That's a good speech, I wonder who wrote it because one thing is for sure; that scaly fucker didn't.
I reckon Pence told him it was this or the 25A,
People who rob a bank don't get to give the money back and say it was all a misunderstanding. That's not the way it works.
Indeed, if I incited a riot and as a result a policeman indirectly, or directly died, I would be arrested, remanded subject to an investigation, tried and if convicted would go to jail and for a long time. Why should Trump be treated differently?
Absolutely. Theres a concern from some about impeachment and various legal issues not dampening things down, but there need to be consequences to his actions. Not avoid it because hes good a throwing tantrums and itll aggravate his followers.
You need to have a confrontation to address the problem before you can fix it
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
If by "Western democracy" you mean the apartheid regime in South Africa and the Smith regime in Rhodesia, no it wasn't suitable for Africans. There again, in most cases neither was what came next.
The interesting bit was that South Africa "was different" according to the same people. One person One vote *was* a moral issue there.
But demanding democracy in Ghana was racist, apparently.
Similar attitudes to towards calls for multi party democracy in Eastern Europe.
The suddenly in 1989 a bunch of people discovered that democracy was a universal thing....
I am not sure what your point is here.
Post colonian chaos in Africa has been economically catastrophic and violent and industrial scale corruption is depressingly common.
Post colonian chaos has moved colonialism full circle (back on topic) and allowed backdoor Chinese colonialism into much of Africa. It is hard to pinpoint what is worst and what is best. The apartheid regimes of the recent past were most definitely not in the "best" category.
Sigh
During the 1980s it was utterly standard for the UK hard left to decry the universality of human rights, democracy etc.
They applied this to Africa - where they made all kind of excuses for the scumbags looting the place. They applied this to Europe - where they declared that Russia had a right to rule Eastern Europe. They applied this to Russia - where they were building a Better World.
Post 1989 they suddenly discovered a love for democracy.
I do apologise for your frustration at my witheringly stupidity.
I was of the centre-left during the time quoted and I do not recognise that as a description of myself. I opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa and also the Soviet Union. Perhaps you have read too many articles from the Daily Mail. Sigh!
If you were on the centre-left you were the opposition to these people.
Or perhaps you don't remember - "The longest suicide note in British political history"?
You mean the only mainstream manifesto that was crazy enough to advocate withdrawing from the common market?
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
The strategic thinking (probably starting with Kissenger) was let's open our markets to them and give us a cheap source of labour (tick). That will make them capitalists (tick). This will create a bourgeois middle class that will increase the pressure for democratic reform (err, some initial success under Deng, not so much under Xi). This will result in the overturn of the CCP (nope).
As a strategic plan it had the typical flaw of assuming that the person to whom the plan is directed will not react in ways that are not in the west's interest. Its been a flaw in American plans since Grant and the Civil War. They always work on the basis that they are going to do things to people without thinking through how those people might respond or even act on their own initiative.
People don't generally seek to overthrow their current political system until it starts to fail on its own terms. The Chinese system operates on the basis of the CCP having absolute political power and using it to deliver stability and continuing economic growth. Right now the CCP is upholding its end of the bargain. When it fails to deliver that, as Suharto did in Indonesia, for instance, it may face a challenge. That will happen eventually but I wouldn't bet on it happening soon. China isn't a threat to the West in the way that the Soviets were because it has no real interest in exporting its form of government. Indeed throughout its remarkably long history China has been one of the least expansionary civilisations on record. China will become more assertive as it becomes more powerful, but I don't see it as a threat to the West. If people are genuinely worried about Western democracy I would suggest that they look to threats closer to home. Eg the US president who just tried to organise a coup.
Whilst I agree with much of that I think your conclusions are too sanguine. China is already in a position where not using Huawei products, for example, is actually very difficult and carries a significant price. They can seek to use economic dominance to control us and our decisions in exactly the same way that the US did with various countries during the second half of the 20th century. Having someone do that that is not on "our side" is going to be seriously uncomfortable and unpleasant. I agree with @Casino_Royale that we need to start thinking about how we respond to that bullying.
As for Trump, he is a liar, a blaggart and a seditionist who should be sent to jail. He is a warning but the US system ultimately proved strong enough to resist him. That's not to say that he hasn't done damage or extended the envelope of the possible.
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
This week marks an investment milestone. My equity portfolio has now passed an average 10% growth over the last decade. It is notable though that 50% of that is in the last year, so not clear evidence of investing genius, apart from cashing out in Feb, and buying back in April.
Notably though, my best performing stocks are mostly those that do well when China does well. ANTO, RIO, PRU etc. Despite events in HK both HSBA and STAN have surged this week. Considering how buggered things are here, in Europe and the USA, it is quite bonkers how well equities have recovered. Expectation of money printing is part of it, but clearly markets expect China and the West Pacific region generally to be the engine of economic recovery for the world.
In that environment, I cannot see any real measures being agreed that economically punish China, whatever lip service is given.
I was going to ask, financially minded PB'ers, wtf is going on with the markets at the moment. Specifically, Tesla and Bitcoin. As a layperson it looks like we're in bubble territory to me, although I'm reminded of that line about markets staying irrational longer than one can stay solvent. And it does seem irrational (or maybe I'm just bitter, having not got on board early enough... sitting in the sidelines in cash.)
It's about money chasing the "next big thing" multiplied by a *perceived* lack of stable invent opportunities - yes, a bubble.
This week marks an investment milestone. My equity portfolio has now passed an average 10% growth over the last decade. It is notable though that 50% of that is in the last year, so not clear evidence of investing genius, apart from cashing out in Feb, and buying back in April.
Notably though, my best performing stocks are mostly those that do well when China does well. ANTO, RIO, PRU etc. Despite events in HK both HSBA and STAN have surged this week. Considering how buggered things are here, in Europe and the USA, it is quite bonkers how well equities have recovered. Expectation of money printing is part of it, but clearly markets expect China and the West Pacific region generally to be the engine of economic recovery for the world.
In that environment, I cannot see any real measures being agreed that economically punish China, whatever lip service is given.
I was going to ask, financially minded PB'ers, wtf is going on with the markets at the moment. Specifically, Tesla and Bitcoin. As a layperson it looks like we're in bubble territory to me, although I'm reminded of that line about markets staying irrational longer than one can stay solvent. And it does seem irrational (or maybe I'm just bitter, having not got on board early enough... sitting in the sidelines in cash.)
It's about money chasing the "next big thing" multiplied by a *perceived* lack of stable invent opportunities - yes, a bubble.
Interest rates are low so where else are you going to put your money?
When inflation kicks in interest rates will start to rise and the bubble will burst. Timing? Your guess is as good as mine. I'd say second half of this year.
Or alternatively real interest rates will sink into negative territory
The Trump coup will go down in history as like the ending of Finding Nemo.
There was a clear plan: 1. Lay down a wall of lies to weaponise the idea the election was stolen 2. Seek legal respite to be turned down (because baseless) proving that "they" have rigged the powers of the state against the rightful victors 3. Whip up revolutionary fervour amongst your supporters. Tell them that Jan 6th is The Day 4. Remove all the people from the DoD who can stop you and replace with your agents 5. Pressurise the GOP saying that unless they do YOUR bidding then your supporters - their voters - will have them 6. Stage the coup. Bring everyone to town. Tell them its Trial by Combat. Demand they March on the Capitol. Have your agents in Congress slow proceedings so that the electoral college isn't actually counted. Giuliani's botched phone call is key here - delay things at least until tomorrow. 7. Storm the Capitol. As the nice lady complaining about free mace in the face said, its a revolution! 8. Refuse to sanction the National Guard to come and regain order. The disorder gets worse. 9. Declare Martial Law. Have your agents inside the DoD direct the National Guard to suppress dissent. 10. Arrest the conspirators - Pelosi, Schumer, AOC. 11. Rule by decree until enough confusion exists about the electoral college result for you to simply toss it aside.
Its insane. It would never have worked. It is laughably naive. But they did it. The problem is that they got to step 7 and it fell apart. Like the end of Finding Nemo there was a Revolution! They Stormed the Capitol! And having got inside and sat in the chamber, the dumb bastards now facing a 10 stretch inside thanks to Trump's own law asked themselves "Now What?"
Storming the Capitol itself does nothing. You needed to be storming it and then holding it long enough for Martial Law to seem reasonable. "We're staying here all night" was the word from inside, reported on CNN. The problem is that some berk managed to call the National Guard. As soon as an army of soldiers appeared outside "its a Revolution!" seemed like a bad idea and "we the people, bitches!" realised it may be a better idea to leave. Because what happens to failed revolutionaries? They don't get mace in the face. They get bullets in the face.
Like most things associated with the dying months of the Trump administration it descended into farce. But it absolutely was serious even if there was little chance of succeeding. Trump and his crime family will almost certainly face the music. But it is wider than that. All of the elected representatives who participated in their part of the coup also need to face justice. Baseless objections to "10 states" to delay certification of the result long enough for the coup to take effect is participating in a coup.
That some still pretended their playing what they thought was a game has nothing to do with things is shameful.
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
You'd need to have a concerted "Buy China last" policy. Good luck in getting Amazon signed up to that....
There is a rather fundamental problem - the deal the UK has signed up to is unworkable. There is a growing pile of factual evidence (as opposed to the mountain of factual explanations before as to why this would happen) of this happening and reports of logistics and industry people realising that there won't be any "common sense" applied to untangle it.
The UK has signed an unworkable treaty and both sides appear to be saying "this is the treaty". How long until the UK reopens negotiations? To seek "concessions" from the forriners who outrageously have gummed up our economy with their barriers to trade which we demanded.
As we were in the EU up till the 31st December 2019 de jure and 31st December 2020 de facto joining again would be simple enough on a technical level (We might have to accept € introduction but thems the breaks) Politically it's a trickier sell - not every leaver has had your damascene conversion.
Suspect that we experiencing a media desperate to find significant problems.
All the vehicles in that disastrous world-ending queue represent about 20 minutes at the stated normal capacity.
Does anyone have a real number for the percentage of perishable food that has actually been sent to landfill?
Rather than the amount of words expended in "because of Brexit" stories?
It is very real. One business I know is going to lose over £100k worth of perishable goods because of it. Brexit fanatics will no doubt continue to be in denial and say it is a price worth paying (for what they cannot define) until it affects them personally.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
I'd rather live under CCP rule than a tory government. At least the Chicoms are competent.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
The strategic thinking (probably starting with Kissenger) was let's open our markets to them and give us a cheap source of labour (tick). That will make them capitalists (tick). This will create a bourgeois middle class that will increase the pressure for democratic reform (err, some initial success under Deng, not so much under Xi). This will result in the overturn of the CCP (nope).
As a strategic plan it had the typical flaw of assuming that the person to whom the plan is directed will not react in ways that are not in the west's interest. Its been a flaw in American plans since Grant and the Civil War. They always work on the basis that they are going to do things to people without thinking through how those people might respond or even act on their own initiative.
Yes, it was wishful thinking.
However, as Taiwan and Hong Kong have shown (and even parts of China at the start of the 20th Century) the Chinese love democracy just as much as any other nation does.
So, the strategy must be to move from wishful thinking toward encouraging internal reform - and moving from economic reliance and geopolitical ambivalence to containment in the meantime.
The reference to Inverness made me think of the song about four and twenty virgins. Which is probably appropriate looking at some of the people involved.
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
If by "Western democracy" you mean the apartheid regime in South Africa and the Smith regime in Rhodesia, no it wasn't suitable for Africans. There again, in most cases neither was what came next.
The interesting bit was that South Africa "was different" according to the same people. One person One vote *was* a moral issue there.
But demanding democracy in Ghana was racist, apparently.
Similar attitudes to towards calls for multi party democracy in Eastern Europe.
The suddenly in 1989 a bunch of people discovered that democracy was a universal thing....
I am not sure what your point is here.
Post colonian chaos in Africa has been economically catastrophic and violent and industrial scale corruption is depressingly common.
Post colonian chaos has moved colonialism full circle (back on topic) and allowed backdoor Chinese colonialism into much of Africa. It is hard to pinpoint what is worst and what is best. The apartheid regimes of the recent past were most definitely not in the "best" category.
Sigh
During the 1980s it was utterly standard for the UK hard left to decry the universality of human rights, democracy etc.
They applied this to Africa - where they made all kind of excuses for the scumbags looting the place. They applied this to Europe - where they declared that Russia had a right to rule Eastern Europe. They applied this to Russia - where they were building a Better World.
Post 1989 they suddenly discovered a love for democracy.
I do apologise for your frustration at my witheringly stupidity.
I was of the centre-left during the time quoted and I do not recognise that as a description of myself. I opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa and also the Soviet Union. Perhaps you have read too many articles from the Daily Mail. Sigh!
If you were on the centre-left you were the opposition to these people.
Or perhaps you don't remember - "The longest suicide note in British political history"?
I remember Michael Foot with fondness. That is not to say I wanted to see the incompetent old fool as my Prime Minister. In much the same way I didn't approve of Mrs Thatcher's support of Botha, both politically and economically. To this day I will not buy a hardware product made by the Eliza Tinsley Company, but that doesn't make me a Soviet loving Communist.
I don't - yes, he was a loveable academic type. But history is full of loveable types whose theorising had a tremendous cost in human misery.
I was the weirdo who thought that multi-party democracy should be applied throughout the world.
Apparently this was bad, bad if I was talking about Eastern Europe. Or Africa, outside South Africa.
The funniest thing, to me, is that even after Russia arrived at Putin.... Putin for the love of Christ.... the last of the "Useful Idiots" are still saying "we shouldn't rush to judge" because of their memories of the Soviet Union.
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
If by "Western democracy" you mean the apartheid regime in South Africa and the Smith regime in Rhodesia, no it wasn't suitable for Africans. There again, in most cases neither was what came next.
The interesting bit was that South Africa "was different" according to the same people. One person One vote *was* a moral issue there.
But demanding democracy in Ghana was racist, apparently.
Similar attitudes to towards calls for multi party democracy in Eastern Europe.
The suddenly in 1989 a bunch of people discovered that democracy was a universal thing....
Who are these fictitious people who you quote from your seemingly fertile imagination? Sources and links please.
I read all about them in definitive works by Freddie Forsythe.
I can quite clearly recall Labour MPs on television, solemnly explaining that Western Democracy wasn't suitable for other countries. Apparently Soviet style communism was better than democracy since it guaranteed housing and jobs....
Why do you think New Labour happened? Who was Kinnock and then Blair fighting against?
This seems a strange battle to be stirring up today, lacking an obvious purpose? The topic is the (possible) threat from Chinese communism and the story of the day is the threat from right wing American extremism.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
If by "Western democracy" you mean the apartheid regime in South Africa and the Smith regime in Rhodesia, no it wasn't suitable for Africans. There again, in most cases neither was what came next.
The interesting bit was that South Africa "was different" according to the same people. One person One vote *was* a moral issue there.
But demanding democracy in Ghana was racist, apparently.
Similar attitudes to towards calls for multi party democracy in Eastern Europe.
The suddenly in 1989 a bunch of people discovered that democracy was a universal thing....
I am not sure what your point is here.
Post colonian chaos in Africa has been economically catastrophic and violent and industrial scale corruption is depressingly common.
Post colonian chaos has moved colonialism full circle (back on topic) and allowed backdoor Chinese colonialism into much of Africa. It is hard to pinpoint what is worst and what is best. The apartheid regimes of the recent past were most definitely not in the "best" category.
Sigh
During the 1980s it was utterly standard for the UK hard left to decry the universality of human rights, democracy etc.
They applied this to Africa - where they made all kind of excuses for the scumbags looting the place. They applied this to Europe - where they declared that Russia had a right to rule Eastern Europe. They applied this to Russia - where they were building a Better World.
Post 1989 they suddenly discovered a love for democracy.
I do apologise for your frustration at my witheringly stupidity.
I was of the centre-left during the time quoted and I do not recognise that as a description of myself. I opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa and also the Soviet Union. Perhaps you have read too many articles from the Daily Mail. Sigh!
If you were on the centre-left you were the opposition to these people.
Or perhaps you don't remember - "The longest suicide note in British political history"?
You mean the only mainstream manifesto that was crazy enough to advocate withdrawing from the common market?
Quite - and look who popped up as Labour leader recently....
This week marks an investment milestone. My equity portfolio has now passed an average 10% growth over the last decade. It is notable though that 50% of that is in the last year, so not clear evidence of investing genius, apart from cashing out in Feb, and buying back in April.
Notably though, my best performing stocks are mostly those that do well when China does well. ANTO, RIO, PRU etc. Despite events in HK both HSBA and STAN have surged this week. Considering how buggered things are here, in Europe and the USA, it is quite bonkers how well equities have recovered. Expectation of money printing is part of it, but clearly markets expect China and the West Pacific region generally to be the engine of economic recovery for the world.
In that environment, I cannot see any real measures being agreed that economically punish China, whatever lip service is given.
I was going to ask, financially minded PB'ers, wtf is going on with the markets at the moment. Specifically, Tesla and Bitcoin. As a layperson it looks like we're in bubble territory to me, although I'm reminded of that line about markets staying irrational longer than one can stay solvent. And it does seem irrational (or maybe I'm just bitter, having not got on board early enough... sitting in the sidelines in cash.)
It's about money chasing the "next big thing" multiplied by a *perceived* lack of stable invent opportunities - yes, a bubble.
This week marks an investment milestone. My equity portfolio has now passed an average 10% growth over the last decade. It is notable though that 50% of that is in the last year, so not clear evidence of investing genius, apart from cashing out in Feb, and buying back in April.
Notably though, my best performing stocks are mostly those that do well when China does well. ANTO, RIO, PRU etc. Despite events in HK both HSBA and STAN have surged this week. Considering how buggered things are here, in Europe and the USA, it is quite bonkers how well equities have recovered. Expectation of money printing is part of it, but clearly markets expect China and the West Pacific region generally to be the engine of economic recovery for the world.
In that environment, I cannot see any real measures being agreed that economically punish China, whatever lip service is given.
I was going to ask, financially minded PB'ers, wtf is going on with the markets at the moment. Specifically, Tesla and Bitcoin. As a layperson it looks like we're in bubble territory to me, although I'm reminded of that line about markets staying irrational longer than one can stay solvent. And it does seem irrational (or maybe I'm just bitter, having not got on board early enough... sitting in the sidelines in cash.)
It's about money chasing the "next big thing" multiplied by a *perceived* lack of stable invent opportunities - yes, a bubble.
Interest rates are low so where else are you going to put your money?
When inflation kicks in interest rates will start to rise and the bubble will burst. Timing? Your guess is as good as mine. I'd say second half of this year.
Yes, that would be my guess too. However, the world is moving from ICE cars to electric and from coal towards renewable energy. Tesla is leading in both and will have new Gigafactories opening in Berlin and Texas this year. My TSLA shares, bought in May & June 2020, are up 262% so maybe I should sell but I think long term they are worth holding on to.
My PetsatHome shares are up almost as much, and I am thinking the same
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Um, because I have a knowledge of the country, its history and its socio-cultural context (oh and its language).
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
The strategic thinking (probably starting with Kissenger) was let's open our markets to them and give us a cheap source of labour (tick). That will make them capitalists (tick). This will create a bourgeois middle class that will increase the pressure for democratic reform (err, some initial success under Deng, not so much under Xi). This will result in the overturn of the CCP (nope).
As a strategic plan it had the typical flaw of assuming that the person to whom the plan is directed will not react in ways that are not in the west's interest. Its been a flaw in American plans since Grant and the Civil War. They always work on the basis that they are going to do things to people without thinking through how those people might respond or even act on their own initiative.
People don't generally seek to overthrow their current political system until it starts to fail on its own terms. The Chinese system operates on the basis of the CCP having absolute political power and using it to deliver stability and continuing economic growth. Right now the CCP is upholding its end of the bargain. When it fails to deliver that, as Suharto did in Indonesia, for instance, it may face a challenge. That will happen eventually but I wouldn't bet on it happening soon. China isn't a threat to the West in the way that the Soviets were because it has no real interest in exporting its form of government. Indeed throughout its remarkably long history China has been one of the least expansionary civilisations on record. China will become more assertive as it becomes more powerful, but I don't see it as a threat to the West. If people are genuinely worried about Western democracy I would suggest that they look to threats closer to home. Eg the US president who just tried to organise a coup.
Whilst I agree with much of that I think your conclusions are too sanguine. China is already in a position where not using Huawei products, for example, is actually very difficult and carries a significant price. They can seek to use economic dominance to control us and our decisions in exactly the same way that the US did with various countries during the second half of the 20th century. Having someone do that that is not on "our side" is going to be seriously uncomfortable and unpleasant. I agree with @Casino_Royale that we need to start thinking about how we respond to that bullying.
As for Trump, he is a liar, a blaggart and a seditionist who should be sent to jail. He is a warning but the US system ultimately proved strong enough to resist him. That's not to say that he hasn't done damage or extended the envelope of the possible.
(responding on my Huawei phone...). I think we are simply adjusting to a more multipolar world. We can rest assured that we are unlikely to ever experience anything as unpleasant as the kind of treatment we have meted out to other countries in our time, and take solace from that.
I see that 2021, where 2020 was pb's year of the Trump apologists, is going to be the year of the CCP apologists.
I think my biggest concern is that the Western hard-Left dismiss it on the grounds of being 'cloaked' racism, claiming it's 'their' culture etc, and then do a bit of 'whataboutery' on the British Empire and USA on top. Perhaps they'll add in that whatever the CCP do it can't be as bad as that, on top.
They will wake up eventually, of course. And China know this. But, they hope to foster enough political division internally within Western countries in the meantime so that by the time they do it's too late.
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
You'd need to have a concerted "Buy China last" policy. Good luck in getting Amazon signed up to that....
I think it's about pivoting away to alternative manufacturing centres first, over a 10-15 year period. But we need to start somewhere.
How are those IT problems at French customs being resolved, eh Faisal?
Honestly, unlike you, you are making irrational posts this morning. There (spelt correctly) may well be IT problems at the French customs. No doubt they are having issues with new systems. BUT we choose unnecessarily to expose ourselves to those issues.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Um, because I have a knowledge of the country, its history and its socio-cultural context (oh and its language).
Whereas you have no such thing.
But of course this is PB so go for it!
Ah, you're a Sinologist. I see.
Chris Patten had an awful lot to say about those. You should read more from him. He's a Tory europhile so you should be more likely to listen to him than me.
Start with his articles on the subject, and then read The Last Governor followed by East and West.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
No. European Colonial powers taught the first generation of African leaders everything they needed to know about greed, genocide and economic pillage.
Worth noting how prevalent democracy is now, at least in the 50% of Africa that is majority Christian.
If you think Africa wasn't filled with greedy, genocidal leaders robbing their people and their neighbours long before the Europeans arrived then you know fuck all about history or human nature.
We certainly didn't give them any shining examples to follow but we didn't need to teach them anything about being bastards because they already knew all of that very well.
"Banning the use of the Uighur language" says Cyclefree. So how come shops in major cities such as Kashgar and Hami have signs in both Chinese and Uighur languages? Just as shops in Lhasa have signs in Chinese and Tibetan languages
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Um, because I have a knowledge of the country, its history and its socio-cultural context (oh and its language).
Whereas you have no such thing.
But of course this is PB so go for it!
Ah, you're a Sinologist. I see.
Chris Patten had an awful lot to say about those. You should read more from him. He's a Tory europhile so you should be more likely to listen to him than me.
Start with his articles on the subject, and then read The Last Governor followed by East and West.
What makes you think Chris Patten isn't right about Brexit too?
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
Good post.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
I strongly suspect we won't see anything of the sort, despite being horribly exposed by COVID. It ones of those things that is always well we would like to, but we have to get over the economic.fall out of COVID, then we have to.....and 20 years later it is totally impossible to ever do so, as Chinese companies have monopolized market sectors.
I see that 2021, where 2020 was pb's year of the Trump apologists, is going to be the year of the CCP apologists.
I think my biggest concern is that the Western hard-Left dismiss it on the grounds of being 'cloaked' racism, claiming it's 'their' culture etc, and then do a bit of 'whataboutery' on the British Empire and USA on top. Perhaps they'll add in that whatever the CCP do it can't be as bad as that, on top.
They will wake up eventually, of course. And China know this. But, they hope to foster enough political division internally within Western countries in the meantime so that by the time they do it's too late.
In an ideal world, what is your vision for what China is, and how it should behave?
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Exactly. The West has become too bloated and willing to accept cheap goods and dodgy labour, and turn a blind eye. This has given China too much economic clout and power.
How to change that is easier said than do, and done quietly, but as 'quick' as possible.
Why should I be exposed to the tweets of someone who doesn't know his "their" from his "there"?
Blimey, now we have grammar snowflakery.
There are standards.
Although, it seems, not in what Scott_P subjects us to in his blizzard of retweets. Any old crap will do....
Anyone can either make a slip or more likely have their device autocomplete the wrong word. The spelling error of one word isn't the issue. What the tweet is highlighting is the issue.
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
If by "Western democracy" you mean the apartheid regime in South Africa and the Smith regime in Rhodesia, no it wasn't suitable for Africans. There again, in most cases neither was what came next.
The interesting bit was that South Africa "was different" according to the same people. One person One vote *was* a moral issue there.
But demanding democracy in Ghana was racist, apparently.
Similar attitudes to towards calls for multi party democracy in Eastern Europe.
The suddenly in 1989 a bunch of people discovered that democracy was a universal thing....
I am not sure what your point is here.
Post colonian chaos in Africa has been economically catastrophic and violent and industrial scale corruption is depressingly common.
Post colonian chaos has moved colonialism full circle (back on topic) and allowed backdoor Chinese colonialism into much of Africa. It is hard to pinpoint what is worst and what is best. The apartheid regimes of the recent past were most definitely not in the "best" category.
Sigh
During the 1980s it was utterly standard for the UK hard left to decry the universality of human rights, democracy etc.
They applied this to Africa - where they made all kind of excuses for the scumbags looting the place. They applied this to Europe - where they declared that Russia had a right to rule Eastern Europe. They applied this to Russia - where they were building a Better World.
Post 1989 they suddenly discovered a love for democracy.
I do apologise for your frustration at my witheringly stupidity.
I was of the centre-left during the time quoted and I do not recognise that as a description of myself. I opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa and also the Soviet Union. Perhaps you have read too many articles from the Daily Mail. Sigh!
If you were on the centre-left you were the opposition to these people.
Or perhaps you don't remember - "The longest suicide note in British political history"?
I remember Michael Foot with fondness. That is not to say I wanted to see the incompetent old fool as my Prime Minister. In much the same way I didn't approve of Mrs Thatcher's support of Botha, both politically and economically. To this day I will not buy a hardware product made by the Eliza Tinsley Company, but that doesn't make me a Soviet loving Communist.
I don't - yes, he was a loveable academic type. But history is full of loveable types whose theorising had a tremendous cost in human misery.
I was the weirdo who thought that multi-party democracy should be applied throughout the world.
Apparently this was bad, bad if I was talking about Eastern Europe. Or Africa, outside South Africa.
The funniest thing, to me, is that even after Russia arrived at Putin.... Putin for the love of Christ.... the last of the "Useful Idiots" are still saying "we shouldn't rush to judge" because of their memories of the Soviet Union.
Your analysis of Foot as a naive theorist responsible for perpetuating human misery has some validity. It is easier for someone of a practical nature like myself to visualise Nelson Mandela shackled to a wall in Robben Island with hardware crafted in the Black Country and imported into South Africa with Mrs Thatcher's blessing as being a more tangible symbol of human misery.
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
Good post.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1989 and ceased being a British colony we no longer even have a direct interest in what goes on there.
China is over the other side of the world, Russia is significantly closer to the UK and more of a direct concern to us.
In any case as China is a superpower and we are only a medium sized power now even if we wanted to take them on there is little we could do alone, the only nations who can seriously challenge and contain China now are the USA and India
How are those IT problems at French customs being resolved, eh Faisal?
Honestly, unlike you, you are making irrational posts this morning. There (spelt correctly) may well be IT problems at the French customs. No doubt they are having issues with new systems. BUT we choose unnecessarily to expose ourselves to those issues.
But those French IT problems will get resolved. Next week will be better than last week, next month better than this.
I can pity poor Faisal, trying to make noise when the only story in the world is America toying with overthrowing democracy. But really, that is all it is - noise, to pursue an agenda that Brexit is going to be a never-ending shitfest. Yawn.
Yes, Godwin's Law etc. but for once it's appropriate.
China is Germany in 1936.
We can see the aggressive dictator in power. We know the Nuremberg laws were enacted last year (banning anti-patriotic sentiment, and the camps in Xinjang). We can see the violation of the Treaty of Versailles (the trashing of the Anglo-Sino agreement and the rule of law) we can see Germany reoccupying the Rhineland (military aggression in the South China Sea, and near Taiwan and the huge expansion of its navy) and we can see the Anti-Comintern Pacts being signed (China with other central asian and African nations).
Of course, by 1941 everyone *knew* what Hitler was like, and it got worse, and know we now think anyone who "couldn't see it coming" in the 1930s must have been a complete idiot. Because we all now KNOW.
So, log-off now for a few minutes, look in the mirror, and - if nothing else - have a think about yourself and how you'd want to be seen in the history books.
What do you want to be? Someone who saw this coming when the evidence was staring you right in the face?
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
If the grandmother had wheels she would be a motorcycle. The "West" as a whole doesnt exist with the "US first" wing still around (who knows what their policy will be in 2024/8/32, the EU will not rely on the US as a stable partner in the next decade), India is very much India first and the south-east Asian countries will navigate a tightrope rather than take clear sides.
I see that 2021, where 2020 was pb's year of the Trump apologists, is going to be the year of the CCP apologists.
I think my biggest concern is that the Western hard-Left dismiss it on the grounds of being 'cloaked' racism, claiming it's 'their' culture etc, and then do a bit of 'whataboutery' on the British Empire and USA on top. Perhaps they'll add in that whatever the CCP do it can't be as bad as that, on top.
They will wake up eventually, of course. And China know this. But, they hope to foster enough political division internally within Western countries in the meantime so that by the time they do it's too late.
In an ideal world, what is your vision for what China is, and how it should behave?
This isn't hard. A democratic country like the USA, Japan or India, would do.
It is funny how these top London lawyers have so much difficulty in understanding the lockdown rules. Their antennae are ready to detect subtle breaches of equality regulation. She's been hot on the trail of antisemites in the Jolly Old Labour Party -- but a simple rule on lockdown like "Do Not Travel to Your Second Home" is completely beyond her ken.
"I would like to apologise to the local community, where we feel deeply embedded," said Mrs Hilsenrath.
So, basically the Llanegryn locals were the happy Stasis 😁😁😁& got Gog Plod to chase her out of Wales on Xmas day & leaked the story so it is all over the press.
And yet the little second-homer (probably third-homer) still believes the locals love her ("deeply embedded").
If you live in Hertfordshire and your children all go to school in Hertfordshire and you work in London, you are not deeply embedded in a small Welsh village
Still, it sounds as though she is in for the 100 per cent DomCum treatment.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission said they will consider whether further action against its chief executive is needed. "She has apologised for this error of judgement," said EHRC chair Baroness Kishwer Falkner.
Whoooo, "need to consider whether further action is needed".
Baroness Falkner is a LibDem, so I am sure she'll take a generous view of the perils of owning many homes.
And if not perhaps an appeal to the pb SecondHome Club (it is solidly LibDem) ?
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
If by "Western democracy" you mean the apartheid regime in South Africa and the Smith regime in Rhodesia, no it wasn't suitable for Africans. There again, in most cases neither was what came next.
The interesting bit was that South Africa "was different" according to the same people. One person One vote *was* a moral issue there.
But demanding democracy in Ghana was racist, apparently.
Similar attitudes to towards calls for multi party democracy in Eastern Europe.
The suddenly in 1989 a bunch of people discovered that democracy was a universal thing....
I am not sure what your point is here.
Post colonian chaos in Africa has been economically catastrophic and violent and industrial scale corruption is depressingly common.
Post colonian chaos has moved colonialism full circle (back on topic) and allowed backdoor Chinese colonialism into much of Africa. It is hard to pinpoint what is worst and what is best. The apartheid regimes of the recent past were most definitely not in the "best" category.
Sigh
During the 1980s it was utterly standard for the UK hard left to decry the universality of human rights, democracy etc.
They applied this to Africa - where they made all kind of excuses for the scumbags looting the place. They applied this to Europe - where they declared that Russia had a right to rule Eastern Europe. They applied this to Russia - where they were building a Better World.
Post 1989 they suddenly discovered a love for democracy.
I do apologise for your frustration at my witheringly stupidity.
I was of the centre-left during the time quoted and I do not recognise that as a description of myself. I opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa and also the Soviet Union. Perhaps you have read too many articles from the Daily Mail. Sigh!
If you were on the centre-left you were the opposition to these people.
Or perhaps you don't remember - "The longest suicide note in British political history"?
I remember Michael Foot with fondness. That is not to say I wanted to see the incompetent old fool as my Prime Minister. In much the same way I didn't approve of Mrs Thatcher's support of Botha, both politically and economically. To this day I will not buy a hardware product made by the Eliza Tinsley Company, but that doesn't make me a Soviet loving Communist.
I don't - yes, he was a loveable academic type. But history is full of loveable types whose theorising had a tremendous cost in human misery.
I was the weirdo who thought that multi-party democracy should be applied throughout the world.
Apparently this was bad, bad if I was talking about Eastern Europe. Or Africa, outside South Africa.
The funniest thing, to me, is that even after Russia arrived at Putin.... Putin for the love of Christ.... the last of the "Useful Idiots" are still saying "we shouldn't rush to judge" because of their memories of the Soviet Union.
Your analysis of Foot as a naive theorist responsible for perpetuating human misery has some validity. It is easier for someone of a practical nature like myself to visualise Nelson Mandela shackled to a wall in Robben Island with hardware crafted in the Black Country and imported into South Africa with Mrs Thatcher's blessing as being a more tangible symbol of human misery.
Michael Foot was very far from an opponent of multi-party democracy.
Between about 1970 and 1989, there were also a fair number of anti-Warsaw Pact, Marxist democrats about, like Varoufakis, although I don't think Foot was a Marxist.
I dont think Trump will see a single day in a jail cell. Hawley and Cruz will be in the Senate for decades as well.
This is now the key battle. When the seditionists are at the heart of government and have democratic mandate, how much effort will be made to remove them? In Hollywood the crooked Chief of Staff gets taken away in handcuffs. Good always triumphs no matter how impossible that looked 20 minutes earlier.
Is America the reality going to actually resemble its own image? Or was that all just baseless propaganda?
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
Good point and I always like a godfather analogy, but what happened to Moe Greene in the end! Maybe Raab can send Williamson and Francois on a secret mission.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Um, because I have a knowledge of the country, its history and its socio-cultural context (oh and its language).
Whereas you have no such thing.
But of course this is PB so go for it!
Which is why any Rest of the World response has to be focused on the Uighur issue. "And another thing..." is a distraction and counterproductive.
To be fair to the EU, its investment agreement is part of an attempt to align China with international norms. The timing of the agreement sucks, but it is the kind of thing everyone has been doing and will be doing with a too-big-ignore world power.
On topic. Though statistically meaningless....I know three separate people who moved to China to work at various times over the last five years and all three love the place. They are bright enough and diverse enough for me to think that the country can't be all bad.
What's it's like for westerners and ordinary Chinese people are likely to be two different things.
Of course but by the same token it's not always easy to judge what goes on in a culture very different from our own and someone from our culture living there can sometimes be a better judge than 'international outrage'.
I remember being with some Bostonians in France during Thatcher's time and being told how barbaric and undemocratic we the British were because of our behaviour towards the Catholics in Northern Ireland. They were describing actions and a country I didn't recognise
Ah yes. I can also recall white, leftly people telling me that "Western democracy" wasn't suitable for Africans.
Apparently traditional African culture *required* corrupt dictators who claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, while buying yet another palace and stashing all the countries money in Switzerland.
If by "Western democracy" you mean the apartheid regime in South Africa and the Smith regime in Rhodesia, no it wasn't suitable for Africans. There again, in most cases neither was what came next.
The interesting bit was that South Africa "was different" according to the same people. One person One vote *was* a moral issue there.
But demanding democracy in Ghana was racist, apparently.
Similar attitudes to towards calls for multi party democracy in Eastern Europe.
The suddenly in 1989 a bunch of people discovered that democracy was a universal thing....
I am not sure what your point is here.
Post colonian chaos in Africa has been economically catastrophic and violent and industrial scale corruption is depressingly common.
Post colonian chaos has moved colonialism full circle (back on topic) and allowed backdoor Chinese colonialism into much of Africa. It is hard to pinpoint what is worst and what is best. The apartheid regimes of the recent past were most definitely not in the "best" category.
Sigh
During the 1980s it was utterly standard for the UK hard left to decry the universality of human rights, democracy etc.
They applied this to Africa - where they made all kind of excuses for the scumbags looting the place. They applied this to Europe - where they declared that Russia had a right to rule Eastern Europe. They applied this to Russia - where they were building a Better World.
Post 1989 they suddenly discovered a love for democracy.
I do apologise for your frustration at my witheringly stupidity.
I was of the centre-left during the time quoted and I do not recognise that as a description of myself. I opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa and also the Soviet Union. Perhaps you have read too many articles from the Daily Mail. Sigh!
If you were on the centre-left you were the opposition to these people.
Or perhaps you don't remember - "The longest suicide note in British political history"?
I remember Michael Foot with fondness. That is not to say I wanted to see the incompetent old fool as my Prime Minister. In much the same way I didn't approve of Mrs Thatcher's support of Botha, both politically and economically. To this day I will not buy a hardware product made by the Eliza Tinsley Company, but that doesn't make me a Soviet loving Communist.
I don't - yes, he was a loveable academic type. But history is full of loveable types whose theorising had a tremendous cost in human misery.
I was the weirdo who thought that multi-party democracy should be applied throughout the world.
Apparently this was bad, bad if I was talking about Eastern Europe. Or Africa, outside South Africa.
The funniest thing, to me, is that even after Russia arrived at Putin.... Putin for the love of Christ.... the last of the "Useful Idiots" are still saying "we shouldn't rush to judge" because of their memories of the Soviet Union.
Your analysis of Foot as a naive theorist responsible for perpetuating human misery has some validity. It is easier for someone of a practical nature like myself to visualise Nelson Mandela shackled to a wall in Robben Island with hardware crafted in the Black Country and imported into South Africa with Mrs Thatcher's blessing as being a more tangible symbol of human misery.
Michael Foot was very far from an opponent of multi-party democracy.
Between about 1969 and 1989, there were also a large number of Marxist democrats, although I don't think Foot was a Marxist.
Trump and his family and inner core watching all the action from a tent, a curious combination of a Bond villain and his bunker but with Laura Branigan's 'Gloria' playing in the background closer to Dr Evil in Austin Powers
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Um, because I have a knowledge of the country, its history and its socio-cultural context (oh and its language).
Whereas you have no such thing.
But of course this is PB so go for it!
Ah, you're a Sinologist. I see.
Chris Patten had an awful lot to say about those. You should read more from him. He's a Tory europhile so you should be more likely to listen to him than me.
Start with his articles on the subject, and then read The Last Governor followed by East and West.
What makes you think Chris Patten isn't right about Brexit too?
It seems that people like you (and others on this thread) are only interested in this subject to the extent you can pursue your existing disputes with fellow Westerners on Brexit.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Um, because I have a knowledge of the country, its history and its socio-cultural context (oh and its language).
Whereas you have no such thing.
But of course this is PB so go for it!
Ah, you're a Sinologist. I see.
Chris Patten had an awful lot to say about those. You should read more from him. He's a Tory europhile so you should be more likely to listen to him than me.
Start with his articles on the subject, and then read The Last Governor followed by East and West.
I know now is not the time for experts which I get from someone such as yourself.
As for 肥 彭 well he came late to the subject, didn't really understand China as well as, say, Margaret Thatcher. Of course he went great guns on the "democracy" angle but as I said, this was missing the point.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Yes, that's the propaganda it puts out.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Any excuse for present behaviour based on 19th century wrongs is horsecrap and theres not a hope in hell that the Chinese regime itself believes that. Governments aren't that stupid, but they know it's useful, everyone does it to a degree, but we shouldn't buy such talk.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Except we won't, because it won't happen. Because even if we wanted to do it there's no way America would go along with it - let alone the rest of Europe that have just signed a deal with China - and no it has nothing to do with Brexit, the EU wouldn't have sanctioned China like that with us as members either.
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
Good post.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
Yes, China is a powerful nation. Even more so than the Soviet Union was. But, no, it's not omnipotent.
There is a lot of wishful thinking here, hoping we can just bury our heads in the sand and cover our eyes in the hope it goes away, because we don't want to wake-up to the very difficult decisions we otherwise might have to take over it.
Another immediate move would be to block Chinese state companies from investing here and elsewhere in the west and put up barriers for non-state Chinese companies as well. Our companies will just have to deal with the blowback. It's the kind of stuff Boris and Joe need to be discussing in a couple of weeks to ensure that Western companies don't fall into the hands of the Chinese state. The EU is very clearly an unreliable partner in this.
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
Good post.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1989 and ceased being a British colony we no longer even have a direct interest in what goes on there.
China is over the other side of the world, Russia is significantly closer to the UK and more of a direct concern to us.
In any case as China is a superpower and we are only a medium sized power now even if we wanted to take them on there is little we could do alone, the only nations who can seriously challenge and contain China now are the USA and India
Sorry, should have been 'Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1997 and ceased being a British colony'
On topic, former Portuguese government minister Bruno Macaes's two books ('Belt and Road', and 'the Dawn of Eurasia') are worth a read. He adds to his experience as Europe Minister with independent travel across off-the-beaten-track Asia and lived in China while writing them.
His alternative (optimistic) perspective for the US in 'History has Begun' is also worth a read (perhaps better for presenting the issues than resolving them)
How are those IT problems at French customs being resolved, eh Faisal?
Honestly, unlike you, you are making irrational posts this morning. There (spelt correctly) may well be IT problems at the French customs. No doubt they are having issues with new systems. BUT we choose unnecessarily to expose ourselves to those issues.
But those French IT problems will get resolved. Next week will be better than last week, next month better than this.
I can pity poor Faisal, trying to make noise when the only story in the world is America toying with overthrowing democracy. But really, that is all it is - noise, to pursue an agenda that Brexit is going to be a never-ending shitfest. Yawn.
You're right they will and I suspect we will never know the true cost of Brexit as we get into a new routine. The Today programme had a whole list of current problems this morning. Some of these businesses will go under, others will have diminished profits or expand less, other businesses won't enter the market. The point is a whole lot of business who were marginal will go out of business, a whole lot of new businesses which may have set up and been marginal (initially or long term) won't get set up. Businesses that aren't marginal become more so, so reduce investment or profits going into the economy, all because of unnecessary wastage.
Had to edit the 'Your'. It was a close shave. Didn't want you to ignore the post. And that is genuine.
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
We really can't. We might be able to contain China, but the idea that we can change who leads it is sheer fantasy. And counterproductive fantasy too.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I see that 2021, where 2020 was pb's year of the Trump apologists, is going to be the year of the CCP apologists.
I think my biggest concern is that the Western hard-Left dismiss it on the grounds of being 'cloaked' racism, claiming it's 'their' culture etc, and then do a bit of 'whataboutery' on the British Empire and USA on top. Perhaps they'll add in that whatever the CCP do it can't be as bad as that, on top.
They will wake up eventually, of course. And China know this. But, they hope to foster enough political division internally within Western countries in the meantime so that by the time they do it's too late.
China is China. If the Communist Party fell, to be replaced by a western-style democracy and (its current) unalloyed capitalism, how would that change the economic relationship with the West? It wouldn't change China selling us things we want to buy. It might trim some of the excesses of state espionage against competitors. Maybe. But otherwsie, I don't see what would change - other than cutting off our option to be outraged at the way they conduct their internal affairs.
The only way you "defeat" China is to be build better quality, better priced, latest fashion products. And we have some inherent problems in achieving that.
I see that 2021, where 2020 was pb's year of the Trump apologists, is going to be the year of the CCP apologists.
I think my biggest concern is that the Western hard-Left dismiss it on the grounds of being 'cloaked' racism, claiming it's 'their' culture etc, and then do a bit of 'whataboutery' on the British Empire and USA on top. Perhaps they'll add in that whatever the CCP do it can't be as bad as that, on top.
They will wake up eventually, of course. And China know this. But, they hope to foster enough political division internally within Western countries in the meantime so that by the time they do it's too late.
In an ideal world, what is your vision for what China is, and how it should behave?
This isn't hard. A democratic country like the USA, Japan or India, would do.
That's it.
The USA has military bases all over Britain, and we cannot operate our defences, our financial systems, etc., without their active cooperation. Are you saying you would be happy for that to be the case with China, provided the Communist regime is removed?
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
A big thing that should really concern western countries is China is investing heavily in AI tech....some get all worked up about a Google AI project being racist, but those companies have oversight and ethics committees and we have a free society that can pick up on this and influence the likes of Google to work harder to make these projects fairer.
Lets just imagine China manages to get to the same stage of market dominance in AI products as it does in cheap plastic crap and low end electronics. We very nearly signed up for their 5G, what if we sign up to their AI products that are a bit more crucial than which stupid dance video to be suggested next by TikTok?
Trump and his family and inner core watching all the action from a tent, a curious combination of a Bond villain and his bunker but with Laura Branigan's 'Gloria' playing in the background closer to Dr Evil in Austin Powers
Sadly I think it has already been shown that that video was not from the events of Wednesday but was rather from one of his recent rallies. That said I agree with you characterisation of him and with the idea he should be impeached/removed/jailed.
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
Good post.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1989 and ceased being a British colony we no longer even have a direct interest in what goes on there.
China is over the other side of the world, Russia is significantly closer to the UK and more of a direct concern to us.
In any case as China is a superpower and we are only a medium sized power now even if we wanted to take them on there is little we could do alone, the only nations who can seriously challenge and contain China now are the USA and India
Sorry, should have been 'Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1997 and ceased being a British colony'
China signed an International Agreement with Patten. The hell we should ignore its terms less than halfway through its duration! There lies anarchy.
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
We really can't. We might be able to contain China, but the idea that we can change who leads it is sheer fantasy. And counterproductive fantasy too.
Agree with this. Our job is to contain China not go for regime change. We're in a cold war with them and yet they're the only side who is fighting it. We've got smart people on here saying we don't need to. Mental.
I dont think Trump will see a single day in a jail cell. Hawley and Cruz will be in the Senate for decades as well.
This is now the key battle. When the seditionists are at the heart of government and have democratic mandate, how much effort will be made to remove them? In Hollywood the crooked Chief of Staff gets taken away in handcuffs. Good always triumphs no matter how impossible that looked 20 minutes earlier.
Is America the reality going to actually resemble its own image? Or was that all just baseless propaganda?
You haven't actually realised Hollywood is baseless propaganda? Are you old enough to be using your Dad's computer son?
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I said slowly, not overnight.
Slowly or quickly, I still can't see that happening. You need to deal a fundamental fact. China makes good products at a fraction of the price elsewhere. If your competitors are free to use them, so will you.
I see that 2021, where 2020 was pb's year of the Trump apologists, is going to be the year of the CCP apologists.
I think my biggest concern is that the Western hard-Left dismiss it on the grounds of being 'cloaked' racism, claiming it's 'their' culture etc, and then do a bit of 'whataboutery' on the British Empire and USA on top. Perhaps they'll add in that whatever the CCP do it can't be as bad as that, on top.
They will wake up eventually, of course. And China know this. But, they hope to foster enough political division internally within Western countries in the meantime so that by the time they do it's too late.
In an ideal world, what is your vision for what China is, and how it should behave?
This isn't hard. A democratic country like the USA, Japan or India, would do.
That's it.
The USA has military bases all over Britain, and we cannot operate our defences, our financial systems, etc., without their active cooperation. Are you saying you would be happy for that to be the case with China, provided the Communist regime is removed?
.
Ahem - Hinkley C nuclear plant? With no Communist regime removed...
Trump and his family and inner core watching all the action from a tent, a curious combination of a Bond villain and his bunker but with Laura Branigan's 'Gloria' playing in the background closer to Dr Evil in Austin Powers
It was the same song played in the clip below , of Nigel celebrating with the MAGAs pre-election, back in November. An apparent favourite.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Which is why negative real interest rates is potentially attractive (especially to those, including governments, holding lots of debt)
Trump and his family and inner core watching all the action from a tent, a curious combination of a Bond villain and his bunker but with Laura Branigan's 'Gloria' playing in the background closer to Dr Evil in Austin Powers
Sadly I think it has already been shown that that video was not from the events of Wednesday but was rather from one of his recent rallies. That said I agree with you characterisation of him and with the idea he should be impeached/removed/jailed.
That video was filmed at the rally in the morning.
Excellent thread, Cyclefree. Simply superb. I agree with every word.
China under the CCP represents a clear and present danger to the future freedom, liberty and security of humanity. All of us.
Forget Brexit. Forget Trump. Forget the EU. Forget Wokeism. Forget Sindyref. Forget any of our relentless introspective obsessions. Forget the tedious mudslinging we all through at each other each and every day. And I'd argue this is even important in winning the ultimate battle against climate change.
This should be the *number one* focus of Western foreign policy, now, with the same level of attention and focus that the Soviet Union had from 1948 to 1991. On a global level.
It's that serious.
We're in for the long haul and, if we want a future world of freedom and democracy, and if we want to stop our independent economies and securities being destroyed, we need to stop ourselves being slowly boiled in the saucepan.
Today. No excuses. No equivocation.
Er, no.
China is simply righting what it perceives to be centuries of wrongs and, because of its size, has realised that it is the 600lb gorilla.
It has very little expansionist ambition and simply wants to redress what it perceives to be historical iniquities (eg. Taiwan, the Spratlys) as well as maintaining its own internal order.
Is it repressive, violent, anti-democratic but it believes it has a greater purpose which is to bring, kicking and screaming if necessary, the country into the modern age to be a global competitor (not aggressor).
And as people on here have already noted, when you think that 20,000 people a day were dying in Shanghai pre-1949, the country has come a long way.
I always liken it to a blind giant bumbling along a narrow corridor. It bumps into the sides often but the direction is forward.
Good post, Topping. Especially the last line if it's an original. They've got over a billion people not just to feed but to meet the aspirations of. It's a massive challenge.
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
Good post.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1989 and ceased being a British colony we no longer even have a direct interest in what goes on there.
China is over the other side of the world, Russia is significantly closer to the UK and more of a direct concern to us.
In any case as China is a superpower and we are only a medium sized power now even if we wanted to take them on there is little we could do alone, the only nations who can seriously challenge and contain China now are the USA and India
Sorry, should have been 'Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1997 and ceased being a British colony'
China signed an International Agreement with Patten. The hell we should ignore its terms less than halfway through its duration! There lies anarchy.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I said slowly, not overnight.
Slowly or quickly, I still can't see that happening. You need to deal a fundamental fact. China makes good products at a fraction of the price elsewhere. If your competitors are free to use them, so will you.
And have not been punished in any way for stealing western IP that has allowed them a big leap forward in quality. They know they can just do it again if they fall behind in a sector, while also spending on their own R&D that they know will be protected.
Yes, Godwin's Law etc. but for once it's appropriate.
China is Germany in 1936.
We can see the aggressive dictator in power. We know the Nuremberg laws were enacted last year (banning anti-patriotic sentiment, and the camps in Xinjang). We can see the violation of the Treaty of Versailles (the trashing of the Anglo-Sino agreement and the rule of law) we can see Germany reoccupying the Rhineland (military aggression in the South China Sea, and near Taiwan and the huge expansion of its navy) and we can see the Anti-Comintern Pacts being signed (China with other central asian and African nations).
Of course, by 1941 everyone *knew* what Hitler was like, and it got worse, and know we now think anyone who "couldn't see it coming" in the 1930s must have been a complete idiot. Because we all now KNOW.
So, log-off now for a few minutes, look in the mirror, and - if nothing else - have a think about yourself and how you'd want to be seen in the history books.
What do you want to be? Someone who saw this coming when the evidence was staring you right in the face?
Or an idiot?
Uh-oh I see you're off on one of your moments again.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Except we won't, because it won't happen. Because even if we wanted to do it there's no way America would go along with it - let alone the rest of Europe that have just signed a deal with China - and no it has nothing to do with Brexit, the EU wouldn't have sanctioned China like that with us as members either.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I said slowly, not overnight.
Slowly or quickly, I still can't see that happening. You need to deal a fundamental fact. China makes good products at a fraction of the price elsewhere. If your competitors are free to use them, so will you.
Yes, I meant it as a Western response, not just one or two countries acting alone. It's, as I said in a different post, the kind of stuff Boris and Joe need to be talking about. How can we extricate western supply chains from China in the least damaging way possible and put up investment barriers against China in Western countries do our IP doesn't fall into their hands.
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
We really can't. We might be able to contain China, but the idea that we can change who leads it is sheer fantasy. And counterproductive fantasy too.
Agree with this. Our job is to contain China not go for regime change. We're in a cold war with them and yet they're the only side who is fighting it. We've got smart people on here saying we don't need to. Mental.
We do need to. We won't.
So we should take the steps we can do. Containing China isn't in the question yet, nor is regime change. But what we can do is work with Australia and Canada and start to build the foundations for future western co-operation. What we can do is block China from investing in Hinckley C (which should be scrapped for other reasons but that's another story) or HS2 or anything else they want to invest in as well as 5G.
Baby steps. The Cold War took half a century, this could take as long or longer.
What do we actually want from China? Do we want to remove the Communist regime and free the people? Because there seems to be no more than token dissent, and most of the population seems, rightly or wrongly, to be behind China's mission to achieve global pre-eminence, and its methods. Try to destroy China completely as a force and break it up into provinces? We can't really pretend that that would be a morally justifiable action. We need to decide what we want China to be, and what we want our interactions in the future to be like, before we can really put the policies in place to try and influence China toward this vision.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
Good post.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1989 and ceased being a British colony we no longer even have a direct interest in what goes on there.
China is over the other side of the world, Russia is significantly closer to the UK and more of a direct concern to us.
In any case as China is a superpower and we are only a medium sized power now even if we wanted to take them on there is little we could do alone, the only nations who can seriously challenge and contain China now are the USA and India
Sorry, should have been 'Plus since Hong Kong became part of the PRC in 1997 and ceased being a British colony'
China signed an International Agreement with Patten. The hell we should ignore its terms less than halfway through its duration! There lies anarchy.
We can ask them to respect the Agreement but other than that we no longer have a direct interest in Hong Kong and even if we wanted to do anything China is a superpower and we are only a medium sized power so it would mean nothing without US support
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I said slowly, not overnight.
Slowly or quickly, I still can't see that happening. You need to deal a fundamental fact. China makes good products at a fraction of the price elsewhere. If your competitors are free to use them, so will you.
And have not been punished in any way for stealing western IP that has allowed them a big leap forward. They know they can just do it again if they fall behind in a sector.
Again you're really rather missing the point. You might want to call for the ref, but there is no ref.
If we are operating a free market, companies will be free to purchase from Chinese suppliers. Are you arguing for govt intervention? Are you arguing for tariffs rules limiting free trade? If you are, you had better make sure they are applied globally.
A thoroughly depressing header. Hard to see a change in approach to meaningfully go against that odious regime happening in my lifetime.
Has anyone any glimmers of hope that the regime is not as strong as it appears?
Dark dreams everyone.
Sorry about that.
What is even worse is that evil regimes like China, Iran, Russia etc will take comfort from what has been happening in Washington.
I wish I could bring you good news.
That's a powerful indictment, Cyclefree. I think that a declining population of working age will ultimately bring China's economic miracle to a halt, and generate all sorts of internal pressures. Of course, the regime may became even more aggressive as a result.
Yes.
And with a leader other than Xi, I think China would have mellowed into middle age: it would have consumed of more what it produced, it would have got fat and rich and comfortable and keen to avoid changes that might inconvenience it. It would probably have edged slowly and surely towards something that looked like a democracy.
It would, simply, have become a bigger Japan or Singapore or Taiwan.
But instead it has Xi, a man with China's national destiny on his mind. And if growth stumbles, he'll look for external enemies to shore up his regime.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's that simple.
Yes, sure, nasty leaders can make or break a country - Mao, Stalin etc. - but it's the system that's rotten. Our foreign policy should first be focussed on getting rid of Xi, and then gentle reforms in "openness" in the hope this then bears democratic fruit in the long-term.
Jung Chang has written convincingly on how the idea democracy doesn't 'suit' China or the Chinese to be total nonsense, as of course we all know it to be, citing the period in the early 1920s, when it was starting to flower, before the warlords, nationalists and then communists got their hands on it.
That made me laugh out loud! "Our foreign policy should should be focussed on getting rid of Xi"
It's tempting to quote the Godfather "The Corleone's don't have that kind of muscle no more'" but that would be an understatement. I know you're a Brexiteer and England now assumes its rightful place at the top of the pile but in all seriousness how do you expect Dominic Raab and his Merry Men get rid of the Chinese leader?
The UK cannot do it alone, no, but we do set our own foreign policy just like Australia and Canada does. If the West acts in concert, with India and the south-east Asian countries, we can do this.
We really can't. We might be able to contain China, but the idea that we can change who leads it is sheer fantasy. And counterproductive fantasy too.
Indeed. Interventions in countries whose regimes we disapprove of (generally known as the NeoCon doctrine of regime change) does not have a particularly good track record whether done via military force or otherwise.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I said slowly, not overnight.
Slowly or quickly, I still can't see that happening. You need to deal a fundamental fact. China makes good products at a fraction of the price elsewhere. If your competitors are free to use them, so will you.
Yes, I meant it as a Western response, not just one or two countries acting alone. It's, as I said in a different post, the kind of stuff Boris and Joe need to be talking about. How can we extricate western supply chains from China in the least damaging way possible and put up investment barriers against China in Western countries do our IP doesn't fall into their hands.
It could well be already too late in lots of sectors e.g. try removing Tencent investment in the video games market, they have tentacles everywhere.
How are those IT problems at French customs being resolved, eh Faisal?
Honestly, unlike you, you are making irrational posts this morning. There (spelt correctly) may well be IT problems at the French customs. No doubt they are having issues with new systems. BUT we choose unnecessarily to expose ourselves to those issues.
But those French IT problems will get resolved. Next week will be better than last week, next month better than this.
I can pity poor Faisal, trying to make noise when the only story in the world is America toying with overthrowing democracy. But really, that is all it is - noise, to pursue an agenda that Brexit is going to be a never-ending shitfest. Yawn.
You're right they will and I suspect we will never know the true cost of Brexit as we get into a new routine. The Today programme had a whole list of current problems this morning. Some of these businesses will go under, others will have diminished profits or expand less, other businesses won't enter the market. The point is a whole lot of business who were marginal will go out of business, a whole lot of new businesses which may have set up and been marginal (initially or long term) won't get set up. Businesses that aren't marginal become more so, so reduce investment or profits going into the economy, all because of unnecessary wastage.
Had to edit the 'Your'. It was a close shave. Didn't want you to ignore the post. And that is genuine.
How are those IT problems at French customs being resolved, eh Faisal?
They aren't. The French had backed off trying to fully impose the new border restrictions due to the chaos. They have said that leniency ends today.
Step beyond the inevitable set up chaos and look into the detail. Lets assume for a minute a world where enough vets have been hired to issue certificates, enough customs agents hired to create the paperwork, the new computer system has been switched on and works, and there's enough customs officials hired to process the paperwork.
That is then the system that we have created working. The problem being that for importers and exporters it doesn't work. The time, expense and complexity makes it simpler to not bother, to buy stuff from elsewhere.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I said slowly, not overnight.
Slowly or quickly, I still can't see that happening. You need to deal a fundamental fact. China makes good products at a fraction of the price elsewhere. If your competitors are free to use them, so will you.
And have not been punished in any way for stealing western IP that has allowed them a big leap forward. They know they can just do it again if they fall behind in a sector.
Again you're really rather missing the point. You might want to call for the ref, but there is no ref.
If we are operating a free market, companies will be free to purchase from Chinese suppliers. Are you arguing for govt intervention? Are you arguing for tariffs rules limiting free trade? If you are, you had better make sure they are applied globally.
No, I am saying what the state of play is. As you say there is no ref and the west have shown they won't act as one, so China know they can play fair and win, and if they don't, they can steal to win with no punishment in any form.
Where as, all Western companies have to play pretty straight by the rules to win long term..otherwise the western ref steps in, and sometimes even pkaying straight isn't enough as a government might decide you are too successful and demand being broken up.
The only solution to the China problem is a slow removal of China from Western supply chains and isolating any country which allies with them with economic sanctions.
Who will pick up the bill for this?
Everyone. We're just going to have to live with a bit of extra inflation.
Hmmm. So you're a business making a product and you have to unilaterally switch suppliers to an unfamiliar and potentially slower, inferior or more costly alternative and then pass on the costs to the consumer.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
I said slowly, not overnight.
Slowly or quickly, I still can't see that happening. You need to deal a fundamental fact. China makes good products at a fraction of the price elsewhere. If your competitors are free to use them, so will you.
Yes, I meant it as a Western response, not just one or two countries acting alone. It's, as I said in a different post, the kind of stuff Boris and Joe need to be talking about. How can we extricate western supply chains from China in the least damaging way possible and put up investment barriers against China in Western countries do our IP doesn't fall into their hands.
Quite frankly in an economy ravaged by Corona, I am not sure that businesses or governments will be all too keen on taking on extra costs.
Obviously, co-ordinated international action is going to be really hard and will take years.
Comments
You need to have a confrontation to address the problem before you can fix it
As for Trump, he is a liar, a blaggart and a seditionist who should be sent to jail. He is a warning but the US system ultimately proved strong enough to resist him. That's not to say that he hasn't done damage or extended the envelope of the possible.
As the UK specifically, all I think we should do is be firm guardians of our technologies, try to keep skilled jobs in the UK wherever possible, be a friendly but straight talking competitor/partner, have a strong national defence policy, and be sure we can operate independently of every country when necessary. The Swiss way. It is not our job to try to stop the Chinese from becoming any richer or more powerful as an end in itself, and I don't believe it's possible anyway.
However, as Taiwan and Hong Kong have shown (and even parts of China at the start of the 20th Century) the Chinese love democracy just as much as any other nation does.
So, the strategy must be to move from wishful thinking toward encouraging internal reform - and moving from economic reliance and geopolitical ambivalence to containment in the meantime.
I was the weirdo who thought that multi-party democracy should be applied throughout the world.
Apparently this was bad, bad if I was talking about Eastern Europe. Or Africa, outside South Africa.
The funniest thing, to me, is that even after Russia arrived at Putin.... Putin for the love of Christ.... the last of the "Useful Idiots" are still saying "we shouldn't rush to judge" because of their memories of the Soviet Union.
The more interesting question is why you believe it.
Whereas you have no such thing.
But of course this is PB so go for it!
They will wake up eventually, of course. And China know this. But, they hope to foster enough political division internally within Western countries in the meantime so that by the time they do it's too late.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-55586418
CPS claims "new expert evidence" means no realistic prospect of convictions.
No doubt it's a long-game.
Chris Patten had an awful lot to say about those. You should read more from him. He's a Tory europhile so you should be more likely to listen to him than me.
Start with his articles on the subject, and then read The Last Governor followed by East and West.
We certainly didn't give them any shining examples to follow but we didn't need to teach them anything about being bastards because they already knew all of that very well.
The first thing, which some here (hiya @Casino ) are having trouble with, is accepting that China is the 600lb gorilla and a global titan only set to get stronger. Not a pleasant thought for those who go to bed in their Union Jack underpants but there is one mother of a country out there which, unlike the US, we didn't give birth to so we can't even patronise them.
How to change that is easier said than do, and done quietly, but as 'quick' as possible.
And you know it. Stop dodging the issue.
China is over the other side of the world, Russia is significantly closer to the UK and more of a direct concern to us.
In any case as China is a superpower and we are only a medium sized power now even if we wanted to take them on there is little we could do alone, the only nations who can seriously challenge and contain China now are the USA and India
I can pity poor Faisal, trying to make noise when the only story in the world is America toying with overthrowing democracy. But really, that is all it is - noise, to pursue an agenda that Brexit is going to be a never-ending shitfest. Yawn.
China is Germany in 1936.
We can see the aggressive dictator in power. We know the Nuremberg laws were enacted last year (banning anti-patriotic sentiment, and the camps in Xinjang). We can see the violation of the Treaty of Versailles (the trashing of the Anglo-Sino agreement and the rule of law) we can see Germany reoccupying the Rhineland (military aggression in the South China Sea, and near Taiwan and the huge expansion of its navy) and we can see the Anti-Comintern Pacts being signed (China with other central asian and African nations).
Of course, by 1941 everyone *knew* what Hitler was like, and it got worse, and know we now think anyone who "couldn't see it coming" in the 1930s must have been a complete idiot. Because we all now KNOW.
So, log-off now for a few minutes, look in the mirror, and - if nothing else - have a think about yourself and how you'd want to be seen in the history books.
What do you want to be? Someone who saw this coming when the evidence was staring you right in the face?
Or an idiot?
That's it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55573412
It is funny how these top London lawyers have so much difficulty in understanding the lockdown rules. Their antennae are ready to detect subtle breaches of equality regulation. She's been hot on the trail of antisemites in the Jolly Old Labour Party -- but a simple rule on lockdown like "Do Not Travel to Your Second Home" is completely beyond her ken.
"I would like to apologise to the local community, where we feel deeply embedded," said Mrs Hilsenrath.
So, basically the Llanegryn locals were the happy Stasis 😁😁😁& got Gog Plod to chase her out of Wales on Xmas day & leaked the story so it is all over the press.
And yet the little second-homer (probably third-homer) still believes the locals love her ("deeply embedded").
If you live in Hertfordshire and your children all go to school in Hertfordshire and you work in London, you are not deeply embedded in a small Welsh village
Still, it sounds as though she is in for the 100 per cent DomCum treatment.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission said they will consider whether further action against its chief executive is needed. "She has apologised for this error of judgement," said EHRC chair Baroness Kishwer Falkner.
Whoooo, "need to consider whether further action is needed".
Baroness Falkner is a LibDem, so I am sure she'll take a generous view of the perils of owning many homes.
And if not perhaps an appeal to the pb SecondHome Club (it is solidly LibDem) ?
Between about 1970 and 1989, there were also a fair number of anti-Warsaw Pact, Marxist democrats about, like Varoufakis, although I don't think Foot was a Marxist.
Is America the reality going to actually resemble its own image? Or was that all just baseless propaganda?
To be fair to the EU, its investment agreement is part of an attempt to align China with international norms. The timing of the agreement sucks, but it is the kind of thing everyone has been doing and will be doing with a too-big-ignore world power.
Beijing honours you. You are China's best friend.
As for 肥 彭 well he came late to the subject, didn't really understand China as well as, say, Margaret Thatcher. Of course he went great guns on the "democracy" angle but as I said, this was missing the point.
It simply isn't going to happen.
There is a lot of wishful thinking here, hoping we can just bury our heads in the sand and cover our eyes in the hope it goes away, because we don't want to wake-up to the very difficult decisions we otherwise might have to take over it.
And with that, I must work. Good day.
His alternative (optimistic) perspective for the US in 'History has Begun' is also worth a read (perhaps better for presenting the issues than resolving them)
Had to edit the 'Your'. It was a close shave. Didn't want you to ignore the post. And that is genuine.
We might be able to contain China, but the idea that we can change who leads it is sheer fantasy. And counterproductive fantasy too.
I am not sure that I can see that happening somehow.
The only way you "defeat" China is to be build better quality, better priced, latest fashion products. And we have some inherent problems in achieving that.
.
Lets just imagine China manages to get to the same stage of market dominance in AI products as it does in cheap plastic crap and low end electronics. We very nearly signed up for their 5G, what if we sign up to their AI products that are a bit more crucial than which stupid dance video to be suggested next by TikTok?
TAAAKE COOVVVEERRRRRR
So we should take the steps we can do. Containing China isn't in the question yet, nor is regime change. But what we can do is work with Australia and Canada and start to build the foundations for future western co-operation. What we can do is block China from investing in Hinckley C (which should be scrapped for other reasons but that's another story) or HS2 or anything else they want to invest in as well as 5G.
Baby steps. The Cold War took half a century, this could take as long or longer.
If we are operating a free market, companies will be free to purchase from Chinese suppliers. Are you arguing for govt intervention? Are you arguing for tariffs rules limiting free trade? If you are, you had better make sure they are applied globally.
Step beyond the inevitable set up chaos and look into the detail. Lets assume for a minute a world where enough vets have been hired to issue certificates, enough customs agents hired to create the paperwork, the new computer system has been switched on and works, and there's enough customs officials hired to process the paperwork.
That is then the system that we have created working. The problem being that for importers and exporters it doesn't work. The time, expense and complexity makes it simpler to not bother, to buy stuff from elsewhere.
Where as, all Western companies have to play pretty straight by the rules to win long term..otherwise the western ref steps in, and sometimes even pkaying straight isn't enough as a government might decide you are too successful and demand being broken up.
Obviously, co-ordinated international action is going to be really hard and will take years.