Top Leaderboard, Site wide
November 27, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!

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 3)

PART 3: Coping With Political Change

Robert Scheer: Hi, welcome. This is Robert Scheer, the editor of Truthdig.com. We’re talking to Martin Jacques, who has written “When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order.” This is the third part of this ongoing little series we’ve been having about this book. And we’ve established by now that the title is provocative, but it doesn’t mean we’re all going to be enslaved to this new Chinese overlord. It just, I guess, is meant to convey that they will, within 20, 30 years, be the dominant power—not just economically, but culturally and politically, and so forth. And so now we’re trying to sketch out: What does this mean as a model? And it’s extremely confusing to people in the West, particularly conservatives in this country, the Republicans and so forth. It was a Republican president, Richard Nixon, who made the opening to China, and I interviewed Nixon about this a few years later, and his expectation was they would become just like us, we’re being silly, capitalism will dominate, they’ll have the same values, they’ll do everything the same. And he saw political democracy as very much coming out of capitalism in the free market, and so this is all a win-win. You’re suggesting something more disturbing, intriguing, or what have you: that we may not have a lock on the essential model. And so what I’d like to do now is sketch out what this means, a strong China. Will it be a bullying China, is one kind of question; will they continue to carry our debt, will they push us around, will they be fairly competitive or unfairly competitive, is there room for us? But that’s only one part. I would like to push you on something we talked about earlier. Are there universal values that should be respected, of the rights of the individual, of limiting government power and the ability of government to intrude and construct your life, or is there something in what you’ve been stressing—the 2,000 years of Chinese history—that conveys a much more aggressive, robust role for the state that might be in the offing? That, to my mind, is the $64 question.

Martin Jacques: Well, I don’t think that the American notion of the limits of power of government is a universal value. I think it’s an American value, which has been very influential, and it’s gone through various iterations—for example, in the neoliberal period. But I don’t think it’s a universal value, and I don’t think it will apply to China or has applied to China or is now applying to China. Because actually the state, firstly, occupies a very different position in society; and secondly, it’s been extremely proactive in the whole process of change. You know, people think, oh, it’s all about the market, but actually the state is extremely active. I mean, it’s been the designer, the architect of this transformation. And if you look now at even the companies, for example, many of them are state-owned. And I think this reflects not simply China now, but China historically. The state has played such an important role in this society, and the Chinese think of it in a very different way. One question, for example, is that in China for a thousand years there have been no serious competitors to the state. And a thousand years is a long time, and you don’t wash away that kind of history quickly. And the result is there are no obvious boundaries to the power of the state. There can be problems with that; of course there can be problems with that. But the Chinese view the state as intimate to society in a way that we don’t.

Scheer: Right, but the Chinese—and Mao is not the first one to do this—but the Chinese, when the state has failed them, have rebelled.

Jacques: Of course. The mandate of heaven is withdrawn and the regime is overthrown.

Scheer: Yes. And in fact, even Mao did his Cultural Revolution to challenge, in a fundamental sense, the power of the party and the bureaucracy that had developed. So when you say there’s an intimate connection with the state, our knee-jerk reaction is to think: a totalitarian model of the state deciding everything and never being challenged. But actually this long history of China has been a history also of insurrection, of fundamental challenge. How does that get institutionalized, or is it always going to be disorderly, and civil war, and revolution, and so forth?

Jacques: Political change?

Scheer: Yes.

Jacques: I think this remains problematic in China. There’s no obvious way in which there can be a regime change, except as a result of growing disorder for whatever reason, and ultimately the overthrow of the regime. It doesn’t happen very much, historically, in China, actually. But when it does happen, it’s extremely destabilizing. Like the fall of the Qing Dynasty in 1911—this was a long, long period for China of great instability and hardship and failure.

Scheer: So isn’t there something to learn from the West, dare I say it, that maybe you should institutionalize the process of change so you don’t have to have this chaos and disorder and everything that’s been attendant to those upheavals of China?

Jacques: Yes. The Chinese will have to find a way of making big political change in a relatively stable way. It may be that … it’s not that they’re incapable of it now. Let me give you one illustration of it. After the death of Mao, when Deng Xiaoping became so-called paramount leader, of course China made extraordinary change. I mean, it basically abandoned central planning and the command economy and embarked on the market reforms and so on, leading to the present growth, and so on. This was a huge political change—much bigger, I would wager, than any political change in most Western societies since 1945. And it was a peaceful change, and it was an orderly change. So it’s not that the country is incapable of doing this, but it was done in a very different way from the way we would do it. We would do it by changing our government. They did it by a fundamental shift within the ruling Communist Party.

Scheer: But the example, then, of course, is Tiananmen Square and brutal suppression and secret police and so forth. Is that the inevitable price of their system? And is that compatible with an increasingly sophisticated population that has access to the Internet? … After all, we’re not living back in the days of the old Chinese dynasties; people have the Internet, they can travel, they can see other models. And these were the things that tore down the old Soviet Union, when people—you know, you sent them around the world, and they said, “Wait a minute, it doesn’t have to be this way.”

Jacques: Well, the reason the Soviet Union failed wasn’t because of the Internet, which didn’t exist anyway, really.

Scheer: But travel, and trade …

Jacques: Well, the reason it failed was because it had become … it had atrophied. Economic growth was failing. The system was incapable of change and was inert. And in that situation, the population that did hear about these things and the changes that were going on around them, thought: “Well, we’ll have a bit of that,” rather than …

Scheer: Well, one example I have …

Jacques: China’s different.

Scheer: I understand, and I don’t want to take too much time on the subject, but I do remember very vividly, because I spent time there then, and I remember when a guy, [Roald] Sagdeev, one of their leading physicists, came to the United States and I took him to a Radio Shack, and he was shocked that in this little franchise Radio Shack store there was equipment that was as sophisticated as in back in his super-secret lab. And you’re absolutely right, the Internet was certainly not full-blown, although there was already the beginning of communication of that kind—the Moscow-Stanford Teleport, and all that sort of thing—but it was the travel, it was the experience. And what I’m asking is a question of whether, in fact, education doesn’t have its own imperative of empowering the individual. Knowledge. And getting back to those universal rights—that part of empowering the individual, and being able to learn and read and travel and study, is you want to figure things out for yourself. And maybe that requires—just for the survival of the system, not just because I happen to think it’s a better way to live—but for the survival, for stability, you better accommodate that, because you’ve got a lot of smart people in China who know a lot about all those other models.

Jacques: Well, so far they have accommodated it, up to a point, I think.

Scheer: Well, let’s talk about that.

Jacques: Well, they have accommodated it; otherwise they couldn’t have grown like they have, because this kind of growth requires immense popular creativity and adaptation, and thirst and appetite for change. So it would be absolutely impossible to do what they’ve done without allowing the individual some space in which to do it. And of course one of the great things in China, as everyone comments today, is the extraordinary expansion in people’s personal lives.

Continued: The Issue of Individualism
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.