• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

China

Ziggurat said:
Yeah, no. That isn't the issue. Rather, I am unwilling to excuse bad behavior on the part of the CCP which has placed them in a position where most of their neighbors hate them.
Click to expand...


What hate? lets go round their neighbors and see.

Russia: Rivals because of a somewhat contested border. A rivalry that has existed since both countries shared that border, regardless of what regime was in power in either country.

Mongolia: Playing Russia and China against each other, firmly dependent on both for virtually everything.

North Korea: Hates everybody

South Korea: Dislike due to history up to and including the Korean war, but on the other hand trading partners and at least China is keeping North Korea from collapsing, which would destroy South Korea's economy.

Japan: Dislike due to WW2 and Japan's tendency to claim the Japanese army was only in China to distribute flowers and peace, especially now that outright deniers of the genocides, rape and devastation are becoming mainstream elected politicians. Also major trading partners.

Taiwan: Here I'll give you the intense dislike, though hate is probably going too far. After all, there are a lot in Taiwan that would like the only change to be who is in power in the mainland, not what the mainland is doing with that power.

Vietnam: Intense dislike since recorded history, regardless of who is in power in either country.

Laos: Close relations with Vietnam, thus anti-China.

Myanmar : Too busy dealing with its coup and rivalries with it's other neighbors to be busy with China, though it has a lot of trade.

Bhutan: No formal relations, firmly in the Indian camp. Some disputed territory

Nepal: Playing China and India against each other to remain independent.

India: In conflict with China about who is the regional power. The current nationalistic party is fueling that happily.

Pakistan: On the one hand, China is suppressing Muslims, on the other hand, China and India are often in conflict and if there is something the Pakistani like it's anyone that dislikes India.

Afghanistan: The current rulers from Afghanistan need a lot of money, and China is perfectly willing to provide that in exchange for all those resources there.

Philippines : Slowly moving towards greater and greater cooperation with China, though some conflict over some uninhabited rocks.


Of those, only the relation with Taiwan is directly influenced by the CCP being in power. Had the nationalists won we'd be looking at a similar situation, though probably sooner as the insanity of the great leap forward and the Cultural revolution would not have happened.
 
Alternatively maybe the theory is that collapse is inevitable, and bailing them out now just delays it and makes it worse when it arrives. Hard to tell what the CCP is really thinking.

The problems with Chinese real estate go far, far beyond Evergrande. A reckoning is inevitable, prices are far, far too high. Chinese property values are significantly higher than US property values, and that frankly makes no sense. It cannot continue.
 
I'll just add - I'm registered at Alibaba as both importer and exporter and get quite a few enquiries on both ends.

It's interesting to note the rise and fall of Chinese companies wanting to export. Most of the time, they're busy enough to not need to cold call, but right now, it looks like every Chinese manufacturer is actively seeking new outlets.

I've sent Roboramma a PM to see if he knows anything about the current state of business.
 
Last edited:
I think , to use a example from the history of the Soviet Union, that the CPP Is rethinking it's version of the New Economic Policy of the Soviets in the 1920's...allowing some private enterprise in Russia. THis was reversed by Stalin who went full scale "State Controls Everything/Command Economy" mode. It did not turn out well for Russia
 
dudalb said:
I think , to use a example from the history of the Soviet Union, that the CPP Is rethinking it's version of the New Economic Policy of the Soviets in the 1920's...allowing some private enterprise in Russia. THis was reversed by Stalin who went full scale "State Controls Everything/Command Economy" mode. It did not turn out well for Russia
Click to expand...

There's no doubt their model has been a raging success - they've gone from basket-case to challenging US supremacy economically, and soon to be military, in less than half a century.

They'd be the ideal world role model if it weren't for those pesky human rights abuses, imperial expansion, corruption, etc.
 
The Atheist said:
There's no doubt their model has been a raging success - they've gone from basket-case to challenging US supremacy economically, and soon to be military, in less than half a century.

They'd be the ideal world role model if it weren't for those pesky human rights abuses, imperial expansion, corruption, etc.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t call it a raging success. The thing to keep in mind is not only how far they have come, but also how far they could have come, had they done things differently. Compare their progress to, say, Hong Kong and Taiwan, and I’d say they’re well behind where they could be.

In other words, I think those pesky human rights abuses, corruption, etc. came at a cost.
 
Ziggurat said:
I wouldn’t call it a raging success. The thing to keep in mind is not only how far they have come, but also how far they could have come, had they done things differently. Compare their progress to, say, Hong Kong and Taiwan, and I’d say they’re well behind where they could be.

In other words, I think those pesky human rights abuses, corruption, etc. came at a cost.
Click to expand...

Is that a really fair comparison though?
Both Hong Kong and Taiwan are tiny compared to China, and both got massive investments from rich countries (the UK and US resp.), whereas China is huge, was totally war-ravaged and had a series of wars since then.
Perhaps it's better to compare them to Brazil or India, in which case they did semi ok economically. Corruption in those two countries is pretty comparable and only India does better in human rights (for now).
 
Actually, come to think of it, the best comparison would be Russia.
Both are countries that transformed communism into a form of oligarchy.
Both have pretty similar levels of corruption and human rights abuses and both have to deal with the consequences of bad economic decisions from the 1940's to the late 1980's.

On the surface at least it seems China is doing better than Russia in that regard.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Is that a really fair comparison though?
Both Hong Kong and Taiwan are tiny compared to China, and both got massive investments from rich countries (the UK and US resp.), whereas China is huge, was totally war-ravaged and had a series of wars since then.
Click to expand...

The wars China engaged in since WW2 were voluntary. Hell, so was their civil war (which also had a strong negative impact on Taiwan). And the lack of foreign investment in China before the 80's was largely due to their choices. Why did Taiwan get more foreign investment than China did? That wasn't chance, that's a direct consequence of choices.

Rural China could not have developed to the level of Hong Kong. But coastal China could have gotten much closer than they did. The point of comparing China to Taiwan and Hong Kong is because they're culturally and geographically comparable. You can't say their success was due to natural resources or an educated population that China lacked. China had all the same necessary prerequisites.

Perhaps it's better to compare them to Brazil or India, in which case they did semi ok economically. Corruption in those two countries is pretty comparable and only India does better in human rights (for now).
Click to expand...

Corruption in those two countries is why doing better than them isn't much of an accomplishment.
 
Ziggurat said:
I wouldn’t call it a raging success. The thing to keep in mind is not only how far they have come, but also how far they could have come, had they done things differently. Compare their progress to, say, Hong Kong and Taiwan, and I’d say they’re well behind where they could be.
Click to expand...
Evidence?
 
Ziggurat said:
The wars China engaged in since WW2 were voluntary. Hell, so was their civil war (which also had a strong negative impact on Taiwan). And the lack of foreign investment in China before the 80's was largely due to their choices. Why did Taiwan get more foreign investment than China did? That wasn't chance, that's a direct consequence of choices.

Rural China could not have developed to the level of Hong Kong. But coastal China could have gotten much closer than they did. The point of comparing China to Taiwan and Hong Kong is because they're culturally and geographically comparable. You can't say their success was due to natural resources or an educated population that China lacked. China had all the same necessary prerequisites.



Corruption in those two countries is why doing better than them isn't much of an accomplishment.
Click to expand...

Because of cold war policies. No communist threat, no need for investment to stick it to the commies.
And let's not forget that the reason mainland China went communist was because the Kuomingtang was even more inept economically, socially and military.
So had they won by some miracle, there is no evidence China would be better off.
Sure, no Great Leap Forward or Cultural Revolution, but a continuation of the warlords era with it's constant warfare.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Because of cold war policies. No communist threat, no need for investment to stick it to the commies.
And let's not forget that the reason mainland China went communist was because the Kuomingtang was even more inept economically, socially and military.
So had they won by some miracle, there is no evidence China would be better off.
Click to expand...

Well, no, there is evidence. Considerable evidence, starting with Taiwan. They took over Taiwan. And in the long run, Taiwan has done far, far better than mainland China.

But even supposing you're right about what would have happened with the Kuomingtang, you're still comparing what the CCP accomplished to what you think would have been a disaster. Not being worse than a disaster isn't an indication of actual success. That's setting the bar far too low.

Sure, no Great Leap Forward or Cultural Revolution
Click to expand...

You're underselling one of history's greatest slaughters.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Because of cold war policies. No communist threat, no need for investment to stick it to the commies.
And let's not forget that the reason mainland China went communist was because the Kuomingtang was even more inept economically, socially and military.
Click to expand...

Personally I think this had something to do with it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War#Conclusion_and_aftermath
However, the Soviet occupation of Manchuria was long enough to allow the Communist forces to move in en masse and arm themselves with the military hardware surrendered by the Imperial Japanese Army, quickly establish control in the countryside and move into position to encircle the Nationalist government army in major cities of northeast China.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom