 1850s up until the 1910s. During this time, Russia has robbed 2m square kilometers of land + huge amount of money from China, not to mention a huge amount of natural resources in northeast China.

China, although having disputes with some of its neighbours, have never taken any other country's land by force, before and after the communists.

And I agree with you about becoming a leader rather than a superpower :shades:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


haha, it's interesting to see you US guys discussing our future. As a CHINESE, ruled by the Communist Party government at the present, I don't think that our countury which is lack of democracy, would become a superpower in this world. A nation can't get respect from others unless it regards democracy, even if it holds the prosperity of ancient Greece, or has the power of Rome Empire. In fact, most Chinese don't wanna be enemy of USA, cuz you were always acting the key role, providing help when China was in corner, especially in World War Two, and also in 1900-1902, it is only America return the war reparations to China Qing Dynasty and convert those money to funds that help excellent Chinese students to study abroad seeking for modern science. Back to 21st Century, for the difference of ideology from Communist Party and Capitalist Party, China and USA has many conflicts in businese, international affairs, and weapons control, but Beijing would not have the power to challenge the status of Washington. Even if China become stronger to be No.2 of the earth, this Asician nation at that time must be a country full of democracy rights, when there is no need to become the enemy of USA, for the most dangerous political conflict "Democracy or Not democracy" has disappeared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply, :thumbsup:.

However, Russia was not a peaceful nation before the communists took over. Russia committed murders, robberies and rapes in the northeast part of China after the 1850s up until the 1910s. During this time, Russia has robbed 2m square kilometers of land + huge amount of money from China, not to mention a huge amount of natural resources in northeast China.

China, although having disputes with some of its neighbours, have never taken any other country's land by force, before and after the communists.

And I agree with you about becoming a leader rather than a superpower :shades:

Interesting, I have never heard about the Russia/Chinese conflicts of the 19th century before. I did realize that imperial Russia had a push to the eastern frontier so I could imagine some isolated violence. I am curious now, I'll check up on that.

I am puzzled what the 2 million sq. kilometers were though, much of the border is Mongolia isn't it? Also the pre 20th century China was mainly behind the Great Wall, not completely of course but mainly much smaller then even today.

Also though it is not the same as taking land from a neighbor I am sure the people of Tibet and the South Koreans and Vietnamese would take issue with the peaceful aspects of communist China. Even Japan has felt the heat, though China has to their credit never attacked Japan outright.

I guess the point here is that there are still elements of the Chinese ruling party that think they need to censor websites, run gulags and keep those prisoners from Tiamenen (sp) Square back in '89 locked away. It is not the 90% of the Chinese people that I think are dangerous but the leadership that is still bent on global domination in the spirit of Mao or Stalin. You can be both a superpower and a superleader, which I am rooting for, but superpowers can be dangerous without smart and humanitarian leaders at their helm. America has no perfect record on that, but we have been blessed that our political system overall has produced the very best AND kept them in check with a powerful congress and court system as well as the power of the people to throw them out after 4 years.

haha, it's interesting to see you US guys discussing our future. As a CHINESE, ruled by the Communist Party government at the present, I don't think that our countury which is lack of democracy, would become a superpower in this world. A nation can't get respect from others unless it regards democracy, even if it holds the prosperity of ancient Greece, or has the power of Rome Empire. In fact, most Chinese don't wanna be enemy of USA, cuz you were always acting the key role, providing help when China was in corner, especially in World War Two, and also in 1900-1902, it is only America return the war reparations to China Qing Dynasty and convert those money to funds that help excellent Chinese students to study abroad seeking for modern science. Back to 21st Century, for the difference of ideology from Communist Party and Capitalist Party, China and USA has many conflicts in businese, international affairs, and weapons control, but Beijing would not have the power to challenge the status of Washington. Even if China become stronger to be No.2 of the earth, this Asician nation at that time must be a country full of democracy rights, when there is no need to become the enemy of USA, for the most dangerous political conflict "Democracy or Not democracy" has disappeared.

Interesting points aufwidesenhenChina, I agree that more democracy would be a great thing for China . . . welcome to the forum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, I have never heard about the Russia/Chinese conflicts of the 19th century before. I did realize that imperial Russia had a push to the eastern frontier so I could imagine some isolated violence. I am curious now, I'll check up on that.

Hehe.. In fact, Russians are those that us Chinese 'hated' the 2nd most right after Japan.

I am puzzled what the 2 million sq. kilometers were though, much of the border is Mongolia isn't it? Also the pre 20th century China was mainly behind the Great Wall, not completely of course but mainly much smaller then even today.

Well, if you look back to the Chinese history, the first unified China (Qin Dynasty) was indeed more about within the Great Wall than without. In fact, the land mass of China kept changing all the time from dynasty to dynasty mainly due to the conflicts we had with other ethnic groups like the Mogolians for example. You probably know that Mogolians ruled the whole of China for around 100 years), but after the Mogolian's defeat by the Chinese, the Ming Dynasty inherited the whole of the Mogolian empire. However, the Ming rulers were not very interested in ruling such a big land because a lot of them (Sebira for example) were seen as useless, so they had lost mass lands to the Russians during the Ming dynasty. Here, these lost of lands are not included in the 2 million sq. kilometers in my previous posts. But still, Ming rules a great empire which includes nowadays Mongolia, ***stan and so on.

See a Ming dynasty map:

http://military.china.com/zh_cn/history2/0...8679_244704.jpg

By the time of Qing dynasty, the rulers have established firm control over most of the lands inherited from the Ming. And the parts from outside the wall were then no different from parts within the Great Wall. In fact, the lands which were later taken by Russia were the origin of where the Qing people come from! However, in the 1840s-1910s, Qing has been constantly defeated by the western countries, countries like Britain and France which were far away from China mostly asked for cash and small areas of lands (e.g HK), but Russia asked for lands. And they have robbed in total 2m+ klsqkm of Qing's lands after a number of unequal treaties. Interestingly, when USSR toke control over Russia, Lenin was talking about returning these unlawful lands back to China, however, no result since his death.

Also though it is not the same as taking land from a neighbor I am sure the people of Tibet and the South Koreans and Vietnamese would take issue with the peaceful aspects of communist China. Even Japan has felt the heat, though China has to their credit never attacked Japan outright.

OMG, so much history already :wacko:

Tibet has been a part of China since Ming dynasty, so it is not CCP who invaded Tibet.

All acient Korean kingdoms paid tributes to the Chinese emperors and then recieved Chinese military protection against for example, the Japanese. Same for what is now Vietnam. Of course there are confusions about the borders, but I don't think these should be pointed to the CCP specifically.

Japan of course is worried, because they know what they have done to China: slaughter Chinese like animals (1937, 300,000 civilians brutally killed by the Japanese invaders in the then Chinese capital Nanjing), not to mention brutal and inhumane killings in other parts of China. An estimate is that around 20m Chinese has died of non-natural reasons due to the Japanese invasion, and of course economical loss is huge too. And I am even not mentioning the atrocities the Japanese did to the Chinese before WW2!

So I guess it is not surprised why Japan is now always feeling the heat even China has never invaded Japan in history, they fear about our revenge. But my understanding is that if the Japanese can face up to history and admit their wrong doings, I am sure the Chinese would be easy to forgive them. China has never had any interest in taking Japan; if they ever had, Japan would have been under China's control for a long time. I always dreamt of this fantacy about China invaded Japan before, not because I hate the Japanese or anything like that, but if that happened, all the later atrocities would not have happened.

I guess the point here is that there are still elements of the Chinese ruling party that think they need to censor websites, run gulags and keep those prisoners from Tiamenen (sp) Square back in '89 locked away. It is not the 90% of the Chinese people that I think are dangerous but the leadership that is still bent on global domination in the spirit of Mao or Stalin. You can be both a superpower and a superleader, which I am rooting for, but superpowers can be dangerous without smart and humanitarian leaders at their helm. America has no perfect record on that, but we have been blessed that our political system overall has produced the very best AND kept them in check with a powerful congress and court system as well as the power of the people to throw them out after 4 years.

Media control is still here. But nowadays, it is quite easy to find articles against the government on the web, and most of them do not have any problem, depending on how strong your comments are of course. Mao in China receives both negative and positive comments. And also because of Mao's wrong doings, I think it is very unlikely that China and the CCP itself would have anyone like Mao in the power. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have learned about the atrocities that Japan committed in China. They are right up there with what Hitler and Stalin did to Europe. Unfortunately these wrongdoings are not well known in the USA. I can completely understand why there are still resentments especially of the use of Chinese as subjects of experiments by the Japanese to test their germ warfare weapons. I understand there are still villages in China that have high amounts of resistant bubonic plague due to these experiments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^As far as Japanese atrocities, they were unfortunately not limited to just China, the Koreans, Phillipinos and Burmese as well as others took severe abuse at the hands of the Japanese. Combined with their ruthlessness (Bridge over the River Kwai, and "Rape of Nanking") the Japanese were at one time the most racist nation on earth by some estimates, though it was more vs. other Asian groups than skin color.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the Chinese have any ambition of controling the world, but instead they want to be in position where they don't have to submit to other powers. They don't really have a history of starting wars but rather building defense and protection.

I can't see them ever attacking the United States or starting a war. They won't rise to be the sole superpower, but they will become ever more powerful and possibly bring some balance to the power struggle on earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moonshield ask the last dozen Japanese and Taiwanese Prime Ministers about that. Also ask the last two dozen South Korean leaders about how natural resource poor (impotent?) North Korea is being used as a insulating proxy by Bejing to spread a military threat in the region.

The millions that died during Pol Pot in the 1970s and during the Vietnam conflict (long after we left in 1975 as well) owe the strength of their opressors to Bejing as well.

China it is correct was historically a victim of others aggression but since Mao they have spread tons of torment in the hemisphere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Moonshield ask the last dozen Japanese and Taiwanese Prime Ministers about that. Also ask the last two dozen South Korean leaders about how natural resource poor (impotent?) North Korea is being used as a insulating proxy by Bejing to spread a military threat in the region.
I think it shouldn't be too difficult to notice that all these countries and regions are the extremes of anti-Chinese and pro-US areas. These are just views and thoughts and were not supported by any hard evidences and facts. Beijing poses no military threat in the region, China's military is only for self-defence. Don't forget China is now playing a very active row in restricting NK's nuke program.

The millions that died during Pol Pot in the 1970s and during the Vietnam conflict (long after we left in 1975 as well) owe the strength of their opressors to Bejing as well.

China aledgedly upported Pol Pot beacuse the regime share same communism ideologies with China. China did not support Pol Pot so that Pol Pot could kill its own people. So I don't think China should be blamed for this. And also, even if China can be blamed, China never directly intervened. In the Vietnam war, China was merely self-defencing, because the Vietnamese (claim that they have the 3rd strongest army then) killed Chinese civilians and tried to steal Chinese land.

China it is correct was historically a victim of others aggression but since Mao they have spread tons of torment in the hemisphere.

All wars since Mao, Korean war, Vietnam war and Indian war, China acted self defence. China did not occupy and foreign land even if they were victorious, and China did not throw the domestic regimes, with contrast to the former Soviet Union and the current US. I know you have different views toward the Korean war, but please remember Korea penisular was used by Japan as a springboard to invade China, therefore I think one should expect that any military conflicts in that are will unlikely to draw China's attention. Back then, when China decided to enter the war, we really thought that the US would invade us after beating NK. Also, if one think China now is same or comparable to the Mao's era, he should find himself misled in the end.

Confusian told the Chinese thousands of years ago, "Peace is the most important thing we should cherish", and the Chinese people indeed bury this thought deep in their minds. Given China's long and continuous history, I think it shouldn't be difficult to come to the conclusion that China is very unlikely to be a threat to the US even if it is to become a superpower. We develop because we don't want to be bullied any more, and apart from that, we need nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have learned about the atrocities that Japan committed in China. They are right up there with what Hitler and Stalin did to Europe. Unfortunately these wrongdoings are not well known in the USA. I can completely understand why there are still resentments especially of the use of Chinese as subjects of experiments by the Japanese to test their germ warfare weapons. I understand there are still villages in China that have high amounts of resistant bubonic plague due to these experiments.

The atrocities that the Japanese commited in China are by no means less cruel than the Germans. I think they are less known to the west, because the Japanese amry did not do these things to the west people the same scale as they did to the Chinese. And also maybe, and I hope it is not true, is that because Japan is a big ally of US, so US tries to not mention it whenever necessary so that to build a picture that Chinese people under the commie's rule are nonsense and hated Japanese for nothing.

Atrocities: They tested their bio-chemical and chemical weapons on live Chinese civilians, in laboratories (near the city of Harbin) only 100km away from my hometown. Imagine, watching how people die and taking notes to synthesis the most dealy virus or chemicals.. Even now, Chinese civilians are still suffering from the bio-chemical leftovers. When the Japanese retreated, they just burned the buildings and buried the bio-chem agents underground, and because they wanted to hide these things, they don't even tell the Chinese where the leftovers are.

When the Japanese army entered a Chinese village, they have this solgan: Kill all, rob all, burn all ( they really do). You can imagine how horrific these scenes would look like: civilians, women, children and elderlies, standing in line, only wishing to be killed by humane means (guns and knives). Because some of the Chinese were brutally killed like the Japanese soldiers were playing games, e.g. using a big stone to hit a preganent woman's belly to get the kid out, cut the men's penises and hang them over their heads.. to name just a few.

In Nanjing, they systemetically killed 300,000 Chinese. I think there will be a Hollywood film this or next year about Nanjing Massacre, so watch out. I think also in one of the American museums, they actually hold some footage of the killing scenes. In Nanjing, two Japanese soldiers had a race to see who can kill the most number of Chinese. Apparent one narrowly won the race by 106 : 105, and they were in the Japanese newspaper for this, see wiki for photo of the newspaper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_Massacre

And to make it worse, these soilders who committed the atrocities, together with 14 class-A war criminals, are still today being worshiped as gods, in the Japanese Yasukuni shrine, and the Japanese prime minister Kiozumi visited there every year. And some Japanese text books even go as far as saying Nanjing massare hasn't happened...

Given all the above, it shouldn't be surprising that Chinese people have very negative views towards the Japanese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gaoanyu, on your last post interesting link.

As far as your response to my points, enjoyed the insight however I feel China could have done much more to stop Pol Pot, diffuse Vietnam and Korea and set the example of peace in the region by making overtures and committments to stability to Japan, Taiwan and the Koreas. I do give China props for their efforts in N Korea but it is pretty clear that they have played a masterful shell game with the north as proxy for terror in the last few decades. The jury is still out on wether they are truly interested in peace with the NK nuke situation.

I do agree that pre-Mao China was TOO docile and has a definite right to self defense, however I tend to feel that one of the reasons Pol Pot, Hao Chi Minh as well as the N. Koreans were allowed to commit such treachery for what seems like decades is that the "old guard" in China see nothing wrong with that.

I would point to the infamous gulags that many a tiananmen square demonstrator have disappeared in (even after a decade?!), the Tibet situation, dampening any free speech on the internet, and the falun gong persecution.

I am very happy to see the peaceful transition of Hong Kong as well as the embrace of capitalism and some types of fair business practices taking root in China, but just as the largest Norwegian money manager (all that oil money) pulled their positions in Wal-Mart for their trade in human rights violations in China shows, the old guard in Bejing have much to learn about peace.

I feel that a few hundred leaders do not a people make, but it is up to the Chinese citizens that love peace to promote that message to an undecided region.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The millions that died during Pol Pot in the 1970s and during the Vietnam conflict (long after we left in 1975 as well) owe the strength of their opressors to Bejing as well.

Although, in complete fairness, we weren't completely guiltless with the Khmer Rouge either - it was known in Washington what was going on in Cambodia before the Vietnamese ran the KR out, and it was our insistence, along with the Chinese, that allowed them to keep their seat at the UN (as the legally recognized government of Cambodia) well into the 1980s. There was a push to expedite the normalization of ties with China, and in the eyes of Zbigniew Brzezinski (Carter's Nat Security Adviser) , the Cambodia/Vietnam conflict was another proxy front against a USSR ally. Thus, if China supported the KR, so would we, and Brzezinski was actually crass enough to say so, while simultaneously stating that the KR were "reprehensible" (the Chinese said the same). Gorbachev's cut-off of Vietnam's support money was the end of it - the political reasons for the discreet Chinese and American support of the KR evaporated.

I would generally agree with you - especially on the N Korea situation. I wouldn't whitewash China's complicity in such situations, but the nastiness and amorality of politics has dragged us into a few similiar scenarios as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is very interesting analysis of the KR situation, very interesting.

America is by no means a blameless nation, but that is besides the point of wether or not China will lead in peace or in dominance. As far as the KR situation you cite instances of an administration that brought a nightcap oil crisis (after Nixon/Ford learned our national lessons for us just 6 years before), the Iran hostage crisis, stagflation at 20-30% rates, the eventual fumble of the Canal Zone into the hands of a communist government monopoly, the Marielita international crime wave (think "Scarface"), initially fumbling Afganistan to the Soviets, and the death of any "human intelligence" at the CIA (which some scholars have argued planted the seeds for our impotence to prevent 9/11) among many other political highlights. The DIFFERENCE is the peace loving and prosperity seeking American people got their 1980 referendem on what some could classify as Carter's incompetence. Do the peace and prosperity loving Chinese people get their 1980?

What troubles me is that we elected a well meaning but arguably spinless leader in 1976 that "went along to get along" even if it was with the likes of the KR, Castro unloading the criminally insane, addicts and perverts to Florida, and initially with the Iranian rebels etc. In the 1940s China supported an equally dangerous leader, but never got a referendem on him or his party. This while all attemps including TS in 1989 and the other "revolts" were mercilessly crushed. Where is the citizen forum to debate human rights abuses (Tibet to the gulags to Falun Gung)? America is not an angel in the least but any leader weak or crass enough realizes that the people will have their say in 2-4 years. China's leaders could quite possibly care less, there is no reprucussion for supporting the Khemer Rouge or Pol Pot or the terror spread in the Koreas or Vietnam.

It is not the Chinese people I am worried about it is if their leaders will obey them, like Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski were forced to obey their people in January 1981.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I definitely agree. I was young in the 70s, but I do remember both the unsettling nature of things that would turn up on the news, and of the chaos of the times. More clearly, I recall being a college freshman when TS happened, and - even to American college kids (at least my friends and I) we were galvanized by what we were seeing; it was people the same age as us, and it was (and remains) extremely upsetting to see how it all played out.

As for background on the SE Asia developments 1970-1990; I had to do some research into it in college, and there is some in-depth scholarship I could recommend to anyone interested, but it's very, very heavy reading. Phillip Short and David Chandler's investigations into the structure of and ideological evolution of the KR are fairly brilliant analyses which, beyond their historical scholarship, give great consideration to the philosophic intersection between morality, psychology, pragmatism, the limits of ideology and theories, and the necessity of recognizing human nature. Elizabeth Becker's work gravitates more towards human rights, basic history and real-life geopolitical intrigue, but she was one of the only westerners allowed into Cambodia between 75 and 79, as a 'visiting journalist' (coincidentally, the week before Vietnam invaded), and her recountings of the trip radiate both detail and horror at the events swirling around her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

;)

That is very interesting analysis of the KR situation, very interesting.

America is by no means a blameless nation, but that is besides the point of wether or not China will lead in peace or in dominance. As far as the KR situation you cite instances of an administration that brought a nightcap oil crisis (after Nixon/Ford learned our national lessons for us just 6 years before), the Iran hostage crisis, stagflation at 20-30% rates, the eventual fumble of the Canal Zone into the hands of a communist government monopoly, the Marielita international crime wave (think "Scarface"), initially fumbling Afganistan to the Soviets, and the death of any "human intelligence" at the CIA (which some scholars have argued planted the seeds for our impotence to prevent 9/11) among many other political highlights. The DIFFERENCE is the peace loving and prosperity seeking American people got their 1980 referendem on what some could classify as Carter's incompetence. Do the peace and prosperity loving Chinese people get their 1980?

What troubles me is that we elected a well meaning but arguably spinless leader in 1976 that "went along to get along" even if it was with the likes of the KR, Castro unloading the criminally insane, addicts and perverts to Florida, and initially with the Iranian rebels etc. In the 1940s China supported an equally dangerous leader, but never got a referendem on him or his party. This while all attemps including TS in 1989 and the other "revolts" were mercilessly crushed. Where is the citizen forum to debate human rights abuses (Tibet to the gulags to Falun Gung)? America is not an angel in the least but any leader weak or crass enough realizes that the people will have their say in 2-4 years. China's leaders could quite possibly care less, there is no reprucussion for supporting the Khemer Rouge or Pol Pot or the terror spread in the Koreas or Vietnam.

It is not the Chinese people I am worried about it is if their leaders will obey them, like Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski were forced to obey their people in January 1981.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for your insight views which really have broaden my minds. I think davidal's made a very good point because after the 1960's, the China-USSR relation became so bad and they almost went into an open war with each other. Back then, most of China's actions were actually OKed by the US. A good example is the China-Vietnam war in which US clearly stood alongside China. In fact, without US's clear stance, China dare not attack Vietnam because the Viets had very good relationships with the USSR.

The TS incident was a sad story for China, and should never happen again. While almost everyone in China now agrees that it is definitely wrong about the killings, most people also agrees that the earned stability was crucial for China's later rapid economic development. A few more points that you may have missed out from reading reports from the west media:

1. Sending troops may seem iron-handed at first, but back then, China had no riot police or such because such large scale and long lasting demonstration had never happened in China before. So China's only bet to restore its capital back to order was to use soldiers. Actually, troops were brought into the capital before the night of 6.4, armed forces were only sent to the TS square after the government declared martial law and asked everyone to leave the square (some people failed to obey to the martial law). Who ordered the soldiers to open fire, how many people really dead are still open questions, we can only wait until the government account to be revealed.

2. It may seem brutal to send troops against the students. But the protest were not just students. In fact, a number of weapon-free soldiers were killed by the demonstrators as well. Most soldiers were around the age of 20, younger then the students.

3. The incident also showed struggles inside the CCP itself. Of course, the hardliners won at last.

About freedom of speech and human rights issues.

1. It is improving quite fast, especially when we enter into the digital era. Although people always mention about the great firewall. It is now, not difficult to find Chinese sites where voices against the CCP were publicly published, something you'll never find 10 years ago. China is of course not as free as say UK or UK, but it's improving step by step, and most Chinese people are happy with the status quo.

2. Falungong. I have to say that Falungong people behaved much better after going abroad, they didn't set fire to themselves in the public to scare kids. I have a classmate, his aunt jumped out of the window from 5 stories after practicing Falungong and died. She believed she could go to haven. Another relative of my another classmate, he refused to take medicine after getting illed, because he believed by practicing, he could be cued. And these were just stories happened around me, not to mention the others. Do you honestly think that China's government should allow its citizens, normally less educated than the west, to practice something like this? Said that, I perfectly understand there are people who practice Falongong and then became healthier, BUT all other Qi Gong methods can do the same, why allow something that could let people kill themselves? I bet the US media never reported case like this.

3. Tibet. First off, I can understand westners always pay sympathy to Tibetans and wish them an independent country and condemn CCP's "invasion". But, even Dalai Lama himself has stated that he didn't want independence; and Tibet was part of China since the Ming dynasty, not that CCP or PLA invaded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not the Chinese people I am worried about it is if their leaders will obey them, like Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski were forced to obey their people in January 1981.

I don't think any Chinese leaders would do anything against the majority of the Chinese people's will. Even in the Mao's era, all defensive wars were largely supported by the Chinese people. I bet that if there were referedums on these wars, the rate of support would be very high. Just like in WWII, when USA was attacked by Japan, almost every American agreed to kick Japan's ass; whereas when G.Bush wanted to attack Iraq, a great number of people actually disagree with his decision. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What troubles me is that we elected a well meaning but arguably spinless leader in 1976 that "went along to get along" even if it was with the likes of the KR, Castro unloading the criminally insane, addicts and perverts to Florida, and initially with the Iranian rebels etc.

Again, quite correct, though I would pull back to the larger picture - we've played nice with some nasty political leaders, internationally before Carter, and after as well, so his moral relativism is a far from unique phenomena. And, for all he might have known and been able to act upon, there were situations - like the Marielito boatlift (and maybe the Iranian revolution) that hit with little warning. Were it not for pre-Carter 'playing nice' with the Shah, for example, the Iran situation (and it's paradigm-shifting fallout) may never have occurred. But I do agree that Carter really washed out much of his promise as a proactive leader very early on, and it's definitely not - in retrospect - what we needed at the time.

Thank you very much for your insight views which really have broaden my minds. I think davidal's made a very good point because after the 1960's, the China-USSR relation became so bad and they almost went into an open war with each other. Back then, most of China's actions were actually OKed by the US. A good example is the China-Vietnam war in which US clearly stood alongside China. In fact, without US's clear stance, China dare not attack Vietnam because the Viets had very good relationships with the USSR.

Gaoanyu - I also appreciate the perspective. We hear a lot about growth and the new economy in China - from politics to life in general it's important to hear some opinions from China as well. I'm certain that China is turning into one of the great powers of the world, which is fine with me. There are a great many connections between the US and China, and I doubt leaders in either country would want to jeopardize that. And the optimist in me expects that - with greater numbers of people in both countries thinking globally - both societies will evolve in beneficial ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.