wat0n wrote:Ok, but how do the elites view these challenges? For instance, surely they want to be able to pursue their Belt and Road initiative as quickly as possible, do they?
Not at the cost of stability. Belt and Road diplomacy is highly dependent on liberal language regarding the importance of global institutions, bilateral relationships, and stability. Deng had a famous saying "keep a low profile and bide your time" that Xi partially rejected in 2017, calling on China to assume a role of global leadership. It could be tempting to read this as a signal for increased aggression internationally, and China has certainly escalated its level of bluster. However, Wang Huning and Li Keqiang have remained a constant power in the Chinese Politburo and have near autonomy over managing the foreign policy of the Chinese state (this is another thing Western readers get wrong, incidentally - while Xi is unquestionably the head, his relationship with the Politburo is much more of a first-among-equals leadership style that is typical in Chinese governing culture). Li and Wang over the last few years have wanted China to fill the vacuum as a stable, calm, and senior statesman in a coherent and established national order. While they may want to rearrange a few chairs, they eschew any sort of revolutionary change, preferring to advance slowly.
Fasces wrote:Well, if competent officials is what you're after I don't think LATAM is such a great alternative...
I'm more lenient in my expectations of countries with pretensions to becoming great powers with nukes and carriers and whatnot. I want a few acres, some goats, maybe a school to run/work at, some Chinese trade for the wife to have a job and I'll have a happy and quiet life.
It is very hard for foreigners to buy land in China, if not outright impossible, and returning to the United States seems very unappealing since this last year. Spanish citizenship makes Latin America easy to move to, though.
Rugoz wrote:That is quite comical given China's imperial history. How do you think the Uyghurs came under Chinese control in the first place?
China has no territorial ambitions beyond those they already had 2,000 years ago. And this is supposed to be an indictment of China.
Rugoz wrote:Oh really, show the data that accurately compares how many loans the West and China have forgiven.https://rhg.com/research/new-data-on-th ... -question/
Rugoz wrote:China sucks when it comes to the environment in general:
China is the world leader in both innovating and manufacturing the materials needed for renewable energy production, as well as EVs and other green technologies. The ship has sailed, and China will reap the benefits of being the first to market both domestically and internationally.
Rugoz wrote: Have the US, Canada and the UK regressed over the last five years? Show us the evidence. Look up per capita emissions for example.
China has outpaced the US and EU in closing coal power plants over the last 4 years.
China (1%) has double the number of electric vehicles on the road as either the EU (0.4%) or USA (0.45%), and more than both of them combined in absolute numbers.
China has double the energy production of the US (8 million gigawatts vs 4.5 million gigawatts) produced buy green energy sources.
China (1st) has more investment in green energy technologies than the US (2) and Japan (3) combined.
As climate change becomes more and more serious in the next century, the Chinese economy will see these benefits.
noemon wrote:The Italians of Corfu perhaps I would, the Turkish-Muslims, no. Comparing Chinese policy in 2020 to Greek policy in 1870(150 years ago) should also speak of your desperation but you don't seem that fazed.
A lag in national development. China has historically not been a nation-state, like much of Europe. To avoid being like Spain in 2020, it wants to act like France or Greece in 1870 and create a comprehensive and universal national identity. The best comparison to what is happening in Xinjiang is as part of that development. The abolition of Occ in France. The indigenous boarding schools in Canada and the USA.
If you would call that genocide, then fair play - the Uiygher campaign is a genocide. I personally feel that throwing it all under the genocide label makes it hard to distinguish between widely different actions, but I won't quibble definitions.