China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hendrik_2000

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
gadgetcool5 said:
Regarding the WJ-6 engine that powers the AG600, it is a copy license of the Russian Ivchenko AI-20 engine developed in the 1950s. Even for 1950s technology China still copies Russia. China has been importing from Russia for 70 years. When China no longer needs to import military equipment from Russia, then I will start to pay attention when keyboard Chinese nationalists start beating their chests and boasting about "having more R&D than the entire developed world." This is like talking about acing the PhD dissertation defense when you have not even graduated from middle school yet. Graduate from middle school first, then we can talk about University. ;)
Click to expand...

You cannot copy engine by using CTRL-C like in your computer You need advance science and technology to do that Compare India to China India has all the help they can muster developing kaveri engine From Soviet Union, French, US, etc yet they failed to develop kaveri and officially abandoned. Yet even though China was technically embargoed she is succeeded in developing WS 10 and it is now maturing with most of Chinese jet J11, J16, even J10 now using WS 10.

As to why china copy engine well you don't have to reinvent the wheel copying is cost efficient since China does not have to invest in long period of design and debugging of new engine during the 80's when her military budget is only 200 billion dollars
China has not imported Russian engine since late in since 2011 We are sure about that since Russia will trumpeted their success.

There is no shame in copying technology every country does it US get free GT technology from britain when she transferred the design of NENE engine to GE out of gratefulness for US support.
US use operation "paper clip" to copy German rocket technology by moving wholesale all German rocket scientist to us The same with Soviet Union. At least Chinese use their own people to copy west technology.

In military technology China is now self-sufficient and does not need anybody and even ahead when it comes to Hypersonic missile, UAV, EM gun, ship building, Radar etc.
You and western MSM make a faulty comparison You should compare China to India and not to US since they have the same starting point

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
ZeEa5KPul

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
manqiangrexue said:
So China can innovate for it or develop alternate strategies for lithography. You're looking at the exact time now and losing the big picture, and that is that historically, whenever something is banned to China, China innovates that technology. That pattern has no fail.
Click to expand...
I have to chime here and correct tidalwave's disinformation. By the way, if there's any doubt that @gadgetcool5 is one of tidalwave's schizophrenic manifestations, his description of EUV lithography optics is how tidalwave described it verbatim. Since tidalwave fancies himself an expert on the Chinese semiconductor industry, he should certainly know that China has done decades of work on EUV. It has the optics, the light source (both DPP and LPP) and workpieces necessary to put together a commercial machine.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
Z

zgx09t

Junior Member
Registered Member
Hendrik_2000 said:
As I said before the older Chinese academic, diplomats are enamored by western ideal and democracy but younger generation intellectual is less so. They see the weaknesses of western democracy and relative strength of Chinese authoritarian system and draw their own conclusion. As well they are increasingly drawn on Chinese philosophy and state craft. They are more and more attracted to German philosopher Carl Schmitt who said

“The survival of the state comes first, and constitutional law must serve this fundamental objective,” Professor Chen, the Peking University academic,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, citing Mr. Schmitt, the authoritarian German jurist, to make the case for a security law in Hong Kong.

“When the state is in dire peril,” Professor Chen wrote, leaders could set aside the usual constitutional norms, “in particular provisions for civic rights, and take all necessary measures.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

‘Clean Up This Mess’: The Chinese Thinkers Behind Xi’s Hard Line
Chinese academics have been honing the Communist Party’s authoritarian response in Hong Kong, rejecting the liberal ideas of their youth.


Tian Feilong, a Chinese intellectual in favor of Hong Kong’s new national security law, in Beijing. As a graduate student, he attended a traditionally more liberal university.

Tian Feilong, a Chinese intellectual in favor of Hong Kong’s new national security law, in Beijing. As a graduate student, he attended a traditionally more liberal university.Credit...Giulia Marchi for The New York Times

By
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Aug. 2, 2020


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

HONG KONG — When Tian Feilong first arrived in Hong Kong as demands for free elections were on the rise, he said he felt sympathetic toward a society that seemed to reflect the liberal political ideas he had studied as a graduate student in Beijing.
Then, as the calls escalated into protests across Hong Kong in 2014, he increasingly embraced Chinese warnings that freedom could go too far, threatening national unity. He became an ardent critic of the demonstrations, and six years later he is a staunch defender of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that China has imposed on the former British colony.

Mr. Tian has joined a tide of Chinese scholars who have turned against Western-inspired ideas that once flowed in China’s universities, instead promoting the proudly authoritarian worldview ascendant under Xi Jinping, the Communist Party leader. This cadre of Chinese intellectuals serve as champions, even official advisers, defending and honing the party’s hardening policies, including the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in Hong Kong.
“Back when I was weak, I had to totally play by your rules. Now I’m strong and have confidence, so why can’t I lay down my own rules and values and ideas?” Mr. Tian, 37, said in an interview, explaining the prevailing outlook in China. Witnessing the tumult as a visiting scholar in Hong Kong in 2014, Mr. Tian said, he “rethought the relationship between individual freedom and state authority.”

“Hong Kong is, after all, China’s Hong Kong,” he said. “It’s up to the Communist Party to clean up this mess.”
While China’s Communist Party has long nurtured legions of academics to defend its agenda, these authoritarian thinkers stand out for their unabashed, often flashily erudite advocacy of one-party rule and assertive sovereignty, and their turn against the liberal ideas that many of them once embraced.

They portray themselves as fortifying China for an era of deepening ideological rivalry. They describe the United States as a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
overreaching shambles, even more so in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. They
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Communist Party control, arguing that Western-inspired ideas of the rule of law are a dangerous mirage that could hobble the party.

They argue that China must reclaim its status as a world power, even as a new
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
displacing the United States. They extol Mr. Xi as a historic leader, guiding China through a momentous transformation.
A number of these scholars, sometimes
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,” have worked on policy toward Hong Kong, the sole territory under Chinese rule that has been a stubborn enclave for pro-democracy defiance of Beijing. Their proposals have fed into China’s increasingly uncompromising line, including the security law, which has swiftly
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

“We ignore these voices at our own risk,” said
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, a historian at the University of British Columbia who helps run
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, a website that translates works by Chinese thinkers. “They give voice to a stream of Chinese political thought that is probably more influential than liberal thought.”
As well as earnestly citing Mr. Xi’s speeches, these academics
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
who counseled stern rulership, along with Western critics of liberal political traditions. Traditional Marxism is rarely cited; they are proponents of order, not revolution.
Click to expand...

New York Times strikes again.
It's the same old West doctrine of Talkingshitism and Myshitisbetterism, all craftily arranged with 80-20 rule where they cherry picked the 20 percent of data points out of proper context to back up the 80 percent of shit-talking.

Did NYT explain why long nosed white skinned European refugees and convicts claim Murica and Antipodes their land? It's quite a distance.
 
Hendrik_2000

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
zgx09t said:
New York Times strikes again.
It's the same old West doctrine of Talkingshitism and Myshitisbetterism, all craftily arranged with 80-20 rule where they cherry picked the 20 percent of data points out of proper context to back up the 80 percent of shit-talking.

Did NYT explain why long nosed white skinned European refugees and convicts claim Murica and Antipodes their land? It's quite a distance.
Click to expand...

Instead of raving and ranting tell me what is wrong with this article I find it logical that now they repudiate the usual western recipe of absolute freedom and absolute individualism for collective good and security. And start looking in their own history and tradition for state craft and ideology
 
Z

zgx09t

Junior Member
Registered Member
I have no problems with you finding some parts of it logical, that's the magic of 80-20 rule.
What I have problems with is the implied conjecture of China hell bent on being a control freak on anything and everything under the sun.
Why would anybody needs an ism, and with an evil connotation to boot, to explain why HK, which is sitting right on the China proper, should be managed properly by China? Did the convicts need an ism to control and manage Australia as they see fit? Did the refugees need an ism to control and manage North America as they see fit?
 
horse

horse

Major
Registered Member
Hendrik_2000 said:
Instead of raving and ranting tell me what is wrong with this article I find it logical that now they repudiate the usual western recipe of absolute freedom and absolute individualism for collective good and security. And start looking in their own history and tradition for state craft and ideology
Click to expand...
That article was like pulling teeth.

You deserve credit for actually making the effort to read the whole thing. A couple of days ago, I tried to read it, maybe got through 3 paragraphs. Saw your post, and decided to try again, and again I could not read it. But at least this time I scanned all the way down to the last paragraph, and that is the bottom-line to this article. At least they published it.

The reporter should just like the people speak. But since the people (cough cough who were Chinese) did not say exactly what the reporter or reporter's audience might want to hear, the reporter always interjects himself with his value system - in an article not about that.

That is why you deserve credit to actually work through that.

Look at what I did. I put more effort into writing this post than read that article.

But ... it's all good, as the white people say.

:)
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
It's funny how the most anti-Chinese Chinese out there still are the most Chinese at showing off "their" education as if that gives them credibility. People who hide behind Western democracies wouldn't complain how they're outnumbered in opinions. If they knew what democracy was about, they would understand people having their own opinion even when it doesn't agree with their own is apart of embracing democracy. But instead there's this ignorance where all they know is hiding behind it and using it as a shield is a good thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top