• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Tuesday Aug 19, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST (date has been pushed). This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

International Centenary: Chinese Communist Party (1921-2021)

I am not sure about the ecconomic ties between pre war western Europe and Soviet as far as I know not that great and there is no growing interdependence.

Unlike China who sells and buys tons of stuff from the west.

hiya there Mr. ShinkanPo,

ayup.

that's all i've been saying in my many exchanges with you, regarding China. i think you've mistaken me for being a pro-China propagandist.

i was only being realistic.

the Soviet Union's economy during the cold war was wretched - its presence, globally, was laughable, and utterly dependent on the price of oil. just another incompetent petro-state. plenty of those around.

even in present day under the mighty Putin, Russia is a joke. its economy is smaller than the "country" of Caliornia. and New York. and Texas.

cuba? joke. iran? joke. Venezuela? joke. north korea? massive joke.

all ridiculous economies, very easy to make pariahs.

Xi is no joke. China is no joke. China is completely and utterly different. the geopolitical mallet that they'll wield (which is already kind of formidable) is only going to get bigger as its massive population advances fully into middle class earning power, meaning; every nation in the world is going to want to do business in China.

even in present day, Hollywood will not greenlight a script that portrays the CCP in a negative light. nope, can't do it. why? its business. China has a huge, massive movie going audience. Xi can break Disney in half if he blocks the release of the Avengers franchise to his 1.4 billion citizens.

that's just the way it is, ShinkanPo, aye?

- IGIT
 
Last edited:
Xi's got the ability to create and fold agencies at the snap of his fingers; can launch policies without any consensus, process or safeguards and he's actually been damn close to flawless on everything from economic reform and infrastructure development to 'anti-corruption' (purging political adversaries) and poverty eradication to military capabilities and scientific advancement.

His tenure thus far has been ultra-competent, and there's good reason the amendment that put him on equal footing with Chairman Mao got 99.8% approval (2,959 votes out of 2,964) from the party. He is the most powerful man in the world when taking into consideration the geopolitical, economic, technological and military clout of the country he runs.

image.jpg

image.jpg
Ultra competent? I don’t know that turning the whole world against you is ultra competent, when the CCP spent 30+ years being ultra conservative and sensitive with their image.

Ultra competent at running a dictatorship, I would agree, but in terms of increasing the power and wellbeing of your nation? That is a dubious claim.
 
Ultra competent? I don’t know that turning the whole world against you is ultra competent, when the CCP spent 30+ years being ultra conservative and sensitive with their image.

Ultra competent at running a dictatorship, I would agree, but in terms of increasing the power and wellbeing of your nation? That is a dubious claim.

I think the ground-work had been laid for him to be successful, probably by superior minds. Deng Xiaoping was really the guy who put all of this in motion.

I'm starting to think that Jinping's going to pull a Putin on China and turn it into a stagnant country eventually. He seems to share a lot of traits with historically bad leaders.

For a while, China might continue to prosper, but the longer he lingers on, the worse it's going to get, probably.
 
It depends on whether you wish for your country to play empire-building games or not. For sure, Jinping is a far more effective empire-builder than a Donald Trump. He might be more effective at it than any American leader since WW2-era times. If we are talking purely from the perspective of increasing the status of their respective nation as a global super-power.

However, I find an incompetent buffoon far easier to deal with than a competent tyrant. The former you can remove from power fairly easily, the latter you cannot, except by force.

I tend to believe that people who pursue moronic ends, would pursue them with or without the freedoms. If you had no freedom, you'd simply not have the freedom to pursue anything outside of those moronic ends. To expect that the state would suddenly turn into a fully optimized scientific technocracy where only facts and logic are obeyed, and falsehoods discredited, is probably wishful thinking. There's just as good of a chance that some guy who believes that his opposition drinks the blood of infants comes to exercise that authoritarian power, rather than someone who's completely rational, pragmatic and aligned with the realities. People who entertain notions of exercising authoritarian power, rarely give much thought to how things would be if the shoe was in the other foot, so to speak.

Let's face it, even Mr. Jinping is not without serious faults, which no Westerner could truly stand in favour of, if they lived under his rule. He has an irrational side to him, atleast from the Western perspective, a petty tyrant's way of dealing with any criticism headed in his direction. A Donald Trump sends angry tweets as a response to critique, Jinping sends people to concentration camps. Trump insults journalists shedding light on COVID, Jinping gives them prison sentences. And his reign will end, eventually. Who's to guarantee that the next guy in line is going to be as capable as he was? Who's to say that the next guy won't just be an incompetent fool with the same cruel streak as Jinping has, in other words, a leader with no redeeming qualities, not even Jinping's competence?

I prefer not to take the gamble of ending up with a Mao Zedong for life, compared to a Donald Trump for 4 years. Electing "for life" leaders is something that ought to be done only under a "worst case scenario", when stability in leadership is to be regarded as something of utmost importance.

hiya the GreatA,

agreed and of course.

i'm american. i love this place (though i do admit i wish i had been born and raised in the Netherlands. Amsterdam is the most excellent place i've ever lived). America gave my parents and my family a chance to flourish. it really is (or least, was) the land of opportunity.

i love bitching in the War Room and the freedom to make fun of Rand Paul of the Shire.

i'm pro-America. i was briefly a journalism major and was a stringer for newspapers (the Courier News, the Star Ledger, up in NJ). i'm massively pro-1st amendment rights, our most important of freedoms.

i'm just saying that Xi is doing a good job (unless you live in Tibet or Hong Kong or you're Uyghur* - i don't entirely believe americans really care about these issues, though i do. i really like Hong Kong and have spent some time there in the past. great, crazy city.), and not all authoritarian tyrants are equal.

- IGIT

* - makes me think of Tolkien for some reason.
 
I think the ground-work had been laid for him to be successful, probably by superior minds. Deng Xiaoping was really the guy who put all of this in motion.

I'm starting to think that Jinping's going to pull a Putin on China and turn it into a stagnant country eventually. He seems to share a lot of traits with historically bad leaders.

For a while, China might continue to prosper, but the longer he lingers on, the worse it's going to get, probably.
Certainly in soft power terms he has already undone decades worth of work and his clamping down of private industry will adversely affect the economy in the future.
 
I'm starting to think that Jinping's going to pull a Putin on China and turn it into a stagnant country eventually. He seems to share a lot of traits with historically bad leaders.

For a while, China might continue to prosper, but the longer he lingers on, the worse it's going to get, probably.

hey TheGreatA,

i don't know. i doubt it.

i would look beyond Xi, and see who his closest advisors are.

*ponders*

i mean, yes, Donald Trump is not a good POTUS and i think he's done a poor job of running the country. but when i look at him, i don't see policy; i see an idiot. when i look for policy, i see lunatics like Stephen Miller.

when i look at Xi - particularly on economic matters - i see the Chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, Wang Yang (i know, i know, an unfortunate name by western standards, but google his bio after you're done laughing). he's the real deal. he's not some corrupt kleptocrat.

i also see the State Council of the PRC, Li Keqiang. Li is not some ideological nut, he's an economist by training with a phd. in his thirties (i think it was his 30s), he won China's Sun Yefang Prize - its highest award for achievement in economic science. the guy was a prodigy. its like having Paul Krugman as your advisor instead of some partisan who has his nose up Grover Norquist's ass.

these individuals are sober analysts/advisors. they're intelligent and guided by economic theory. i think they're formidable. i don't they're going anywhere anytime soon.

'least, that's how i see it, my friend.

- IGIT
 
Last edited:
hey TheGreatA,

i don't know. i doubt it.

i would look beyond Xi, and see who his closest advisors are.

*ponders*

i mean, yes, Donald Trump is not a good POTUS and i think he's done a poor job of running the country. but when i look at him, i don't see policy; i see an idiot. when i look for policy, i see lunatics like Stephen Miller.

when i look at Xi - particularly on economic matters - i see the Chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, Wang Yang (i know, i know, an unfortunate name by western standards, but google his bio after you're done laughing). he's the real deal. he's not some corrupt kleptocrat.

i also see the State Council of the PRC, Li Keqiang. Li is not some ideological nut, he's an economist by training with a phd. in his twenties (i think it was his 20s), he won China's Sun Yefang Prize - its highest award for achievement in economic science. the guy is a prodigy. its like having Paul Krugman as your advisor, and not some partisan who has his nose up Grover Norquist's ass.

'least, that's how i see it, my friend.

- IGIT

How long are these people going to last, though, if Xi starts to grow more paranoid and petty? He has already been purging a lot of people.

Wang Yang for example fancies himself as a bit of a liberal. His statements have gotten himself in trouble with the Chinese authoritarians a few times.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/05/why-did-beijing-suppress-wang-yangs-remarks-on-taiwan/

Is he just going to stand back and watch as Jinping continues to consolidate power and trample all over any idea of a more legitimate democracy?
 
How long are these people going to last, though, if Xi starts to grow more paranoid and petty? He has already been purging a lot of people.

Wang Yang for example fancies himself as a bit of a liberal. His statements have gotten himself in trouble with the Chinese authoritarians a few times.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/05/why-did-beijing-suppress-wang-yangs-remarks-on-taiwan/

Is he just going to stand back and watch as Jinping continues to consolidate power and trample all over any idea of a more legitimate democracy?

hello again TheGreatA,

Xi is really an interesting fellow.

yes, i think the treatment of ethnic minorities in China is beyond horrific. its really the stuff of dystopian movies. its an outrage.

but Xi's own story, from his upbringing to present day, is really kind of amazing. i admire him, i admit it (in the same way i have an easy time saying i don't admire Donald Trump).

yes, he purged the government - but he didn't purge government to seize power - its the other way around. he was given the reigns with the expressed intent to wipe out corruption, because at the time China really was teetering on a kleptocracy, and not the socialist market economy that Deng envisioned;

Kroeber says the rumor behind Xi's disappearance that summer begins with Xi's going to China's Communist Party elders.
"And the story goes that he said, 'Look. We've got a serious problem here. This requires very serious measures to rein in corruption and impose more discipline, and I'll do that, but you need to give me carte blanche to do what I want,' " says Kroeber.

"His aim is much broader," Kroeber says. "He wants to create a system that will survive after him. And in that sense, he is a kind of member of this Chinese elite that has a sense of mission about the country as whole."


i'm not saying Xi is Ghandi, of course. its just like i said; not all authoritarian tyrants are equal.

this isn't the rise of Japan, in the 1980s. its going to be a fundamental reshuffling of the world order, and it'll outlast both you and i...

...still, i don't mean to be the harbinger of doom on this sort of stuff, because i think it'll all be fine. life seems ok in Germany. life seems ok in South Korea. life seems good in Denmark.

not being "number 1" doesn't mean that life suddenly becomes unfun, or anything like that.

- IGIT
 
Last edited:
TL;DR: An observation on the People's Republic of China. Any thoughts on the infamous 'all powerful' ruling party, its history, current developments, or how it should be dealt with now and in the future? Are we entering the "Chinese Century"? Here's to the next 100 years? :confused: Yes, "Fuck The CCP". Noted. This is actually the first of two centennials they have marked and the country has been through much: Civil War (1945-1949) to Great Leap Forward (1958-1962) to Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) and finally into Contemporary Era (1978-present) -plus- COVID-19. All of those are open to discussion and opinion.

ccp1.jpg


Modern Beginnings.

Deng Xiaoping (22 August 1904 – 19 February 1997) was a Chinese politician who was the paramount leader of the People's Republic of China from 1978 until his retirement in 1992. After Chairman Mao Zedong's death in 1976, Deng rose to power and led China through a series of far-reaching market-economy reforms, which earned him the reputation as the "Architect of Modern China."

Deng outmaneuvered the late Chairman's chosen successor Hua Guofeng and became the new paramount leader of the People's Republic in December 1978. Inheriting a country beset with social conflict, disenchantment with the Communist Party and institutional disorder resulting from the chaotic policies of the Mao era, he started the Boluan Fanzheng program which brought the country back to order.

Deng initiated the historic Reform and Opening-up of China, launched the 863 Program for science and technology, established its nine-year compulsory education and resumed the National College Entrance Examination interrupted by the Cultural Revolution. He opened China to foreign investment and the global market, developing the country into one of the fastest-growing economies in the world and raising the standard of living of hundreds of millions. During his leadership, more people were lifted out of poverty than any other time in human history.



The present day CCP retains Dengism in terms of economic development and modernization under the governance of a one-party state, and that was never going to change. The west was foolish to believe that market economy reforms and its decision to fully bring the country into the fold of international trade would ever lead to a democratic China. The Politburo has also broken from Xiaoping policy in two major ways by scrapping presidential term limits with a strong nudge back towards cult of personality totalitarianism and the rejection of soft power foreign policy. The official line of "peaceful rise" and "regional harmony" is pure cringe predicated on submission to Sino supremacy, and that ultimately extends to the rest of the world.

One external policy goal of the regime is the exportation of its authoritarian model of governance around the globe and the state-run Xinhua news agency has been rather transparent about that. To the CCP, western political systems are associated with fractured societies, inefficient government, endless power transitions and high potential for social disarray. The possibility of political reckoning in China is extremely unlikely regardless of the government's highly repressive nature towards civil liberties from a westerner's perspective, and the population appears to be conditioned for authoritarian acquiescence with a younger generation and growing middle class apathetic to domestic politics. There's something of an unspoken pact between the ruling party and its people with a trade-off of continued prosperity and national achievement for staying out of politics.

Since a lynchpin of the party's legitimacy hinges on continued prosperity, they're rather shameless about currency manipulation, overbuilding, subsidization, product dumping, lack of reciprocity, forced technology transfers and the theft of intellectual property and industrial trade secrets. So much of China's system is based around throughput and maintaining employment, hence the wild investments all over the globe with Chinese nationals shipped in to work in foreign countries and an insane amount of domestic infrastructure projects with entire cities built in which nobody lives. This is also part of why news reports propaganda about the CCP looking to replace the USD as global reserve currency can be laughed off. The position carries a great amount of privilege but their setup is like one big vested interest against the capital inflows, reduced exports and increased unemployment that tends to be included with it.

Xi Jinping studied chemical enginerring at Tsinghua University and keenly understands the value of STEM. Since taking control of the party in 2012, he's launched a blizzard of institutional changes that include shifting priorities (and hundreds of billions) from a previous focus on late-stage product development towards fundamental/applied research and instigating policies to encourage investment in them; reforming evaluation systems, raising the budgets for R&D overheads, cutting bureaucratic red tape to give scientists more freedom with few ethics restraints and incentivization efforts to attract foreign talent from abroad. However, China is still rife with academic fraud and misuse of research grants despite a heavy crackdown effort and researchers there also tend to be fixated with pure output quantity. The PRC can take the global lead in both R&D expenditures and total output whilst actually remaining behind the US in high-impact quality.

ccp2.jpg


ccp3.jpg


And for what they can't achieve or innovate internally? That's the reason for the implementation of a top-down, decades-long, state-directed strategy of intransigent policies, acts and practices which both deliberately and indirectly undercut the output, competitiveness, investment, research, development, innovation and strategic domestically spawned industries of their geopolitical rivals. Many of those industries also serve as invaluable sources of high wage employment, global exports, sustained economic growth and national security for the countries being fleeced. In this case, first and foremost: the United States of America. As found by virtually every bipartisan commission and panel assembled over the last decade, including the IP Commission.

ccp4.jpg


Where global trade is concerned, the OBOR Initiative - spanning more than 60 countries - is in the realm of hyperambitious in its attempt to gain control over the means of delivery. It's at least had the immediate benefit of forging stronger geopolitical ties, opening new markets for Chinese companies and provided continued demand for production with the larger agenda geared on reshaping the global economic order around China's interests wherein they wield a most advantageous position to dictate the terms of global trade. The CCP's system of industrial planning also allows them to coordinate the activities of myriad groups toward specific goals and this is a strategy implemented across every R&D field as well.

ccp5.jpg


Also: Something, Uyghurs, Something.


Ultra competent? I don’t know that turning the whole world against you is ultra competent, when the CCP spent 30+ years being ultra conservative and sensitive with their image.

Ultra competent at running a dictatorship, I would agree, but in terms of increasing the power and wellbeing of your nation? That is a dubious claim.

Well, yeah. China is considerably more powerful than where it stood when he took over as General Secretary. I've watched them close the gap on America in the Nature Index by over 50% and make significant strides in Quantum Key Distribution technology. The ascent is almost kind of terrifying, got me clutching my semiconductors at night. <45>

I think the ground-work had been laid for him to be successful, probably by superior minds. Deng Xiaoping was really the guy who put all of this in motion.

I'm starting to think that Jinping's going to pull a Putin on China and turn it into a stagnant country eventually. He seems to share a lot of traits with historically bad leaders.

For a while, China might continue to prosper, but the longer he lingers on, the worse it's going to get, probably.

It's not as if he made the power grab on his own, the party clearly wanted to install heavy handed leadership continuity over an extended period and approved the move in lockstep. They probably found it necessary if the CCP was going to implement the strenous and temporary economically slowing reforms required to rebalance itself from being investment-led to a more sustainable consumer-led growth model, as well as ditch the soft power foreign policy mask. Hu Jintao was what this forum would call a "cuck", by comparison. Xi is a bull... in a China shop?

<36>

A Superpower. (!)
 
hello again TheGreatA,

Xi is really an interesting fellow.

yes, i think the treatment of ethnic minorities in China is beyond horrific. its really the stuff of dystopian movies. its an outrage.

but Xi's own story, from his upbringing to present day, is really kind of amazing. i admire him, i admit it (in the same way i have an easy time saying i don't admire Donald Trump).

yes, he purged the government - but he didn't purge government to seize power - its the other way around. he was given the reigns with the expressed intent to wipe out corruption, because at the time China really was teetering on a kleptocracy, and not the socialist market economy that Deng envisioned;

Kroeber says the rumor behind Xi's disappearance that summer begins with Xi's going to China's Communist Party elders.
"And the story goes that he said, 'Look. We've got a serious problem here. This requires very serious measures to rein in corruption and impose more discipline, and I'll do that, but you need to give me carte blanche to do what I want,' " says Kroeber.

"His aim is much broader," Kroeber says. "He wants to create a system that will survive after him. And in that sense, he is a kind of member of this Chinese elite that has a sense of mission about the country as whole."


i'm not saying Xi is Ghandi, of course. its just like i said; not all authoritarian tyrants are equal.

this isn't the rise of Japan, in the 1980s. its going to be a fundamental reshuffling of the world order, and it'll outlast both you and i...

...still, i don't mean to be the harbinger of doom on this sort of stuff, because i think it'll all be fine. life seems ok in Germany. life seems ok in South Korea. life seems good in Denmark.

not being "number 1" doesn't mean that life suddenly becomes unfun, or anything like that.

- IGIT


He's a big sweetheart.

 
hello SanchoMF, good morning to you,



the CCP is easy to do business with, my friend. if ya do business with the US, we end up making demands on how you treat your workers and how you treat your environment. its a nuisance, lol. the USA tries to tell other countries how to govern when it does business with them.

China doesn't bother with any of that leftist liberal malarkey. they have one rule, "Don't say anything that embarrasses the CCP". that's it. otherwise, they allow you to govern as you please.

America is more difficult to do business with.

America is so difficult to do business with that America's own biggest corporations have choosen instead to shift its investment and manufacturing to China over the past few decades.

lol.



yep. Americans can't help themselves. i don't think its fair to blame ourselves, though. we're no different from the rest of the world. everyone wants in, as far as China goes.



unfortunately, i agree.

the thing is, unless you get the rest of the planet to agree with the ban, American manufacturing is going to suffer a cardiac arrest, as far as its global competitiveness goes.

its too late.

it maybe was too late the moment Nixon went to China. the Chinese weren't going to remain this rustic farm folk, living in the stone ages, forever. that's not China.

it was definitely too late the moment President Clinton gave China "most favored nation status", and green lit China's acceptance into the WTO.

the US walked away from any effort to reassert itself when it abandoned the TransPacific Parntership (thank you Bernie and thank you Donald) and left its trade partners twisting in the wind.

sooo....

....we are where we are.

- IGIT

Yep. The truth is ugly.

Although the way China (CCP and the business it favours) deals with the West in general is similar to how they deal with countries they really want to exploit (African countries, poor Asian countries) their shadiness in bribery is quite actively being called out and confronted (Australia is a good example of waking up).
Greedy and power hungry people are what the CCP seeks actively in the West so naturally there's plenty of them in the free market economies; the same cats who don't mind sitting in all tables politically speaking, neither loyal or patriotic.
They flaunt some money, lend some power and idiots get swooned candidly getting the short end of the stick.

It's damn shameful but I have some hope. There are whistleblowers are populist movements here, the stuff the CCP hates.
Even the local Western leaders get reminded of their mortality every now and then.
 
The unfortunate reality is that China will likely have greater longevity than western nations due to their indifferent attitude towards the general well being of not just their people, but people in general. If they can continue to walk the fine line of treating people poorly, but not poorly enough to foment unrest, they’ll be more successful than us.
 
Yep. The truth is ugly.

Although the way China (CCP and the business it favours) deals with the West in general is similar to how they deal with countries they really want to exploit (African countries, poor Asian countries) their shadiness in bribery is quite actively being called out and confronted (Australia is a good example of waking up).
Greedy and power hungry people are what the CCP seeks actively in the West so naturally there's plenty of them in the free market economies; the same cats who don't mind sitting in all tables politically speaking, neither loyal or patriotic.
They flaunt some money, lend some power and idiots get swooned candidly getting the short end of the stick.

It's damn shameful but I have some hope. There are whistleblowers are populist movements here, the stuff the CCP hates.
Even the local Western leaders get reminded of their mortality every now and then.

SanchoMF my friend,

i have no hopes. i think they win, lol. i want the US to achieve a more positive and mutually beneficial relationship with China, to be honest.

*ponders*

there is still great poverty in china, of course. and areas of Western china still look very stone agish, for sure. the thing is, despite all that, a country with cities that look like this doesn't make for a good villain. they look successful. they look like they are doing alot of winning, to me.

wangjing-area-china.jpg

62b88e99753c69d9a743ba1d25ead847.jpg

chengdu-milken.jpg

Beijing-NationalGrandTheater02-1500-5a8b07b204d1cf00369fbd6d.jpg

gallery16_national_art_museum_of_china_competition_safdie_architects_cp.jpg

Sunrise-Kempinski-Hotel-Beijing-3.jpg

lol.

i mean, sheesh. these images are actually scarier to me than anything i've read about China's military. these places look sleek. modern. futuristic. Ridley Scott on LSD.

as a fine arts major, i have to tell you; i find these pieces of architecture intimidating.

i predict that the West will find the allure of investing in China too compelling to ignore; its just impossible. and the West will more or less accede to its demands (since generally speaking, China respects the sovereign nature of its trading partners - China doesn't ask or anyone to change its government; it just wants to do business).

there's just way, way, wayyyyy too much money there. and money is agnostic about things like nationalism - it knows no borders.

- IGIT
 
Last edited:
The unfortunate reality is that China will likely have greater longevity than western nations due to their indifferent attitude towards the general well being of not just their people, but people in general. If they can continue to walk the fine line of treating people poorly, but not poorly enough to foment unrest, they’ll be more successful than us.

hiya there Err,

i get that there's angst regarding China's rise. of particular worry to me is the rise of their tech industry; its real and its ongoing. their leadership has also identified holes in our economic armor and they're exploiting these holes. i get it. but lets be honest with ourselves...

...the US is "losing". we don't like it, so we're claiming something shady is afoot. lol....hmmmf. i've heard this rationale used before recently. its someone famous.

we're losing and its fair and square;

China secured the World Trade Organization’s go-ahead to impose $3.6 billion in sanctions against the U.S., in a case that predates the tariff war between the world’s two largest economies but may add a layer of tension to ongoing talks.
The damages awarded, in a document released Friday on the Geneva-based organizations’ website, are the third highest in WTO history.
https://www.industryweek.com/the-ec...s-wto-case-to-sanction-36-billion-in-us-trade

don't delude yourself into thinking that China's leaders are indifferent to the general well being of its own people. respectfully, i find that notion border line racist, lol. its ignorant.

generally speaking, the fortunes of the public have soared under the current leadership. that's because the leaders are actually normal human beings, lol. they work. they sleep. they have families. they like sports and good food. they're not aliens from outer space.

they want to see their country flourish. Xi is a scientist by training; he's not some lunatic general who led a junta to seize power.

these are sophisticated people. Trump is a barbarian compared to the current leadership in Beijing.

*muses*


- IGIT


 
hiya there Err,

i get that there's angst regarding China's rise. of particular worry to me is the rise of their tech industry; its real and its ongoing. their leadership has also identified holes in our economic armor and they're exploiting these holes. i get it. but lets be honest with ourselves...

...the US is "losing". we don't like it, so we're claiming something shady is afoot. lol....hmmmf. i've heard this rationale used before recently. its someone famous.

we're losing and its fair and square;

China secured the World Trade Organization’s go-ahead to impose $3.6 billion in sanctions against the U.S., in a case that predates the tariff war between the world’s two largest economies but may add a layer of tension to ongoing talks.
The damages awarded, in a document released Friday on the Geneva-based organizations’ website, are the third highest in WTO history.
https://www.industryweek.com/the-ec...s-wto-case-to-sanction-36-billion-in-us-trade

don't delude yourself into thinking that China's leaders are indifferent to the general well being of its own people. respectfully, i find that notion border line racist, lol. its ignorant.

generally speaking, the fortunes of the public have soared under the current leadership. that's because the leaders are actually normal human beings, lol. they work. they sleep. they have families. they like sports and good food. they're not aliens from outer space.

they want to see their country flourish. Xi is a scientist by training; he's not some lunatic general who led a junta to seize power.

these are sophisticated people. Trump is a barbarian compared to the current leadership in Beijing.

*muses*


- IGIT
It’s not racist, it’s just a matter of observation, look at the way they treat Uighurs and other minorities. I’m sure that the quality of life has improved drastically for
the average Chinese citizen. It still doesn’t change that whatever freedom they perceive they have is a facade that can be taken away by the party at any given time,
like those journalists who were disappeared for reporting on the coronavirus outbreak.
 
hiya there Mr. ShinkanPo,

ayup.

that's all i've been saying in my many exchanges with you, regarding China. i think you've mistaken me for being a pro-China propagandist.

i was only being realistic.

the Soviet Union's economy during the cold war was wretched - its presence, globally, was laughable, and utterly dependent on the price of oil. just another incompetent petro-state. plenty of those around.

even in present day under the mighty Putin, Russia is a joke. its economy is smaller than the "country" of Caliornia. and New York. and Texas.

cuba? joke. iran? joke. Venezuela? joke. north korea? massive joke.

all ridiculous economies, very easy to make pariahs.

Xi is no joke. China is no joke. China is completely and utterly different. the geopolitical mallet that they'll wield (which is already kind of formidable) is only going to get bigger as its massive population advances fully into middle class earning power, meaning; every nation in the world is going to want to do business in China.

even in present day, Hollywood will not greenlight a script that portrays the CCP in a negative light. nope, can't do it. why? its business. China has a huge, massive movie going audience. Xi can break Disney in half if he blocks the release of the Avengers franchise to his 1.4 billion citizens.

that's just the way it is, ShinkanPo, aye?

- IGIT

@Deorum

The way I see it the Soviet union failed the comercial test they havent produced interesting products even for their own region the Soviet block.

If we will look it and simplify this lets take a look at entertainment..

Video games.. The western aligned markets like Japan produced Mario! Pacman! And other early video game classics.

What video game the Soviets made popular? Tetris a fucking puzzle game.

It would not have been popular had Nintendon't not marketed it with Jimboy!

Now did I say Computer video games?
G7oEwsl9DWk48AxHXcPOQf1O2h-daJshYyo3zwcwqa7kvebTYYZE64dZk-xjrFKZJiQAoiuLzoxIoFe8c7pJzCDKo6ZeyG0fEzklm02wUQIgKPaeM8U=w320-h253


Eh so what's inside Video game consoles?

Nope its not Pubic Hair....

Chips! Silicon Chips! And now we are seeing China agressively trying to win the Chips war.!

Like what Deorum said in his previous comentary about Chips its one if not the most defining advantage the west had over the Soviets!

Its some thing the West had so much lead its not even funny.

Maybe the "imperialist West " will strike back at China at some point bribing their industry leaders to buy Western chips instead of developing their own and undermining their own programs.

It wont be pretty some will cry fists will be thrown,
Will Elon musk move to China?

Will Jack Ma' moved to the US?

Will Xi poos over confidence result some resentment?
 
It’s not racist, it’s just a matter of observation, look at the way they treat Uighurs and other minorities. I’m sure that the quality of life has improved drastically for
the average Chinese citizen. It still doesn’t change that whatever freedom they perceive they have is a facade that can be taken away by the party at any given time,
like those journalists who were disappeared for reporting on the coronavirus outbreak.

Lol that guy
When all else fail

RACE CARD
 
It’s not racist, it’s just a matter of observation, look at the way they treat Uighurs and other minorities. I’m sure that the quality of life has improved drastically for
the average Chinese citizen. It still doesn’t change that whatever freedom they perceive they have is a facade that can be taken away by the party at any given time,
like those journalists who were disappeared for reporting on the coronavirus outbreak.

hiya Err,

the treatment that China has dealt out to the Uyghurs is terrible. ditto the denizens of Tibet. terrible.
i wasn't speaking in absolutes. i said that, generally speaking, the fortunes of the China's citizenry have soared under Xi - and this is undeniable.

also, the average Chinese citizen isn't some untrained savage, lol. they know what their freedoms are and are not. they are, believe it or not, just like Americans in this respect - we also know what are and are not our freedoms. these are simple concepts.

the reason why you see so little political dissent (and zero sustained political dissent) in China is the same reason you rarely see jihadist beheadings in the United States. its illegal and general society finds it distasteful.

*high fives*

- IGIT
 
hiya Err,

the treatment that China has dealt out to the Uyghurs is terrible. ditto the denizens of Tibet. terrible.
i wasn't speaking in absolutes. i said that, generally speaking, the fortunes of the China's citizenry have soared under Xi - and this is undeniable.

also, the average Chinese citizen isn't some untrained savage, lol. they know what their freedoms are and are not. they are, believe it or not, just like Americans in this respect - we also know what are and are not our freedoms. these are simple concepts.

the reason why you see so little political dissent (and zero sustained political dissent) in China is the same reason you rarely see jihadist beheadings in the United States. its illegal and general society finds it distasteful.

*high fives*

- IGIT
Perhaps you are right, the people in China could be culturally less inclined to engage in protest because it’s considered distasteful. However, is this due to a natural inclination that developed culturally over decades and centuries, or perhaps due to social conditioning based upon the strict and rigid control the communist party maintains over education and the indoctrination of children into that system. It seems to me that the Chinese are quite spirited in their will to protest, with Tianenman square and Hong Kong coming to mind. I would be inclined to say that the absence of protesting within China is partially related to an unhealthy fear the people have of their government.

giphy.gif
 
Back
Top