/ China

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
SI - profile removed on 29 Oct 2013
China is demonised in the West because it doesn't have democracy and is ruled by the communist party. Our media presents us an unbalanced and negative view of the country.

China is the superpower least likely to go to war.

The CPC is internally democratic, and it has a membership of 80 million. Any Chinise citizen can become leader of the country.

The CPC advises provincial authorities to improve human rights and reduce capital punishment. China's human rights are similar to those of Britain half a century ago.

China is a communist state operating a capitalist economic model, this has provided China's economic growth, China is the only country that could switch to communism if it no longer wishes its economy to grow.

China is the least indebted superpower so is less likely to require continual growth.


Let the fun begin... <dons arguing hat>
IainRUK - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l: 80 million of 1.3 billion population?
GrahamD - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK:

China's human rights similar to Britain in 1963 ?
Postmanpat on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
>
>
> China is the superpower least likely to go to war.
>
> The CPC is internally democratic, and it has a membership of 80 million. Any Chinise citizen can become leader of the country.
>
So, 6% of the population gets tovote. This democratic?

If joining UKIP were necessary to become the leader of the UK would you be happy?
>
> China is a communist state operating a capitalist economic model, this has provided China's economic growth, China is the only country that could switch to communism if it no longer wishes its economy to grow.
>
Why?

> China is the least indebted superpower so is less likely to require continual growth.
>
You think the population would accept declining living standards?

Sir Chasm - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l: "China is a communist state operating a capitalist economic model, this has provided China's economic growth, China is the only country that could switch to communism if it no longer wishes its economy to grow."

So it isn't communist then. I think this thread is a not so subtle attempt to discover gudrun/shonatheliar/naedanger's new identity.
chris j on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

> China is the superpower least likely to go to war.

Given the sabre-rattling with Japan and the Philippines over the last few years are you quite sure about that?
thin bob on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to chris j:
> (In reply to shaun l)
>
> [...]
>
> Given the sabre-rattling with Japan and the Philippines over the last few years are you quite sure about that?

Also Some Unpleasantness with Taiwan and, um, Nepal.
IainRUK - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to GrahamD: I'd say far further back. They execute more than anyone in the world with very little right of appeal and a justice system heavily influenced by politics, with no transparency. I think it very right that we do not approve of their human rights. It's shockingly bad.
GrahamD - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK:

I agree. It was the OP that suggested that China now was like Britain 50 years ago.
ice.solo - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

Have you spent much time in china?
teflonpete - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

Tiananmen Square?
teflonpete - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

You can google China's history on human rights, but not if you're in China.
In reply to shaun l: Is it true that they stuff live monkey's heads through holes in a table then cave their skulls in and eat their brains, or is that a myth?
Timmd on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to thin bob:
> (In reply to chris j)
> [...]
>
> Also Some Unpleasantness with Taiwan and, um, Nepal.

...and Tibet.
SI - profile removed on 29 Oct 2013
<removes thinking cap><replaces with arguing cap>

Comparing China to Britain was a pretty stupid thing to do, comparing China to Europe and Russia is a far more sensible. Similar sized land mass, same latitude, similar population size.

My point about human rights in China was also a bit stupid, they are pretty terrible. However the CPC encourage the provincial government to execute less people, which leads me to think they wish to improve them.

Tiananmen square is without doubt a dark period in the history of China. Not one I shall try to justify. However, correct me if I'm wrong but was that one of the only occations China has used the Military to quell a protest? The incident seems more like a Bloody Sunday on acid than government policy. Compare that to the atrocities we've seen in Europe and Russia since WW2/Mao's revolution.

BTW, I know I went in a bit full beans with the OP but the general purpose of the thread was to test my theories out, I'm happy to be corrected, and I'll happily read any links proving so.





IainRUK - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l: I think most in the UK are very open to chinese trade.. its the future, but thats how we can influence. I do wish the UK government had a stronger stance on the death penalty, and I include to the US on that.. I was always dissapointed with the stance on hussein.. I wished we'd categorically stated we were opposed to his execution and even backed out there and then.

Problem with China it is such a vast vast country, I don't know much about it though, how much each province has its own rule making powers, similar to the USA.. and then how the special admin areas.. Macau and Hong Kong operate.. and least how Taiwan is.

I've a mate from Taiwan he's very much that it is its own country.. afterall its an olympic recognised team...
Simon4 - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

> Tiananmen square is without doubt a dark period in the history of China. Not one I shall try to justify. However, correct me if I'm wrong but was that one of the only occations China has used the Military to quell a protest?

You are totally wrong!

Have you never heard of The Great Leap Forward, or the Cultural Revolution?

These were atrocities running into 10s of millions of deaths, certainly on the scale, in fact greater than the Nazi genocides or Soviet massacres, gulags etc, certainly rivaling and exceeding the Great Terror, the collectivisation of Agriculture and the terror famine in the Ukraine. Much less well documented even than the Soviet era, as this was in any case a much more isolated tyranny, while for a period after the end of the Soviet Union, quite detailed (if not necessarily that accurate or complete), information came out, the Nazi era is quite well recorded.

That is quite apart from Mao's relentless brutality during the very long Chinese Civil War, not to mention things like the quite recent repression of Tibetan unrest (and consequent Tibetan attacks on ethnic Han Chinese).

The only reason that Tiananmen Square is fairly well known and documented is that it was at the end of a period of relative openness, also there were quite a few foreigners around to witness it. Though even on that occasion, the repression was on a much greater scale than just in the central square.

Where, BTW, do you get the idea that there is any kind of internal democracy in the Communist party? This would be very surprising news to anyone who actually knows China in the present.

My impression of China at the moment is that there is quite a lot of economic freedom (one might almost say too much), including the freedom to travel too and from the West, as long as you don't try to take any political activity. Do that and you are in trouble, even more than in Putin's Russia.

You are right that China is unique in the world. But certainly not in the way that you think.
SI - profile removed on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to Postmanpat:
> (In reply to shaun l)
> [...]
> So, 6% of the population gets tovote. This democratic?

It's internal democracy. You have to join the party to vote, anyone can join the party - 100% of the population can vote. It's less demoractic than the West certainly, but is it dictatorship? Why have only 6% of Chinese people joined the party?

Do you think a Western style democracy could work with a poulation of 1.3 billion?

> If joining UKIP were necessary to become the leader of the UK would you be happy?

The CPC's like UKIP?

> You think the population would accept declining living standards?

I don't think living standards would decline, if the economy stopped growing then it would stay the same. Why did the CPC decide to remain the CPC at the turn of the century (it was debated). They're are many capitalists in the CPC.

SI - profile removed on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to ice.solo: Nope, but I bet you have, do tell!
IainRUK - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l: So there's one party...
SI - profile removed on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK: Iain I'm not sure many of us know much about China. I'm not saying it's a paradise, i'm not saying it's better than the West but I want to know more about it. The thread attracted the usual response, a list of atrocities...

I think Simon4 beautifully illustrates the impression of China we're fed over here. But this is the oldest civilisation on the planet, I know their way is different but I want to understand it.

Ice-solo's right, I need to go!
SARS on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

What do you want to know. Culturally vastly different to Brits. My ex wife is HK Chinese so I've had some acquaintance. If you read Chinese history you'll also get some insight - lots of tragedy, much of it quite recent.
ice.solo - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

ive spent nearly 20 years involved with the country, first studying it then living and working there, plus dozens of trips and an ongoing role consulting on various aspects. some of that stufff has been directly involved with their awakening.

its not a democracy. they vote, yes, but not as we do. china actually has a massive voting number, but its at a very base range and its not open to many. they vote at a grassroots level for positions within local parties. its not about electing leaders, just roles.
above that all else is totally opaque. what goes on in chinese power plays is not disclosed.
as for the party, its open to everyone - who takes allegience to the rules. these include professing atheism and adherance to a single party system.
no, not any chinese citizen can become a leader.

half a century ago britain did not execute +2000 people a year. back then britain also had an independant judiciary and was party to many international governing bodies that oversee human rights. china has almost none of that.
even with leverage from groups like the ADB to align with international protocols, little has happened.

use the military against the people? it happens regularly. think tibet, xinjiang and inner mongolia.
the tiananmen square incident was as much a media event as a violent one. to this day the west is very uneducated about what happened and the evolution of events. of course its inexcusable, but it wasnt as simple as the army shooting students.

simon4 has it on the nail re chinese atrocities. the motivations were totally different to the jewish holocaust and stalins purges (in most ways), and the scenario they were set against were too, but the death toll and the madness have no equal.

china is not without massive debt. their entire economy is based on a foundation of mega-investment from the US and japan. and that bubble is well on the way deflating. for 5 years now many assets have been down-sized in china for a multitude of reasons, not least the endemic corruption that has always stifled top level foreign interaction.

yes, capitalism has been the steroid of their economy. its been very very disparate, but the living standards of hundreds of millions have been raised - tho some by very little.
they couldnt go back to maoist communism tho, not now, it had already ground to a halt and the interaction with other large economies wouldnt allow it. suddenly cutting themselves off would be a disaster on the largest scale as they are too reliant on foreign resources to sustain themselves now. the tax and social system would fail going back to a system where the government was expected to provide basic resources.

its hard to think where china is going. the version seen in the west is very tainted. china looks as much to its immediate neighbours as it does to its big trading partners. they still skirmish on their borders (of which very little is actually in ethnic han control), and the internal problems of modern growth is surpassing what their world position can cope with.
even internationally, for a major economy, permanant seat on the security council and top resource devourer, they still have the basic issues of a 3rd world nation and act like it. their currency is still worthless outside their borders, their institutions a joke and their contributions to international governing bodies near non-existant. thailand, venezuala and canada have more political influence internationally.

also, china being a superpower not going to war is a hazy statement. they have been in a state of declared conflict with india for 50 years - regularly firing upon each other. recent flare ups with pacific neighbours have scrambled airforces and navies, chinese backed mercenary armies in myanmar have clashed violently for decades, chinese military have clashed with ethnic groups along the kazakh and vietnamese borders.
true, they are unlikely to go far away and get involved - that said their navy has been tasked with dealing with somali pirates and have been suspiciously successful.

should you go? sure. the party ended 10 years ago and its pretty tame these days. it used to be really intense. nowdays its mostly a post-industrial nightmare that more dull than confronting. theres great stuff there tho, between the shit parts. the han themselves are fascinating as a civilization.
plus the mountains are great. whilst everybody whines about crowds on everest, the taliban in pakistan and bolts in patagonia theres all that put together then doubled in china being ignored. but keep that to yourself, ok.
Al Evans on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Simon4: I'd also include the mass starvation of millions of Tibetans due to the Chinese making then turn all the millet fields (which grows in Tibets climate) into rice growing areas (which doesn't prosper in Tibets climate). The Chinese admit to hundreds of thousands starving, the Tibetans claim it was millions.
Al Evans on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to Postmanpat)
> [...]
>
> It's internal democracy. You have to join the party to vote, anyone can join the party - 100% of the population can vote.

No they can't you have to be nominated by a person 'of standing' within the party, a teacher or a politician.
Postmanpat on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to Postmanpat)
> [...]
>
> It's internal democracy. You have to join the party to vote, anyone can join the party - 100% of the population can vote. It's less demoractic than the West certainly, but is it dictatorship? Why have only 6% of Chinese people joined the party?
>
Supposing they don't agree with the party????!!!

> Do you think a Western style democracy could work with a poulation of 1.3 billion?
>
Something along those lines.Yes.
>
> The CPC's like UKIP?
>
Did you seriously not get the point of the comment? In that its views represent only a portion of the population,yes.
>
> I don't think living standards would decline, if the economy stopped growing then it would stay the same. Why did the CPC decide to remain the CPC at the turn of the century (it was debated). They're are many capitalists in the CPC.

No, if an economy stops growing living standards decline.

Because the CPC has the reins of the power and want to keep it that way?

ByEek - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Postmanpat:

> So, 6% of the population gets tovote. This democratic?

It is better than the average turn out in this country for the local council elections! :-)

I am with the OP on this one. China is such a massive country that you can't take a single issue like human rights and because a few high profile people get treated badly the whole country gets tarred with the same brush.

If we look a little closer at our own sceptred Isle, we see that we do not have freedom of speech, that we have police brutality and large swaths of government departments and quangos that are totally unaccountable. And for all we bang on about democracy, constituency boundaries and safe seats along with a total apathy from the population as a whole, we may as well live in a dictatorship.
Bruce Hooker - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK:
> (In reply to shaun l) So there's one party...

No, there are others.

The level of condescension on this thread towards the Chinese people, especially from Brits given our atrocious history concerning China, would, if heaped together, tower way above Everest itself!

Leave the Chinese alone, they suffered enormously during two centuries of colonial oppression, now they are pulling out of it, quite rapidly by any objective standards, and will regain their position in the world if their enemies don't interfere.
toad - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker: How do you view ice. solo's post? On the face of it it sounded informed and objective, but I know you sometimes have a different viewpoint.
IainRUK - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
> (In reply to IainRUK)
> [...]
>
> No, there are others.
>

is there political freedom?
Postmanpat on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to ByEek:
> (In reply to Postmanpat)
>
> [...]
>
> It is better than the average turn out in this country for the local council elections! :-)
>
Different issues. I agree with all you say about UK "democracy" but that is not of much relevance in discussing China. It is also entirely different that only 6% of people bother to vote as opposed to only 6% are allowed to vote.
Bruce Hooker - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to toad:

Much is sort of true but don't forget he is not politically neutral, anymore than any of us are. He says he was working there for years but perhaps he could tell us in what context and for who?

We all tend to judge a country through our own eyes and many also look at particular places and historical periods without looking at the overall picture. I read somewhere that for the last 3 or 4 (can't remember) thousand years apart from the couple of centuries that they fell under foreign colonial domination, China was the most advanced civilization in the world. The Chinese Revolution of 1949 put a stop to this domination and started what is an amazingly rapid regeneration of the country, but like turning super-tankers round it isn't an instant operation, and one that inevitably led to errors and tragedies. Now they appear to be out of the worst, give them time.

Also it would be na´ve to imagine that their rival world powers look on this with a neutral benign attitude - it isn't exactly the historical attitude adopted by the Western world when they feel threatened, so it would not seem surprising if they were efforts made to hinder China from becoming once again the most civilized, and human nature being what it is, powerful nation in the world.
Bruce Hooker - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK:
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker)
> [...]
>
> is there political freedom?

The Chinese might ask "Is there food?". A starving family isn't really politically free either, is it? India is presented as a great democracy by many but on average are the Chinese better off than the Indians?

As I keep repeating, give them time. Many Chinese say that what really scares them is returning to the horrors of the first half of the 20th century and the 19th century. A break down of civil society in such a huge densely populated country doesn't beat thinking about... Iraq multiplied by 50!

SARS on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Lots of what you wrote I agree with. And I do think the West has a habit of trying to impose their ideals on culturally very different societies.
SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to ice.solo: Thanks, nice to read some informed opinion. I won't dispute anything you said there other than the dept. The figures I saw showed the EU had the higest dept, US second and both around 15 times greater than the Chinese.
SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Postmanpat:
> (In reply to shaun l)
> [...]
> Supposing they don't agree with the party????!!!

I'm not claiming it's democracy like we have in the West, but that there is some form of democracy, and that it isn't a totalitarian dictatorship.


> [...]
> Something along those lines.Yes.
> [...]
> Did you seriously not get the point of the comment? In that its views represent only a portion of the population,yes.
> [...]

I got the point, so what your saying is 6% of British people voted for UKIP and 6% of Chinese people can vote, however 6% of British people aren't members of UKIP. I think the question should be would you be happy if you had to join Labour or the Tory party to vote, and the answer would be yes. I've never voted, I don't care whether Labour or the Torys are in power. You may think this atypical yet our voter turn out shows different. Perhaps the low party membership shows satisfaction, the Chinese fear social discord more than anything else.

>
> No, if an economy stops growing living standards decline.

Hasn't the Japanese economy been stagnant for a decade? Have living standards fallen?

>
> Because the CPC has the reins of the power and want to keep it that way?

The CPC had an internal debate at the turn of the century as to whether to remain The Communist Party of China or remove the Communist tag. They did this to keep hold of the reins of power? Why?

SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Simon4: The wikipedia page on the CPC explains how the internal democracy works. I'd post a link but I can't work out how to do it on my phone.
SARS on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

It's funny because I think on a number of measures Japanese living standards have fallen in the last 20 years. E.g. higher percentage of part time workers.

However, Japan real GDP per capita has basically been growing over time - even in the past 20 years.
IainRUK - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker: Why the need to invade other countries?
ByEek - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Postmanpat:

> Different issues. I agree with all you say about UK "democracy" but that is not of much relevance in discussing China. It is also entirely different that only 6% of people bother to vote as opposed to only 6% are allowed to vote.

You are quite right of course. I was very surprised to discover when talking to some of my peers in China, that they weren't really that bothered about democracy. Such is the pace of prosperity and opportunity I guess things like democracy aren't that much of a problem. I guess it is the same in this country. On balance, things are kind of ok and as a result, there is a general apathy towards politics. People only seem to get involved in politics when change is in the air.
Postmanpat on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to Postmanpat)
> [...]
>
>
> I got the point, so what your saying is 6% of British people voted for UKIP and 6% of Chinese people can vote, however 6% of British people aren't members of UKIP.
>
Blimey.... No, the point is: is it fair that in order to be allowed to vote one has to subscribe to the positions of a particular party?
>
> Hasn't the Japanese economy been stagnant for a decade? Have living standards fallen?
>
See SARS reply.
>
> The CPC had an internal debate at the turn of the century as to whether to remain The Communist Party of China or remove the Communist tag. They did this to keep hold of the reins of power? Why?

1)They like power. (and the "perks" it brings.)

2)They fear anarchy.

Bruce Hooker - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK:
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker) Why the need to invade other countries?

Quite agree, why Western countries still seem to think they have this right, and are very reticent to give their ill-gotten gains back never fails to amaze me.... that could well make the subject of another thread.

IainRUK - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker: I know.. so you agree they should leaev Tibet..

SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK: Did China invade Tibet? From what I understand the Chinese marched an army to the boarder and stuck a deal with the Dalai Lama.
SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Postmanpat:
> (In reply to shaun l)
> [...]
> Blimey.... No, the point is: is it fair that in order to be allowed to vote one has to subscribe to the positions of a particular party?

It's not fair compared to Western Democracy, no. My point was it isn't a totalitarian regime as most people imagine.

> 1)They like power. (and the "perks" it brings.)
>
> 2)They fear anarchy.

That's not what I meant, I meant why did they decide to remain the Communist Party of China? If I'm missing something quite obvious here you'll have to explain.

IainRUK - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to IainRUK) Did China invade Tibet? From what I understand the Chinese marched an army to the boarder and stuck a deal with the Dalai Lama.

No there was a battle.
In reply to shaun l: What about the monkey brain thing?
teflonpete - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to Postmanpat)
> [...]
>
> It's not fair compared to Western Democracy, no. My point was it isn't a totalitarian regime as most people imagine.
>

Except that it's a one party state and the formation and election of government is controlled by what the single party will allow.
teflonpete - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Submit to Gravity:
> (In reply to shaun l) What about the monkey brain thing?

Looks like they're cracking down on it (excuse the pun). :0)

http://www.ibtimes.com/china-cracks-down-monkey-brain-other-wild-animal-delicacies-916161
SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to ice.solo: Hey, a little re-read and re-think and there's a few points


>
> simon4 has it on the nail re chinese atrocities. the motivations were totally different to the jewish holocaust and stalins purges (in most ways), and the scenario they were set against were too, but the death toll and the madness have no equal.

I disagree here, I'm not sure about Simon4's figures. I've seen death tolls from Stalin's Russia estimated at 10 million and 60 million. Likewise most other atrocities. Because of this I have very little confidence in death tolls, i'd say the madness of WW1 and WW2 combined were equal to the Chinese revolutions. The whole world was drawn into madness.


>
> yes, capitalism has been the steroid of their economy. its been very very disparate, but the living standards of hundreds of millions have been raised - tho some by very little.
> they couldnt go back to maoist communism tho, not now, it had already ground to a halt and the interaction with other large economies wouldnt allow it. suddenly cutting themselves off would be a disaster on the largest scale as they are too reliant on foreign resources to sustain themselves now. the tax and social system would fail going back to a system where the government was expected to provide basic resources.

Yet the government choose to remain the Communist Party. If the global economy was to colapse, capitalism to fail would the Chinese not be in a much beter postion to establish a new economic model?

>
> its hard to think where china is going. the version seen in the west is very tainted. china looks as much to its immediate neighbours as it does to its big trading partners. they still skirmish on their borders (of which very little is actually in ethnic han control), and the internal problems of modern growth is surpassing what their world position can cope with.

> also, china being a superpower not going to war is a hazy statement. they have been in a state of declared conflict with india for 50 years - regularly firing upon each other. recent flare ups with pacific neighbours have scrambled airforces and navies, chinese backed mercenary armies in myanmar have clashed violently for decades, chinese military have clashed with ethnic groups along the kazakh and vietnamese borders.
> true, they are unlikely to go far away and get involved - that said their navy has been tasked with dealing with somali pirates and have been suspiciously successful.

Always on the boarder though... The Chinese defend there boarders or use military force to influence/coerce their neighbours. A completely different military policy to the Russians, EU and US.

>
> should you go? sure. the party ended 10 years ago and its pretty tame these days. it used to be really intense. nowdays its mostly a post-industrial nightmare that more dull than confronting. theres great stuff there tho, between the shit parts. the han themselves are fascinating as a civilization.
> plus the mountains are great. whilst everybody whines about crowds on everest, the taliban in pakistan and bolts in patagonia theres all that put together then doubled in china being ignored. but keep that to yourself, ok.

Will do ;)
SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to Submit to Gravity: Apologies sir, it seems I have completely ignored your question. I will now attempt to answer it in the most comprehensive manner I am able to.

I have no idea, probably?
SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to teflonpete:
> (In reply to shaun l)
> [...]
>
> Except that it's a one party state and the formation and election of government is controlled by what the single party will allow.

Do you think western style democracy would work in China?

tony on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> Yet the government choose to remain the Communist Party. If the global economy was to colapse, capitalism to fail would the Chinese not be in a much beter postion to establish a new economic model?

Probably not. If Western capitalist economies collapsed, they'd pull an awful lot of Chinese industry down with it. For example, Foxconn employ about a million people manufacturing electronic goods, mainly for the rest of the world. If demand for those electronic goods disappeared, Foxconn and most of their million workers would be stuffed. The growth in the Chinese economy has come largely as a result of Western demand.
In reply to shaun l:

> Yet the government choose to remain the Communist Party.

They could call themselves the Birthday Party, the Rave Party or the Fancy Dress Party, it doesn't change what they are and that's very clearly not communist in any sense of the word.
teflonpete - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to teflonpete)
> [...]
>
> Do you think western style democracy would work in China?

I really don't know, ice would be in a far better place to offer an opinion on that. For my part, I'm not convinced that western style democracy works in the west!
Bruce Hooker - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to IainRUK:
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker) I know.. so you agree they should leaev Tibet..

So you meant Tibet :-) The thing is they regard this as historically part of China, which is not totally absurd, but they haven't invaded any countries outside their own back-door for many centuries which, alas, cannot be said for our own "democracies".

ice.solo - on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to ice.solo) Hey, a little re-read and re-think and there's a few points
>
> I disagree here, I'm not sure about Simon4's figures. I've seen death tolls from Stalin's Russia estimated at 10 million and 60 million. Likewise most other atrocities. Because of this I have very little confidence in death tolls, i'd say the madness of WW1 and WW2 combined were equal to the Chinese revolutions. The whole world was drawn into madness.
>
numbers from the failed great leaps and cultural revolutions range between 30 and 70 million. that doesnt include another million here and there from the civil wars
it was a different sort of madness, often not the insanity of war. most were from starvation from ecological disasters bought upon by moronic agricultural ideas and propaganda plays that wiped out industries. the madness of the cultural revolution was the genuine thing as atrocities went on in a frenzy of paranoia and zealousness.
>
> Yet the government choose to remain the Communist Party. If the global economy was to colapse, capitalism to fail would the Chinese not be in a much beter postion to establish a new economic model?
>
china now is a capitalist economy, suffering all that other capitalist economies do. they are communist in regime, but even the large state owned conglomerates are run along regular capitalist means. the state no longer provides most of what it once did, tho it still controls the populations lives geared towards its own ends.
china is totalitarian. the government controls where you live, what job you have, how you have children, get married and where you can go. its better than it used to be, but basic living choices in china still directed by the government.
>
> Always on the boarder though... The Chinese defend there boarders or use military force to influence/coerce their neighbours. A completely different military policy to the Russians, EU and US.
>
so wars on the border dont count?
the chinese defend borders that are often disputed since dubious events decades ago. the most volatile is the SE bborder with india where china claims arunachal as part of their territory that came with taking over tibet. likewise incursions into vietnam and coastal waters are based on land grabs from history, sometimes centuries ago. china actually posseses a large chunk of kashmir (aksai qin) in a rarely mentioned aspect to the conflict.
bear in mind too that 'china' as it now is, is a nation composed of territories, many only recently included and under duress. all of their land borders have involved military pressure and many areas are still heavily disputed and volatile (i worked on projects concerning this).
so yes, very different policy to the round eyes, but not without its own inconsistancies.
>
> Will do ;)
dont just hang around the cosmetic coastal wonder cities and the tourist trail and think you have seen 'china'. get yourself to places like ningxia, henan, qinghai and guizhou for a more balanced perspective.

In reply to shaun l:
>
> China is the superpower least likely to go to war.
>
Given the size and quatity of submarines and aircraft carriers China is currently building, I find that statement impossible to believe.
SI - profile removed on 30 Oct 2013
In reply to ice.solo:
> (In reply to shaun l)

> [...]
> china now is a capitalist economy, suffering all that other capitalist economies do. they are communist in regime, but even the large state owned conglomerates are run along regular capitalist means. the state no longer provides most of what it once did, tho it still controls the populations lives geared towards its own ends.
> china is totalitarian. the government controls where you live, what job you have, how you have children, get married and where you can go. its better than it used to be, but basic living choices in china still directed by the government.

I'm not sure what sense you use the term totalitarian. To me that means Hitlar, Stalin, Mao - would you still put China with that group? Aren't many of those measures, single child policy in particular to prevent overpopulation problems?


Why do you think they keep the communist tag?

> [...]
> so wars on the border dont count?
> the chinese defend borders that are often disputed since dubious events decades ago. the most volatile is the SE bborder with india where china claims arunachal as part of their territory that came with taking over tibet. likewise incursions into vietnam and coastal waters are based on land grabs from history, sometimes centuries ago. china actually posseses a large chunk of kashmir (aksai qin) in a rarely mentioned aspect to the conflict.
> bear in mind too that 'china' as it now is, is a nation composed of territories, many only recently included and under duress. all of their land borders have involved military pressure and many areas are still heavily disputed and volatile (i worked on projects concerning this).
> so yes, very different policy to the round eyes, but not without its own inconsistancies.


I think defending your boarders is much different to fighting wars half way round the world as the US has always done, England since we learnt to sail into the wind.

Even fighting aggresive wars and pre-emptive strikes on your boarders is more justifible (but not nessacessarly justifed) than fighting wars on other continents imo. At least China has some notion of self denfence when it fights. Our wars are only ever about conquest when they're far from home.

When I said war I meant full-scale war. Nothing in China's history or actions convince me that there likely to start a full -scale war. I know shit loads of them in Sheffield. They're all really nice.


> [...]
> dont just hang around the cosmetic coastal wonder cities and the tourist trail and think you have seen 'china'. get yourself to places like ningxia, henan, qinghai and guizhou for a more balanced perspective.

Cheers for the advice dude. Off to Ton Sai this Winter, if I don't complete my 7 year project to climb an E4 next Summer it'll never happen. Time to accept enternal punterdom, grow a beard, ditch the rope and see some cool shit. On mushrooms!
ice.solo - on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to ice.solo)

> I'm not sure what sense you use the term totalitarian. To me that means Hitlar, Stalin, Mao - would you still put China with that group? Aren't many of those measures, single child policy in particular to prevent overpopulation problems?
>
the central govt still tries to totally control the population. basic freedoms we take for granted are limited or denied in china.
the one child thing isnt really part of that, yes, its more about controlling growth.
its not as bad as the stalin and maoist stuff from the 60s, and its much better than it was even when i started going there, but its still a level of control many would say is unnacceptable. the one central agency controls what people do, see and think. tv is a non-stop blanket of blatant propaganda covering an entire world perspective, and the chinese were amongst the first to harness tvs power. even today tiny impoverished hamlets may have a telly as one of the few powered devices.
>
> Why do you think they keep the communist tag?
>
maybe because it still applies to much of the govts ideal.
the chinese never have functioned as a democracy, so regimes that think for the people are normal.
a communist tag contnues to justify the central systems ideals of collectivism towards a greater national cause, and works to justify the limiting of unwanted 'enemies' like religion, free media, mass migration etc, all the while assuring the base population they are the real heroes.
it also works to keep a massively agricultural populace tilling the soil.

china still has 5 year plans, ideological enemies, obligated labour, political prisons housing activists and concpts to collectivise and stratify everyone according to language and ethnicity. its not a nation built on diversity like democracies profess, rather its all about 'unity' towards a common goal and some of the old stalin/maoist methods still get that done.

also, its would be hard to change the minds of so many people after 50 years of telling them otherwise.
>
>
> I think defending your boarders is much different to fighting wars half way round the world as the US has always done, England since we learnt to sail into the wind.
>
> Even fighting aggresive wars and pre-emptive strikes on your boarders is more justifible (but not nessacessarly justifed) than fighting wars on other continents imo. At least China has some notion of self denfence when it fights. Our wars are only ever about conquest when they're far from home.
>
> When I said war I meant full-scale war. Nothing in China's history or actions convince me that there likely to start a full -scale war. I know shit loads of them in Sheffield. They're all really nice.
>
>
> [...]
>
> Cheers for the advice dude. Off to Ton Sai this Winter, if I don't complete my 7 year project to climb an E4 next Summer it'll never happen. Time to accept enternal punterdom, grow a beard, ditch the rope and see some cool shit. On mushrooms!

ads.ukclimbing.com
SI - profile removed on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to ice.solo: This is how I see China...

It's like Mordor (in a conceptual sense, not that it's full of orcs and monsters).

Sauron is the CPC, annomynous, hidden - always watching the world.

The mountains represent the firewall and media control. I know it's not impossible to get round but it probably works for most of the population. The CPC shields the Chinese people from outside influence and propaganda. Does it do this to control or protect them?

The eye watches the world industrialise, it learns from the mistakes of the founding fathers of capitalism and produces, would it be fair to say, the most successful and rapid capitalist progression ever seen? It learns that trade and co-operation is a more effective long term foreign policy than miltary action or political domination.

Not sure I can think of a good analagy for the Nazgul, students maybe? The eyes and ears - slowly, politely and quietly watching and learning. Pretending to wait for the green man even when it's eleven o'clock and no cars are coming.

What is the eye? It's tenticles of government and bureaucracy stretch over the largest population in the world, riddled with corruption, for sure, but unable to stop the cunning and will of humanity. Is it a ruthless tyrant or benevolent dictator ?
ice.solo - on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to ice.solo)

> I think defending your boarders is much different to fighting wars half way round the world as the US has always done, England since we learnt to sail into the wind.
>
> Even fighting aggresive wars and pre-emptive strikes on your boarders is more justifible (but not nessacessarly justifed) than fighting wars on other continents imo. At least China has some notion of self denfence when it fights. Our wars are only ever about conquest when they're far from home.

yes and no. china isnt defending its borders, its making military incursions to expand territory and the resources (including trade routes) within that.
no other country is trying to push into china. the conflicts are skirmishing is over extensionist policies that china has has for centuries.
but youre right, they dont have much motivation to go far and start things off.
>
> When I said war I meant full-scale war. Nothing in China's history or actions convince me that there likely to start a full -scale war. I know shit loads of them in Sheffield. They're all really nice.
> lets hope not. since the great wars with other north asian tribes theyve mostly just killed each other. first half of the 20thC saw some conflict over turkestan, and they had were very involved in korea and somewhat in vietnam, but having mostly tin pot neighbours keeps things pretty small (except when the japanese and europeans bought the war to them).
>
>
> Cheers for the advice dude. Off to Ton Sai this Winter, if I don't complete my 7 year project to climb an E4 next Summer it'll never happen. Time to accept enternal punterdom, grow a beard, ditch the rope and see some cool shit. On mushrooms!

thats a good plan. if ton sai doesnt satify the itch then yangshuo and getu arent too far away, both in interesting regions that have millions more locations the same if not better.
then theres the mountains....shit, theres still whole ranges with 6000m peaks that almost no one has ever heard of, only seen from google earth. its a great country to immerse yourself in. the west really has only seen thru the key hole.
SI - profile removed on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
> (In reply to shaun l)
> [...]
> Given the size and quatity of submarines and aircraft carriers China is currently building, I find that statement impossible to believe.

Well....yep. It's sort of like believing in God. Not sure you'll meet him and hope it won't be soon, but if you do you want him to know you were on his side. That's why I started this in off belay.
ice.solo - on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to ice.solo) This is how I see China...
>
> It's like Mordor (in a conceptual sense, not that it's full of orcs and monsters).
>
> Sauron is the CPC, annomynous, hidden - always watching the world.
>
> The mountains represent the firewall and media control. I know it's not impossible to get round but it probably works for most of the population. The CPC shields the Chinese people from outside influence and propaganda. Does it do this to control or protect them?
>
> The eye watches the world industrialise, it learns from the mistakes of the founding fathers of capitalism and produces, would it be fair to say, the most successful and rapid capitalist progression ever seen? It learns that trade and co-operation is a more effective long term foreign policy than miltary action or political domination.
>
> Not sure I can think of a good analagy for the Nazgul, students maybe? The eyes and ears - slowly, politely and quietly watching and learning. Pretending to wait for the green man even when it's eleven o'clock and no cars are coming.
>
> What is the eye? It's tenticles of government and bureaucracy stretch over the largest population in the world, riddled with corruption, for sure, but unable to stop the cunning and will of humanity. Is it a ruthless tyrant or benevolent dictator ?

thats pretty cool and smart. parts do indeed feel like mordor at times (tho afghanistan feels like mordor ALL the time).
the thing about control or protect is maybe the crux here - i think its both.
given a liberal state the chinese have often collapsed into warlordism. great free dynasties usually are followed by chaos and centuries of atrocity. if anyone is being protected its the chinese people against themselves, their powermongers certainly.

in this round, i think its worked. you mention the rise of capitalist results and id say yes - but not as successfully as other models like the thai and japanese versions - in china many many have been left out where in thailand and japan things have been more even. despite all the progress over 20 years, a huge proportion is still only one step ahead of starvation. in comparison, after 20 years the japanese had one of the highest living standards in the world.

unlike japan the chinese havent given up their expansionist ideas for trade and industrial ones. if anything its bolstered it as national arrogance grows with economic gain and the ideas of retaking old territories gets sold as a goal. at a time when foreign ideas are getting past the firewall, foreign devil propaganda is increasing to keep it in check.
again with japan, even tho relations are the lowest in decades and missiles are being aimed, the largest growing tourist group to japan is chinese...
the govt plays a thin ice role on that one, as japanese investment fuelled the industrial rise, with japan still having huge assets in china they keep threatening to pull iff either china goes rogue or japan needs the spending money.

tyrant or benevolent dictator? both i suppose. to keep a nation as unruly and regionalized as the chinese focussed requires strong leadership. both the carrot and the stick need to be powerful motivators.
abseil on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to ice.solo:
> (In reply to shaun l)
>
> Have you spent much time in china?

Great question.

Here's my suggestion to posters: be careful posting loads of stuff about a culture/ country you don't know anything about except through media, and haven't been to (and not only as a tourist for a few days. I once read that Indians are sick of people spending a weekend in Calcutta, then spending the rest of their lives telling everyone about 'India'). (PS I've probably done it, please look it up then call the pot black. Won't do it again).

ice.solo, I really enjoyed reading your posts on China and on other topics.
SI - profile removed on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to abseil: lol
abseil on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to abseil) lol

Laugh as much as you like, then post what you know first hand about China.

I've now spent decades living and working in Asia, more than half of it in China, working and living with innumerable Chinese friends and colleagues. But I'm still cautious about generalizing about the place - I don't know enough yet.

ice.solo, I really enjoyed reading your posts on China and on other topics. You've talked a lot of sense.

shaun l, I hope you can go to China, and have a great time there.
Timmd on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
> (In reply to IainRUK)
> [...]
>
> So you meant Tibet :-) The thing is they regard this as historically part of China, which is not totally absurd, but they haven't invaded any countries outside their own back-door for many centuries which, alas, cannot be said for our own "democracies".

Tibet has been independent historically too, and China has been governed by Tibet historically. To say it was wrong for the PLA to go into Tibet to 'reclaim Tibet for the Motherland' isn't totally absurd.

I can't be fussed to debate it though so I'll leave it at that...
Timmd on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker: Nor is it absurd to imagine that Tibet might be quite a happy and progressive country now, if one compares it with the Buhtan region which was very like Tibet when Tibet was invaded (in being feudalistic) which shortly after started to open up to the outside world and has recently had democratic elections.

So it's very debatable to say that Tibet wouldn't be better off without China having been involved in it's recent history, given the genuine pregress in Buhtan.

SI - profile removed on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to abseil: I was laughing because of my thread in the chat room 3 minutes after yours, you didn't address me personally yet I assumed you were talking about me. I thought you were quite rude. I don't think you have to have been to a country to have an opinion on it. Of those comments in the op the second part of the one about human rights was pretty stupid, I admitted that straight away. The one about any Chinese person being able to be leader was speculation. Ice Solo says they can't but didn't say why. He's contributed so much to the thread so I didn't want to hassle him any further.

The rest was opinion or predictions of the future, and I stand by them. I'm entitled to my opinion and i'm intitled to express it. Ice Solo may have a much more informed opinion than me and I haven't disputed any of the facts he's posted - i've only questioned his opinion, which I don't wholey agree with, as I am entitled to.

For someone like me who struggles with reading, writing and understanding information UKC is the best place to learn. If I don't understand something someone has written I can ask them to explain. The thread was deliberately provocative to enact a response.

For me the thread has been enlightening and informative, voices have spoken on both sides and there's been far less abuse or ridicule than I was expecting. I'm sorry if I made you cringe or think I'm a tit - but hey hey, that's me. And I ain't got a problem with it.
Choss on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

If youve got an opportunity to go, Shit yeah go.

My Daughter did a school exchange with a pupil at a school in Beijing last year. She Loved it. Great stuff, staying with host family and going to a Chinese school.

She couldnt stomach their Delicacy of whole sea slug Though!
SI - profile removed on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to abseil:
> (In reply to shaun l)
> [.
>
>
>
> shaun l, I hope you can go to China, and have a great time there.

Btw, if you're just a somewhat up front person and i've taken offence where it wasn't intended, read my last post with a layer of prissyness removed. Peace ;)

SI - profile removed on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to Choss: I'll go soon, just waiting for them to revert to communism. Probably a few weeks yet... :)
Choss on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to shaun l:

think that boats sailed 7;^)

But Seriously. Our Kid Loved it. Said everyone is incredibly hospitable and friendly.
Timmd on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to Choss: My late mum loved it for the same reasons, she found it a fascinating place, seeing the different levels of income, and how people lived.
Postmanpat on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to Choss:
> (In reply to shaun l)
>
> think that boats sailed 7;^)
>
Point of order: what does 7;^) mean?
Choss on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to Postmanpat:
> (In reply to Choss)
> [...]
> Point of order: what does 7;^) mean?

Cheeky Profile smiley face with a quiff.

Just Kidding, its a Secret Symbol Used by us Secret Agents of the Chinese state!

SI - profile removed on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to Postmanpat:
> (In reply to Choss)
> [...]
> Point of order: what does 7;^) mean?

It's pretty obvious if you spin your screen round and look at it sideways - but if you haven't got a smartphone your wife might think you're a nutter.

abseil on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to abseil) I thought you were quite rude. I don't think you have to have been to a country to have an opinion on it... I'm entitled to my opinion... The thread was deliberately provocative... but hey hey, that's me. And I ain't got a problem with it.

You're right, I was quite rude. And I apologize - I'm sorry. And no doubt I've said loads of things to people about places I've never been to e.g. Burma, South Africa.

Wishing you all the best and yes, peace.
SI - profile removed on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to abseil: Cheers dude, <raises virtual pint glass>. I think it's quite easy to be rude without meaning to.
abseil on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to shaun l:
> (In reply to abseil) Cheers dude, <raises virtual pint glass>. I think it's quite easy to be rude without meaning to.

Cheers <raises glass> and thanks for your reply and understanding.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.