China in Revolt

Commentary ^ | December 2006 | Gordon G. Chang

[rfp1234]

The moden Chinese state is more fascist than communist.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

...... Deng decided to use force to put down the protests. Beijing’s residents, armed with rocks and little else, fought back against the well-equipped soldiers of the People’s Liberation Army. By the time the tanks had pushed their way to the students gathered in Tiananmen Square, both soldiers and citizens had already died. .........

.....As Deng correctly calculated, shedding the blood of hundreds had the effect of intimidating hundreds of millions. There were few disturbances in the years immediately following Tiananmen.

[Candor7]

China will attempt to unify itself by defining external enemies of the state. When that time comes, the West must decide how to handle China.

People forget that there is no separation between the military and civilian branches of government in China. We so naturally assume that , being Americans. All of this infrastructure needs only a single command to be converted to a war footing.

So I do not trust anything about China, or its agenda to conquer the Pacific Rim through creeping Hegemony, The Spratly Islands, and the systematic invasion of Japan's Territorial waters by its new submarine capability.Tibet is an example of what happens to a state which is unilaterally defined as a client state. Similarly China is doing the same in Buthan, building roads right across the Buthan /Tibetan Automonous Region border,wherever it suits China. The use of Korea as a destabalizing puppet, the wild card which drives an engine of fear in Asia, is also fairly evident.

China is not a peaceful nation. It is an economically aggressive nation, and an aggressive military power which moves ever so slowly. Creeping conquest by hegemony is easy for liberals to ignore, and so we see ignorance toward a consistent policy to destabilize US society through opium shipments to the west from South East Asia,industrial espionage,political contributions to the Democrat Party ( Al Gore and the Buddhist Temple) and the shipment of arms to America for LA street gangs ( a whole load of fully automatic weapons, AK -47s destined for the US black market was intercepted by the BATF in 1996.**)

China is the West's greatest enemy.And she means to economically conquer the West before militarily subjugating it.Make no mistake about it.

********************************************************

**

http://www.ak47world.com/clinton.html

Pictured above in the Whitehouse, in a photo that was obtained from the Chinese news agency Xinhua (that never appeared in the Clinton-loving U.S. media) shown is the 'lying piece of scum', otherwise known as Bill Clinton, sitting in the Whitehouse with Red Chinese Army General Zhang Wannian, who was also the primary Chinese Army Official (nicknamed, "The Butcher of Bejing") who ordered the slaughter of Chinese dissident students at Tiannenmen square, that most of the Clinton-loving news media also 'forgot' to tell you about! In addition, the Clinton-Loving news media has also failed to tell of Clinton's treachery, that would seem to far OVERSHADOW Watergate, or anything Richard Nixon ever did, and how Bill Clinton took a CASH BRIBE on February 6, 1996 (in the Whitehouse) for an import permit for the May 1996 smuggling of $8 million dollars worth of FULLY-AUTOMATIC Chinese AK-47s via the China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) ship the 'EMPRESS PHOENIX", that was uncovered by an ATF undercover agent named Gary Hipple, and later code-named "OPERATION DRAGONFIRE", and how close the FBI, ATF, and U.S. Customs investigators came to PUTTING BILL CLINTON IN JAIL!!! ******************************

[TAdams8591]

Marking.

[Zhang Fei]

China is China. The remarkable thing about Mao and the supposedly permanent revolution is how very superficial it turned out to be. But given the tremendous social inertia of a country that old and a population that large, we might perhaps have expected it. I hope no one misconstrues this as racist because it isn't, it's a cultural observation, but the Chinese are, broadly speaking, intelligent, shrewd, far-thinking, and some of the finest capitalists the world holds. Their prediliction for collective effort predates communism by more than a millennium and will, IMHO, outlive it. This is not unrelievedly positive - it means, for one thing, that extant individuals are the exception rather than the rule in Chinese society and are often viewed with suspicion. It was they who most caught the attention of the Red Guard during the nightmare years of the Cultural Revolution.

The Chinese don't really think too much about these things because it doesn't do much to improve their material lives, not because they believe in collective efforts. If collective effort were their thing, Communism should have succeeded beyond Marx's wildest dreams in China. The reality is that under Communism, China goofed off because nobody wanted to work harder than the next guy for the same bowl of rice and (Chinese) pickles. Now that you get paid more the harder you work, the ancient Chinese work ethic, not flair for collective work, is coming out of its shell.

Now that it's acceptable to acquire status symbols that flaunt your superior status in life, compared to your neighbors, ordinary Chinese are starting to work long hours - hours that would have been unthinkable in Communist work units. (One upmanship, not humility, is a traditional Chinese value - the first is the reality as practiced over most of Chinese history, whereas the second is the theory taught in Chinese ethics texts).

Bottom line is that Chinese are fiercely entrepreneurial and competitive (with each other). Communism kept this suppressed for a while. It is this competitive spirit that will bring China out of its economic slumber. At the same time it is also what endangers the Party - there are political contenders who see clearly that the Party is just another in a millennia-long line of power-seekers. The idea "I could do that job - probably better" along with sufficient organizational skills and charisma is how previous contenders to the Dragon Throne have won power in the past. The Chinese are attached to the idea that there should be a unitary Chinese state. Historically, they have not exhibited as strong an attachment to the idea that a particular faction should be in charge.

This is why the Party will need to be vigilant to maintain its power. It is also why it seems to overreact to every provocation. Because a single spark can start a prairie fire.

[Zhang Fei]

There is another issue, however, that will prove a challenge to Chinese society, and it is the demographics that have resulted from decades of one-child policies that have skewed the population toward the male and guaranteed that it will halve in a generation or two. Were it balanced it might not be a bad thing and it has staved off the certainty of eventual famine, but at a price. That price will be fewer couples and more single men and a far higher percentage of insupportable elderly, a configuration that will challenge everything that we think of as Chinese culture. I'm guessing that will constitute a greater long-term change to China than communism did.

This isn't that big of a challenge. Monogamy is a Western import. Chinese men used to marry as many wives as they could afford. Another way of putting this is that throughout most of Chinese history, Chinese society has consisted of large numbers of bachelors alongside wealthy men with many wives.

Feeding the elderly isn't really a big problem. China doesn't really have a hunger problem today - the issue is now whether they can afford cars and big ticket consumer products. As to medical care for the elderly, that's also overstated. In China, when the elderly get sick and can't afford better medical care, they die. It's viewed as a fact of life rather than as a national tragedy.

[MARTIAL MONK]

BUMP

[Zhang Fei]

I think the potentially destabilizing impact of a major military setback is a major reason the Chinese elite won't make a move against Taiwan. For them, losing a war for Taiwan could mean losing much more at home.

Chinese dynasties have lost major wars against foreigners without collapsing. I seriously doubt the Party would collapse after the failure of a Taiwan invasion. My feeling is that any Party collapse would come out of some internal disturbance that spiralled out of control, led by a number of charismatic rebels each independently reaching for the brass ring, peeling off supporters from among the Party faithful and the military along the way. Pretty much Gordon Chang's scenario.

[Billthedrill]

Another way of putting this is that throughout most of Chinese history, Chinese society has consisted of large numbers of bachelors alongside wealthy men with many wives.

You are correct, of course. The problem is that "many wives" may no longer be an option. For most countries a surplus of young men might be a bigger problem than it usually is to China, but not always - there was that Warring States period...

But on the whole, if there is a society that might deal the best with this unique demographic challenge it'd be China. I hope to live long enough to get a hint of how it might turn out.

[Zhang Fei]

You are correct, of course. The problem is that "many wives" may no longer be an option. For most countries a surplus of young men might be a bigger problem than it usually is to China, but not always - there was that Warring States period...

All I'm saying is that lifelong bachelorhood is a traditional part of Chinese history, whereas permanent revolution isn't, despite the pervasiveness and persistence of that phenomenon. Note that lifelong bachelorhood hasn't caused notably more political problems in countries where the phenomenon is exacerbated by polygamy, mainly in the Muslim countries and in Africa. I think it's just an idle thought by some Western theorist of the view that all that abstinence can't be healthy and that war and sex are substitutes for each other. In other words, another illegitimate offspring of Fraud's fertile imagination.

[lucysmom]

I think the potentially destabilizing impact of a major military setback is a major reason the Chinese elite won't make a move against Taiwan.

A I understand it, the relationship is not as hostile as we think. The status quo works well for business and financial interests on both sides.

[Billthedrill]

A BTT for your excellent comments. The notion that excess bachelors (of a certain age cohort) leads to instability is a topic I'd love to discuss on another thread sometime. There are some historical precedents that may or may not be accidental - the Thirty Years' War, for example. Cause and effect? Almost certainly not. Influential? I truly do not know but I wouldn't rule it out.

(That's the sort of stuff this old bachelor thinks about surrounded by books and beer. Suppertime for me and I wish you a wonderful evening.)

[BJungNan]

This long article leaves out much. For starters, it is not universal among Chinese that the studen protests in Tianamen were a good thing, that putting them down was a bad thing.

This writer ignores significant Chinese history that weighs heavily in the opinions of many Chinese, many of whom suffered directly under Mao.

Many welcome stability and the one party system over what they had before. They want nothing to do with student movements that brought such misery on the land.

This writer can be likened to a liberal utopian in the U.S., full of ideal and short on practical reality.

[BlueDragon]

another freudian illegitimate offspring ----

--------------marker--------------------------------------

(you are not totally incorrect in spelling his name "fraud", heheheh!)

Thank you for your insightful comments concerning China.

[MARTIAL MONK]

The Triple Alliance War wiped out an estimated 90% of Paraguay's men. The resulting economic collapse lasted for the next half century. The remaining 10% were just too tuckered out to go to work in the morning.

[Captainpaintball]

bump

[wodinoneeye]

"A BTT for your excellent comments. The notion that excess bachelors (of a certain age cohort) leads to instability is a topic I'd love to discuss on another thread sometime. There are some historical precedents that may or may not be accidental - the Thirty Years' War, for example. Cause and effect? Almost certainly not. Influential? I truly do not know but I wouldn't rule it out.
(That's the sort of stuff this old bachelor thinks about surrounded by books and beer. Suppertime for me and I wish you a wonderful evening.)"



Simple mathematics can be used -- how many prostitutes does it take to handle 1000 single men .....

The lower the number the less likelihood of transference to other compensations.

[Carry_Okie]

Already the leadership is busy chasing down secret societies, political parties, and private armies dedicated to bringing down the Communist party. In late 2002, Open Magazine, a Chinese-language publication in Hong Kong, reported that the Ministry of State Security believed there were more than 60 such revolutionary organizations in existence; today there could be over 100. For every one that is uncovered and destroyed, at least another is ready to take its place.

Once again, we see the power of the MSM to kill a story, its most dangerous attribute.

[Steel Wolf]

Meanwhile, China spent $36 BILLION on their military this year.

We spend that every coupld of weeks.

[WashingtonSource]

Feeding the elderly isn't really a big problem. China doesn't really have a hunger problem today - the issue is now whether they can afford cars and big ticket consumer products. As to medical care for the elderly, that's also overstated. In China, when the elderly get sick and can't afford better medical care, they die. It's viewed as a fact of life rather than as a national tragedy.

What happens when a couple, both of whom were an only child, are taking care of four elderly parents and maybe a grandparent or two? Will the wife, for example, say it is not her duty and her parents are left without care and when the parents can't make it any longer, they become homeless and die?

What happens when this is repeated on a massive scale?