Comments by "神州 Shenzhou" (@Shenzhou.) on "How China is Using BRICS to Change the World Order" video.

@MarkYeung1 "You mean as Chinese I should invade Ukraine?" Honestly, you're disgracing Chinese all over the world with your poorly thought out words. You may be Chinese, but China's official stance has always been to support peace in Ukraine. For example, China has put forth a 12-point peace process for a peaceful resolution in Ukraine. Putin has welcomed this idea, while the USA has rejected this peace process. What has you being Chinese even got to do with this?
16
@MarkYeung1 You said: "Check out what Russia has done to Syria" Russia has supported the Assad administration of Syria against the Western-sponsored draft resolutions in the UN Security Council that demanded his resignation. Assad is well-liked by the Syrian people (you can find videos of Assad casually walking around the streets) and he has recently returned to the Arab league. So isn't Russia a force for peace in Syria?
9
@MarkYeung1 "Just because Russia is a BRICS member doesn't mean China should support the Russia economy to fuel the war." India is a BRICS member yet India continues to trade with Russia and has not condemned Russia's special military operation in Ukraine, so what's your point? You're just trying to single out China that's all. Also, the USA continues to send military aid to Ukraine in support of war, yet you only pick on China?
4
@JR-ng9yo "It includes Arunachal Pradesh, India as one of China's states." Arunachal Pradesh is part of Southern Tibet (which is a part of China). The British, after colonizing India, drew up India's borders and included Arunachal Pradesh as part of their territory, ignoring the historical boundaries and without even consulting China about the border. Even till today, India still insist on the British India border instead of consulting historical boundaries between India and China.
4
@MarkYeung1 "What has China done to Ukraine since the beginning of the war?" China has provided humanitarian supplies to Ukraine, including infant formula, quilts, and moisture-proof mats. China has also offered to mediate peace between Ukraine and Russia, and even put forth a 12-point peace plan for a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Ukraine. Putin has welcomed this plan while the US rejected this peace plan. Instead, the United States continues to send military aid to Ukraine then isn't this a clear example of supporting war?
4
@etienne8382 Agreed. China is Australia's biggest trading partner, yet the AUKUS deal has convinced Australia to treat its biggest trading partner as an adversary.
4
@MarkYeung1 "China has recognized Ukraine's independence since 1992." China still does that today. According to the Embassy of Ukraine in the People's Republic of China: "China invariably supports Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Ukraine remains firmly committed to “one China” policy. Given ongoing transformation and reforms in Ukraine in recent years, the two sides are currently undertaking measures aimed at launching a new phase of development of bilateral relations with the view to bringing them up at a new level." - Embassy of Ukraine in PRC China is on friendly terms with both Ukraine and Russia so why can't China continue to trade with both sides?
3
@MarkYeung1 "The fact that Xi decided to skip the G20 summit in India is a slap to the face of India." Not true. President Xi and Prime Minister Modi already had a prior meeting (August 24) to discuss the border issues, so there is no urgent need for Xi and Modi to meet again face-to-face so soon. Also, Putin has also decided to skip the G20 meeting, so most likely Xi is doing so in support of Putin.
3
@MarkYeung1 "Why are you single out the United States ?" Well, because the United States is the largest provider of military assistance to Ukraine (having committed $43.7 billion since the start of the Biden administration). This is the biggest proof of a country supporting war, yet you seem to think China is doing so just by trading with Russia?
3
Russia and China are facilitating the global transition towards a multipolar world, dominated by multiple voices, instead of the unipolar world, dominated by a single voice (namely that of the U.S and its "allies".)
2
@MarkYeung1 "Seems like China is looking for a fight?" Seems like you don't even know Chinese history, and just assume China is belligerent that's all. And it appears that you take the side of India, even though India is a BRICS member who continues trading with Russia (i.e India is buying Russian oil priced in Rupees/Ruble)
2
@MarkYeung1 "China has trades with Russia numbers hundreds of billions of dollars each year to fuel Russia's war machines." China trades peacefully with Russia and China does not supply Russia with military equipment, so how's that supporting war? Even India (world's largest democracy) continues to trade with Russia and neither does India vote to condemn Russia's special military operation, yet you're only singling out China?
2
The West desperately needs an off-ramp in Ukraine, but all they seem to have is an escalator.
1
If you look at their political systems, all four of them achieved rapid economic growth under authoritarian leadership of some form. The Kuomintang ruled Taiwan with an iron fist, jailing/purging political rivals (a period known as White Terror in Taiwan) and imposed martial law on Taiwan for 38 years, which was qualified as "the longest imposition of martial law by a regime anywhere in the world" at that time. Yet under single-party KMT rule, Taiwan's economy flourished in what's known as the Taiwan Miracle (台湾奇迹). Singapore, even till today, has always been governed under a single-party (PAP) and Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore's founder) was a dictator who jailed/exiled his political rivals. Yet Singapore transformed from a sleepy fishing village nation into a world class country under the PAP. In Korea, South Korean dictator Park Chung-hee introduced economic reforms that eventually led to rapid economic growth and industrialization and was credited with the Miracle on the Han River (漢江의 奇蹟) although he also became increasingly authoritarian. Political opposition was constantly repressed and Park had complete control of the military, and much control over the media. Lastly, Hong Kong's rapid economic growth was achieved while it was still a British colony under authoritarian rule (before the 1997 handover and the One Country, Two Systems policy). This shows that not all countries/states have to adopt Western-style democracy to be successful and the Four Asian Dragons/Tigers are living proof of this.
1
Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea and Hong Kong achieved these rapid economic growth under authoritarian single-party governments. Taiwan had been ruled by single-party KMT who imposed martial law in Taiwan for 38 years, which was qualified as "the longest imposition of martial law by a regime anywhere in the world" at that time. Singapore even till today has been governed by a single-party government (People's Action Party) and South Korea's economy flourished under the South Korean dictator Park Chung-hee. Lastly, Hong Kong's rapid economic growth was achieved while it was still a British colony under authoritarian rule (before the 1997 handover and the One Country, Two Systems policy). This shows that not all countries/states have to adopt Western-style democracy to be successful economically and the Four Asian Dragons/Tigers are living proof of this.
1
@MarkYeung1 "Look at how well North Korea is doing. Shenzhou's arguments were very strange." Because the USA imposed sanctions on North Korea and stymied its economic growth, while at the same time, pouring US aid into South Korea. After the Korean War North Korea was the greater economic and military power on the Korean peninsula due to the North's history of heavy industries such as the power and chemical plants, while South Korea was once one of the poorest countries at that time. "The United States’ $35 billion investment in economic foreign assistance has helped the Republic of Korea (ROK), once one of the poorest nations, become the world’s 12th largest economy." ... Source: (How U.S. Foreign Assistance Has Helped South Korea)_
1
@MarkYeung1 According to Human Rights Watch (Singapore): "Singapore’s political environment is overwhelmingly repressive. Citizens face severe restrictions on free expression, association, and peaceful assembly through overly broad criminal laws and regulations." - HRW Singapore ... Doesn't Singapore's political system sound very much like China's? So this EASTERN style of democracy you described is doesn't appear to fit in with the Western definition of democracy.
1
@MarkYeung1 "Hong Kong is not an independent country and China has a final say in their voting system." That's why I wrote "countries/states" just like how Taiwan is not an independent country too and together with Hong Kong, the two are part of China. Also, China's final say in Hong Kong is in accordance with Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45, which states: "The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government." - Article 45, Hong Kong Basic Law Therefore, Beijing (aka Central People's Government) reserves the right to appoint the Chief Executive of Hong Kong and China is not violating Hong Kong Basic Law in the process. "The last 3 years (2020 to 2022) Hong Kong people were leaving in record numbers." Mainland China is home to the largest number of Hong Kong expatriates, more than any other region in the world, outside of Hong Kong.
1
@norincofan1949 "The determining factor was not whether the govts were authoritarian or not but whether they ruled for the people or for the wealthy comprador class within their borders." Agreed. You can have authoritarian systems which care for the ordinary people, and you can have Western-style democratic systems which cared for the wealthy classes. Yet Mark Yeung seems to think the worst of authoritarian systems, even though it worked for Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea and Hong Kong.
1
老实说翻墙之后，就觉得西方媒体对中国太傲慢与偏见，而且很多美国人已经被美媒洗脑了。
1