Comments by "Alan Friesen" (@alanfriesen9837) on "" video.

Sir Malcolm states that China presents its political model as an alternative to the Western Democratic model. I've never seen a Chinese suggest that other countries should adopt their model, at least not since the seventies. My observation is that China doesn't really care what the political model of other countries are and only insists on its model within what it considers to be part of China, and even in that case they've accepted postponement. His assertion that other Chinese societies have been more successful with Western models is also questionable. Taiwan and Singapore both blossomed from highly authoritarian seeds. Hong Kong had never been democratic before 1997 and has lost relative standing ever since. All three have benefited from Cold-War anticommunist investment that the Peoples' Republic could never have gotten. In fact, if China had not "fallen to the communists" in 1949 then none of east Asia would have had the support and investment that helped build up the capitalist economies from Singapore all the way to Japan.
61
@ivantsl3496 I'm totally cool with it. I'm an imperialist by nature. What I don't care for is nationalism.
6
China is an empire, as are the United States and Russia.
4
grimm reaper Oh, we definitely have our nationalists here in America, and they're pretty scary. As for love of country, it's patriotic if it's inclusive, whether it's Chinese, Americans or any other group of countrymen. In order to be patriotic the love of country has to include everybody else that calls that country home or who aspires to and the call for defense of the country needs to include everyone inside of it who's not fighting to undermine it. It becomes nationalism when it becomes exclusive. Nationalism can be saying that people don't belong for one reason or another or trying to keep "the wrong sort" out, or it can be dehumanizing or suppressing those that can be identified as an "other". I've seen a little Chinese nationalism targeted at the Japanese and justified by the atrocities perpetrated on China during the Japanese war and occupation seventy years ago, but I haven't seen much beyond that outside of comment board trolls. I have seen a lot of American nationalism. Our last hundred years of history is littered with minority oppression, immigrant restriction and ghettoization—racist policies justified by nationalist arguments. Some of those nationalist arguments are in full view today and driving things like the current immigration debate. There's also a touch of nationalist ideology in Western foreign policy in which non-liberal-democracies are instinctively viewed as non-legitimate governments. It's this nationalist point of view that has determined that China cannot be allowed to equal the United States in global power or influence.
4
@bobbarkeriii2597 China is benevolent if it wants to be. Power gives a country the option to choose. I'm glad that so far China seems to be relatively averse to conflict, at least if you're not claiming atolls in the South China Sea. I hope China stays benevolent, but there is no guarantee that that will be the case indefinitely.
3
@j2174 I don't think China has pushed its political model since the days of Mao. The political model that existed at that time is no longer followed in China. If I'm mistaken, please let me know. I'm not sure what context you're referring to here. It's not that I doubt you; there is a lot of information I didn't provide.
3
@meganh9460 Oh there's probably the odd booster here or there. It's nothing like the western insistence on liberal democracy that borders on political evangelism though. I don't know the tone of your quote, but I don't see it as necessarily insistent.
2
@dixonpinfold2582 "I can't tell which of my posts you meant." I think your prudence and patience argument is a good one. I think you can tell by my posts that I'm a sinophile but I'm not too starry-eyed in that respect. I know that China is perfectly willing to flex if it thinks that it's in their interests and as it becomes stronger and more influential it will flex more and more as it pushes back against the aspects of the current world order that it finds disagreeable. I still have hope that this won't lead to a terrible global conflict but rather to concert of great powers including Europe, Russia and Persia that can work together to keep the world relatively peaceful so we can all hold hands and sing kumbaya. I also respect how well thought out your response to Megan H was overall. I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of the power of Chinese tycoons. One area I really think the Chinese have an advantage in is the relationships between government and business. My perception is that in China government tells business what to do. As an American I sometimes feel like business tells government what to do here. While both of these relationships can be problematic, at least the mission of government is to take care of the people. That being said, it is possible that the influence of wealthy Chinese individuals and families may eventually overcome the government. There is certainly precedent for this in Chinese imperial history.
2
Mahesh Shende As an American I'd be shocked if China started taking over my territory. That's not to say it couldn't happen, but I probably wouldn't see it coming. I'm not completely insensitive to the plight of people over whom empires encroach especially those who live through the process, but historically people have had more peaceful, comfortable and prosperous lives within the fold of powerful empires than they have outside of them. That's not to say there haven't been some examples of terrible treatment of groups of people within empires, but it's usually those on the outside who really suffer.
1
@aksbeixhev China's relationship with the Uighurs varies from Uighur to Uighur, and frankly I have some concerns on that point. China is hostile to Falun Gong as it should be considering that Falun Gong is actively trying to destroy the current Chinese government. China is not kind to human rights activists, nor are human rights advocates kind to China. What I've heard of organ harvesting has been from the mouth of Falun Gong. I know China used to use the organs of executed criminals for transplants but I don't think that is the case anymore. And while I strongly suspect that there were incidences of Falun Gong members dying in custody early in the conflict at the hands of overzealous local officials it is my understanding that it was never official policy to kill them, and I don't believe there has been a credible accusation of such for a very long time. As for Tienanmen Square, that was over thirty years ago. An awful lot has changed since then. China is authoritarian and it is Orwellian to the extant that party members are frequently given nearly impossible tasks in order to maintain their standing within the party. This hypercompetition leads to exceptionally talented leaders, but it also can lead to corruption and to humiliation of those caught being corrupt. It has led to incredible improvements in the lives of average Chinese however, the vast majority of whom trust their government and have no desire to change the system.
1
I like this topic though. And it's nice to see the pro-Chinese view represented.
1
@dixonpinfold2582 I have a great deal of respect for Japan, Taiwan and Singapore and I would throw in South Korea, probably the most impressive country of the group, in there as well. Absolutely those countries should be proud of their accomplishments economically, socially and politically. But they, along with the Philippines, all received huge economic and political investments in the fifties and sixties from the United States (and later from Japan) to counter the Soviets, and the Chinese. Though Japan got a little investment in the forties, the other countries got nothing. America was intent on rebuilding Europe and didn't give a rat's ass about Asia except to make sure that Japan (the real threat at the time) had to be kept under control. It wasn't until 1949 that the United States seriously considered investing in Asia and that was due to the "Fall of China" to the PRC. It's possible the United States would have taken a more enlightened view regarding East Asia without that event but if the KMT had kept China or China splintered into little fiefdoms like it had after the fall of the Qing then the Soviets would most likely have concentrated their efforts in Europe and American money, tech and political pressure would have been almost entirely focused across the Atlantic. East Aia would have been treated more like Africa or Latin America, which it looked like at the time. The people of East Asia have done amazingly well and it's not just because of support and guidance from America and other western countries. However, to ignore the role of those factors is ahistorical. These are factors that China (outside of Taiwan) didn't benefit from, and if the Communists hadn't scared the hell out of the Americans by taking China, they are factors that the whole region probably would not have benefited from either.
1
@dixonpinfold2582 There are several aspects of increasing authoritarian pressure in China that concern me. But if I'm being honest I'm more concerned with the abuses coming out of my own government in the past couple of years because I think they have more sweeping negative effects on the population of both the United States and the world, but that's another conversation. Any powerful entity, whether an individual dictator, an oligarchical class, or a tyrannical majority, is capable of oppression and exploitation. The worst instances of oppression usually come out of power bases paranoid both of the possibility of losing power and of the personal consequences of such an event. I'm getting off track. My point is that while I agree with you that people with absolute power very often abuse that power, the same is true of any other power holder, including "the people".
1
@dixonpinfold2582 I know you weren't addressing this towards me but I'm really glad you expressed it. I very much agree with it.
1
@lche059 I totally agree. No country should be trusted in part because over time circumstances change and the interests of countries and the people that make up those countries alter as a result.
1
@dixonpinfold2582 Don't let me or anyone else talk you out of that belief.
1
@tsbm9 The Chinese Peace Corps? yeah, they're here. And while they are definitely Chinese cultural appreciation boosters and government apologists I still don't see them pushing their political structure on anyone. A lot of people seem to see any kind of cultural exchange activity as insidious which is really unfair. You can't expect a Chinese outreach program to badmouth China. When I was overseas in the U.S. army we, as individuals, were expected to represent the the United States in the best light that we were capable of. The same is true for any government employee, contractor, or government supported NGO. This meant being kind and helpful while brandishing the flag and not bringing up some of my country's shortcomings if avoidable. Why we would expect it to be different for Chinese could only be chalked up to political (hopefully just political) biases.
1
@dixonpinfold2582 China has a Marxist ace up their sleeve which they may or may not eventually use. According to Marx a mercantile period dominated by the bourgeoisie is one of the steps towards communism. This period is eventually supposed to be superseded by a revolution which takes the production means away from the bourgeoisie by force and distributes it among the proletariat. As long as a market system works for the country the party can keep it going without completely abandoning Marxist doctrine so long as it maintains that this is indeed just one of the necessary phases. Of course, in the government's discourse with business executives and entrepreneurs it's not really in their interest to frame it this way especially if they want these economic engines to keep humming. So as long as private companies appear to benefit the people and don't threaten the government then it's in the party's interest to let business run a s usual. If, however, the market economy fails or causes too much misery to the people or too much hassle for the party, they could "move on to the next phase". The Chinese aversion to chaos is strong so the party would almost certainly try to tightly manage such a "revolution". Now it's quite possible this will never happen. My insight on the long-term strategies of the CCP are, shall we say, somewhat limited. But I do think it is a possibility that is genuine and that very few people actually consider.
1
@dixonpinfold2582 Thank you, you're a gentleman and a scholar (unless of course you're a lady and a scholar, it's hard to tell in these internet threads).
1
@dixonpinfold2582 The President for life thing, the not yet a fait accompli, is a bit disconcerting The cameras are life in the world we live in. I haven't yet seen China abusing them and they've certainly been helpful during the COVID crisis. Re-education camps are also something to be concerned about. So in fairness you've put your finger on China's more troubling aspects, and you're right to do so. China is not perfect, but neither is its current behavior worse than that of its peers considering the challenges it has to deal with. As for the private fortunes argument, first of all I find it a little telling that you seem to be advocating for private fortunes. I know that they are an inevitable consequence of liberalism but I'm not sure they do more good for the world than harm. As for China's permission for individuals to acquire and maintain them, it's a curious point. Because China has maintained its Communist branding it maintains the option of declaring the bourgeois stage of socio-economic evolution to be over if economic liberalism, to the extant that it exists in China, fails to provide for the country's needs, and still be compliant with Marxist doctrine. Whether or not the CCP would do this, or even if its leaders have considered this, is something I do not know.
1
@dixonpinfold2582 We actually had a fairly intricate discussion about all this stuff and it turns out I had already made these points but forgot. I just reacted when I somehow came across that old comment.
1