Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 20, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide
DIG DIRECTOR

Martin Jacques
Martin Jacques is the author of "When China Rules the World: the Rise of the Middle Kingdom and the End of the Western World." He is a visiting senior fellow at the London School of Economics, IDEAS, a centre for the study of international affairs, diplomacy and grand strategy, and a visiting...




 



 
 

When China Rules the World

(Page 2)

PART 2: Pluses and Minuses of Homogeny

Robert Scheer: Continuing … Truthdig’s discussion, I’m Robert Scheer, the editor of Truthdig, with Martin Jacques, a very well-known international reporter, correspondent, covered the world, and he’s written a book that has a very provocative title: “When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order.” But as we were discussing in Part 1, which I would recommend that people go check out, what he’s really talking about is the emergence of a very powerful nation, not just economically, but culturally, politically. And that in the next 20, 30 years it will probably be the No. 1 nation in certain key respects, and that while this is not inherently threatening, it is something to ponder because it will be different. And I just want to get to this question of the “rule,” which, again, sticks in one’s mind. People have developed some very negative views about China, post-Cold War, over Tibet, over the question of dealing with their Muslim population. And you’ve written, and others, that while those may be reprehensible or whatever one thinks about them, they aren’t really typical of China, because they occur within China’s borders, and that there’s a 94 percent Han majority, or is it 92 percent? That we actually have a more homogeneous society in China maybe than anywhere else, and that it shouldn’t be seen as a model of the new imperialism, I guess would be your point. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I …

Martin Jacques: Well, I think that China will in time project itself in all sorts of ways around the world. I think in that sense it will have some of the characteristics of a global power, whatever that global power is. But it will be also expressed in different ways. One of my greatest concerns about the rise of China—in fact, my greatest concern, not one of them, but my greatest concern—is the question of the attitude of the Han towards cultural differences, different ethnicities. Because, as you point out, it’s certainly true—very unusual, quite different from any other populace, nation like India or Indonesia or the United States—the Chinese overwhelmingly consider themselves to be of one race: the Han. This is a product of a long—once again, back to the civilization-state, 2,000 years and longer of a sort of ethnic construction of China, which has seen the Han-ization of China. Now, in a way, for China, that’s been a great strength, because it’s essentially held the country together. That’s why it’s never divided, that’s why it was nonsense in 1989 ever to predict that China would break up. It was never going to happen, for this reason. But on the other hand, the negative side to this is the Han have a very weak conception of cultural difference and the respect for cultural difference. And the reason they have such problems with the Uyghurs and the Tibetans—and it’s very, very serious; I mean, we’ve had really serious racial riots in Lhasa last year and Urumqi this year—is because, essentially, the Han notion of handling other ethnicities is to Han-ize them. To assimilate them. To civilize them.

Scheer: Yeah. I mean, they claimed they were doing the Tibetans a favor.

Jacques: Yeah, of course. You know, we’re raising—and in some ways they have been …

Scheer: It’s what you Brits tried to do in India, right?

Jacques: (Laughs) Yeah. Yeah, we did, and not just in India. But, you know, to raise the Tibetans or the Uyghurs up to the level of the Han, and thereby Han-ize them, that’s of course what’s happened, historically, with the Mongolians and with the Manchus and so on.

Scheer: We should remind people, because the confusing thing in talking to Chinese, not just the ones who are associated with Beijing, but even from Taiwan and elsewhere, they say: “Wait a minute, these people in Tibet are primitive, they have slaves or they have serfs, we’re going to bring them into the modern age.” It’s very much the language of that kind of enlightened colonialism, or pretending to be enlightened.

Jacques: I mean, yeah, there are obviously certain similarities. There are similarities, but it’s important to see the differences as well. I’m not one of these people who thinks, well—there’s certain common characteristics about racism everywhere, for example, but racism is culturally embedded in a society, so therefore it also has distinct features. So it’s not true to say it’s always exactly the same; it’s not.

Scheer: No. So tell us about the difference. What is this about the Han … ?

Jacques: The Han mentality? Well, I think historically the Han feel themselves to be superior. They’re very culturally self-aware. …

Scheer: Well, with some justification.

Jacques: You can understand why they feel that, because … a lot of civilizations have had a place in the sun, at least once. But the Chinese are unusual in that they’ve had that place in the sun several times. The Tang Dynasty, the Song Dynasty, the early Ming Dynasty, and before that as well. So the Chinese really are very proud of this sense of cultural achievement, cultural level that they’ve acquired. You know: one of the first written languages in the world; with the Fertile Crescent, the first settled agriculture. So culturally it’s extremely sophisticated, it’s true. And essentially, it defined itself against those to the north of it, the Manchus, the Mongolians, as [the Manchus and Mongolians being] barbarians who were essentially nomadic, and interestingly, they got absorbed. You know, the Qing Dynasty was a Manchu, not a Han, dynasty. Likewise, before that, the Yuan Dynasty was a Mongolian dynasty, and that was more problematic, but basically that got absorbed as well. So this is a very sophisticated culture. The problem is that the Han have, as a result of this long historical process, and such a universalizing process within China, that they don’t really understand cultural difference. They look down upon others. They have a very hierarchical view which is both cultural and racial. They’re fused. Now, that could be a problem if you’re a global power.

Scheer: Let me ask you a question. You know, we’re used to thinking—at least during the Cold War, we were used to thinking of China as having a communist ideology, which is after all a Western import, and a notion of proletariat leadership and being influenced by Westerner Karl Marx, and—from your British Museum, didn’t he write …

Jacques: He did, in the [Museum] Reading Room.

Scheer: Yeah, in the Reading Room. And so we’ve actually looked at China through that—the Commies, the Reds, and so forth. What you’re suggesting in your book and articles you’ve written is that, basically, that’s kind of an add-on that’s been transformed by the entire history of China. And that the thing that has emerged is neither now going to be a copy of the West—capitalism—or a manifestation of a sort of Marxian fantasy of the proletariat state, but rather an add-on to these thousands of years of history. And that we have to learn to think about it in intelligent ways.

Jacques: Exactly. That’s exactly what I think.

Scheer: So let’s start the learning process. Really—what are we missing?

Jacques: Well, I think that what we’re missing is this … the starting point has to be to try and understand Chinese history. I think that communism, the way it’s seen in the West, has gotten in the way of us understanding China, because we think—oh, communism, we think we know what communism is. We don’t know, of course, but we think we know what it is. And we think of it in terms of the Soviet Union, and it’s not; it’s completely different. The Soviet Communist Party and the Chinese Communist Party are utterly different. The Soviet Communist Party never had a popular base. The Chinese Communist Party had a very popular base. So it’s a very confident organization, very resilient, could change direction with extraordinary flair from the ’70s with the death of Mao to the reform period of Deng Xiaoping. So my point is, really, that you have to understand China not so much as … you know, the communist period introduced certain changes which were very important to China’s success, but really the heart, the core of China is not that. The core of China, I think, is much longer, over a long period of Confucian values, very different kind of family, very different kind of state, context of a civilization-state, tributary state system in East Asia, and so on. These are the building blocks for understanding China. Now, you’ll notice that every term I’ve used—they are not familiar to us as Westerners. They are not familiar. They are alien to us. We cannot understand them with the traditional Western conceptual apparatus. So to try and understand China, we have to make a completely new intellectual effort. We can’t carry on with the thinking, which remains prevalent in the West, that ultimately China is going to be like us, because it isn’t.

Scheer: So this is the challenge. The challenge is without giving up what we think are our universal values—freedom, and the importance of the individual, and restraint on the state and so forth—to try to understand that there might be another model that accommodates those, or are we giving up these traditional values? In 10 seconds, to end this segment.

Jacques: No, I don’t think we’re going to give up some of our values, but we’ll probably acquire new ones as well.

Continued: Coping With Political Change
Dig last updated on Dec. 17, 2009


Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.


More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 21, 2009 at 8:08 am Link to this comment

johannes - We don’t call them Nazis here in California, we call them “progressives” “Jews for Peace” “Not in My Name” and other deceptive euphamisms.

Report this

By johannes, December 21, 2009 at 5:44 am Link to this comment

I wrote if you have to beleef the internet site Jewwatch, they are ruling the world, the Zionist, maby you think it are the Chinees Maffia, in combination with ?

Do you know me, mister Liqueur boy, Keep in line please, respect old boy thats wath we need.

Report this
Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 20, 2009 at 9:31 pm Link to this comment

The problem with China ruling the world is they always want to rule the world over again 5 minutes later! *S*

Report this

By Dayahka, December 20, 2009 at 8:38 pm Link to this comment

China is not going to rule the world. They have no interest in that. They are primarily interested in ruling their own country, the center of the world, and the immediately surrounding area.

What China represents is not the ascendancy of a new lone superpower, but a new bipolar world headed towards multi-polarity, as soon as Russia, Brazil, and India can get heir acts together. The EU is another possible prong in the multilateral world, but it is doubtful that the EU can ever be a unified and sovereign nation, rather than just a lapdog for the Americans.

No, China will not rule the world. Rather, China and the US now are center stage, one a free, capitalist, innovative system aiming for social justice for its people, and the other a fascist state looting the public treasury to enrich the rich.

Report this

By Bobadi, December 20, 2009 at 5:46 pm Link to this comment

Martin Jacques: “Of course China will not rule the world any more than the United States has ruled the world for the last 60 years, or Britain before. But I think China will, in time, become the most powerful and influential country in the world, and that’s what I mean by ruling the world.”

So no, its not a question of anyone “ruling the world” but what group becomes more dominant and influential.

If you think about the massive and tragic economy of our militarism, the trillions of dollars we are borrowing for it; this produces the strong politics and manipulation that any other large economy enjoys.

It is very telling, that Obama stands behind his Presidential podium giving us all of the same Bush rhetoric about evil people and our moral crusade against them, while not a single word is uttered about the underlying politics, manipulation, and militarism in which Israel has managed for its benefit, which ultimately ends in our US detriment.

Report this
Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 20, 2009 at 3:10 pm Link to this comment

Johannes - how annoying it must be to believe that Jews are running the world and YOU do not even rise to the level of a pawn in their game. I hate to disappoint you but “Jews are not running the world” AND YET you STILL don’t rise above the level of pawn in anyone’s game because you are a pathetic kook who can only blame others for the fact that you never have achieved nothing and stand for even less. Look at it this way, if “Gentiles were running the world” you would still be an insignificant empty headed creep!

Report this

By JeffersonSmith, December 20, 2009 at 8:23 am Link to this comment

China is not the most corrupt nation in the world, but they are certainly in the top ten.  I have worked for a Chinese company and worked in China. If they are the economic and political model of the future then we are all in a lot of trouble.  The oligarchy of wealth in China is focused in the Army and the CPC.  If you don’t have a “partner” in China you cannot do business there and the “baksheesh” is worse there than in any part of the world I have done business in.

The government is not progressive in any sense of the word we understand in the West and they are not environmentally sensitive or politically open.  We have provided most of the technology and capital to launch China’s “economic miracle” and without export markets their economy is unsustainable.

I have seen this type of analysis before, with Germany, Japan and now China.  Soon we’ll be reading about India’s looming supremacy… I am not saying that China won’t grow, but until they have their, infrastructure, governance and social equality problems addressed, they won’t be “ruling” the world anytime soon, much less by 2050.

Numbers do not tell the whole story…

Report this

By johannes, December 20, 2009 at 4:13 am Link to this comment

Its a question with to many answers, and possibilitys.

Report this
Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 19, 2009 at 1:51 pm Link to this comment

Compete with China’s low paid work force?

If I had known what having teenagers was really gonna be like I would have handcuffed them to a loom 14 hours a day until they were of legal age and labeled my product, “not made in Pakistan”. If every parent did this until their kids were of age it would kill two birds with one stone and resurrect the economy. We would have all the cheap labor we’d ever need and your kids would move out while they were still “young enough to know everything”!

Report this

By Bobadi, December 19, 2009 at 1:21 pm Link to this comment

I would love to learn how to bring back a constructive value to this nation, where is that coming from?

Are we going to compete with China, and its massive underpaid workforce it has to draw from?

Perhaps we could become its retirement community, and trade our debt back to them by serving their growing aged.

Report this
Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 19, 2009 at 12:22 pm Link to this comment

RAE - trust me, the sky is not falling and it is not “capitalism or our western ways” that led to the melt down. It is graft and corruption that we will clean up and remain the greatest nation on earth. Learn Mandarin if you please but if you wish to live in China, remember, one benefit is you won’t need an organ donor card because if you express political opionions like the one you have expressed here they may just execute you, harvest your organs and implant them in some commie that sees things more like they do than you do YET!

Report this

By omop, December 19, 2009 at 10:36 am Link to this comment

Whether “When China Rules the World”  will go thru the ages annotated in a
poem by Will Shakespeare or not is still to be seen.

Some Truthdiggers might find it interesting and agree with its premise while
others may think BFD.

Herewith then

   



All the World’s a Stage



 
    All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages.

At first, the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse’s arms.
Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress’ eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation

Even in the cannon’s mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slippered pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,

Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,

Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
( Is this what awaits America?)

Happy New Year Everybody. 2010 is the Chinese year of the Tiger.

Report this
RAE's avatar

By RAE, December 19, 2009 at 7:37 am Link to this comment

It seems that many, if not most, participating in this forum understand and accept the views expressed so clearly by fattkidd. There are likely hundreds of thousands more who would also agree.

So I ask: If so many are aware that our present capitalist ways will inevitably lead to the economic collapse and social ruin of America and other western nations, WHY do we collectively wave our hats in the air, yell Yahoo! and put pedal to the metal DOING THE SAME THING AS WE’VE ALWAYS DONE?

It can’t be that we’re ignorant. We KNOW what we’re doing. So it must be that we’re profoundly ARROGANT and STUPID - a recipe for disaster if there ever was one.

Well, I might be arrogant but I’m not THAT stupid - I’m signing up for a Mandarin course on Monday!

Report this
race_to_the_bottom's avatar

By race_to_the_bottom, December 19, 2009 at 7:09 am Link to this comment

Most of the commentary on China, including on this site,  is wrong because of a lack of understanding of Chinese culture and history and Leninism. Both are necessary.

It is normal to believe other people’s lives are guided by the same principles which guide our own. There is no objective reason that this should be so anymore than beliefs that the Earth is the center of the universe.

Chinese civilization developed independently from that of the West. Leninism is a completely different world view from capitalism.

Therefore, the axioms used by people in the west are mostly wrong when applied to China, and therefore their conclusions will also be wrong.

Report this

By Bobadi, December 19, 2009 at 6:01 am Link to this comment

I am saving your comment to my hard drive, and linking to this site. That was a very succinctly and elegantly put capsulation of China/US comparison of political and economical realities.

Report this

By jimch, December 19, 2009 at 5:15 am Link to this comment

Fattkidd:
That is a good, insightful post closely resembling my own take on our problems. Too bad the message doesn’t have a “contagion” element embedded in it.

Early on, when jobs were both being outsourced and sent to other countries, I suggested it was a myopic action that would eventually come back to haunt us when it was discovered that U.S. citizens had lost their purchasing power. And now it has arrived!

Report this

By ofersince72, December 18, 2009 at 8:57 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

not to worry,  Those of you that believe this climate
collapse isn’t going to change everything on this
planet have your heads in the sand.

It is going to be very different than what the
pundits tell us.
It will be survival within twenty years or less.

Earth is about ready to rejuvenate itself, its already started. It will remineralize its soils.
It ain’t nice to fool mother nature.

It is going to be so much different than what was
talked in Denmark. They even lie about physics and
the climate change.  I much prefer to believe
Hamaker over Gore any day of the week!!!! Gore…
an OK kind of guy, but a known conservative who
like Obama is much of a fraud for big business
and also like Obama , had no reason to recieve a
Nobel Peace Prize !!!!!!!!!

Report this

By fattkidd, December 18, 2009 at 1:11 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

there is one HUGE difference between the Chinese economic model and the western that is completely overlooked by those who make claims that the chinese lack resources or that pollution is out of control or that the prosperity is only being felt by a few: The Chinese know these things and since their economy is managed by the gov’t, they are in a much better position to deal with them. Just today I learned that the oil/gas of the Caspian Sea region is going to be developed by China and a pipeline constructed to Bejing. So much for our adventure in Afghanistan! They make deals for energy with countries that are much more stable than the ones we choose to deal with. If it’s determined that their electronics companies need copper to expand, the gov’t buys up ALL of the copper in South America! They have already made commitments to provide ever increasing amounts of their energy from renewable recources than we ever will. They’re in the process of building a 5000MW (or something like that) wind farm off the coast that will provide electricity for millions of households in the near future. They have embraced green building techniques and recyclable materials in just about every new construction project in the country. They get it. They know where the future lies. They are not controlled by old world, fossil fuel based money interests like we are. The US may still be the largest economy in the world but that’s only possible due to our massive debt-financed consumption which is only possible because the dollar is the reserve currency but, there is no law that says it has to be this way forever. In fact, the BRIC nations, Brazil, Russia, India and China have called for a new basket of currencies as a reserve and have quietly begun divesting themselves of dollar reserves. The US economy is now almost entirely dependant on military expansionism which is also debt financed and cannot continue forever. And, as bad as we think the wealth gap is in China, ours is much, much worse. We now lead the world in disparity between the rich & the poor. 1 in 4 US kids and 1 in 6 adults are dependant on food stamps to eat. The Chinese also know that in the nuclear age of mutually assured destruction, it’s rediculous to spend $1trillion/yr on building & maintaining a conventional military empire. Why would China want to invade the US? What do we have that they could possibly want? As was stated in an earlier post, we have no natural resources other than coal and China has plenty of that as well. Problem with America and especially of those on the right is that we/they believe their own hype. They believe we can maintain our global hegemony on military might alone and we continue to spend more and more of our GDP on the military industrial congressional complex. Do some research past empires and see how well that’s worked out in the past. Seems the Chinese have been reading some Stalin: ‘We will sell the capitalists the rope with which they will hang themselves’. Greenspan and Ayn Rand should have read some Marx at some point in their lives. ‘Capitalism only succeeds if there is a widespread sharing of prosperity. If/When the heads of capitalist system cease to share the wealth with those who actually produce the wealth of the country, those workers will demand socialism.’ And, he’s 100% correct and that is exactly what is happening in America today. The US will eventually become a social democracy the same as European nations because the owners of society have not learned this very basic principal. As they move more factories to China to exploit cheap labor & low regulation, they guarantee the destruction of the system that brought them their great wealth and power in the first place. Capitalists are destroying capitalism thru their own greed and at the same time giving rise to a new model of Chinese state managed capitalism. Short sightedness and lust for quick profits have doomed us. Ayn Rand couldn’t have been more wrong.

Report this

By bobadi, December 18, 2009 at 11:02 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

remoran,

I think one can apply your question to how we here in the US have the same issue of low reproduction and so import our workers from other countries via the intractable undocumented worker/slave class. I imagine the Chinese will follow in this elitism, as well as following our vast world resource consumption by using the same economic levers we used.

Report this
Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 18, 2009 at 10:44 am Link to this comment

I appreciate remoran’s comments because they are a rational counter balance to this “the sky is falling” “blame America first” self loathing modality that is so prevelant. Humans are imperfect, we better get used to it, freedom still offers room for growth that anything less, stifles, even if ours is imperfect!

Report this

By remoran, December 18, 2009 at 10:33 am Link to this comment

I have a problem with this analysis because of the lack of natural resources China has (even less then the US), the population overload and the environmental disaster. No mention is ever made about the fact the Chinese have the oldest population in the world, which brings up the question, how are the seniors going to cared for by the too few young who comprise the nation’s workforce. This very important fact was pointed out by an astonishingly honest interview conducted by the NY Times with the Chinese Foreign Minister about four years ago. To me, China will be a super power for a very short time because they don’t have the natural resources (Russia anyone) needed to keep them on top.

Report this
RAE's avatar

By RAE, December 18, 2009 at 9:42 am Link to this comment

Damn this global poison - this “power OVER” mentality - gets tiresome. Empires come, empires go. How many more millennia must pass before the homo sapiens on this planet mature enough to try another way?

Report this
Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 18, 2009 at 7:31 am Link to this comment

To read some of the comments from readers on would presume it would find broad acceptance on the far left to balance our budget by harvesting organs.

Report this
Liquor Store Larry's avatar

By Liquor Store Larry, December 18, 2009 at 7:28 am Link to this comment

It is tragic to me that leftists, at once don’t see that our unique position in the world stems from our freedom, even as they are willing to scuttle our freedoms with policies that debase them. Whether this is done out of guilt or desire to feel equal or prolatariat or whatever, that disgusting quality of wanting to grovel to cultures who are “inferior” rather than to be comfortable with having found a better way and being confident in it. This is tortured thinking that misses the point.

Report this

By omop, December 18, 2009 at 6:04 am Link to this comment

Me thinks the over-quoted, “He who holds the gold makes the RULES”, may have been the premise for Mr. Jacques’ provoking title.

At one time it used to be said that the best “friends” a Soviet General had were his counter parts in the US military and vice a versa.

B. Disraeli a one time PM of England is on record as stating, “The world is governed by different personages than what is imgined by those who are not behind the scenes”.

IMO “When China Rules the World” it will be more in a paternalistic rather then a colonialistic modus operandi. Obviously a realistic and factual determination can only be made after China Rules.

Truthdig and Mr. Scheer are to be commended for “provoking” their readers into the future.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, December 17, 2009 at 6:38 pm Link to this comment

A largely non militaristic industrial country which knows how to manage a large and ever growing educated population, providing national health care, education and a low crime rate.

They have experience the U.S. lacks developed over millenia of cultural society.

Report this

By tommy_slothrop, December 17, 2009 at 6:23 pm Link to this comment

Please don’t tell us that the Chinese aren’t inclined to confront us militarily.  The people who have been trying to provoke them into doing just that (by sending spy planes into their airspace, stationing troops in neighboring countries and conducting military exercises off their coast) will be so disappointed.  Leiberman, for instance, has submarine manufacturers in his state to support.

Report this
Ouroborus's avatar

By Ouroborus, December 17, 2009 at 6:18 pm Link to this comment

Ed Harges, December 17 at 10:58 am #
We Americans should all be studying Chinese and Hebrew.
It’s best to know the
languages of those who rule us.
==========================================
LOL; but not really; interesting comment, but I see
Chinese as more important. Israel’s survival isn’t so
certain, IMO.

Report this

By P. T., December 17, 2009 at 11:47 am Link to this comment

For a different viewpoint, by Professor Dongping Han, that addresses the massive unrest in rural China, click on http://www.monthlyreview.org/091214dongping.php

Report this

By loneagle, December 17, 2009 at 9:42 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

montanafearmongeringscaredhack is more
accurate.

Report this

By Franklin Paine, December 17, 2009 at 8:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Another example of the myopic, over-simplified, popular tripe! Anyone who knows a thing about China knows that it is, in fact, a corrupt beyond words, fragile, inherently unstable country. while the US is certainly NOT the overwhelming power that it has been in the past, its economy continues to be more than twice the size of the next largest. The US military is also by far, more powerful and global in scope than that of any other country (or bloc of countries for that matter). Additionally, the idea that China owning US debt is somehow a major liability also represents the kind fearful, misleading (sophomoric) thinking that characterizes the populist mindset. Like it or not, if one intends to do global business, the Dollar will be the currency and English is the language. The truth is (although counter-intuitive) that China’s ownership of US debt is more problematic to China than it is to the US.

There is a global (financial/business) system in place—it’s controlled by western interests. It would be the height of naivete to believe that those interests haven’t well considered the “China-issue”. I’m reminded of the US hysteria of the late 80’s that Japan was “buying up America”! What was happening, in-fact, was that US interests were taking their flushed, cash-rich Japanese counterparts to the cleaners.

Finally, having said the above, the idea of evaluating the world in nationalistic terms is anachronistic. It’s a global world (and has been since early 80’s) and in that world there will be winners and losers. Individual Nations clearly have had less and less meaning in this new context.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, December 17, 2009 at 6:58 am Link to this comment

We Americans should all be studying Chinese and Hebrew. It’s best to know the
languages of those who rule us.

Report this

By montanawildhack, December 17, 2009 at 6:27 am Link to this comment

Boy, that was a lot of reading and not nearly enough pictures….

This is a bit tangential but permit me to make a few comments on the Toys for Tots program as it relates to China…. 

Every year at this time U.S. Marines appear on my Tv set all pimped out in their dress blues with lots of shiny things on their chest asking for donations for the Toys for Tots program…  What’s hilarious about this is that 99.9999 percent of these toys are manufactured in China and the money made goes right into the Chinese coffers to purchase more and better military hardware that will inturn be used to kill these same Marines…. Does anybody else think that is just about the funniest thing in the world????

“Oh no Montanawildhack, China will never attack us…We’re their biggest trading partner.”  Yes, Now we’re their biggest trading partner but what happens when the proletariat in the USA becomes so broke that they don’t have money to spend on this Chinese shit????  What happens when the USA goes totally bankrupt?????  What use will the Chinese have with us then?????


Me, I’m studying Manderin (sp) as our new Chinese masters will need passive toadies to make their Project for the New Chinese Century a reality….
I can already say, “This way to the ReEducation Camp you pigs.”

Report this

Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2

 

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

 
 
 

Advertisement

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 


A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.