Posted on 10/18/2001 10:02:07 PM PDT by super175
Most Chinese people - along with most of the international community - think the central Government's decision to side with the United States and its partners in the fight against international terrorism is Beijing's wisest decision in a decade.
President Jiang Zemin, who was among the first foreign leaders to telephone President George W. Bush after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, has handled the crisis well. He has condemned the September 11 assaults, expressed his shock and condolences to the American people, and reiterated his full support for the fight against terrorism.
In the past, Beijing has disappointed its people with poor foreign-policy decisions - for example, the central Government has been soft on Japan and stayed mute when Pakistan's military staged a coup two years ago.
The worst episode was in 1990, when Beijing abstained in the United Nations Security Council's vote endorsing the use of force to oust Iraqi troops from Kuwait. China has been victimised by Japanese and other foreign aggression, so most Chinese are baffled as to why their government is sympathetic towards Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
China's unconditional support of the US-led war against terrorism is refreshing for the world and the people of China. A week after the attacks, Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan went to Washington on a trip that had been scheduled earlier to prepare for this weekend's summit between Mr Jiang and Mr Bush at the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation meeting in Shanghai. During Mr Tang's visit, the two countries agreed to share intelligence that might aid the Bush administration's war on terrorism. Soon after, Beijing sent a delegation of counter-terrorism experts to Washington to explore avenues of co-operation.
But for most Chinese, humiliations at the hands of America - for instance, the US-led Nato bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade in May 1999, and the mid-air collision of a US spy plane and a Chinese fighter jet resulting in the loss of the fighter pilot in April this year - are still fresh in the mind.
Chinese people simply do not believe US claims that the embassy bombing was an accident because they think US intelligence systems are too sophisticated to allow such an error. As for the spy-plane incident, most Chinese are less concerned with the actual cause of the accident than with the fact that the US was spying on their country. Most insulting, in their view, is Washington's dismissal of its surveillance activities as "routine" and its resumption of such flights shortly after the accident.
Given this angry backdrop, many Chinese, although shocked, took some solace in the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon because they revealed America to be as vulnerable as China. These people believe that to some extent the US Government's unilateral policies are to blame. That does not mean they think Islamic extremists are blameless or that ordinary American people deserve to be hurt, just that the US has reaped what it has sown.
There are plenty of reasons for Beijing to co-operate with the US-led international coalition against terrorism. This will burnish China's international image, improve its relations with Washington and legitimise its fight against terrorism in Xinjiang province, where pro-independence Islamic extremists periodically stage violent attacks.
Initially, Beijing might have attempted to link its co-operation with US support for its fight against separatists in western China and Taiwan, but it later decided this was unwise during such a crisis. But Beijing might still be concerned that US retaliation against Afghan-supported terrorist organisations could result in a long-term US presence in Central Asia and an expansion of Japan's military role.
Sino-American relations are at a crossroads. The US should stop demonising China, which cannot be a "strategic competitor" for the foreseeable future, even though Beijing prefers a multi-polar world. And China should initiate political reforms and abandon its policy of making the fight against US hegemony its security priority. In fact, the Chinese people and the American people are friends - it is just their governments that do not get along. One lesson to be drawn from the September 11 attacks is that it is much safer to make friends than enemies.
When Beijing and Washington drop their Cold War mentalities, they will find they are more constructive partners than strategic competitors. They will find a new world in which all people can live peacefully and co-operatively.
All the nations of the world - especially such powers as China, Russia and the US - are re-evaluating their foreign policies after the terrorist attacks. Most noticeably, Washington is co-operating more with the UN and its member countries and is involved more in the Middle East peace negotiations (the US has even come out in support of a Palestinian state).
The US-led military strikes on Osama bin Laden, who is alleged to have masterminded the September 11 attacks, and the Taleban regime harbouring him in Afghanistan have so far been proper and limited, although some hawks in the Pentagon want to expand the war.
These are signs that a new world is coming and Beijing and Washington should seize this opportunity.
Zhang Tianguang (zhangtianguang@yahoo.com) is a senior engineer who studied American Studies, as a civilian, at the PLA's Foreign Language University in Luoyang, Henan province.
The reason why Marx said capitalism was the same as feudalism is because they are both class societies and people of different classes are not equal.
>>Capitalism was considered 'evil' for this very reason.
Capitalism was considered 'evil' because there were still ranks and classes in the society.
>>Marx advocated a general uprising so that the peasants could overtake their feudal masters...which they considered capitalists to be...
Marx's research was mainly focused on the workers, not peasants. I don't think Marxism is the theory to solve the problems in feudalism because Marx said the anti-feudalism was the task for capitalists.
See the link to the Boston Tea Party in post #52...
The Brits wanted to come in and create a monopoly in their favor...but at the same time did not want to give us representation in the government.
Have you ever heard "no taxation without representation"?
The Brits certainly were not against business. Why do you think the Brits were trading in China?
In feudal Europe, the royals thought they were endowed by God to be greater men than others, as in "God decided that I am better than you are".
Classes in Marxism meant, 'if he is rich then he is of a different class'...
In American society all men have been and still are free to move from being poor to being rich any time they see fit.
There is no divine law preventing anyone from moving up or down in the ranks. It depends on your work and honesty, and ability. The American Dream...
Members of Congress can go to jail or get pulled over for traffic violations. They can be fined or found guilty by the courts.
No one is exempt from the law. NO ONE.
All men (and women) are equal before the law (and God).
Do you think anyone would dare to arrest the King of England 250 years ago?
Maybe I should say this way. The colonialists did things in a feudal way so that it actually hurt the capitalism in America. The nature of American revoution was to promote the capitalism.
>>All men are created equal before God (and endowed with certain inalienable rights). It had absolutely nothing to do with who owned what.
Marx dinn't think so. Marx believed that the social status was determined by the economic status.
>>In Marxism if I own more than you then we are not equal.
Rgiht, because we are at different starting points.
>>In American-ism. If I am a billionaire, and you are a peasant, we are both equal before God and the law.
Not true in reality. You can hire a lawyer to escape imprisonment but I can't afford, so I go to jail.
What about the American Dream?
Some people say those lawyers may not be as good as others (sometimes) and that is constantly talked about as a weak point that must be addressed.
Everyone has a lawyer though. No matter who you are. (That is if you get in trouble with the law).
Right. This is Marxist materialism. The class depends only on the wealth.
American Dream doesn't solve the problem with the society. People can move between classes, but classes still exist. You can move from selling labor to buying labor, but there are still those who have sell labor. Accoring to Marxism they are slaves of capitalists. So you still have slaves in your society.
"Capitalism" is a made up word. It was made up in the year 1877. That is over 100 years after America was independent.
"Capitalism" is a communist code word.
The Brits were monopolistic bullies, and the American entrepreneurs did not like that too much.
Define "capitalism"... I think your statement here is strange...
Marx dinn't think so. Marx believed that the social status was determined by the economic status.
Marx thought this way, but the Americans did not, and still don't.
Rgiht, because we are at different starting points.
America was born with religious beliefs. We do not start out at different points because we all started from God and should be treated like that is so. Rich people were born naked just like poor people.
It doesn't???!!!
People can move between classes, but classes still exist. You can move from selling labor to buying labor, but there are still those who have sell labor. Accoring to Marxism they are slaves of capitalists. So you still have slaves in your society.
According to Marxism all classes have to be destroyed--everyone has to be 100% equal (which in reality means everyone has to be poor as hell). If I am smarter than the guy next to me, or if I work harder, I better not try to excel.
Marx didn't think so. Marx said a classless society has to be based on highly-developed capitalist society, which means everyone will be equally rich (not poor). The society must be able to provide as much materials to everyone as needed. He repaetedly said poverty is not socialism or communism.
Each individual in America is a capitalist in their own right.
They are not forced to work for anyone.
Their 'capital' is their profession. They employ that profession to make money. Just because they work for someone else does not make them slaves.
They can employ their 'capital' any way they want to...They can work for whoever they want to.
Everyone has capital, some people have more capital than others, but everyone has capital.
Wealth is created by individuals who employ their capital to make more capital.
Capitalism is a practice or society in which the sole purpose of people's activities is to make as much money as possible with the help of capital. Everything, including human beings, is commodity which can be sold or bought.
According to Marxism, wealth should be created by people who voluntarily contribute their physical or mental labor to valuable social activities.
I used to say Godless Communist Mainland China, but now I just say China. When I say Taiwan, I mean Taiwan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.