Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Penny China isn't investing in developing countries out of the goodness of their hearts. This is a 1000 year old diplomacy tactic called the Chinese tributary system. It's a modern spin of a Ming and Qing foreign policy tactic.
Even Mao invested a lot in Africa. One of my friends' father spent 10 years in Tanzania in the 1960s to help them build a railway.
Westerners never fully understand China and make a lot of false assumptions.
Even Mao invested a lot in Africa. One of my friends' father spent 10 years in Tanzania in the 1960s to help them build a railway.
Westerners never fully understand China and make a lot of false assumptions.
China also helped Cuba too and my grandmother's home country the German Democratic Republic, which was the Communist part of Germany. China invests mainly in politically similar countries, they will not invest in countries heavily aligned to USA. And sorry, just because your last name is Chinese doesn't mean you know everything about China. My Chinese stepfather was the same exact way as you, a CPP sympathizer who took any criticism on the CPP as an attack on the Chinese people themselves. Give it a rest, I put up with it for 10 years. I know more about China and the Chinese than your average Westerner does. Get used to the idea
Penny China isn't investing in developing countries out of the goodness of their hearts. This is a 1000 year old diplomacy tactic called the Chinese tributary system. It's a modern spin of a Ming and Qing foreign policy tactic.
The Tribute system didn't work like that. In fact, it's a misnomer because the word "tribute' has a subservient and "hand over your wives and valuables" quality that the Chinese system of foreign relations did not have back then. It was more a reciprocal relationship based on the Confucian principle of "older vs younger". It wasn't meant to be exploitative.
China is investing in Africa to ensure that it has the resources to maintain its own industrialization. It has nothing to do with the traditional tribute system that you're referencing. And, china isn't the only one who acts out of its own national self interest. The US and most of its western allies win the gold medal in that sport.
The Tribute system didn't work like that. In fact, it's a misnomer because the word "tribute' has a subservient and "hand over your wives and valuables" quality that the Chinese system of foreign relations did not have back then. It was more a reciprocal relationship based on the Confucian principle of "older vs younger". It wasn't meant to be exploitative.
China is investing in Africa to ensure that it has the resources to maintain its own industrialization. It has nothing to do with the traditional tribute system that you're referencing. And, china isn't the only one who acts out of its own national self interest. The US and most of its western allies win the gold medal in that sport.
My point being, is China is buying its influence around the world with money. China has been doing that for a very very long time, longer than any European nation state has existed. China is doing the same thing the the West is doing, except, China uses soft power, whereas the white man accomplished the same goal with bullets and swords.
Last edited by Ibginnie; 04-16-2015 at 12:45 PM..
Reason: edited quoted post
The Tribute system didn't work like that. In fact, it's a misnomer because the word "tribute' has a subservient and "hand over your wives and valuables" quality that the Chinese system of foreign relations did not have back then. It was more a reciprocal relationship based on the Confucian principle of "older vs younger". It wasn't meant to be exploitative.
China is investing in Africa to ensure that it has the resources to maintain its own industrialization. It has nothing to do with the traditional tribute system that you're referencing. And, china isn't the only one who acts out of its own national self interest. The US and most of its western allies win the gold medal in that sport.
Uhhmmm, is this a joke? Because many illegal Mainland Chinese tour guides operating in other countries have exactly that kind of mentality.
I have personally heard (very likely unregistered) mainland chinese tour guides in South east asia talk stuff like how the old ancient kingdoms of southeast asia send their most beautiful wives and all their gold and jade to the Chinese emperor as a sign of respect.
I think South korea is also facing a problem like this too; i remember reading about an incident about this too.
I found it all hilarious but also quite insulting.
My point being, is China is buying its influence around the world with money. China has been doing that for a very very long time, longer than any European nation state has existed. China is doing the same thing the the West is doing, except, China uses soft power, whereas the white man accomplished the same goal with bullets and swords.
Absolutely agree. Without the CCP keeping order, China will fall into complete chaos, both politically and socially. There are still way too many uneducated peasants who are selfish, dirty and way too uncouth for any form of meaningful democracy to function properly. It would simply breakdown into mob rule. Just look at the disaster case of India and no one in their right mind, Chinese or otherwise, would wish that on China.
Now if China split into separate provinces, there are several viable candidates for nascent democracy to form and move forward. Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shandong, Guangdong and the Pearl River delta and a few others along with perhaps Fujian might. The rest are still too tenuous. The megacities can definitely be democratic.
Last edited by Ibginnie; 04-16-2015 at 12:46 PM..
Reason: edited quoted post
Absolutely agree. Without the CCP keeping order, China will fall into complete chaos, both politically and socially. There are still way too many uneducated peasants who are selfish, dirty and way too uncouth for any form of meaningful democracy to function properly. It would simply breakdown into mob rule. Just look at the disaster case of India and no one in their right mind, Chinese or otherwise, would wish that on China.
This is what I have been saying.
No educated Chinese love the CCP and pretty much everyone thinks it is extremely corrupted - but the difference is that they also have to consider what would Chinese be without the CCP, who will continue the reform and economic growth and keep raising living standard and creating jobs?
It is very easy for an outsider to say "the CCP is evil, just get rid of it and make China a democracy and give the Chinese all the freedom they need!" Yeah, sounds fantastic! Let's play SimCity! They won't live in China. And all the expats can pack and leave the minute some chaos happens, But the 1.3 billion Chinese still need to live their entire life and they have to consider the post-CCP era, possibly decades of chaos, economic decline, high employment. While westerners only need to look at these on the TV.
Can you even imagine if the CCP collapse all of a sudden? There will be a power vacuum. What business fears most is political uncertainty. Foreign companies will pull out, jobs will disappear, people starve. Have those people thought about this? They probably don't care, as long as there is one fewer "evil dictatorship" in this world, who cares how many will fall back to poverty and live in $2 a day, it is not like they are their relatives or something.
China's political reform will need to be a very slow and time consuming process. For Christ's sake, countries like Spain and Portugal were not democratic until 1975, and Taiwan and Korea much much later. Why can't China be given more time?
Honestly, while I think that countries should ultimately be able to determine their leadership, uh...
I frankly don't trust the Chinese with that right now. Democracy is a privilege. You can't just thrust it on people and expect it to work. Democracies hinges upon everybody playing by the rules and respecting the victor, and I'm not sure the Chinese are capable of that right now.
Honestly, while I think that countries should ultimately be able to determine their leadership, uh...
I frankly don't trust the Chinese with that right now. Democracy is a privilege. You can't just thrust it on people and expect it to work. Democracies hinges upon everybody playing by the rules and respecting the victor, and I'm not sure the Chinese are capable of that right now.
I am 100% sure most Chinese aren't able to do that. I am sure more than 50% of Chinese don't even know government expenses come from the taxes they pay. How can you expect them to vote?
Even among the world's most advanced democracies, it works with great flaws. The fact that anyone, without any slightest knowledge on economies and politics can vote is a great concern (sometimes leading to vote hijacking).
The right to vote should be a privilege, not a right by birth. One should finish certain education and pass certain basic tests in order to gain that right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
