Impact of China's rise in the world - Long term predictions (30-50 years)
- Thread starter tamsen_ikard
- Start date
If the Five Eyes persist in their Cold War against China, can we expect China to destroy the anglos utterly, the way the xiongnu were destroyed?
Your point is so wrong on so many levels......
First of all. Han dynasty's conquest of the Xiongnu has mixed consequences, there are negative consequences and positive consequences and mixed consequences:
1. Han dynasty is more militarized than She really needed. This directly led to the rise of warlords, and the entire civilization revolves around the capability for controlled violence as a part of its core Value System. This led to the bloody Three Kingdom era. You might find it cool and hot-blooded that even a gentle intellectual like Zhuge Liang (诸葛亮) has invested all his intellectual ability in developing methods and strategies for war, but to a civilization, this is disastrous. Genius like him should spend his effort on the betterment of life, technology, art, science, religious enlightenment, etc. Instead he spend his whole life on how to thwart the unification endeavor of his fellow compatriots (and to kill people), only to enforce his own version of unification.
2. Han dynasty did destroy the Xiongnu, but it also opened a Pandora's box but unchaining a number of minor nomadic groups/tribes that were suppressed by the Xiongnu. Sure they were all in awe of, and impressed by, and even worshiped the militarily powerful Han dynasty, but it also drew these tribes southward towards a much weakened Jin dynasty and Southern Dynasties. So is it really a good thing for Chinese civilization just to punish and destroy the Xiongnu? Well, from today's point of view, yes. However, if you lived through "五胡乱华" as a Han Chinese, you would DO ANYTHING to not live under such fear and instability. It is only pure luck and good karma that the 五胡 was impressed enough about the Chinese Civilization that they willingly assimilated to Chinese. On this note, I would say this also because the Han Dynasty impressed them with Her military legacy and martial spirits. So this is hard to say.
3. Nobody can really destroy someone else. What destroyed them were their own inability to evolve and adapt to the new world order and more current humanity's way of life. Sure the Han dynasty destroyed the Xiongnu, but what makes the Xiongnu a problem to Han is not them being Xiongnu, but the fact that nomadic way of life are indirect conflict with agrarian. Han dynasty DID destroy Xiongnu, but they DIDN'T destroy their true enemy: Nomadic way of life. But destroying Xiongnu, the Han dynasty simply gave a (or many) newer nomadic group to compete for supremacy on the steppes and ushering a rise of a new Nomadic Suprepower. What really ended this problem, is the fact that later dyansties and people realized the issue and gradually developed a common goal: unite the Agrarian and the Nomad into the same imperial system. So, destroying the Anglos is either impossible or meaningless.
Today, we Chinese still need to look at our history and rediscover the greatness of our collective ancestors, nomad or agrarian, and draw lessons from them. Our current task is to find a way to merge Maritime and Continental powers into a hybrid form of modern civilization. Such task is what we need to put our effort in today, NOT how we could simple get rid of the Anglos. If we Chinese could found a new form of civilization that reconciliate the differences between the Maritime and the Continental. Than the era of the "Maritime versus Continental" will end, just like how the Qing dynasty ended the long struggle of merging the Nomadic with the Agrarian.
Last edited:
This is why the PRC and PLA are a great country, a great military with a great doctrine. Not just because "为人民服务", but because the PRC and the PLA only focuses on the necessary means for victory, nothing more.
Almost every other major and advance countries, be it the Russians, US, Europeans or the Japanese, they have a "killing machine aesthetics". These countries worship kill machines and their aesthetics indulges in the enjoyment of killing. They all want to showcase the "beauty" of their weapons design:
- Some (like the Russians) prioritizes a sense of roughness and courseness as a way to exert fear and discomfort,
- Some (like the Japanese, etc) prioritizes a sense of refinement to showcase and advertise their high tech manufacture and trade capabilities,
- There are also the USA which does both.
The Japanese aesthetics is way too refine to the point of feeling too "feminine" and delicate. Their weapons are like fine crystal, glass or fine chinaware; you will feel bad to rough-handle them. The Russian aesthetics, on the other hand, are way too rough and course, their lack of refinement always have a brutish feeling to them. The Americans seem way too greedy in which they always want the best of both worlds, even though the two attribute are intrinsically mutual exclusive of one another. China wants neither. China is like Zen that strive for the Great Oneness and Emptiness.
The PRC and the PLA aesthetics is summarized by this: "土共不土战斗力五". China NEVER intended to develop a weapons aesthetics for the purpose of exerting influence on other. They don't need to make their weapons look extra-ordinarily course and rough and intimidating, nor do they need to make their weapons seems extra-ordinarily refined. Chinese weapon aesthetics is also quite muted and humble, very 中庸 and Zen. They are never like the Japanese who is obsessed with beauty (Japanese weapons are as beautiful and seductive as their women).
Chinese weapons are like Chinese deities and Immortals (神仙), they are not over-glorified and beautified, but they are mixed of idealized state-of-being and down-to-earth humility (by adding disabilities and imperfections to deities, like 铁拐李). This is a very highly enlightened mindset, in the matter of survival. Because weapons and machine of war is essential the embodiment and realization of One's Will-to-Be and Will-to-Survive. The Chinese weapons aesthetics are as tranquil and chill as their own attitude towards Survival and Death. Chinese people are calm and strong, they are peaceful but longsuffering, they have a bottomless potential for survival. In this matter, the Chinese mindset and attitude China is great and worthy of emulating.
Last edited:
I don't know about any of that but I definitely know the Chinese like strong and beautiful weapons. Sure, design and looks are not a priority but I would be lying as a Chinese myself if I didn't admit that many of us likes a strong and good-looking rifle. Your comment comes off as a bit preachy.
solarz
Brigadier
Way too many generalizations.
China has been in catch-up mode for the better part of two centuries in terms of military technology. Modern Chinese weapon systems were originally based on Soviet designs, but iteratively enhanced to approach American functionality while retaining Soviet cost-effectiveness.
This is an evolution of necessity based on pragmatic considerations. You could argue that Chinese value pragmatism, but historically that has not always been the case. Indeed, China fell behind the West due to highly impractical considerations during the Ming and Qing dynasties.
I can see the benefit in this because really, they have become a little too proud and a little too willing to go to war for anything they want. Really, I wouldn't mind if they simply got rid of all the Anglos in the world at this point since they keep on playing themselves as heroes while behaving worse then villains right now. All that is needed is for a civil war/natural disaster and that will be the beginning of the end for all of these idiots, then we can watch this eyes get put out without mercy.
Rather I'd say post-Mao CCP has been really pragmatic. It works with whoever can give the most benefits, doesn't export revolution, adopting market economy.
The USA has been commiting genocide on there natives and other nations around the world along with gaslighting those nations into thinking they are the bad guys simply for have the audacity to question why the USA along with its allies as to why they are killing them without any real reason.
This have been done for the last 5 decades and all this elicits from the west is yeah whatever. So advocating for the west to take responsibility for there evil deeds shouldn’t be too much to ask, if only because the west has gotten too happy with the idea with a war with Russia and China to balance their budgets books (due to there screw ups no less) in order to force both nations to have to pay the cost of such a war even though the USA has started it all. I do advocate the genocide of there militaries and all those that harm innocent life with reason or purpose (not the by standers that having nothing to do with it) to the last man so that the Consequences will be remembered forever and to cripple any future chance the west could ever have to rise again to harm others since really, what does the USA produce other then toilet paper and death and is still looking forward to do might I add
Last edited: