Geopolitics in the 2020s.

[Detournement]

The USAF have admitted flying within 1km of the plane.

[welshbairn]

14 minutes ago, Detournement said:

The USAF have admitted flying within 1km of the plane.

I don't think that's unusual in a war zone.

[bendan]

On 24/07/2020 at 08:06, JTS98 said:

.... due to the existence of said plan... 

How do you know such a plan exists (other than in the minds of crackpot Chinese and American nationalists)?

Edited July 28, 2020 by bendan

[bendan]

On 25/07/2020 at 00:46, Enigma said:

 

Yeah the ending of the one child policy has pretty much done f**k all to stop China’s declining birth rate. People living way longer too, going to be very interesting to see how China copes with that.

 

They have completely mis-timed the ending of the one-child policy. It needed scrapped way earlier but they left it far too late and they allowed a resulting culture of insane hothousing of only children to become entrenched in urban China. It is pretty much impossible for parents there to keep up if they have more than one kid and both parents work.

Edited July 28, 2020 by bendan

[Guest JTS98]

35 minutes ago, bendan said:

How do you know such a plan exists (other than in the minds of crackpot Chinese and American nationalists)?

Are you questioning the existence of the extensively covered Belt and Road strategy?

Fair play to you.

[Tight minge]

This is the equivalent of saying Liverpool need to sack Klopp. 
It's readily apparent to anyone with a grasp of economics that state planning has a been a huge advantage to China and if they continue to invest in their country at the same rate in the next 40 years as they have in the past 40 they will by far surpass everyone else. 

Would happily take that as a bet, but I’ll be dead in 40 years.

Chinese investment cannot continue as a linear event (financially or economically) and is already coming unstuck.

Internally costs in the coastal regions are getting non competitive against SEA and SE. There only option is developing the interior regions (Chengdu and such like), however this is not cost efficient because of logistical costs and the reluctance of people to return to the interior.

Externally the belt and road initiative is starting to slow down as countries realise it as weighted to China.

Chinas growth over the years has been as much down to other countries insatiable appetite for cheaper goods and globalised manufacturing. This appetite, at least at government level, is waining and with a global recession looming, protectionism will balance this.

Where countries have tolerated China, that tide is changing.

* Protectionism talk from Trump/west.
* Many of the initial belt and road initiatives are proving to be sub standard or weighted to China making newer initiatives less welcome.
* Huawei
* Indonesia being the first SEA country to actively stand up to China in the South China sea by sending troops and missile batteries in response to their encroachments.
* India blocking Chinese apps.
* Hong Kong

Internally things are starting to unravel as well and although it is easier to control a population when you have brainwashed their education. The controls they are putting on the people suggest they are losing the battle. VPN’s which were readily available in China are now near impossible to use.

Of course, reading anything coming out of China has to be taken with a pinch of salt and having a ‘frank discussion’ with a Chinese person will not usual deliver any reality.

The Chinese people themselves are abandoning their culture more and more and aspire to gain a twisted western middle class they perceive and through the education and policies are generally extremely selfish, blinkered and racist people.

Generally mainland Chinese are disliked by most in the region.

At best and most likely, China will remain a major power globally without being significant in any way and at worst it will implode.

Having lived and worked in Asia for the last 15 years, including living in China on several occasions and locations and dealt with all aspects of life in China I would say that JTS98 has a clear grasp on China.

Maybe he is seeing the negative in China, but that is understandable as you really can’t rely on anything coming out of there and frankly for all the advancements and growth over the last 15+ years, the country is clearly also going in a negative direction.

I have been asked twice in recent years to return to China on lucrative deals and refused both. Once through the ‘honeymoon’ of living/traveling there, its pretty shit and if you spend time in the ‘countryside’ there is no evidence of any of these great improvements other than surveillance.

Its not the country it portrays itself to be.

[bendan]

6 hours ago, JTS98 said:

Are you questioning the existence of the extensively covered Belt and Road strategy?

Fair play to you.

No, I'm questioning the confirmed existence of a 100 year plan for global dominance. But fair play to you for trying to conflate the Michael Pillsbury/Liu Mingfu '100 year marathon' claim with the B&R strategy.

[Guest JTS98]

8 minutes ago, bendan said:

No, I'm questioning the confirmed existence of a 100 year plan for global dominance. But fair play to you for trying to conflate the Michael Pillsbury/Liu Mingfu '100 year marathon' claim with the B&R strategy.

So you think its plans to control the entire South China Sea (before even considering its move into the Indian Ocean and beyond), develop its navy, and build strategic bases and lacky states all over Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and Africa are all just for a bit of a laugh?

You're entitled to your opinion. I don't think it's one anybody who follows developments in China would agree with.

Edited July 29, 2020 by JTS98

[bendan]

Just now, JTS98 said:

So you think its plans to control the entire South China Sea, develop its navy, and build strategic bases and lacky states all over Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and Africa are all just for a bit of a laugh?

You're entitled to your opinion. I don't think it's one anybody who follows developments in China would agree with.

This is hilarious. 

You said that a 100 year plan for global domination existed. You then claim this plan is in fact the B&R strategy, a claim that obviously depends entirely on your interpretation. Now you're saying it's not actually the B&R but in fact the development of China's navy and the building of influence around the world.

I don't doubt China is seeking to increase its influence and power, particularly in its own back yard and with US troops all around it - most countries do that as they get richer. Simply *assuming* this means a plan for global domination exists is the stuff of conspiracy theorists.

I'm curious as to how you 'follow developments in China'. Everything you say about the country seems to come from following hopelessly ill-informed speculation from far beyond the borders of the country.

As you said, we're entitled to our opinions, but that's all they are until you can produce some evidence.

[Tight minge]

So you think its plans to control the entire South China Sea (before even considering its move into the Indian Ocean and beyond), develop its navy, and build strategic bases and lacky states all over Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and Africa are all just for a bit of a laugh?
You're entitled to your opinion. I don't think it's one anybody who follows developments in China would agree with.

Everything that China is doing just now is clearly for their economical dominance. I wouldn’t buy into any 100 year plan or such like and compare a lot of this to the US and the Marshall plan as much as that gave economic dominance to the US.

The areas that China are exerting the strongest presence are resource rich; oil in the South China Sea, rare earths in Africa (which has been where the west has been wholly complacent). The man made islands, I believe are purely driven to ’muddy the waters’ in any legal wrangle than for any military strategy.

The development of their navy is something that is much needed for them and I guess to play an aggressor in the South China Sea rather than global dominance.

Don't imagine their aspirations are much different than any other country, just with a very mainland Chinese attitude.

[bendan]

3 hours ago, Tight John McVeigh is a tit said:

 

The Chinese people themselves are abandoning their culture more and more and aspire to gain a twisted western middle class they perceive ..

 

 

I don't really agree with this these days. There was a period where Western culture and lifestyle was seen as something to aspire to but that has definitely waned, as it has in some other countries as they've developed.

[Guest JTS98]

1 hour ago, bendan said:

This is hilarious. 

You said that a 100 year plan for global domination existed. You then claim this plan is in fact the B&R strategy, a claim that obviously depends entirely on your interpretation. Now you're saying it's not actually the B&R but in fact the development of China's navy and the building of influence around the world.

I don't doubt China is seeking to increase its influence and power, particularly in its own back yard and with US troops all around it - most countries do that as they get richer. Simply *assuming* this means a plan for global domination exists is the stuff of conspiracy theorists.

I'm curious as to how you 'follow developments in China'. Everything you say about the country seems to come from following hopelessly ill-informed speculation from far beyond the borders of the country.

As you said, we're entitled to our opinions, but that's all they are until you can produce some evidence.

I suppose I'd ask you two questions.

1) Do you think China has a strategy for the next century?

2) What do you think the purpose of that strategy is?

I don't think having a plan to be the preeminent power in the world is evil. I think more countries than just China have it. You're using loaded language to make it seem like I view China as  some kind of Scoobie-doo baddie.

My point in this (and it was another poster who brought it up) is that China is unlikely to achieve its ambitions because it is so poorly run and faces too many obstacles.

[Detournement]

Reading English language Asian newspapers obviously induces Daily Mail level brain rot.

It's a sign of how well media propaganda works everywhere that Trump's tariffs have went from being viewed as a racist idiocy which would hurt America to generally accepted with a large proportion of people clamouring for harsher measures.

[bendan]

51 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

I suppose I'd ask you two questions.

1) Do you think China has a strategy for the next century?

2) What do you think the purpose of that strategy is?

I don't think having a plan to be the preeminent power in the world is evil. I think more countries than just China have it. You're using loaded language to make it seem like I view China as  some kind of Scoobie-doo baddie.

My point in this (and it was another poster who brought it up) is that China is unlikely to achieve its ambitions because it is so poorly run and faces too many obstacles.

We were talking about known, existing plans. I'm sure China has a strategy for the whole century (because it's 'so poorly run'?) but I haven't seen anything beyond things like Made in China and The Chinese Dream, which I think has goals up to 2049.

The stated purpose is the 'revitalization of the nation'. We can speculate about what that means.

I've seen you say several times that the country is so poorly run. What do you base that on? To me, there are vast differences between different places in China in terms of quality of governance, but in general there has been huge improvement over the last two decades. That doesn't mean there haven't been backward steps, of course, but almost every administrative process has been streamlined and standardised.

[Tight minge]

I don't really agree with this these days. There was a period where Western culture and lifestyle was seen as something to aspire to but that has definitely waned, as it has in some other countries as they've developed.

I would say it is accelerating. The clamour to be ’middle class’ in China these days is insatiable. Every time I am over, for me, I see more and more signs of lifestyle change. Sure, outside of the fashion ’icons’, there is more a focus to China brand which are mostly rip offs of western brands, but the culture target is the same.

Your more likely to meet someone in Starbucks, Luckin or other generic coffee shop than a tea house. Pizza places are hugely popular as are fast food restaurants including McDonald's which wasn’t popular a number of years ago.

Car ownership is a sign of status as is property ownership, particularly in a western styled home.

The absolute inability for the government to entice people back into the interior which is seen as old/tradional may bear that out.

Of course change and development happens everywhere but when people look at China with misty eyes as some glorious middle kingdom. It's not.

[Detournement]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jul/29/five-eyes-alliance-could-expand-in-scope-to-counteract-china

UK 'centre right (lol) MPs' trying to formalise the renewed Cold War.

It's sad that it's once again likely to be Africans and Latin Americans who suffer due to this insanity.

 

[Tight minge]

We were talking about known, existing plans. I'm sure China has a strategy for the whole century (because it's 'so poorly run'?) but I haven't seen anything beyond things like Made in China and The Chinese Dream, which I think has goals up to 2049.
The stated purpose is the 'revitalization of the nation'. We can speculate about what that means.
I've seen you say several times that the country is so poorly run. What do you base that on? To me, there are vast differences between different places in China in terms of quality of governance, but in general there has been huge improvement over the last two decades. That doesn't mean there haven't been backward steps, of course, but almost every administrative process has been streamlined and standardised.

Would pretty much agree with all that.

I can kind of see the poorly run comment though, but depends on which way you are looking at it.

The government has economic aspirations for sure and on the whole that is successful (although as mentioned earlier, I believe this is coming off the rails a bit of late). However, these aspirations do not extend to everyone in the country. As long as there is growth and as long as the coastal areas are developing, the government really couldn’t care less about their citizens.

If they truly believed in equality and universal country development they would be overhauling their education system. Nearly all the elite in China educate their children overseas which should be a telling sign.

Quality over quantify is as relevant in Chinese education as about anything else in China.

Private property investment overseas is massive and away of getting money out of China, again for the elite.

The drive, imo, is economic development for the benefit of the elite at the expense of everyone else and this is reflected not only in the lack of fucks given about the interior but the control it exerts on minorities to keep them in line. - Not any different that anywhere else in the world.

This leads to the absolute shambles of some of the local government that central government only ever appear to focus on when something big breaks and Mianzi kicks in. Local government do what ever the f**k they want and false report up the chain as the likelihood of the central government acting is slim.

For all that, poorly run carries weight.

A number of years ago, central government blocked all visas for the Philippines for a time. It was absolutely impossible for a Filipino to get a visa or renew a visa in China, unless they had the cash and applied in Hunan who quite openly carried in issuing visas at a ’premium’.

An interesting topic which I am sure no one will agree on and no one can claim any certainty.

A huge, diverse country affected by ideas we can hardly comprehend (mianzi / renzhi).

[Guest JTS98]

51 minutes ago, bendan said:

We were talking about known, existing plans. I'm sure China has a strategy for the whole century (because it's 'so poorly run'?) but I haven't seen anything beyond things like Made in China and The Chinese Dream, which I think has goals up to 2049.

The stated purpose is the 'revitalization of the nation'. We can speculate about what that means.

I've seen you say several times that the country is so poorly run. What do you base that on? To me, there are vast differences between different places in China in terms of quality of governance, but in general there has been huge improvement over the last two decades. That doesn't mean there haven't been backward steps, of course, but almost every administrative process has been streamlined and standardised.

I outlined a few pages ago the numerous foreign and domestic policy failures that show a very poorly run state.

Belt and Road is going badly (and was poorly judged from the start - there's a reason nobody else had touched most of those projects), Taiwan, India, Hong Kong, South China Sea, getting two fingers given to it by Australia and America, getting two fingers given to it by Vietnam and Indonesia, inequality and discontent domestically, having to resort to threatening to imprison those you claim are your citizens in your own country, actually imprisoning those seen as potential dissenters, continual amateurish diplomatic mis-steps, picking fights with the NBA, having to bend over backwards to stop information getting into their own country, a political system that rewards loyalty in the face of all evidence over ability (look at the start of the covid crisis or SARS or mining accidents).

I could go on.

None of that speaks of a well-run country that the rest of the world should be terrified of.

China will always be important and it's bound to be relatively powerful because of its sheer size. But it doesn't rule the world and under The Party it is unlikely ever to do so.

The Party are like a football manager that manage to make their team less than the sum of their parts. It's simply not a system that rewards competence.

Edited July 29, 2020 by JTS98

[bendan]

1 hour ago, JTS98 said:

I outlined a few pages ago the numerous foreign and domestic policy failures that show a very poorly run state.

Belt and Road is going badly (and was poorly judged from the start - there's a reason nobody else had touched most of those projects), Taiwan, India, Hong Kong, South China Sea, getting two fingers given to it by Australia and America, getting two fingers given to it by Vietnam and Indonesia, inequality and discontent domestically, having to resort to threatening to imprison those you claim are your citizens in your own country, actually imprisoning those seen as potential dissenters, continual amateurish diplomatic mis-steps, picking fights with the NBA, having to bend over backwards to stop information getting into their own country, a political system that rewards loyalty in the face of all evidence over ability (look at the start of the covid crisis or SARS or mining accidents).

I could go on.

None of that speaks of a well-run country that the rest of the world should be terrified of.

China will always be important and it's bound to be relatively powerful because of its sheer size. But it doesn't rule the world and under The Party it is unlikely ever to do so.

The Party are like a football manager that manage to make their team less than the sum of their parts. It's simply not a system that rewards competence.

There are plenty of weaknesses to China and its system but there are strengths too, like the long term view taken on a lot of infrastructure investment. 

I don't agree that you can do well in the party nowadays solely based on loyalty. It's obviously an essential component, but competence is also required, at least in the more developed areas.

I think there's a general lack of perspective on China in the West. People don't understand where it's come from, and they are largely unaware of its achievements due to the focus on negative stories in our media. It's still got a long way to go, and it will find the going harder as it develops, but there are loads of good things happening there that are ignored.

[Guest JTS98]

9 minutes ago, bendan said:

There are plenty of weaknesses to China and its system but there are strengths too, like the long term view taken on a lot of infrastructure investment. 

I don't agree that you can do well in the party nowadays solely based on loyalty. It's obviously an essential component, but competence is also required, at least in the more developed areas.

I think there's a general lack of perspective on China in the West. People don't understand where it's come from, and they are largely unaware of its achievements due to the focus on negative stories in our media. It's still got a long way to go, and it will find the going harder as it develops, but there are loads of good things happening there that are ignored.

Fair enough.

I think its achievements are mainly behind it and its current strengths are vastly over-stated by the western media. There always has to be a credible adversary, and at the moment China is the only one available since Russia is a shambles.

Funnily enough, a lot of the issues that harm Russia are also a problem for China. The lack of rule of law and entrenched political power by force being the two weaknesses that all others stem from.

That said, I think The Party's days are numbered and China would be much stronger without it.

Edited July 29, 2020 by JTS98