There's growing technological alternative for cleaner fuel compare last century, and this need massive state intervention and subsidies to promote these alternative then reliance on coals and fossil fuels. China need to study and accelerate the growth of these safe nuclear energy but in light of Fukushima situation, safety need to be of highest priority in deployment. Wind and solar, and hydro where it make sense....China need a lot of energy to grow even bigger.
Chinese Geopolitics
- Thread starter Major
- Start date
- Status
There's growing technological alternative for cleaner fuel compare last century, and this need massive state intervention and subsidies to promote these alternative then reliance on coals and fossil fuels. China need to study and accelerate the growth of these safe nuclear energy but in light of Fukushima situation, safety need to be of highest priority in deployment. Wind and solar, and hydro where it make sense....China need a lot of energy to grow even bigger.
Blackstone
Brigadier
No cherry picking here, I've always considered HK part of China.
There's corney capitalism all over the world, so the crux of the issue is degrees of it and not mere existence. There's no moral equivalency here.
No, I'm talking about copious Chinese citizens in Communist China looking to get out (with their wealth), and they have a long list of preferred destinations, starting with the United States, followed by other Western nations. I expect Xi Jinping to crackdown on that soon.
Cherry-picking in terms of statistics not terms of sovereignty since almost all published China statistics from western sources exclude Hong Kong whether it's GDP, FX reserve, annualized trade data. When Hong Kong is grouped, a term Greater China is used. And then there is the issue of Taiwan. Should it be included or excluded?
Yes crony capitalism exists all over world. But, situation in US is worse than in China according to economist's statistics so it's not difficult to see that someone might mistaken your concerns for Chinese crony capitalism as a little disingenuous. And then, there is the old adage, people living in glass house shouldn't throw stones.
To be still considered as a plutocrat, one must currently use its wealth to influence and control a government. Corrupted Chinese officials and their associated corporate lackeys are escaping with their ill-gotten gains to foreign destinations. Once they escaped, their influence and control diminishes. Coupled with the ongoing crackdown of corruption, plutocracy in China is probably going to be reduced by a notch or two.
Also, Xi Jinping has already started cracking down on naked officials (whose families all have foreign passports) and their illegal wealth transfer. There was an exposés on CCTV about Bank of China running unauthorized fund transfers to foreign countries. There is also talk of new tax regulations in the pipeline that Chinese citizens need to declare their foreign holdings and incomes. In other words, the wind is shifting for current Chinese plutocrats.
Blackstone
Brigadier
You and I share the same view on the lame stream media's "journalism" on Taiwan, HK, Macau, Mainland, Diaoyu Tai, and Japanese-occupied Okinawa.
Glasshouses should not and would not eliminate discussions, debates, and criticisms. Consider the following fallacies;
- China invaded Tibet, so it has no room to complain about Japan's invasion of Manchuria, China, Taiwan, and Diaoyu
- China grabbed land from Xinjiang, so it can't complain about Russian theft of Siberia
- China held hegemony over Asia in the past, so it has no room to complain about American hegemony today
- China imposed tributary systems over its weaker neighbors, so it can't throw stones at the West for imposing their system
There's no question Xi jinping and Wang Qishan deserve much credit for their fight against corruption, but both have said there's more corruption to root out, so I take them at their word it's still open season on plutocrats in China's target-rich environment.
Agreed. Most western reports about China are often tainted with inherent biases.
Glasshouse is used to illustrate the notion that some like to climb their moral high horse and offer unconstructive criticisms of bad behaviors in other countries that are even more prevalent in their own countries. If you want to have a discussion about how plutocracy can be reduced in China, what ways to fight corruption is the most effective, I am all for it. But judging from some of your latest posts in this thread, you seem to be predicting Chinese government's collapse due to plutocracy or pollutions especially when you mentioned vox populi in a post. I apologize in advance for any unintended offense.
This is little OT, PRC didn't invade Tibet nor grabbed land from Xinjiang. The Siberia question has been settled many times in this forum.
Yes, the fight against corruption is a long road in China just as the fight against disproportional influence lobbyists have over Washington in US.
Blackstone
Brigadier
I call them as I see them, be they black, white, grey, or anything in between. I understand reasonable people can agree, and I'll make allowances for the reasonable ones.
Tibet has been in China's orbit since the 1300s, and is part of the empire when China's strong, but drifts into quasi-independence when China's weak. You could call it what you want, but Tibet was quasi-independent during the post-WWII Chinese Civil War, and Mao had to invade the rebellious province to bring it back into the fold.
I'm first in line to rant against special interest lobbies in DC, especial the liberal ones, but this forum is about China-related topics, and not about the US. If you want to see Americans deeply and mercilessly criticizing our government, just pick up any newspaper/media in any American city, town, village, or hamlet, and you'll see complaints about everything under the Sun.
That's fine. Let's agree to disagree then. Only time will tell what will happen in the future. It's nice to see you make your position regarding China clear for all to see.
Not going into this as it will most likely become a mud slinging contest.
Then, can we agree to leave holier than thou unconstructive criticism away from the discussion as well as cherry picking statistics? If I may respectfully make a request , can you just tone down some of your disparaging remarks about Chinese government such as calling it Leninist or referring to Chinese leaders as red nobles? Those terms add nothing to the discussion, but only to inflame emotions.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Who defines what's "holier than thou?"
Agreed on "Red Nobles," but I refer to 'Leninist state' as an accurate description of a one-party government, and not the atrocities Lenin and his minions perpetrated. Are you objecting to the governing definition or its association with Lenin's name?
Statistics define holier than thou. If problems and issues are worse in one country demonstrated by figures, they don't get a free pass to criticize others regarding the same problem, lead by example.
I am objecting to the negative connotations associated with the term, Leninist state. And the term itself is not an accurate description of modern China anymore especially when there is talk of plutocracy. Like I mentioned before, the term single party state is much more neutral and clinical.
Blackstone
Brigadier
We agree on this, to a point. We'll just have to play it by ear.
I'm against usually against political correctness for the sake of being PC, but you're right on Chinese Communist Party today is very different from Lenin and Mao's days (and I have said as much in previous posts). Let's just agree to civil debates.
- Status