Comments by "David Himmelsbach" (@davidhimmelsbach557) on "No, China Won't Rule the World" video.

  1. The CCP has brought back slave-economics. Due to the weird nature of their totalitarian controls, Red Chinese citizens are de facto serfs not legally allowed to leave their farms.  Sheesh.  That's exactly how the Tsar treated his serfs. Amazing!
    4
  2.  @melofiloxd1429  Close, but not quite. Gandhi actually pitched the insane idea that Hindus ought to suffer under Muslim rule. As crazy as that is, he was leaning back on prior Indian history when Hindus DID live under various Muslim big shots. The idea was rejected out of hand, then and there. It was the Muslims that demanded the schism. East Pakistan and West Pakistan became their political turf based on demographics. So, the Hindus that lived in what was to become E,W Pakistan usually fled to their religious kin -- and the Muslims did likewise. On the way, they, those fleeing, were often attacked in rampant slaughter -- by the other side. Yes, this went both ways. The notional national authorities at the time, the British, just ran away. Their departure was already sealed in the deal -- so there was no way that they'd jump back into the soup. BTW, the primary reason that the British ever came to rule India turned on Muslim versus Hindu religious slaughter. The British Army and administration stopped said slaughter -- especially and most famously with the Thuggee cult.
    2
  3.  @melofiloxd1429  Dial in "They" for me. Indentured servitude was invented by the English so as to apply it to poor, orphaned Celts: Scots, Irish, Welsh, Cornish. It's a whole 'nother kettle of fish. Most would agree that today's college price tags are obscene. But, even deadbeats don't suffer prison or expulsion. ( America and later Australia were where the English dumped their indentures.) BTW, indentured servitude was limited to seven-years. (Biblical limit, yes, religion was used to invoke that limit.) What's really important was that indenture law involved a signed-contract -- usually signed with an X -- as the child could not read or write -- and the 'deal' was coerced, anyway. (Sign or go to prison.... what a deal!) From time to time, the owner of the contract would re-sign the victim with another X. When this happened the indenture lasted another seven-years. This was known as the DOUBLE CROSS. Yup. You double-cross someone by unilaterally changing a contract. (See: Darth Vader.)
    2
  4. The CCP simply does not have an attractive, exportable culture. The contrast with the USA is epic by any standards. The Han wish to flee Red China -- America is thronged at its borders -- and it's a problem for the USA. The CCP has no cultural allies. Burma, Pakistan, North Korea -- sheesh.
    1
  5.  @dimuthbhanuka1027  The CCP stole your port. Cute. Read up on debt diplomacy.
    1
  6.  @dimuthbhanuka1027 You must be a troll-bot. Red China has taken over your port. Your nation could not make the payments to Red Chinese contractors... which is hardly surprising as the port was pretty new and very dead.  De facto, the CCP built a port with their own labor and materials to suit their own needs -- on your coast. Now they have a commercial base too large to be practical... but quite practical for basing the PLAN.  Cute. BTW, YouTube posts can't brainwash anyone. You REALLY need to read up on debt-diplomacy. There's a ton of ink on how the CCP screwed over your country and corrupted your politicians.  Most of the 3rd World is now backing out of similar deals such as your port -- the story has gotten out. Kenya has been bankrupted by Red China's construction of a mere railroad. And again, they didn't use any local labor to speak of. Neither Sri Lanka or Kenya figured on that angle. Neither nation had any route to getting the hard currency required to payoff the CCP. When the deals were signed, they thought that they'd be financing steel and wood and concrete... local labor would do the work... so how bad could that be ? Well, now they know. But you still don't. Some decades from now, you just might figure it out. Do study up.
    1
  7.  @dimuthbhanuka1027  You nit. American is the premier and original anti-imperialist power on this Earth. America started life busting up the British Empire. It took centuries for the BE to finally kick India and Sri Lanka and Pakistan free. America is not an empire. In an empire, the periphery economically is exploited to the advantage of the center. Imperial London, Paris and Rome fit that bill perfectly. In America -- right now -- that scheme runs backwards. The center supports the periphery.  We can't get Puerto Rico to go its own way. She won't leave -- because she's getting so much largesse from Washington DC. Guam won't declare independence, either. Guam is more American than Americans... fanatically so. America is merely big. America is trying to stop wide-open immigration. But the matter is now totally politicized because the Democrat Party sees that its only big source of future dumb voters is out of Latin America -- a culture used to dictatorships and oligarchy. Democratic cities are run exactly that way -- so the 'fit' is natural. On the whole, recent immigrants from the south are destined to be on the dole for eternity. They have no hope of making their way in America's modern economy on their own. Their farming skills have no value -- and that's all that they know. Few can even read and write -- in their local languages... English is to dream. It's sad.
    1
  8.  @dimuthbhanuka1027  The US has terminated the following empires: British French Dutch Soviet Nazi Japanese Portuguese Spanish It has kicked loose: Cuba Philippines Panama  (the Canal Zone and Panama from Colombia in the first place) It has tried to kick loose: (repeatedly) Puerto Rico The USA is THE anti-imperialist nation. It's the reason that Red China and Russia are the only empires left on this planet. You clearly don't know what an empire is. Bigness is does not mean empire. Brazil is huge -- and has never been an empire.
    1
  9.  @dimuthbhanuka1027  He was terminated by Arabs -- up close and personally. He started the war, his war, by declaring economic war on Paris and London. The USA was dragged into the conflict via our NATO obligations to France and Britain. You are obviously ill read. Go back and check the day-to-day history of that war. Paris and London declared war BEFORE the USA. President Obama was dragged kicking and screaming into supporting NATO -- by Hillary Clinton, his Secretary of State. She pointed out that due to the NATO charter, the US was obligated to support Paris and London. Why Paris first? The fanatical dictator was bankrupting the largest banks of France. These banks also just happened to be partially owned by the French government. He did so because the French Press said truthful -- but embarrassing -- things about the tyrant. But that wasn't enough. The tyrant re-negged on his deal with the British government signed by himself with the prime minister of Britain. He grabbed the microphone to tell the whole world that British Petroleum would no longer get the crude oil that it was owed. At a stroke, BP was bankrupted. BP was the foundation for no end of British pension fund payouts. Millions of retirees would soon be marching on Whitehall. London declared war on the tyrant so as to re-establish the original contract. Last I looked, Britain is getting its cut of Libyan oil out of the field that it drilled and piped. The pensioners were saved. Hurrah! For the USA, the war was nothing but a financial bleeder. The US had no investments in Libya -- as the tyrant had prohibited them -- and Congress had prohibited them. So there! One thing was made clear,  NATO = the US DoD. Even economic and financial embarrassment is sufficient for NATO to jump into the soup. BTW, the tyrant was chronically offered retirement to other 3rd world lands. He turned every petition down flat. He could've retired to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Dubai, -- on and on the list goes. The US would've had no issues with such a scheme. We were the player pitching them. Again, the tyrant turned down all such retirement schemes -- flat. So, he really killed himself, Adolf style. There was no WAY that he could survive a war with NATO. (He also turned down offers by Kiev and Moscow, too. Everyone wanted the madman to quit.) So don't blame America.  You've got a lot of studying to do.
    1