Why US will lose a war with China over Taiwan island - Page 10 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15171793
Unthinking Majority wrote:No i don't want WWIII. It won't get to that point, it didn't during the Cold War.

I don't really care who is in charge, but i want them to be a democratic country, because democratic governments are at least accountable to somebody (the electorate), and can be fired for doing a bad job. The CCP could rape 1 million babies and nobody could do a thing. If Biden ordered 1 million babies to be raped I would guess he likely wouldn't get re-elected.

China will not go to war with the USA over Taiwan, because China isn't stupid. Like most governments they are rational actors. China is always doing a cost-benefit analysis as any rational actor does, and the costs of going to war with the USA over Taiwan are far higher than the benefits. China will continue to push and aggravate re: Taiwan but they will do nothing militarily any time soon. Unless they bluff and the US blinks.


Raping and killing babes have been a common practice in US among Deep State Elite and nobody could do a thing.

Pizzagate
In March 2016, the personal email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, was discovered. WikiLeaks published his emails in November 2016. Emails contained coded messages that connected several high-ranking Democratic Party officials and U.S. restaurants with an human trafficking and child sex ring. One of the establishments was the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria in Washington, D.C.

Members of the alt-right, conservative journalists, and others who had urged Clinton's prosec
Image
#15171802
Unthinking Majority wrote:I don't really care who is in charge, but i want them to be a democratic country, because democratic governments are at least accountable to somebody (the electorate), and can be fired for doing a bad job.


Basically my position as well. Many leftists have lost their way in somehow thinking it's a good thing for the planet to have authoritarian gutter governments call the shots around the globe. They need to remove their blinders and see the world for what it really is. It's getting to the level where they look like useful idiots.
#15171809
Rancid wrote:
Basically my position as well. Many leftists have lost their way in somehow thinking it's a good thing for the planet to have authoritarian gutter governments call the shots around the globe. They need to remove their blinders and see the world for what it really is. It's getting to the level where they look like useful idiots.



That could use some explanation..
#15171813
late wrote:That could use some explanation..


Have you not seen the CCP apologism by leftists here? Not just on this thread, but many others.

My advice to these people is that although western democracy is flawed and has its issues. It has certainly improved, and it contains the machinery to continue to improve it. It has the machinery to continue to right what is wrong.

I would tell them, don't throw out the democracy/freedom baby with the bath water.
#15171819
Rancid wrote:
Have you not seen the CCP apologism by leftists here? Not just on this thread, but many others.

My advice to these people is that although western democracy is flawed and has its issues. It has certainly improved, and it contains the machinery to continue to improve it. It has the machinery to continue to right what is wrong.

I would tell them, don't throw out the democracy/freedom baby with the bath water.



I don't see them as Lefty, quite the opposite.

But then, I don't pay much attention to them, just the goofy things they say. So I could be wrong.

Unless Moscow Mitch is a Lefty now 8)
#15171824
late wrote:I don't see them as Lefty, quite the opposite.

But then, I don't pay much attention to them, just the goofy things they say. So I could be wrong.

Unless Moscow Mitch is a Lefty now


They are leftist. Confused that the CCP is some how leftist/socialist/etc. When it's clearly a hard right government. Hence my bewilderment with their constant apology towards the CCP. These are the enablers that will drive us towards longer protracted issues. These people are abuse victim running from one abuser to an even worse one.

My impression of you is that you are not leftist either. You strike me more as a typical American leftist (democrat type), which in the grand scheme is a right wing party as well. That is neither here nor there though.
#15171828
Rancid wrote:
They are leftist. Confused that the CCP is some how leftist/socialist/etc. When it's clearly a hard right government. Hence my bewilderment with their constant apology towards the CCP. These are the enablers that will drive us towards longer protracted issues. These people are abuse victim running from one abuser to an even worse one.

My impression of you is that you are not leftist either. You strike me more as a typical American leftist (democrat type), which in the grand scheme is a right wing party as well. That is neither here nor there though.



I'm a Progressive.

A bunch of words, Left, Right, socialist, are obsolete. Most simply use them out of habit, and it doesn't help.

I'm not far from Liz Warren, although I am not sure how serious she is about climate change.

Who is defending China?
#15171839
Unthinking Majority wrote:the US as a democracy are at least accountable to somebody (the electorate). The CCP could rape 1 million babies and nobody could do a thing. If Biden ordered 1 million babies to be raped I would guess he likely wouldn't get re-elected. Imagine if George W. Bush governed for life as a dictator, or Donald Trump? My fear with the CCP is if China becomes a hegemon the possibility that a very bad man is put into office. A sociopath like a Stalin, Hitler, Saddam Hussein etc.


I am not sure that this is true.

Chinese acts of aggression against its close neighbours is mirrored in US foreign policy in Latin America. There was no widespread or significant movement in the USA to stop this action.

Chinese aggression against Uyghurs is mirrored in North American treatment of Indigenous people here. Again, there was no widespread or significant movement by the North American public to hold the government accountable.

The idea that the citizens of the USA force their government to act better than the Chinese is not borne out by history or facts. It is, at best, theoretical.
#15171896
Rancid wrote:Basically my position as well. Many leftists have lost their way in somehow thinking it's a good thing for the planet to have authoritarian gutter governments call the shots around the globe. They need to remove their blinders and see the world for what it really is. It's getting to the level where they look like useful idiots.

They think China will somehow be nicer to the global south and exploit them less. What naive fools.

The victim-oppressor dynamic has blinded them, because the left are obsessed with their compassion for the oppressed, and think the CCP (China) are one of the oppressed, being so-called communists in a poor country and all. Sure they'd never stab their fellow oppressed countries in the back!

And the right of course are obsessed with maintaining the power of the powerful, so instead of being compassionate pussies like the left the right often behave as assholes. So we live in a world of pussies and assholes, which is why we're fucked.



Pants-of-dog wrote:I am not sure that this is true.

Chinese acts of aggression against its close neighbours is mirrored in US foreign policy in Latin America. There was no widespread or significant movement in the USA to stop this action.

Chinese aggression against Uyghurs is mirrored in North American treatment of Indigenous people here. Again, there was no widespread or significant movement by the North American public to hold the government accountable.

The idea that the citizens of the USA force their government to act better than the Chinese is not borne out by history or facts. It is, at best, theoretical.

Well in order for the populace to keep politicians accountable in a democracy they have to 1. be properly informed, and 2. they have to care.

A lot of what was done in Latin America was done clandestinely through covert ops, and the things that were reported many didn't care, or were propagandized by their gov via anti-communism through the Cold War lens. Vietnam was the first televised war. People started to care when they were more informed what was going on instead of only relying on government propaganda, and many then protested against the government. Similar to ie: Gitmo torture, or Abu Ghraib and the Iraq War in general.

You could say the same about police violence vs blacks in the US. 80 years ago before personal video cameras and TV you didn't see Rodney King or George Floyd happening, and white people were more racist so many wouldn't have cared much anyways.

So this all doesn't mean democracies are perfect at keeping governments accountable, but it's at least better than dictatorship governments who have carte blanche to do anything they want with no repercussions.
#15171904
Unthinking Majority wrote:Well in order for the populace to keep politicians accountable in a democracy they have to 1. be properly informed, and 2. they have to care.

A lot of what was done in Latin America was done clandestinely through covert ops, and the things that were reported many didn't care, or were propagandized by their gov via anti-communism through the Cold War lens. Vietnam was the first televised war. People started to care when they were more informed what was going on instead of only relying on government propaganda, and many then protested against the government. Similar to ie: Gitmo torture, or Abu Ghraib and the Iraq War in general.

You could say the same about police violence vs blacks in the US. 80 years ago before personal video cameras and TV you didn't see Rodney King or George Floyd happening, and white people were more racist so many wouldn't have cared much anyways.

So this all doesn't mean democracies are perfect at keeping governments accountable, but it's at least better than dictatorship governments who have carte blanche to do anything they want with no repercussions.


Okay.

How is the current US movement to hold the USA accountable for supporting Saudi Arabia in their current strikes against Yemen?

If you can show a significant movement that is forcing the US government to stop, that would provide a real world example for your claim.
#15171914
Unthinking Majority wrote:They think China will somehow be nicer to the global south and exploit them less. What naive fools.


The interesting thing is, there is already evidence that they are not being nicer. Their debt-trap diplomacy in Southeast/South Asia and Africa being one example. There's no secret here, the Naivity is through the roof with these people. I don't want to see that happen in Latin America next; but it will (@Tainari88 will cheer this on as China "busting a move" like it's a good thing...). China is already pressuring Latin American countries to cut off ties with Taiwan (in exchange for bad loans and "investment" at that). This looks like dipping the toes in the water.
#15171921
Pants-of-dog wrote:Okay.

How is the current US movement to hold the USA accountable for supporting Saudi Arabia in their current strikes against Yemen?

If you can show a significant movement that is forcing the US government to stop, that would provide a real world example for your claim.

Again my claim is based on the premise: in order for the populace to keep politicians accountable in a democracy they have to 1. be properly informed, and 2. they have to care.

So I assume most Americans either don't know what's happening in that case and/or don't care. Again, I'm not saying democratic accountability is perfect, I'm just saying some accountability is better than no accountability.
#15171930
Rancid wrote:My advice to these people is that although western democracy is flawed and has its issues. It has certainly improved, and it contains the machinery to continue to improve it. It has the machinery to continue to right what is wrong.


Western democracy has declined significantly as inequality has risen. It's institutions have been captured by oligarchs, and effective reform is, in my eyes, functionally impossible even if theoretically possible. In the US and Australia, the constitution has become a sacred cow, the electorate too divided by oligarchic forces, and politicians both too weak willed to govern according to the will of people. In the EU, undemocratic institutions continue to push to take more and more power away from national governments, and put it in the hands of technocrats that aren't subject to the people's will. In general, all these societies have seen their state institutions weaken and more and more economic, social and political power put into the hands of corporate entities that either have no democratic hierarchy, or one limited by property requirements in the form of shares.

By contrast, the Chinese state still exercises effective control over these entities and acts to prevent oligarchs from amassing too much power outside the state apparatus itself. Over the last five years, participation in local decision making has increased significantly and membership in the CCP, and thus access to the intraparty democratic hierarchy, has steadily increased as well - doing so remains an explicit goal of the CCP. It is below participation rates in the West, but it is heading in the right direction, and the concept of socialist democracy as expressed by Xi Jingping as the goal by 2049, at least on paper, isn't inherently more authoritarian than the West - though it is antipluralist.

This is not to say that the US or EU are less democratic (in the usual sense) than China, today. But rather that both entities are trending toward a similar point somewhere between them and that the differences are becoming less significant with each passing year.

The key difference is that the Chinese government is motivated by mass welfare and the public good in a way that is not present, in my experience, in the US or EU policies. I've lived in poor areas of Shanghai, and poor areas of Philadelphia - the differences in services available, cleanliness, safety, etc and literally night and day. The West clings to neoliberal notions that government should cede control to undemocratic and unsupervised entities - NGOs, corporations, and others - and that limiting the government's power to control and regulate these entities is synonymous with liberty or democracy. It is not - it is a transfer of power from an accountable and democratic institution to thousands of unaccountable and undemocratic lordlings. The decentralization of power is not synonymous with democracy, and in many ways is antithetical to it, and often leads to a lack of accountability that leads to a degradation of basic services and welfare to the most vulnerable sections of society. China does not suffer from this: even the most marginal communities receive significant support from the central government, with or without economic justification or expectaction that it will see a "return on investment". This attitude difference is very important to me, personally.

As for freedom - civil liberties and political freedoms in the West greatly outstrips that of China. However, most of the poorer individuals in Western society are severely limited in their ability to use that freedom effectively by economic concerns. Concerns about rent, debt, jobs and others, especially in the US, serve as a de facto limitation on the expression of that freedom. China, in contrast, severely limits the political freedoms of its people, though de facto, in day to day life, there is little difference between living in China, the EU, or the USA. This is because, in contrast with Western states, Chinese citizens enjoy a great deal of economic prosperity relative to cost of living that empowers them to have the economic stability to live their lives without being overly concerned about economic barriers that limit their expression. The CCP, furthermore, has a highly proven track record regarding their commitment to improving the material conditions of its people, a far better track record than most Western states since the 1970s.

No one is apologizing for the CCP or ignoring its faults. However, the trend lines being what they are, it is perfectly justified to be optimistic about the future of the CCP and pessimistic about the future of the West - the former is getting better, and the latter is getting worse.

The key aspect for me, however, as a non-Chinese, is that China, internationally, is far more interested in bilateral relations, mutual development, and maintaining international institutions and stability than the US: especially in the global south, where US/EU policy is fundamentally uncompromising and ideologically flawed. Incidentally, this is somewhere where a Western style democracy would make things worse: by and large, the Chinese population is quite nationalistic - they demanded the CCP roll tanks into Hong Kong, and criticized it when they didn't, they clamor for the annexation of Taiwan, and they thing the Uyghers are getting off easy, if anything. Internationally, a democratic China would likely be more antagonistic, I feel, not less - les by a Modi or Erdogan type figure with actual geopolitical power.
#15171932
Rancid wrote:Have you not seen the CCP apologism by leftists here? Not just on this thread, but many others.

My advice to these people is that although western democracy is flawed and has its issues. It has certainly improved, and it contains the machinery to continue to improve it. It has the machinery to continue to right what is wrong.

I would tell them, don't throw out the democracy/freedom baby with the bath water.


Rancid, one has to be truthful. The USA's democracy is in serious trouble. No doubt about that.

The CCP is authoritarian and it is not going to put the genie back in the bottle. Did you look at the numbers?

Yes, we will face imperialist ambitions of one old world power the USA and an emerging one the PRC.

In the end though? You can't keep China in check if at home you are run by another Donald Trump or a democratic machine that ignores good candidates for a neoliberal with the same need to keep doing war for years. It is wars for years and years already. Time to end all the wars and unite and do better.

The PRC, got an advantage doing something the USA should have done a very long time ago? Do you know what it is? I will tell you---being the final authority on profit. Period. The government tells the big corporations who is the damn boss. The government. Not the corporations. The USA gave up government authority to the corporations, they became for sale doing the bidding of these companies who moved to the PRC to open toy factories, car part factories, home goods, clothes, Christmas trees, etc. They gave up their manufacturing including medical supplies now needed to the PRC because they did not give a damn about what kind of government regulates them. Democratic or undemocratic. The bottom line is PROFIT. That is what fucked over the USA as a world power. Never let profit overrule government authority.

If you do? A state capitalist government like China's will kick your ass in the game of who gets to rule the world. You can't allow profit margins and greed and needing to sell to one and a half billion Chinese people cheap goods be the only factor in loyalty to a nation.

What is the flawed thinking? This guy--the Nomad Capitalist mentality. Go where you are treated best. Where you pay no taxes and where your only responsibility is your net worth.



Screw community, government, responsibilities and civic stuff. Just MONEY and individualism. If you do that? You are going to lose against some collective fascist nationalist and efficient GOVERNMENT dominant system like China's.

You can't have sellout politicians who sell their gov't authority for dollars. But that is the neoliberal model in the USA. That shit needs to be removed if the USA has a fighting chance against the expansion of Chinese interests. Period.
#15171935
Rancid wrote:Agree.

I also don't think it's the US's job to keep China in check or whatever.


This to me is the single biggest overriding concern - I don't want China to have undue influence within the West. But I fear that the West, fearful of losing its hegemony, will push for an aggressively antagonistic relationship and kickstart a new cold war. End of the day, in the next 50 years, I don't think China has any aspirations of hegemony beyond the first island chain, and I'm OK with that if it avoids conflict.
#15171936
Rancid wrote:Agree.

I also don't think it's the US's job to keep China in check or whatever.


Rancid, you don't understand imperialism yet well with this statement. This is imperialism:

Imperialismo (Imperialism)
Doctrina política
El imperialismo —que se basa en ideas de superioridad​ y aplicando prácticas de dominación— es el conjunto de prácticas que implican la extensión de la autoridad y el control de un Estado o pueblo sobre otro. Wikipedia

Damn Rancid, my phone keeps putting it in Spanish. Let me translate:

Imperialism, is based on the idea of superiority and applying the practices of domination--it is a set of practices that imply the extension of authority and control of one state over the citizens of another.

In other words? They think they have the right to interfere. The world is theirs. ALL OF IT.

Why do you think Noemon's Mount Olympus Gods are full of Hubris? They are all trying to control each other and the puny humans whom they manipulate. HUBRIS. A human flaw.
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
Lawlessness in San Fransisco

In most countries, theft under $5000 is a summary […]

CRT

Are you missing the obvious, or just running away[…]

Turkey: Woman killed in attack on pro-Kurdish par[…]

Another poster already killed your argument, so w[…]