Grace Jin "Drexel". Interesting. Also, *cough cough* "Bullshit!" *cough*.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Religious or should I say cult leaders tend to be like this.
Not sure if this stretching too far. If combined with the Nexperia case, the US, EU, and their allies have found another one of China’s soft spots: Chinese government and companies’ overseas assets. It is true that should they arbitrarily seize these assets, China’s own military power at the moment has yet (and will likely never become) to be able to recover them by force. Expect more overseas Chinese workers to be massacred and their companies’ properties seized driven by an unknown ‘black hand’. There would be no PLAN wolf warriors because PLA is not a global force. It is simply not capable of protecting China’s overseas assets and personnel beyond China’s periphery.
At the age of Anglo-Saxon-led globalisation of the 80s and 90s, protection of private property and ownership rights were sacrosanct. That meant if a Chinese company were to legally purchase a plot of land in the US, the Feds and States couldn’t simply seize it. Things have now changed.
Since Orange just declared a return to the 19th Century might makes right Westphalian international system (meaning anything arbitrary is possible in a black jungle), is Beijing prepared to face all of its trading partners becoming predators? Does China have nonviolent means to fight back (besides rare earth) in the upcoming waves of arbitrary seizures and trade exclusions (think of a US, EU, and Japan led global Chinese Exclusion Act)?
If not, would full militarisation (before Chinese population ages after 2035) and necessary military campaigns (against neighbours aligned with adversaries) to establish hegemony in East & South Asia be the only options left when facing global Chinese exclusion? The goal of campaigns would be to use force to secure near abroad markets and carve out a genuine sphere of influence where Chinese products and rules (along with other privileges for China) dominate. Such campaigns could be waged with the assumptions that Washington and Paris ( or even New Delhi) would not risk full nuclear holocaust against China over its allies on the region, and that they would be forced to negotiate a ‘dignified’ withdrawal akin to US withdrawal from Vietnam. But this would require China to achieve significant conventional superiority whilst maintaining robust and credible nuclear counterattack capabilities. The most recent US NSS clearly articulated that the only way for the US to prevent Chinese hegemony in Asia is through the conventional superiority of the combined forces of the US and its allies. But given China’s industrial capacity and America’s deindustrialisation, it would be an arms race in which China has a chance of winning. The only thing lacking is political will, particularly among China’s elites who dream of returning to western markets if Beijing could simply make more concessions to the ‘civilised Anglo gentlemen’.
It appears that China could be facing something Germany and Japan faced in the 1930s. To conquer or be conquered (in China’s case, be embargoed and isolated until it becomes a bigger version of Iran and collapse), unless Beijing figures out a way to fight back and break the containment.
Pretty much proving christianity is a tool for western interference in Asia
Back for another round...
Attachments
-
blast_1439277792_1439277805.jpg
If Panama did this to the US, there would definitely be some kind of "accident" where explosive material being shipped "accidentally" blew up right when the cargo ship was "coincidentally" at the weakest part of the canal, leading to damage that would take years to fix. Just saying...
A bit too sensationalist, ehh?
If China is so worried about western countries siezing Chinese investments, there is likely 10 times more western investment inside China. Nothing is stopping China from siezing all the Mcdonalds and walmarts and BMW and apple stores of China.
The only problem is China's own timidity and desire to appear "business friendly".
When it comes to Chinese investments in the global south, both the west and China are mainly influencing national governments. Nothing is stopping China from using its own money, spies and other nefarious means to foment anti-western nationalism in these countries and then those governments can sieze western investments in those countries.
Again, Panama and most of central America are especially vulnerable to US domination because of their location. China cannot expect to have any influence in places like that. Any Chinese investment in those countries should be stopped and withdrawn.
China can also punish those countries by placing under complete sanction of Chinese products. That will be a heavy blow to any country. Again, no PLA invasion required.
China has plenty of options to retaliate without having to use military power.
China is way behind its adversaries in these capabilities and political will.
That’s right, especially among Chinese business elites. As a socialist country, one of the biggest headaches for China is that the most entrepreneurial people (the national bourgeoisie) are also the most likely to be traitors. It has been a dilemma since 1978 when China has to maintain delicate balance of encouraging animal spirit and state planning/industrial policies/public interests. If you stretch the Chinese history even further, every emperor hates businessmen because he fears the establishment of an alternative centre of political power as powerful businessmen could bribe officials away from the imperial order and loyalty to the emperor. Yet, as businessmen grow beyond simple mom and pop shops, they would always desire political systems that could protect their property rights against arbitrary seizures by the emperor. China never managed to solve this century old conflict, albeit businessmen were able to survive and function as catalysts between state bureaucracy, market, and indirectly help implement certain developmental goals set by the emperor so long as they don’t grow too big. So there hadn’t and will never be Rockefellers in China. In Anglo Saxon countries, the Parliament and Congress are meant to represent the national bourgeoisie against both the king/president’s arbitrary power and potential ‘mob rule’ (wealth redistribution ) by the majourity (workers and peasants). The very alternative centre of political power feared by Chinese emperors became to core driving force behind modernity and political power in the West. They worked for 200 years until neoliberals allowed capital to capture the state and turned the bureaucracy into a servant of capital. They drove the Industrial Revolution and all the innovations we see today, but could not reign in the power of capitalists when state really needed to be in charge.
There is another problem that China has as a late comer. Whilst Anglo business elites are patriots because they run their own political systems and international trade, Chinese bourgeoisie (also as late comers) conducted businesses in an international system where the Anglo set the rules and determine price, demand, and supply. So Chinese business elites depend on a market created by others. This reality also influences the political loyalty and interests of Chinese business elites.
Lots of simplifications and generalisations here of course.
Last edited:
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
This is what I’m talking about why everything costs so much in the West. The US dealership network is afraid of China selling EVs directly to customers if they’re in the US meaning cutting them out of leaching off of Chinese EV success so they can profit which only makes everything more expensive.
They talk about forcing China to transfer technology like China did to the West. Well they never transferred their best technology yet they expect China to. But the US will never be able to compete with China on price because of how many others want to get into the supply chain to add their costs to the line of production.