Mark Steyn: Who can stop the rise and rise of China? The communists, of course

The Sunday Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | 06/12/05 | Mark Steyn

[Pokey78]

Steyn ping!

[PetroniusMaximus]

***The Chinese of wealth always builds his house with a cunning simulation of external poverty. ***

My brother wanted to build an underground mansion. It would be accessable only though a secret elevator conceled in a rundown mobile home on the land above it.

Alas, he never built it.

[proxy_user]

Mid-century? When half the population is over 60, and the other half consists of 2/3 men and 1/3 women?

I don't know what you want to call it, but it's not going to be pretty.

[RobFromGa]

The 21st century will be an Anglosphere century, with America, India and Australia leading the way. Anti-Americans betting on Beijing will find the China shop is in the end mostly a lot of bull.

Thanks, Pokey. This is another Steyn gem:

[Lurker]

" its internet protective blocks are not the armour but the, er, chink."

Damn Steyn owes me another keyboard.

L

[traviskicks]

http://www.neoperspectives.com/china.htm

Some scattered posts on china.

[monkeywrench]

Good article!

[Paul Ross]

Thanks for the ping!

Steyn scores another bullseye hit of the fawning self-loathing liberal class. Falling for the "Potemkin Villages v. 2.0" of China, hook, line and sinker.

Follow the rose-colored glasses. And you will find liberals.

Anyways, I have read an analysis that, the Communist Party, which lines it's own and its families pockets, that would represent a wealthy ruling class of about 150-250 million people. As many as well-to-do as our own country.

That many wealthy can put on a good front to foreigners to conceal the state of affairs for the other 1 billion souls under their heels, and noses chained to grindstones.

[Conservatrix]

Markk Steyn: I want to marry your brain.

[ncountylee]

NAMBLA workers paradise?

[phoenix_004]

"One country, two systems" will lead to two or three countries, three or four systems. "

Its just a matter of time!!!!!!!!

[ABG(anybody but Gore)]

I agree. Sooner or later, those 1 billion folks in the backwoods are gonna want a slice of the faux prosperity pie. There's already unrest in some of the Muslim provinces in western China, and Tibet is always a hotspot. Throw in the fact that communism is completely antithetical to basic human nature(why else would they so fear Falun Gong?), and I could see the regime folding like a house of cards within the next 20-30 years.

[Tax-chick]

When European analysts coo about a "Chinese century", all they mean is "Oh, God, please, anything other than a second American century".

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Mind-numbed Robot]

The race in China is to see how much military might they can accumulate before economic collapse. If they get very strong before they start collapsing, as they start collapsing those in power may do something stupid to try to hang on.

The Communist doctrine still depends on world domination to eliminate dissenters and opposition. They are only flirting with free enterprise to fund their soon-to-be-powerful military. Free enterprise doesn't exist without freedom and they are too stupid to realize that.

That was the whole idea behind Nixon's initiative with China. Yeah, that Nixon, the one being vilified to boost the reputation of journalists.

[gcruse]

the Chinese government, which pretends to be a world power but is terrified of words.

I wonder if China spends as much money trying to stop the speaking of some words as the US spends trying to stop Americans from smoking a weed... and the US is a world power.

[maica]

Thanks Pokey

Steyn is one of our premier teachers in understanding reality.

[Paul Ross]

I could see the regime folding like a house of cards within the next 20-30 years.

It certainly "could". But not necessarily...and not without help. These kinds of regimes don't fold easily. The Soviets didn't. They didn't "just" collapse, or by the milk of human kindness springing from Gorbachev's breast, as the liberals want to believe.

They were pushed over the cliff by Ronald Reagan,

.

Reagan's administration empowered the internal opponents and dissenters by our strongest shows of support.

We had a confrontational strategy then. Which was magnanimous in victory:

Unfortunately, what we have now is one of denial and self-delusion about the nature of their regime. And with that self-delusion, we have empowered their regime, rewarding them immensely with an exponentially-increasing economic windfall...all for merely pretending to be one of the club.

[LibertarianInExile]

[LibertarianInExile]

"Free enterprise doesn't exist without freedom and they are too stupid to realize that. That was the whole idea behind Nixon's initiative with China. Yeah, that Nixon, the one being vilified to boost the reputation of journalists."

Nixon deserves vilification. We are boosting the fortunes of the Communist state we will eventually have to stand and fight if following Bush's inaugural goals to make people free around the world. No one here would have accepted that for Nicaragua or Cuba. People here loathe Armand Hammer. Nixonian detente would have been rightfully called appeasement if he'd have had a "-D" after his name on the ballot.