There should be an Australian guy who is still just hating on China in the 2nd panel anyway.
post
Can we just have like a couple of years of everyone just getting on with their own shit
Chinas military stays in and around china as far as i know…
But the us is everywhere interfering in everyones business
Yes comrades, that is 100% correct. Assuming you also accept chinas definition of where its territory ends.
Personally, I'm just waiting for the aggressive, expansionist country of Switzerland to end it's occupation of Zurich.
Where does the US territory end, Palestine? Vietnam??
Yes let's support le Taiwan independence!! (But don't look up what territory the ROC has in their constitution btw)
I do know China meddles in Africa a lot. I think because they are interested in resources, maybe mining or oil?
I read in the past that a lot of the Sudanese groups that pillage and fight with a lot of South Sudan are funded and given firearms or something by China or Chinese groups. I think this was more prominent around 15 years ago when South Sudan was trying to be independently recognized.
Side note: I also remember reading that George Clooney used to fund some kind of satellite thing that helped South Sudanese track movements of North Sudanese so they could preemptively avoid attack.
China definitely meddles. But yeah, probably nowhere near the degree the US does.
Are you comparing economic collaboration with installing military bases?
China has exactly one foreign military base. It's in South Africa. They are very happy with it and there's no contention.
By contrast, US military bases in Japan are notorious for raping, kidnapping, and other abuses of locals.
No. China does not also "meddle" in the rest world.
I'm not comparing Chinese influence to US. Both can exist and both can be bad. I don't believe I've ever read of lots of bases or invasions by China (though they do practice invasions with Russia sometimes). But they have in the last 10-15 years equipped a lot of Sudan with more than simple economic influence. Guns. Weaponry. Resources that allowed Sudan to oppress South Sudan. Well-documented since like 2010.
I mean you did compare them and you're still comparing them. You're saying they're both bad. That's literally a comparison.
China is selling arms to anyone and everyone that wants them. Is that meddling or mercantilism?
By comparison, the US is committing mass murder almost daily.
No, they're not both "bad". The US is atrocious and China is selling weapons to bad people.
Gyude Moore: “China in Africa: An African Perspective” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5uzxV8ub9k
These are soft power projection projects. You would recognize them as such if it were the US doing it (which we used to before Trump decided it was woke), so why do you stick to the Chinese state narrative here?
Those 2 things are not mutually exclusive. In fact, genuinely helping poor countries develop is a pretty good way to gain soft power.
No one here, and I do mean no one, is saying that China isn't gaining anything from doing that. But that doesn't mean it's bad for the other party or hides some nefarious secret purpose either. Diplomacy isn't a zero sum gain where if China gain from a deal therefore the other party has to lose to compensate, that's not how international relations work.
No. Its not. Go read about their lease agreements. Theyre doing the same thing just through financial means.
https://africacenter.org/spotlight/china-port-development-africa/
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Ek6HZ5nD4&t=670
The only thing clear is if yoy do business with them they will take control of whatever it is they build. And acti g like they wont use it for military means when needed is a childs mentality.
meanwhile in the real world https://jasonhickel.substack.com/p/is-china-doing-colonialism-in-africa
While it does have benefits, the overarching Chinese plan is to own everything, and have countries on the debt hook.
USA is the world bully by might, China does it by strategy
There's lots of other links that discount your denial of their plans and how they leverage. USA is like 5 year plan, 10 year plan. China has 100 year plan and 1000 year plan.
I just don't want to confuse capitalism vs socialism, with Global Domination strategy of USA or China.
They are "socialist" but they aren't doing it out of the idea of greater good of all humankind, they are a dictatorship (currently) and this is self interest so they can be a global logistic player and their port building also includes military access. This is a longterm goal to be the only superpower.
From ex pats of China, they disagree with you that there is huge rates of satisfaction or "democracy".
You are trying to paint a pleasant picture on the web, but people who have left it disagree with you.
Chinese citizens have to tow the line. The company I worked for had operations there, when our guys meet with counterparts then and ask probing questions everyone clams up, and one off to the side says we can't talk about bad things.
If you go against it you have reprogramming training classes.
We even have Chinese police stations here in Canada and they go knocking on doors because a Chinese citizen has said something negative about the homeland. And coerce them into going back to the mainland. This is not me reading it on the web, this is coworkers at the house when it happens to their room mates.
Stop trying to make China a utopia it is not. I agree with Socialism, but not a dictatorship.
It woukd seem you are being paid to promote China propaganda, or you are severely deluded to what goes on there.
A survey of citizens that know they cannot speak ll without retribution to them or their family, will always look positive. Please use some critical thinking here.
If you go against it you have reprogramming training classes.
No, that’s not a thing.
We even have Chinese police stations here in Canada
No, you don’t. That’s not a real thing, either. You’re just regurgitating Cold War II propaganda nonsense you saw on TV.
This is not me reading it on the web, this is coworkers at the house when it happens to their room mates.
Why are you making shit up? At this point I think you made the company up, too.
It woukd seem you are being paid to promote China propaganda, or you are severely deluded to what goes on there.
I think you’re projecting. Why are you peddling anti-China lies for free?
A survey of citizens that know they cannot speak ll without retribution to them or their family, will always look positive.
During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.
Please use some critical thinking here.
I am. They lead me to believe you’re full of shit.
Chinese citizens have to tow the line. The company I worked for had operations there, when our guys meet with counterparts then and ask probing questions everyone clams up, and one off to the side says we can’t talk about bad things.
If you go against it you have reprogramming training classes.
So your "evidence" for that is a personal anecdote + trust me bro? Assuming you're not just making shit (it's not verifiable, as anecdotes tends to be) can you give examples of the kind of "probing questions" your guys asked? Also, did you personally witness the meeting or were you just told about it by your guys afterward?
Looks to me like your little story is full of holes at best.
We even have Chinese police stations here in Canada and they go knocking on doors because a Chinese citizen has said something negative about the homeland. And coerce them into going back to the mainland. This is not me reading it on the web, this is coworkers at the house when it happens to their room mates.
Ah, yes. China totally has a nation spanning network of secret police stations (with all the 10s of 1000s or more personnel and tons of equipment that would imply) in Canada that Canada either somehow didn't notice or won't do anything about for some reason. A guy you know told you, so it must be true! Trust me bro!
If your gonna make shit up or repeat shit made up by someone else, you should at least try to make it not completely nonsensical.
Stop trying to make China a utopia it is not. I agree with Socialism, but not a dictatorship.
No one said anything about China being "a utopia" and you know it.
You know how ridiculous your narrative about China being a 1984 tech-dystopia that will track you down to the end of the world sounds and how badly it holds up to scrutiny, so instead of defending your narrative (since you can't really) you try to flip the table around and pretend that we are the one with a ridiculous narrative by pretending that we consider China "a utopia" when none of what we have said points to that at all.
I see it, and anyone who isn't already indoctrinated by you narrative can easily see it too.
It woukd seem you are being paid to promote China propaganda, or you are severely deluded to what goes on there.
"If you believe something other that what I believe, you must either have been paid to say you do or be stupid/insane." A cheap excuse to dismiss criticism without having to think about it or come up with an actual counter-argument.
A survey of citizens that know they cannot speak ll without retribution to them or their family, will always look positive. Please use some critical thinking here.
That, my friend, is what we call an "irrefutable argument", and it's a fallacy. "Chinese peoples aren't happy with their government, and if they say they are it's because the government forces them to." It's a bullshit excuse to immediately reject any evidence that doesn't agree with your narrative.
You're not refuting our point, you're just coming up with excuses to dismiss it without having to think about an actual reason it might be wrong (because you can't, and until you do I'll continue to affirm that you can't).
Brainwashing by some pseudo mind control is not how it works, its indoctrination by rote. Same as cults or religious faith. There core belief is altered to somebody elses way.
Of course if you were paid it would change the merit.
You seriously don't seem to understand critical thinking. And this is a waste of time
Have a good evening.
It is not an insult, it is fact. You are spouting rhetoric without actually thinking about what you relay. CIA tries over a small period in an experiment, bad results.
But Dude look up cults and how their leaders get them to do things like drink poison or murder for them. Or have a extreme group suicide bomb themselves. Indoctrination.
If you raise a kid and tell him everyday that black people are bad, they believe it and perpetuate it. Indoctrination.
You are being what the rest of the world criticizes China for doing to its citizens. Being single minded with out a way to see past the delusions, and regurgitate random info without actually disseminating the root of things.
Again, you thinking being paid or not doesn't change the merit , it absolutely does.
Just like when red state newspapers report on news: they have to slant it to favour the payer or you don't get paid. It's how control works.
If you don't see this, then that is highly unfortunate that you can't see the truth.
Sorry but no. Tibet, South China Sea, they've even got patrols to intimidate Australia
B-b-b-b-b-but China might, possibly, at some point in the future, try to reclaim Taiwan! Both sides! Two things true at once! Me speculating about something possibly happening is the exact same as the thing actually happening!
Hasn't China stated that they intend to reclaim Taiwan? Don't they claim Taiwan as part of their country right now?
Yes, as they have since the war, just as Taiwan claims China. Your point?
Peace with Taiwan has been maintained for nearly a hundred years, with a mutual understanding that nobody would try to force the issue too hard (look up "strategic ambiguity"). In recent years, the US has been recklessly deviating from that understanding and now people treat the status quo as "Chinese aggression," because of propaganda.
There is no "claim" to be made and there is no "reclaim" to be had against such a claim.
Taiwan is and always has been recognized as part of the country of China. That's why the losing army in the civil war went there - because it was part of the country they were a party of.
China has stated for 70 years that the island province of Taiwan will be integrated into the rest of the governance of the country. For 50 years it has explicitly stated it will be integrated peacefully, because the CPC recognizes that doing it forcefully would actually be contradictory and create a constant guerilla warfare situation as well as invite the world's militaries to intervene. The CPC has no intention of forcing Taiwan to integrate except if Taiwan works with foreign governments to establish a substantial and real threat to the security of the mainland.
If China waits long enough, the Western economies will collapse and Taiwan will very quickly and easily realize that the West just can't support them anymore and when they look to see who they depend on for nearly everything, and who their relatives are and who their dominant trading partner and who can protect them militarily, it's going to be an easy process of integrating the provincial government of Taiwan into the government of the mainland - especially since the CPC is committed to One Country Two System meaning the provincial government of Taiwan can continue operating with the same structure and same politicians and same processes as it has now.
Is that integration supposed to be a good thing?
Yes. Integration means less conflict, more collaboration, less redundancy, more dynamism, less wasteful military build up, fewer threats from the US.
One country two systems means that China provides for national defense of the entire space while Taiwan maintains a substantial amount of governing autonomy.
Think of it like Greenland choosing to be a part of Denmark to keep itself safe from the US military, except in this example Greenland would be historically part of Denmark for centuries and have a population of 99% Danes and have some parts of Greenland only 4 miles off the coast of Denmark with US troops already stationed on it training Danes on Greenland to fight the mainland.
China seeks to reclaim Taiwan as part of China for the same reason Taiwan seeks to reclaim the mainland as part of China.
Yeah these guys are dreaming that China won't invade Taiwan.
China is not the good guys now... America is just fuckin worse
If you believe in good guys and bad guys as an adult I've got a fuckin Harry Potter wand to sell you
Not every country in the world is as corrupt as the the US.
You let your politicians trade shares, what else do you all expect to happen?
You should try basing your beliefs on facts and evidence sometime.
China was just talking recently about how Taiwan is there's...
What world do you live in where China won't invade Taiwan eventually...
When it becomes untenable for the US to maintain a global military hegemony Taiwan will reluctantly submit to being in the Chinese orbit because of geographical realities and then be firmly on a path to reunification. It's very likely the only blood that will be spilled will be by the chud protestors.
They've been "just recently" talking about how Taiwan is theirs for the past 70 years and haven't done shit.
I live in a world where basic pattern recognition exists.
Speculation? China has set a deadline for this to happen! And they've already taken territory of several other countries by force, including all of Tibet.
several other countries by force, including all of Tibet.
Tibet has historically been part of China for a long time, which is probably why Taiwan claims it along with the rest of China (in fact, Taiwan's claims go further and include Mongolia). Tibet broke away along with a bunch of other warlord states in the chaos following the fall of the Qing dynasty, and was never internationally recognized as an independent country. Its people were freed from the tyrannical, slave owning theocracy and rejoined the country, which led to the doubling of their average life expectancy (along with the rest of China). China's claim to Tibet is about as valid as the US claim to the Confederate States.
All of that happened over 70 years ago under Mao, before the country shifted focus with major reforms in the 80s. Though to be fair to you, there aren't exactly a lot of recent wars involving China for you to choose from, are there? Not your fault you have to go back 70 years.
So Russia has a right to control Ukrain too by that logic?? What year exactly should we all revert world borders back to and why?
Hmm? I think you've got that backwards. Ukraine is the one trying to reclaim lost territory that's currently under Russia's control, is it not? What year exactly should we revert world borders back to and why?
I wonder if you can see the problem with the naive solution of trying to "lock in" whatever the present borders are. If a country seizes territory, even without any justification, that territory is now part of the present borders, and therefore would be "locked in" by that standard, suggesting that anyone who tried to take it back is the aggressor (until they succeed in reclaiming it).
I think that what you're asking is a very complicated and valid question, even if you didn't mean it in earnest. The question of what makes a country legitimate is quite complicated. I would argue that the "north star" of legitimacy is what outcome is best for the people. In the case of Taiwan, I think the best outcome is to maintain the status quo of de facto independence without rocking the boat with things like formal independence. It's not worth starting world war 3 over a formality.
But when you have a "country" like the Confederacy or Tibet, which keeps people in bondage under horrible conditions, then obviously the best outcome is for them to be defeated and taken over by someone else. Slavery and serfdom are automatically delegitimizing.
There's also another reason why reunifying Tibet was justified, which is explained very succinctly by the 1944 US War Department film, "Why We Fight: The Battle For China:" (around 8:20)

But how could Japan, only 1/20th the size of China, and with only 1/6th it’s population, think of conquering China, much less the world?

Modern China, in spite of its age old history, was like the broken pieces of jigsaw puzzle, each piece controlled by a different ruler, each with his own private army. In modern terms, China was a country, but not yet a nation.
The part of China's history where it was broken up into these warlord states was part of what they call, "The Century of Humiliation," when Chinese people were subject to imperialism and aggression from many different countries, worst of all being Imperial Japan. Because the country was so fractured, it was difficult to mount an organized, collective defense. This was understood by basically everyone, by the US, by the communists, and by the nationalists. That's why the communists and nationalists were willing to form a unified front against the warlord states despite their major ideological differences, because it was obvious to everyone at that time that a unified China - a "One China Policy" - was important and necessary. Even today, both the PRC and ROC formally agree on the idea of a One China Policy, and the US has (in the past at least) as well.
But again, today, I personally believe in maintaining the status quo, where Taiwan is de facto independent. There's significant precedent that this can maintain peace and keep everyone relatively satisfied. The same precedent did not exist in Tibet or in any of the other warlord states. Furthermore, Taiwan has significantly better human rights and conditions in general than Tibet where you'd die a serf at age 30. The whole "Free Tibet" thing is pure propaganda, only followed by people who are completely ignorant of the actual facts of what life was like there before, and of the history in general.
Tbf China claiming Taiwan is pretty bad.
Imagine if US claimed Hawaii is theirs.
A closer analogy would be: Imagine that after losing the Civil war, the Confederates flee to Puerto Rico, kill tens of thousands of people there for being "yankee sympathizers", and establish 40 years of martial law while claiming to be the true and rightful government of the entire continental US.
Still not a good analogy because Puerto Rico was never a state of the USA. It would be more like if Long Island had been invaded by England and occupied after England beat the US in a war, and then the US had a war to kick the English off long island and then had a civil war immediately afterward and the loser fled to Long Island and said "we are the rightful government of the USA" and then Spain came by and started arming the fuck out of them while the loser of the civil war ran a fascist dictatorship for 40 years and killed tens of thousands of its own people for ever saying "maybe we could just negotiate a final surrender?"
It's more akin to the US claiming the ex confederate southern states (which it does), and other countries being "strategically ambiguous" and selling the Confederate remnants weapons and promoting their independence while officially recognizing the US/Washington
Greenland as strategig against Rusia and China is anyway a stupid argument, due tthat Alaska is separated by 4 km from Rusia, in cold winters you can go walking from the US to Rusia, and China has only commercial trading interests with other countries, not imperialistic ones, like this orange piece of shit.
https://ian.macky.net/pat/map/nhem/nhemblu.gif
Greenland is way closer to way more of Russia than Alaska
Look on the map, don't confuse a straight line distance on a sphere, the shortest distance from Greenland to Rusia go over the EU (Norway and Sweden), while in Alaska they need a simple Zodiac or even Walking in the Winter.

We're talking about missiles
Even with missiles there isn't any reason to invade Greenland, apart of a NATO member, there is already an US Base there since 50 years. No, Rusia and China are not the reason, but rare earth in Greenland are, like in Venezuela the oil, not the democracy.. The next is Panama and Canada in the expansions plan "to make America great again" (and the paria for the rest of the world).
China is still bad too
Russia is still bad too
Who good?
No good. Only interests.
Eu is doing okay tho trending downward, India is trending upward but not there yet. Uruguay doing okay. Brazil doing okay. Vietnam is trending up. Thailand is good. Australia is doing okay but trending downward. I'm not saying they're good just okay, but Better than China and US.
As a European, I can promise you the the EU isn't good.
It's a neoliberal cult that purposefully keep its poor eastern members down for the benefit of its wealthy western members; continues to meddle in and exploit Africa by any means at their disposal, including coups, invasions, funding and arming of death-squads and assassinations, even decades after so called "decolonization"; cultivate an attitude of horrific and bloodthirsty racism among their population, especially against migrants despite being the cause of most mass migrations in the first place, in order to keep migrants miserable and their labor cheap; fund and arms a genocide as we speak; has purposefully let overt and covert neo-Nazi factions gain power in every of its member states; stabbed their own economy for the benefit of the US, multiple times; and so on and so forth.
On the scale of "badness" the EU is right behind the US, they're just more subtle and quiet about their evil than the US is.
You'll find all countries have engaged in imperialism in one way or another. China towards Tibet, Europe towards Africa, the US currently, well, everyone.
China is not socialist, either, it's state-capitalist with socialist rhetoric. China is also currently lacking in some social features, particularly full universal healthcare coverage and strong worker rights. Vietnam, however, is quite steady and making great strides. Here's hoping for more
You're using Lenin's definition of imperialism. Lenin’s definition focuses on economic domination, not military or territorial control, so for the PRC’s invasion, which was "liberation," it’s better to use the modern definition of imperialism, which most people reading this will be doing anyway.
Tibet was also a serfdom, not a slave society, there is a distinct difference. Serfdom binds a person to land. Slavery treats them entirely as movable property. One is labour, one is chains. Calling it liberation is also extremely negligent and steeped in bias, the US military uses this excuse all the time, that they are liberators instead of imperialist forces.
But ultimately this all avoids the question of whether or not the Tibetan population wanted integration with China, that's the crucial part that makes it imperialist, the inability for the Tibetans to decide for themselves.
Which, again, you're making a false conflation. We've established that Europe is imperialist, yes. We've established that the US is imperialist, yes. But then you're including the PRC in an attempt to make it appear anti-imperialist -- Which it mostly wasn't. It's a very camp argument. Imperialism is imperialism, it doesn't matter who's doing it and for what reason.
Redsails is also not a good source, it's openly from an ML perspective, so it's not neutral, which you absolutely have to be when discussing history. It's also under no pretence to be academic or accurate either, Redsails is ideologically driven rather than factually driven - so it won't ever be critical of the ML perspective. You can use redsails to talk theory, absolutely, but not as a historical or factual source, it's dishonest.
China is also not entirely socialist, either, it’s state-capitalist with socialist rhetoric. They still have private property.
Redsails is also not a good source, it’s openly from an ML perspective, so it’s not neutral, which you absolutely have to be when discussing history. It’s also under no pretence to be academic or accurate either, Redsails is ideologically driven rather than factually driven - so it won’t ever be critical of the ML perspective. You can use redsails to talk theory, absolutely, but not as a historical or factual source, it’s dishonest.
There is no such thing as a neutral historian. Every human has things they know and things they don't even on topics they are experts in, every human has opinions on the things they know (or think they know) that will unavoidably taint what they say, even unconsciously, and therefore, everything written or said by a human is necessarily biased. And that's saying nothing of financial interests, politics and other things that bias things even further.
This is not avoidable, the most you can do is be aware of biases and work with/around them.
If an historian or a journalist tell you that their work is "neutral" or "unbiased", they are either lying to you or don't know how biases work, and in either case you should be very skeptical of them because they are clearly not doing their job correctly.
China did not imperialize Tibet. The Mongols did.
See, the Mongols were a violent expansionist force. They occupied China and they occupied Tibet. The Chinese managed to expel the Mongols from China and rebuild their nation. Then in the early 1700, the Chinese expelled the Mongols from Tibet, freeing Tibet.
Because Tibet was unable to remain free if the Mongols would return, China established a permanent defensive military presence, establishing Tibet as a protectorate, but leaving it self-governed.
A century later the Europeans imperialized China, crushing it militarily, economically, and legally. As part of this, Tibet saw a rise in a monarchical theocracy enslaved 95% of Tibetan people, torturing and murdering them indiscriminately.
A few decades after China recovered, it returned to Tibet to free the Tibetan people from that monarchy and once against established Tibet as a self-governing independent protectorate, which it remains to this day.
In the last 400 years, I don't think that any meaningful number of countries in the world have ever recognized Tibet as an independent state, and outside of the brutal theocratic monarchy, I don't think the Tibetan people have ever sought to establish that they are an independent country.
top 92 comments