Impact of China's rise in the world - Long term predictions (30-50 years)


Aval

Just Hatched
Registered Member
The only critique I have of the article are the 400 years part and the portrayal of China as some backwater s**thole that somehow made it to the top. The Qing dynasty was one of the largest or possibly the largest economic powerhouse in the world. Western intellectuals all wanted to copy China’s philosophy and culture until the First Industrialization in the early 19th century. The only mistake made by the Qing was that they didn’t do their own investigation of the West. Such an investigation would have made them realize the threat the West posed. China has never been a beggar like many other countries have been. In its history, many of its dynasties were one of the major players in the world during their eras. The Chinese just made a mistake which is the one I said above. They aren’t victims/prey; they just let down their guard due to their complacency.
Indeed, Chinese arrogance has been perhaps the greatest enemy in Chinese history. Hopefully, it has been forever stamped out. So long as the Century of Humiliation is never forgotten, perhaps that arrogance will never return. Confidence is vital, but arrogance caused the Ming to burn Zheng He's fleets, and the Qing to ignore the West. The price of eternal prosperity is eternal vigilance.
 

Aval

Just Hatched
Registered Member
China is the only hope of non white nation that can bring progress and hope for humanity excellent article by Eqyptian via Emperor

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But in the twenty-first century, we are witnessing the rise of China. We are decades away from China becoming the greatest power on earth. This will be China’s time, and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. Attack China all you want, curse her and monger rumours and hysteria — but the truth is that none of your accusations are backed up by evidence. The Western press is under the thumb of Western governments that want to stay on top of the world for eternity. And the truth is that China is not affected by the noise and maneuvers of her enemies.

For her first thirty years, from 1949 to 1979, China was basically blockaded and isolated economically and politically by the West. It didn’t even have a seat in the UN General Assembly. And it was dirt-poor in those days, barely a speck of the global economy, a tiny fraction of Japan’s or Germany’s GDP — not even able to prevent famine. And it still didn’t submit to pressure or take any orders. Why on earth would it do that now?

China will be the next global power. There’s nothing that can be done about that. The first stage is that its economy only needs to grow at 4.7 percent per year to become the world’s largest by 2035. That means the usual, historical bare-minimum of 6 percent is already overkill. The US can build as many bases as it wants, slap as many sanctions as it wants, recognise whatever bogus genocides it wants. That’s what it’s been doing all along. Has any of it made a difference? China can adapt to any situation. It took China a mere ten years to go from being barred by the US Congress from participating in the “International” Space Station, to building its own Space Station from zero.

See, the US has an $800-billion war budget, 800 military bases, 13,000 aircraft, 500 warships, 6,000 nukes — but it doesn’t have what China has: invincible national resolve. It takes the US about 5 years to renovate a bridge, and it takes China 43 hours. There’s simply no competing with that.

China doesn’t need to be a military superpower or empire. That was never part of the plan. US troops, God bless their souls, will continue sitting in their bases, scratching their balls, costing their government $800 billion a year to do nothing. Meanwhile, China will continue to actually develop.

That’s the part of the equation that America totally missed, because it has barely developed since Reagan’s day. China is a better place to live today than at any time in its previous 5,000 years; Americans saw their highest standard of living in the 1960s and those days will never come back.

So yes, China will be the next global power, and the Chinese are vastly superior to us in every way. This is a fact that everyone can attack but that nobody can change, like the theory of evolution.

Look at you silly buggers, talking about China like it’s going to be the next Nazi Germany. Even many Middle Easterners I know fit in this foolish category. Did you notice when the US invaded or overthrew the governments of 20 countries in the past 32 years (my lifetime)? Did you even know? You think just because you’re ready to forget all that because of Beyoncé and Game of Thrones and Snapchat and other US cultural exports, it didn’t happen.

The US is feeding me terror-bytes about Hong Kong, Taiwan, Tibet, Tiananmen Square, Great Leap Forward! I don’t see any dead bodies, I can’t show you one invasion or one example of Chinese regime change, I can’t even find Hong Kong on a map or tell you one factual detail about Tiananmen Square, but the US State Department and all its media are telling me CHINA BAD!

Aren’t you at least curious to see what a world with a nonwhite, non-Western leader might look like, after 400 years? Because God knows that leader won’t be us. It won’t be Brazil or Africa, or the Middle East or India or Indonesia or Nigeria or Pakistan. We’re a mess.

China was a mess too. But we remain a mess many decades after we achieved independence, and the Chinese went their own way, disentangled their mess and created their destiny. We’re not made of what the Chinese are made of.

I see China as hope. Hope that a colonised, brutalised, primitive and humiliated country, can rise above its past — refuse to be weak any longer — rebuild itself from nothing, with iron resolve, and become too strong to be overru
n by the West again!

yes I like the conclusion of the article which basically give hope to the downtrodden and appeal for solidarity

China made it, it wasn’t supposed to make it, so now it must die. What a difference 5 years can make. China went from “crucial partner” to “number one threat.”

We should be helping and supporting China to keep climbing to the top, and giving her some serious solidarity as she withstands the new Cold War of Western imperialism. It’s been a long 400 years. China is the first non-Western country to even come close to reaching a status of ultimate global importance. She is akin to the the first member of an impoverished family to go to university. That is our family of nations.

And when China gets to the top, believe me, it won’t be a repeat of the French, British, or American Empire. Not a single developing country on earth will be worse-off because of China becoming #1. There will be something good in this for all of us, so let’s wake up.

- Ismail Bashmori is an Egyptian China watcher
That answer was problematic because the writer was incredibly self-depreciating. But the "Nationalism for the Global South" part was well written, and clearly, it resonated with many.

If anyone is curious, the original answer was written on Quora.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
100% false. At similar relative power levels, nobody has been as peaceful as China. China is currently 80% of US GDP and has done nothing aggressive with that power. When China was the leading economic power during the Ming Dynasty, the only time military force was used were against the Mongols as revenge, and against Japan for invading Korea, both essentially defensive use of force.

For comparison, U..S at 30% of British Empire GDP in the 19th century already was displacing the native Americans. President Andrew Jackson famously said, when even the Supreme Court ruled against the forced deportation of Native Americans, "The justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it!" US was not a global superpower during the reign of Andrew Jackson. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan at just 30% and 25% of U..S GDP respectively were already engaged in genocidal wars of aggression.

So no, China is not being an abuser because it can't be an abuser. China has had the capacity - if it foolishly chose to do so - to use force in destructive and unproductive ways for a long time. It doesn't do so because that is self defeating, immoral and stupid.
You forgot to mention the Admiral Cheng Ho who sail with 40000 sailor and soldier in one of the greatest armada in the world preceding Columbus by 100 years. He visit Malay peninsula 5 times and not a single attempt to colonize or enslave people. Mahathir said repeatedly he does not afraid of China because history show China is not colonizing power and He thanks China for that. There are million of Chinese live in SEA since 500 years ago Not once they try to colonize SEA instead they mingle and many cases inter marry with the locals. Though sometime I feel they should colonize those SEA since the native just waste their bountiful land and neglecting their own citizens
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
That answer was problematic because the writer was incredibly self-depreciating. But the "Nationalism for the Global South" part was well written, and clearly, it resonated with many.

If anyone is curious, the original answer was written on Quora.
I don't think he is self depreciating It is more like honest self assessment why the global south fail to modernize their economy and their society. It is brutal but that is the reality. Take Indonesia for example a bountiful land rich in mineral and oil. Balmy weather. Rich maritime riches. But failed to modernize . Singapore is a dot in SEA a swamp land with no hinterland and no resources. Yet 70 years latter Spore is one of the richest people in the world . The difference is the quality and honest leadership grounded in Confucianist precept of doing the service to the people. And meritocracy. While in Indo and Malaysia race is the primary consideration for advancement. In other word one value excellence and the other mediocrity. The result speak for itself. Culture play a very large role in a country advancement
 

Bigboii

Junior Member
Registered Member
That answer was problematic because the writer was incredibly self-depreciating. But the "Nationalism for the Global South" part was well written, and clearly, it resonated with many.

If anyone is curious, the original answer was written on Quora.
It'll lead to racism 2.0 wait and see, every race is capable of it

it'll slowly become a superiority complex
 

montyp165

Junior Member
It'll lead to racism 2.0 wait and see, every race is capable of it

it'll slowly become a superiority complex

One major thing that China has unlike virtually all the Western powers (including the US) is that China has been a major power in the past and has provided a stable order for its neighbors for a longer timeframe than even the existence of said Western powers, so China being a preeminent power would only really be a point of conflict with those not of the neighborhood to begin with.
 

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
I dont know where to put this. Since I think this is the nearest, I'll put it here. Because in order to predict the future, we need to look at the past to find how we got here the first place before we can think of how we will be in the future.

So today is the 120 anniversary of signing of the "treaty" with the eight nations alliance. Least we forget.

FB_IMG_1631094771742.jpg

120年前的今天,清政府與列強簽訂《辛丑條約》。

120年後的當下,你們沒有資格在中國的面前說,你們從實力的地位出發同中國談話


I love the bolded text. For those can't read Chinese. It goes something like this:

120 years ago Qing government forced to sign treaty.

120 years later, you are not qualify to tell China, you're "coming from the position of strength".

今天是 #辛丑條約120周年,勿忘國恥,吾輩自強。 世界還是那個世界,列強還是那個列強,但是中國已不再是那個百年前的清朝 百年滄桑,乾坤扭轉,天翻地覆慨而慷!我們中國人生活的這片和平土地都是先輩們用鮮血和生命換來的,我們要愛護國家、努力拼搏、珍惜生活!
 

Aval

Just Hatched
Registered Member
I don't think he is self depreciating It is more like honest self assessment why the global south fail to modernize their economy and their society. It is brutal but that is the reality. Take Indonesia for example a bountiful land rich in mineral and oil. Balmy weather. Rich maritime riches. But failed to modernize . Singapore is a dot in SEA a swamp land with no hinterland and no resources. Yet 70 years latter Spore is one of the richest people in the world . The difference is the quality and honest leadership grounded in Confucianist precept of doing the service to the people. And meritocracy. While in Indo and Malaysia race is the primary consideration for advancement. In other word one value excellence and the other mediocrity. The result speak for itself. Culture play a very large role in a country advancement
I see the self-depreciation as problematic in two respects:
  • It may feed into a superority complex because the writer's self-depreciation of everyone that isn't Chinese essentially strokes the ego of the Chinese. I've already stated that arrogance is one of the greatest dangers China can face, so I am automatically skeptical of any pro-China piece that seems needlessly ego-boosting. Being proud in measureable metrics is good (e.g poverty alleviation statistics, COVID handling ability), but deriving confidence from the self-depreciation of others is incredibly dangerous.
  • Self-depreciation of such degree is repulsive to many people; this partially invalidates the answer itself by morality alone, and makes it more difficult to spread an otherwise very well written answer. Many people who broadly support the answerer's stance are unwilling to share and spread the answer itself because it goes against their personal moral sensibilities.
Honestly, a little editing can make that answer a lot more palatable for general readers. This way its message can spread further, which is what is important. I'm sure that "nationalism for the Global South" is not a new concept invented by this particular Egyptian, but it is not yet a strong ideology and could be promoted better (if it would be beneficial).

Self-depreciation must also be constructive in order to be useful. Comparing oneself to monkeys is not constructive. It is simply an emotional statement meant to express the writer's frustration at his own country, which while understandable, negatively affects how acceptable his answer is even to those who broadly agree with his stance.
 

sinophilia

Junior Member
Registered Member
I see the self-depreciation as problematic in two respects:
  • It may feed into a superority complex because the writer's self-depreciation of everyone that isn't Chinese essentially strokes the ego of the Chinese. I've already stated that arrogance is one of the greatest dangers China can face, so I am automatically skeptical of any pro-China piece that seems needlessly ego-boosting. Being proud in measureable metrics is good (e.g poverty alleviation statistics, COVID handling ability), but deriving confidence from the self-depreciation of others is incredibly dangerous.
  • Self-depreciation of such degree is repulsive to many people; this partially invalidates the answer itself by morality alone, and makes it more difficult to spread an otherwise very well written answer. Many people who broadly support the answerer's stance are unwilling to share and spread the answer itself because it goes against their personal moral sensibilities.
Honestly, a little editing can make that answer a lot more palatable for general readers. This way its message can spread further, which is what is important. I'm sure that "nationalism for the Global South" is not a new concept invented by this particular Egyptian, but it is not yet a strong ideology and could be promoted better (if it would be beneficial).

Self-depreciation must also be constructive in order to be useful. Comparing oneself to monkeys is not constructive. It is simply an emotional statement meant to express the writer's frustration at his own country, which while understandable, negatively affects how acceptable his answer is even to those who broadly agree with his stance.

Yes he went too far with the self-insults but the point was made honestly, not with self-deprecation which is more about shitting on oneself for the humor of it or as self-defense from criticism.

The sad truth is everything he said is correct, but that shouldn't be looked down upon. When someone is weak and is cheering you on because they see you as a big brother, it's a good thing. As long as it doesn't come with the expectation of commitments then I'm 100% all for it, and to be honest I don't think that guy is expecting China to be sending him money or open the door for immigration like the West does.

He loves China for what it is and what it can be opposite the Anglo-led White supremacist world, and he recognizes how incapable his people and the 'Global South' will be for the foreseeable future (instead of bullshit bluster like Iran or North Korea which just ends in humiliation after humiliation) so he attaches his fate and the fate of his country and people to China's.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
I see the self-depreciation as problematic in two respects:
  • It may feed into a superority complex because the writer's self-depreciation of everyone that isn't Chinese essentially strokes the ego of the Chinese. I've already stated that arrogance is one of the greatest dangers China can face, so I am automatically skeptical of any pro-China piece that seems needlessly ego-boosting. Being proud in measureable metrics is good (e.g poverty alleviation statistics, COVID handling ability), but deriving confidence from the self-depreciation of others is incredibly dangerous.
  • Self-depreciation of such degree is repulsive to many people; this partially invalidates the answer itself by morality alone, and makes it more difficult to spread an otherwise very well written answer. Many people who broadly support the answerer's stance are unwilling to share and spread the answer itself because it goes against their personal moral sensibilities.
Honestly, a little editing can make that answer a lot more palatable for general readers. This way its message can spread further, which is what is important. I'm sure that "nationalism for the Global South" is not a new concept invented by this particular Egyptian, but it is not yet a strong ideology and could be promoted better (if it would be beneficial).

Self-depreciation must also be constructive in order to be useful. Comparing oneself to monkeys is not constructive. It is simply an emotional statement meant to express the writer's frustration at his own country, which while understandable, negatively affects how acceptable his answer is even to those who broadly agree with his stance.
Well the road to redemption is to acknowledge your sin(failing) as good Christian said. The same thing if you denied your shortcoming or making excuses for your failing then you never progress. You cannot be polite or deferential when you do analysis as to why you don't make progress. You have to see as it come, no beating around the bushes. That is what LKY did He go straight to jugular and dispense with nicety and decorum. There is no morality in perpetuating misery in the name of political correctness . That is the problem with western democracy or TV show go to the lowest common denominator . When the eastern culture tend to go to the highest achievement and excellence!
As I said he just be honest to himself and that is rare.
 
Last edited:

Top