Chinese Economics Thread

[AssassinsMace]

Yes, the difference is obvious to anyone with any ability to think. Western colonialists just invaded, killed, robbed and enslaved Africans. How can anyone be confused with something as simple as that ?
Western media is just using their old tricks of hoping if some claims are repeated often enough, some will eventually believe it. Unfortunately, considering the intelligence levels of much of western media's audience, some are believing it.

Not just the Western media but notorious liars as well. There's a difference from what someone believes and what someone wants to believe.

 

[latenlazy]

Not just the Western media but notorious liars as well. There's a difference from what someone believes and what someone wants to believe.

You forget that France had to cede Algeria in part because its population refused to stomach the torture of Algerians, and the British didn't ceded India and Pakistan for the sake of letting them go, they faced a lot of domestic pressure too. Obviously the citizenry are not as blinded as you'd like to think.

 

[Red___Sword]

Although I clicked the "like" button on AssassinsMace's post, I suggest we ditch the ideology argument, before the one who rules all (aka, the Emperor) are not amused and send his instrument of will (aka, Vadar), to set things "right".

I thought people having problem with China's economic stuff, would go for more professional sites like yahoo news, youtube comments, CNN comments... and stay out of sites like SDF which from the name of it, gosh, it talks DEFENCE stuff!

 

[latenlazy]

Although I clicked the "like" button on AssassinsMace's post, I suggest we ditch the ideology argument, before the one who rules all (aka, the Emperor) are not amused and send his instrument of will (aka, Vadar), to set things "right".

I thought people having problem with China's economic stuff, would go for more professional sites like yahoo news, youtube comments, CNN comments... and stay out of sites like SDF which from the name of it, gosh, it talks DEFENCE stuff!

Members club room, but I agree. I don't know why this keeps drifting to colonialism when we should be talking about the economy (I know, I sound like a hypocrite).

 

[AssassinsMace]

You forget that France had to cede Algeria in part because its population refused to stomach the torture of Algerians, and the British didn't ceded India and Pakistan for the sake of letting them go, they faced a lot of domestic pressure too. Obviously the citizenry are not as blinded as you'd like to think.

Never said anything of the sort and what does that have to do with what I stated unless you're linking dissatifaction with Chinese business in Africa as Africans unprising against colonialism. Dissatisfaction with business dealing is not colonialism. Colonialism also subjugates the indigenous population. Aren't people complaining about Chinese bringing its own labor? Doesn't sound like subjugation to me. Want to bring up the BBC's own annual poll on international relations. While they relish how China is viewed neagtively in European countries, China biggest positives come out of Africa. Sorry to tell you the positives of what China has done in Africa outweighs the negatives. I can bring up your point about how business excuses everything because that's all what China is doing in Africa.

 

[latenlazy]

Never said anything of the sort and what does that have to do with what I stated unless you're linking dissatifaction with Chinese business in Africa as Africans unprising against colonialism. Dissatisfaction with business dealing is not colonialism. Colonialism also subjugates the indigenous population. Aren't people complaining about Chinese bringing its own labor? Doesn't sound like subjugation to me. Want to bring up the BBC's own annual poll on international relations. While they relish how China is viewed neagtively in European countries, China biggest positives come out of Africa. Sorry to tell you the positives of what China has done in Africa outweighs the negatives. I can bring up your point about how business excuses everything because that's all what China is doing in Africa.

I was referring to yours and schumacher's comments about the Western audience being purely ignorant. While common intelligence in any society isn't something to be proud of, I do think it ventures a bit far, even if we're talking about what the Western audience thinks of China in Africa. (I hear it from both ends, and having lived in both societies I am pretty sure what either asserts about the other isn't entirely true).

You can probably see the western reaction to China's development activity in Africa in two ways. One would be that China is asserting colonial interests, and the other is that certain media sources are somewhat sensitive about the topic of colonialism. Given the amount of material regarding the negative legacies of colonialism left by Western countries in some of these media sources I'm inclined towards the latter, though they are not mutually exclusive. Furthermore, a lot of the sources I've read ask the questions of whether China is exerting colonial influence, but by itself presents a lot of caveats and uncertainty regarding the matter. I have never read a piece that directly jumped out and said "China is being imperialist" like what we saw about the US regarding the Iraq War and Afghanistan, for example.

I wouldn't bring polls regarding international relations into this. It's a good thing the public does not determine foreign policy for any country. I am sure that dislike for China in Europe is equally mirrored by China's dislike for western countries. Neither are healthy, or are based on well informed sentiments, I'd wager.

I hope you actually read my comments before you assume what my view on the matter of Africa though. I do not think I've said anything negative regarding the matter so far. To tie this back to talk about the economy though, while Africa needs China economically, China also needs Africa. The last couple of years we've seen China try to make inroads into independent high tech and high skilled sectors. They are doing this to bump up the standard of living and take its growing middle class up the manufacturing ladder. However being competitive in foreign markets would present certain problems regarding both market saturation and political barriers. Putting substantial aid in developing countries like Africa and the Middle East gives China a significant foothold in emerging markets, allowing Chinese high tech firms to grow without worrying about market incumbents. The interesting thing is that China is not going at it alone. Part of Wen's visit to Europe was about the incorporation of European partners into China's development plans. This is good for Europe, which is also looking for new export markets, but it is also good for China, because the existing social infrastructure of Africa are holdovers from European colonialism.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Based on what you've just commented all your conclusions are based on a lot of assuming. Never said it was based on ignorance. I in fact believe it's wholly intentional with an agenda. Wasn't bringing up polls to argue about popularity. I brought it up because it was their own poll. The BBC is a culprit using terms like "colonialism" to describe China in Africa yet their own poll says Africans are more positive than negative on China.

I have read your comments and it's sort of confusing where you come up with a lot of it. You draw a lot of conclusions based on what you think people are stating not what they actually said. Now I know much of it is based on what you assume is being said. Never said anything about people being ignorant.

I hope you actually read my comments before you assume what my view on the matter of Africa though. I do not think I've said anything negative regarding the matter so far. To tie this back to talk about the economy though, while Africa needs China economically, China also needs Africa. The last couple of years we've seen China try to make inroads into independent high tech and high skilled sectors. They are doing this to bump up the standard of living and take its growing middle class up the manufacturing ladder. However being competitive in foreign markets would present certain problems regarding both market saturation and political barriers. Putting substantial aid in developing countries like Africa and the Middle East gives China a significant foothold in emerging markets, allowing Chinese high tech firms to grow without worrying about market incumbents. The interesting thing is that China is not going at it alone. Part of Wen's visit to Europe was about the incorporation of European partners into China's development plans. This is good for Europe, which is also looking for new export markets, but it is also good for China, because the existing social infrastructure of Africa are holdovers from European colonialism.

Again, did I make any statement contrary to that? I did say it was a business. Business ain't charity where one side just does it to be nice. Business is based on mutual needs.

 

[latenlazy]

Based on what you've just commented all your conclusions are based on a lot of assuming. Never said it was based on ignorance. I in fact believe it's wholly intentional with an agenda. Wasn't bringing up polls to argue about popularity. I brought it up because it was their own poll. The BBC is a culprit using terms like "colonialism" to describe China in Africa yet their own poll says Africans are more positive than negative on China.

In regards to the BBCs poll, logically , if you're going to accuse the BBC of setting an agenda with a poll, it would be remiss not to hold the same standards to polls conducted in China about American sentiment. Furthermore, if it were a conspiracy, they would not have mentioned that Africans held the contrary view.

In regards to the talk about seeing it one of two ways, I was addressing more broadly inconsistencies with seeing the entire media as solely trying to construct a narrative of Chinese colonialism. The evidence I've seen so far does not seem to back that conclusion.

I have read your comments and it's sort of confusing where you come up with a lot of it. You draw a lot of conclusions based on what you think people are stating not what they actually said. Now I know much of it is based on what you assume is being said. Never said anything about people being ignorant.

In regards to assumptions, if you're referring to the stuff on economics or media systems, I study this stuff for college, so it's a bit impractical just to explain from scratch where a lot of my "assumptions" come from. That would require digging through 4 years worth of readings, some of which are in boxes. I hope you forgive me for that.

If you're referring to the comment about "ignorance" it was in direct response to

Yes, the difference is obvious to anyone with any ability to think. Western colonialists just invaded, killed, robbed and enslaved Africans. How can anyone be confused with something as simple as that ?
Western media is just using their old tricks of hoping if some claims are repeated often enough, some will eventually believe it. Unfortunately, considering the intelligence levels of much of western media's audience, some are believing it.

Not just the Western media but notorious liars as well. There's a difference from what someone believes and what someone wants to believe.

I was not calling you ignorant, just pointing out that people have demonstrated autonomy from their media system before. It was very much a side point to the discussion regarding what could or could not be construed as colonialism (which on another side point, in academic terms violence and conflict is not necessarily a requirement for some definitions of colonialism).

On the whole, I actually feel like you've misunderstood what I've been trying to say a lot of times too. For example, when I talk about google's behavior (in the other thread), I am not defending or endorsing it. It's confusing to me when you engage in a discussion about whether its behavior is right or wrong (a question of should), when I am mostly focusing on the cause of their behavior ( a question of how/why).

Again, did I make any statement contrary to that? I did say it was a business. Business ain't charity where one side just does it to be nice. Business is based on mutual needs.

"Never said anything of the sort and what does that have to do with what I stated unless you're linking dissatifaction with Chinese business in Africa as Africans unprising against colonialism. "
I think that's where the confusion is coming from. It seemed like you were asserting that I saw China as exercising colonialism (which I personally is dependent on the scope of the definition).

I probably should have clarified, that the moment I said "going back to the economy", I was no longer responding to you, but voicing broader thoughts regarding China and Africa's relationship. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[AssassinsMace]

In regards to the BBCs poll, logically , if you're going to accuse the BBC of setting an agenda with a poll, it would be remiss not to hold the same standards to polls conducted in China about American sentiment. Furthermore, if it were a conspiracy, they would not have mentioned that Africans held the contrary view.

I never heard of China doing polls certainly not publicly released. That would be democratic. If the BBC actually kept tracked making sure they don't contradict themselves, that would mean they have integrity. Maybe it's because they're just arrogant.

In regards to assumptions, if you're referring to the stuff on economics or media systems, I study this stuff for college, so it's a bit impractical just to explain from scratch where a lot of my "assumptions" come from. That would require digging through 4 years worth of readings, some of which are in boxes. I hope you forgive me for that. If you're referring to the comment about "ignorance" it was in direct response to

I was not calling you ignorant, just pointing out that people have demonstrated autonomy from their media system before.

On the whole, I actually feel like you've misunderstood what I've been trying to say a lot of times too. For example, when I talk about google's behavior (in the other thread), I am not defending or endorsing it. I am giving it

Never said or assumed you were calling me ignorant. You said Schumacher and I were calling other people ignorant which we never did. That was one of your assumptions that I was talking about.

I think that's where the confusion is coming from. It seemed like you were asserting that I saw China as exercising colonialism (which I personally is dependent on the scope of the definition).

I think that's where the confusion is coming from. It seemed like you were asserting that I saw China as exercising colonialism (which I personally is dependent on the scope of the definition).

I probably should have clarified, that the moment I said "going back to the economy", I was no longer responding to you, but voicing broader thoughts regarding China and Africa's relationship. Sorry for the confusion.

Now it makes sense. Pardon me for the digression.

 

[latenlazy]

I never heard of China doing polls certainly not publicly released. That would be democratic. If the BBC actually kept tracked making sure they don't contradict themselves, that would mean they have integrity. Maybe it's because they're just arrogant.

I was taking a class on US China Diplomacy when I was studying abroad in Fudan, and our professor showed us polls they conducted. Don't remember the numbers off the top of my head, but the trend got pretty negative after the 2001 spy plane incident (and was trending down from the embassy bombing).

You have to understand that news organizations like the BBC aren't ideologically or logically consistent messaging apparatuses. If they were they wouldn't present contradicting information. Not every article is written by the same person or goes to the same editor.

Furthermore, a poll isn't a reflection of the organization who conducts it. Just because the people they polled sees China as colonialist, does not necessarily mean the BBC itself does. There is nothing inconsistent about the BBC reporting that Africans have a positive view of China while Europeans see China as being colonialist. That is about what African or Europeans think, not about what the BBC thinks.

Never said or assumed you were calling me ignorant. You said Schumacher and I were calling other people ignorant which we never did. That was one of your assumptions that I was talking about.

Okay, because that was a bit confusing. While you didn't outright calling people ignorant:

Yes, the difference is obvious to anyone with any ability to think. Western colonialists just invaded, killed, robbed and enslaved Africans. How can anyone be confused with something as simple as that ?
Western media is just using their old tricks of hoping if some claims are repeated often enough, some will eventually believe it. Unfortunately, considering the intelligence levels of much of western media's audience, some are believing it.

Not just the Western media but notorious liars as well. There's a difference from what someone believes and what someone wants to believe.

There was a certain connotation. Admittedly upon rereading that he did say "some". However, my original reference to Algeria and India were also examples where the media acted autonomously against their own country's colonial interests. That was probably the original point I wanted to refute, either that they are not being inconsistent with being against a notion of Chinese colonialism (which again I have yet to see any article unabashedly accuse China of being), or that they are merely tools of Western interests.

Now it makes sense. Pardon me for the digression.

Sorry for the confusion as well/