Comments by "F Liu" (@F_Liu) on "Geopolitical Economy Report"
channel.
-
46
-
43
-
41
-
38
-
37
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
32
-
31
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
24
-
@roberthealey7238 ''All previous iterations of low cost workers worked hard as well; where do you think the US got its wealth from?'' No one here is denying the fact that American/European workers had worked hard, however a lot of the wealth/investments transferred into the US were collected (many occasions looted) through brutal European colonialization/aggression/slavery around the world. The US invested (not doing charity) in China in the late 70s for its own material and monetary gains (taking advantages of the competitive and well trained Chinese labour) plus the US was seeking to get China on its side to help winning the Cold War against Soviet Union at the time. Quite different circumstances.
''China will now have its wealth taken away by other Asian countries and Africa, joining the long line of history of nations that lost their wealth due to out of control greed and arrogance. China was already starting to lose manufacturing to India, Vietnam and even Mexico before the plague hit.'' This is not quite the case. The US/West wished they could decouple with China this easily, but the simple reality is that they have not been able to. In fact, many of these low end manufacturing facilities across Asia have been set up by Chinese business owners (partly to avoid US economic sanctions: the US just don't seem to want people of the developing world to live a better life), and because China still has the complete supply chain in place, many of these businesses find it hard to operate, plus infrastructures and labour quality is very poor in countries such as India. It will take a long while before China is replaced in this regard. China still provides the most favourable business environment for Western investments, hence more have come to invest despite all the anti China rhetoric. And another point is most Chinese youth would NOT want to work in manufacturings anymore, therefore, it won't be such a loss when some will eventually be moved abroad. And the Chinese have already been investing in Africa, Latin America, South East Asia, etc... That has always been China's goal, to lead the economic development of the entire global south so they could be free from Western economic domination (based on greed and exploitation).
23
-
22
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
@colindant3410 I am not sure you understand what truly happened in Hong Kong, because what has been reflected through the Western media was largely one sided, if you had witnessed on the ground of what really happened (all the horrendous things took place that were deliberately hidden by your MSM: people got set on fire and burnt alive for speaking against the rioters, beaten up just for speaking Chinese Mandarin rather than Cantonese, beaten up for singing the Chinese national anthem, police officers had molotov cocktails thrown at them trying to burn them alive... I have evidence the rioters were supported by the Western governments' agencies). You would know that it was clearly the West who disrespected the people of Hong Kong by using them as tools for the purpose of creating instabilities in China both economically and politically (yes, it was a colour revolution). In fact, the US slapped economic sanctions on Hong Kong after the ''peaceful protests'' so that the people of Hong Kong would suffer.
Hey, do you think that the US/West could respect the way of life of the people of Taiwan by first giving them a choice? I think not. Because if they did, they would first acknowledge the fact that majority of the population in Taiwan do NOT support independence/separatism, which is against the agenda of the current Taiwan government and their supportive Western powers. Yeah, and if you respected the people of Taiwan, you would agree that what the US/West has been doing by pushing Taiwan closer to conflicts, wars and even potential death and destruction will be to the detriment of the people there. How is that respecting the way of life of the people of Taiwan when you literally want to turn their home into a warzone?
18
-
17
-
@mikeyrose4183 First of all, have I understood correctly that you live in China? And you have been dealing with the Chinese business people from Mainland China? I agree with you to a certain extend that there is such ''ethnocentrism'' in the Chinese mentality, both based on the fact that China has a long history and rich culture, (yes they consider themselves wise and well civilised people perhaps more than people from most other cultures) and also as I said they know they are smart at business, by the way, being smart at business often means not being nice likable people, it means being ruthless and cold a lot of the times, yes business competitions are tough, the Chinese learned this since very young, how to out compete among thousands, hundreds of thousands of school kids to reach the top universities they aim to get to, it is often their only way up in transforming their lives. This culture is unique to the Chinese. And yes, some see foreigners as ''inferior'', and guess what some see Whites as inferior too, but most of the time this is not based on race, this is more to do with the economic status of the country where these people are from, there is this ''I care more dealing with people from ''rich'' countries, and less with people from less developed countries'' way of thinking, but again, I feel your experience is not representative of all Chinese (business) people, or you have not truly understand what the Chinese people are all about, there are A LOT of cultural differences, many of which some Westerners could never get use to, nevertheless, most Chinese people are actually very friendly and welcoming of people of other cultures and races. To generalise a whole nation of people is itself narrow minded.
17
-
@kubhlaikhan2015 ''In the first place the British do NOT take great pride in the days of empire'' Public opinion surveys carried out both in recent years and the past paint a contradicting picture of the sentiment, but I guess you are allowed to deny them instead pretend to speak on behalf of the majority of your population.
''we are probably the most self deprecating and least jingoistic people on the planet.'' I am not sure about that, btw where are your protests against the Ukraine war? Since your government has been known to be very active on sabotaging the peace prospect of this conflict, you surely would object such uncharacteristic representation of your ''least'' jingoistic population, lol. Again, where are all the protests?
''Ordinary people reaped no rewards from empire, only hardship.'' They might have been overcharged by their merchants but nevertheless contributed to the huge demands of foreign imports, hence the booming businesses with China (and India), that eventually drove a trade deficit with these countries so high, they have to resort to selling opium basically, as a payment for Chinese goods. I am pretty sure the people then were aware of the existence of such immoral trade, or were they lied to as they have been today?
''As regards the "Opium War" in particular - opium did not have the negative connotations it does today. The ravages of today's heroin trade allow it to be portrayed as something far worse than it actually was.'' Again, this is not true, it was officially against the Chinese law to trade and consume opium and possibly illegal too in Britain, the British were fully aware of this Chinese law, oh yes they also knew very well the drug's harmful effects on people, In fact the Chinese emperor wrote to the Queen repeatedly to beg her basically to stop killing the Chinese people, but all were ignored, the British clearly chose profit over morality.
''The medicinal and recreational uses of opium do NOT lead automatically into depravity but in any case the Emperor's motives were not about the effects of opium but on the state of China's balance of trade.'' Lol, first I like here when you speak on behalf of the voiceless Chinese people, who themselves, their families and society all suffered at the hands of the British illegal drug trade. This is like essentially a drug dealer telling the drug addicts to not to worry about the ill effects just so that they can continue to profit from immorality. As I already mentioned in my last paragraph, the Chinese emperor wrote to the British state several times to ask Britain to stop trading this very harmful drug to poison its people, because he and his local officials witnessed the devastation of the drug trade caused, but here you repeat the same narrative as this secondary school materials, insist the British were all about trade... clearly they had no morals, and you are here defending it, what does that make you?
''The imbalance was preventing them minting more gold and silver coins which they needed in order to suppress revolts.'' This is total nonsense. The Chinese had been having a trade surplus with Britain, it was the British who was running out of gold and silver to pay for Chinese goods, hence Britain resorted to forcefully trade opium to balance its trade deficit, btw, what revolts are you speaking of in this case? To be vague or just make up some non existent ''revolts'' won't do I am afraid. The fact of the matter was very simple, the British opium trade was illegal and immoral with devastating effect on the Chinese and their normal trade, Chinese government had to take action to stop it - destroying opium at all cost - to save its people and country.
Your narrative is the same as the secondary school material I mentioned in my OP, a pathetic attempt to whitewash British Empire's crimes. But you can only fool yourself you can't fool the people who ever suffered from British colonialism, especially when you try to do so by twisting truth or even outright lie as you did here. Best action you can take is to learn properly from your past and make sure it won't be repeated. You are a living proof of how your educational system have failed you on this.
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
@rsuriyop Because most of them are idiots (I am talking about the illegal ones), yes, I know you are not going to take this explanation seriously, but that is the truth. Most of them have no idea about life in the West and they blame the Chinese government/system for their own misfortune in China, many regret after they arrive in the West, many actually come back after the bad decision. About the legal ones, I don't actually think there are that MANY these days, btw, they are free to go and live wherever they want, doesn't mean they will have a better life than in China, often many don't.
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
@jackvue722 ''Let me ask you, are Uyghurs ethnic Chinese? By saying Chinese is a singular ethnicity, you suggest there is only one group, the Han.'' Go read my previous reply, I already answered you, you seem insistent wanting to put words in my mouth. As you've been too lazy to read, here, ''So ''Chinese'' (中华民族) is a cultural identity composed of multiple ethnicities within the same nation state, but it IS still an ethnicity (collectively), just not in the same context as how the word is used in the West.'' In fact you've actually confirmed my comment by stating ''The Communist Party of China not only strengthened the identity and publicity of [a] “Chinese nation,” but also recognized that “China is a multi-ethnic country and Chinese nation is a joint name of all ethnic groups within Chinese Territory”...''
I think 民族 translated as nationality is inaccurate in the context for China, 民族 usually means ethnicity, i.e 少数民族 (ethnic minority). Again, to say the PRC is a multi-national (instead of multi-ethnic) state created jointly by the people of all its ''nationalities'' give people a false impression that there are several independent nations within China, which is not the case.
A rebellion or revolution partly fueled by ''Han chauvinism'' due to the increasing dissatisfaction of the Manchu rule is not representative enough to suggest this sentiment has been running in the mainstream throughout Chinese history. Explain how ROC was a Han chauvinist state?? Where the founding father of the ROC Sun Zhongshan was the one who came up with the idea of including all (major) ethnic groups into the big Chinese collective identity. ''The recognition of Manchus, Mongolians, Hui, and Tibetans was done to maintain territorial integrity.'' Incorrect. The recognition of these groups is just to stress their equal importance in the national identity and promote unity among all groups. ''unlike the Kuomintang and Chiang Kai-shek that hold that there is only one ethnic group in China (the Han).'' Again, this contradicts with Sun Zhongshan's ethnic policy.
''it is necessary to combat big-nation chauvinism, mainly Han chauvinism, and to combat local national chauvinism.'' This is clearly meant for all ethnic groups in China, but of course, Han being the majority ethnic group, it would be more likely to have a Han chauvinist movement... But in reality, as I said, the so called Han chauvinism has never become the mainstream sentiment in any form both historically and since the founding of the New China.
I repeat, ''Chinese'' is a collective cultural and ethnic identity made up by all its 56 ethnic groups, I don't know why you have a problem with that.
10
-
10
-
10