NationStates Jolt Archive

Chinese history has shown a cyclical nature of rise and collapse, which has been repeated more rapidly recently. The last period was in the l;ate 60s and early 70s (the "Cultural Revolution").

So how long before the next collapse and how bad will it be?

Prolly within 10-20 years or so. And it will be BAD. REALLY BAD.

Chinese history has shown a cyclical nature of rise and collapse, which has been repeated more rapidly recently. The last period was in the l;ate 60s and early 70s (the "Cultural Revolution").

So how long before the next collapse and how bad will it be?

Good question. However I think what will happen is their next "Chairman" or national leader will likely be a hard core Communist and undo all the gains they've made and make it more Maoist again. Thus, starting them back at square one.


Just my theory on what I believe will happen.

Prolly within 10-20 years or so. And it will be BAD. REALLY BAD.

I think how bad it'll be will depend on where. I suspect the coastal areas will fare much better than the interior.

I think how bad it'll be will depend on where. I suspect the coastal areas will fare much better than the interior.

Bad for everyone, actually. China is now a part of the world economy. Should China collapse, everyone is affected. I believe that China is now a big creditor nation, a big consumer nation, a big market. Plus, a chaotic country with 1 billion+ citizens is much more harder to control than let's say 300 million+ in the case of the former USSR.

I think how bad it'll be will depend on where. I suspect the coastal areas will fare much better than the interior.

Thansk to globalisation, if China has a massive internal upheaval like the "Revolution", we'll all suffer for it.

It's hard to imagine, but given the overinflated nature of the Chinese stock market these days, any major 'self correction' could have dire consequences for the US markets (especially given the jittery nature at the moment) and the knock on effect would spread rapidly.

Bad for everyone, actually. China is now a part of the world economy. Should China collapse, everyone is affected. I believe that China is now a big creditor nation, a big consumer nation, a big market. Plus, a chaotic country with 1 billion+ citizens is much more harder to control than let's say 300 million+ in the case of the former USSR.

Not to mention that they have invested heavily into Bonds with the US Government. If they do collapse they can demand we pay them, thus causing a collapse of our own economy. We'd have to turn on the printing presses and make them work on over drive, thus generating inflation through the roof and a second Great Depression. Yeah, another of my doom and gloom theories....:(

Bad for everyone, actually. China is now a part of the world economy. Should China collapse, everyone is affected. I believe that China is now a big creditor nation, a big consumer nation, a big market. Plus, a chaotic country with 1 billion+ citizens is much more harder to control than let's say 300 million+ in the case of the former USSR.

Not to mention that they have invested heavily into Bonds with the US Government. If they do collapse they can demand we pay them, thus causing a collapse of our own economy. We'd have to turn on the printing presses and make them work on over drive, thus generating inflation through the roof and a second Great Depression. Yeah, another of my doom and gloom theories....:(

Not to mention that they have invested heavily into Bonds with the US Government. If they do collapse they can demand we pay them, thus causing a collapse of our own economy. We'd have to turn on the printing presses and make them work on over drive, thus generating inflation through the roof and a second Great Depression. Yeah, another of my doom and gloom theories....:(
Exactly. Also, prices for commodities would fall, since perhaps the growth of China would be halted. Thus, oil prices would fall (and so maybe Hugo Chavez will, too); copper prices would fall; and many companies investing in China could find out that their investments may be at peril...

Exactly. Also, prices for commodities would fall, since perhaps the growth of China would be halted. Thus, oil prices would fall (and so maybe Hugo Chavez will, too); copper prices would fall; and many companies investing in China could find out that their investments may be at peril...

Another problem we'd face would be that most of the trinkets American's love to purchase would no longer be feasible to create, since they are only made in the first place because of cheap Chinese labour. A T-Shirt that goes for ten bucks here now becomes thirty.


(YAY! 7,100 posts!)

Another problem we'd face would be that most of the trinkets American's love to purchase would no longer be feasible to create, since they are only made in the first place because of cheap Chinese labour. A T-Shirt that goes for ten bucks here now becomes thirty.
Well, there's still cheap Vietnamese labor, there's still cheap Filipino labor, there's still cheap Thai labor...

'sides, would people even have money to buy things in the face of economic chaos?
(YAY! 7,100 posts!)
*turns green with envy* :p

Chinese history has shown a cyclical nature of rise and collapse, which has been repeated more rapidly recently. The last period was in the late 60s and early 70s (the "Cultural Revolution").If it is cyclical, when were the last 2 collapses.. and when were the last 2 Highs (rise) ?

Whenever Cthulhu stops dreaming.

I foresee the next collapse of China as potentially devastating and may lead to another large-scale conflict.

Picture this: Let's say that the next decade is very prosperous for the Chinese nation. Chinese automobiles are selling like hotcakes to those who won't spring for high-priced American, European, or Japanese automobiles. Even better, they're actually beginning to be of good quality. The Chinese economy booms, and the standard of living in the cities of China improves drastically. Some labor reforms are even being considered, but none are really implemented at the lowest levels.

However, with great improvement comes great problem. Chinese stock is being sold on margin in shady deals, and massive undercutting of poor-quality goods is causing significant damage to the economy. Factor in organized crime, and we have a recipe for an economic collapse. China is the epicenter, sure, but the effect is felt all over the industrialized world.

The Chinese section of the global stock market loses the vast majority of its value. Many people in China are broke, and many people outside China are hurting. Investor confidence is in the toilet, China enters the next Great Depression, and much of the rest of the world, particularly Japan, South Korea, and the United States, suffer a major recession.

The pro-business government of China is seen as the cause of the problem, and while the Communist party in China is not ready to give up power, it certainly is ready to make some major changes. A hard-line Maoist is named as the new Premier of China, and he makes it his goal to strengthen the military and declare harsh martial law in all of China. This is, of course, in response to uprisings, riots, and frustration all around.

The new premier is drawing comparisons to Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, etc. And, with the expulsion of foreign interests from China, the comparisons are starting to make sense. Under the new ruler, things start off slow at first but then begin to improve, and the Chinese war machine begins to emerge.

Meanwhile, the Korean War becomes hot again, and South Korea is forced to mobilize against the North Koreans, who intend to take back the entire peninsula. China pledges its aid to the North Korean cause; the U.S. threatens retaliation against the forces involved in an invasion of South Korea should such an invasion take place.

At the same time, the Islamic world seeme to be agitating the region as well; Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt have all stated their official declaration of hostility against Israel, which they intend to wipe off the map. Israel, as always, is mobilized, and the U.S. is forced into a situation in which it must potentially fight a war on two fronts.

It's not clear if the first strike will be on Tel Aviv or Seoul...

How encouraging....

Bloody ages, when China gets power, it keeps it.

If there will be a collapse in China, I doubt it will be a violent one. The growing educated middle class will simply not allow a Maoist into power. 1989 had only 200,000 people, but that was in 1989. The number of well-educated Chinese have exploded since than. The Communist Chinese government could barely keep the lid on 200,000 people, could they do it to 2 million? 20 million? The chances of a Maoist going into power is impossible, even the current Communist leaders despise Maoism, which is understandable since they were some of its victims.

It happened in South Korea, Spain, Portugal, and Nationalist China. Economic freedoms ---> economic growth ----> growing consciousness ----> growing pro-democracy movements ----> political freedoms. A country cannot be rich and authoritarian simultaneously. Prosperous countries naturally become free, and if China continues to prosper, that will be a likely endpoint.

Not to mention that they have invested heavily into Bonds with the US Government. If they do collapse they can demand we pay them, thus causing a collapse of our own economy. We'd have to turn on the printing presses and make them work on over drive, thus generating inflation through the roof and a second Great Depression. Yeah, another of my doom and gloom theories....:(

This all depends on the nature of whatever may take place. If some form of national economic actor lives on, this is possible. But if we see a return to regional factionaliskm and warlordism, who can call in the bonds?

If it is cyclical, when were the last 2 collapses.. and when were the last 2 Highs (rise) ?

It depends on how bad of chaos one defines as collapse.

Here are some events from the last 100 years that may be defined as "collapses":
Cultural Revolution
Great Leap Forward
2nd Sino-Japanese war
Warlord era
Xinhai Revolution
Boxer Rebellion (stretching 100 years a bit, because this was a biggy)

As for rises, the current period from 1976 to now definately fits the bill. The time frame from the founding of the PRC to the Great Leap Forward would likely work as well, but is up for question as to whether it was a rise or just a lull. The same goes for a very short window of the Republic of China - probably just 1912-13.

<snip>

While I don't think that will happen, that would make a pretty cool book or mini-series.

The vast majority of China's new wealth is concentrated along the coast. Hundreds of millions in the interior remain as poor as ever.

This disparity is not conducive to stability...China's government will have to address the problem eventually if it wishes to retain power without internal unrest.

Well the CCP needs to realize that socialist statism doesn't work, they need to work towards direct democracy and self-management.

As many people have pointed out, the interior of China remains poor, while the coast prospers. If any collapse of the Chinese gravy train is to occur it will begin in the interior. A preventable problem, but I doubt that the Chinese will be willing to address it any time soon. By the time they attempt to do anything about it, it will already be too late.

Well the CCP needs to realize that socialist statism doesn't work...


The Party's Republic figured that one out in the 1970s. His name was Deng Xiaoping.

Capitalist statism has been working remarkably well for the Party since. On the coast, anyway.

EDIT: As concerns the topic of the thread, neither The Party's Republic nor the Party are going anywhere anytime soon. The global economic order has too much to lose.

The Party's Republic figured that one out in the 1970s. His name was Deng Xiaoping.

Capitalist statism has been working remarkably well for the Party since. On the coast, anyway.

Anything statism doesn't work, all countries like Vietnam and China have done is taken the worst of socialist statism (authoritarianism, political rights) and the worst of free-market capitalism (poverty, unemployment and debt) and then say it's best of both worlds. The key is decentralization to autonomous communities which have direct democracy, that means economic self-reliance also.

The world economy relies a lot on China. If some sort of civil war broke out I would not be surprised to see U.N. peace keepers deployed. Same thing would happen if the U.S. went into civil war.

Anything statism doesn't work...

Capitalist statism works brilliantly, actually. Best on Earth, as a matter of fact. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html)

Capitalist statism works brilliantly, actually. Best on Earth, as a matter of fact. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html)

http://www.inclusivedemocracy.org/journal/ss/ss.htm
I suggest you read this, you may learn something.

Also, quoting CIA factbook=fail.

If some sort of civil war broke out I would not be surprised to see U.N. peace keepers deployed.


I would, considering such action would require Security Council approval, which The Party's Republic (a Security Council member) would never agree to in a million years.

I would, considering such action would require Security Council approval, which The Party's Republic (a Security Council member) would never agree to in a million years.

If they supported the government rather than the rebels they may.. but you have a point.

http://www.inclusivedemocracy.org/journal/ss/ss.htm
I suggest you read this, you may learn something.


Will I learn how to distinguish between acknowledging a characteristic of a given order versus advocating a given order?

Reality is complex like that. That would be a good skill to have.


Also, quoting CIA factbook=fail.


12-Year-Old's IM internet meme = fail.

If they supported the government rather than the rebels they may.. but you have a point.

With the history of Western imperialism in China complements of the United Kingdom and the Untied States, China (of any political flavor) has had very strong opinions about foreigners getting involved in internal affairs. Which is why The Party's Republic would never ask for or authorize UN intervention regardless of who supports what.

Good question. However I think what will happen is their next "Chairman" or national leader will likely be a hard core Communist and undo all the gains they've made and make it more Maoist again. Thus, starting them back at square one.


Just my theory on what I believe will happen.

Eh, not too likely. A great many party leaders have links to export reliant industries and the like. A hard core Maoist coming to power in China would have to exterminate nearly the entire party if he wants to go back to square one, and that's not going to happen easily.

Eh, not too likely. A great many party leaders have links to export reliant industries and the like. A hard core Maoist coming to power in China would have to exterminate nearly the entire party if he wants to go back to square one, and that's not going to happen easily.

Well, it we are going have hard core Mao-ism - it is going to fail as I think the Chinese army really likes capitalism now.

If you look at the history of the world from the perspective of humanity, there have been a number of large powerful nations that have been superseded; Egypt by Rome, Rome by UK, UK by USA (I know that continuity is sketchy, but you get the idea). What if the next one is USA by China. It is my personal belief that the East will inherit the world power. Russia is also now increasing in power for the first time since the fall of the Soviet states. I'm not talking about a violent takeover, just a gradual ascent to power.:sniper:
I've always wanted to use that smilie, but never had a reason to.

Saturday, at ten in the morning. Plan accordingly.

I foresee the next collapse of China as potentially devastating and may lead to another large-scale conflict.

Indeed, Indeed.

Picture this: Let's say that the next decade is very prosperous for the Chinese nation.

-snip-

Investor confidence is in the toilet, China enters the next Great Depression, and much of the rest of the world, particularly Japan, South Korea, and the United States, suffer a major recession.

So far this is right on track.

The pro-business government of China is seen as the cause of the problem, and while the Communist party in China is not ready to give up power, it certainly is ready to make some major changes. A hard-line Maoist is named as the new Premier of China, and he makes it his goal to strengthen the military and declare harsh martial law in all of China. This is, of course, in response to uprisings, riots, and frustration all around.

This is where you go off the rails, IMO. The rest of your scenario I fiound to be unrealistic.

Bloody ages, when China gets power, it keeps it.

This is demonstrably untrue. My above list of the collapse of the 20th C. should make that clear.

If there will be a collapse in China, I doubt it will be a violent one. The growing educated middle class will simply not allow a Maoist into power. 1989 had only 200,000 people, but that was in 1989. The number of well-educated Chinese have exploded since than. The Communist Chinese government could barely keep the lid on 200,000 people, could they do it to 2 million? 20 million? The chances of a Maoist going into power is impossible, even the current Communist leaders despise Maoism, which is understandable since they were some of its victims.

It happened in South Korea, Spain, Portugal, and Nationalist China. Economic freedoms ---> economic growth ----> growing consciousness ----> growing pro-democracy movements ----> political freedoms. A country cannot be rich and authoritarian simultaneously. Prosperous countries naturally become free, and if China continues to prosper, that will be a likely endpoint.

I agree it's highly unlikely there will be a Maoist. And this ignores the huge disparities in income and wealth. It also ignores many of the other things that factor into China's growing problems:

The vast majority of China's new wealth is concentrated along the coast. Hundreds of millions in the interior remain as poor as ever.

This disparity is not conducive to stability...China's government will have to address the problem eventually if it wishes to retain power without internal unrest.
As many people have pointed out, the interior of China remains poor, while the coast prospers. If any collapse of the Chinese gravy train is to occur it will begin in the interior. A preventable problem, but I doubt that the Chinese will be willing to address it any time soon. By the time they attempt to do anything about it, it will already be too late.

Taking those last two together, as I hinted above, I agree that this is a big peice of the problem. Just as a note, China's Gini coefficient has exploded - IIRC it was under .3 in 1980 and is now closing in on 5...

However, the wealth/income imbalance is not the only piece though. China is set for big environmental trouble as well. And the economic bubble is running away and the central government is having difficultry controlling it. The male/female embalance is going to start kicking in soon too.

EDIT: As concerns the topic of the thread, neither The Party's Republic nor the Party are going anywhere anytime soon. The global economic order has too much to lose.

The CCP is well on it's way to becoming a gang of kleptocrats.

I think the question is unanswerable as we simply do not have enough information on China given we cannot trust their figures, nor do we know the extent of current unrest. I agree with previous posters in that it won't happen as long as the economy grows and, to be honest, I can only see it growing in the foreseeable future.

However, if there was serious unrest...

...an interesting result would be whether the South splits from the North.

If you look at the history of the world from the perspective of humanity, there have been a number of large powerful nations that have been superseded; Egypt by Rome, Rome by UK, UK by USA (I know that continuity is sketchy, but you get the idea). What if the next one is USA by China. It is my personal belief that the East will inherit the world power. Russia is also now increasing in power for the first time since the fall of the Soviet states. I'm not talking about a violent takeover, just a gradual ascent to power.:sniper:
I've always wanted to use that smilie, but never had a reason to.

I'm not saying that China will definately collapse, but the current situation there, viewed through the lens of China's history of collapsing into chaos, would give a strong indication that China is due for another round of chaos soon.

I'm not saying that China will definately collapse, but the current situation there, viewed through the lens of China's history of collapsing into chaos, would give a strong indication that China is due for another round of chaos soon.
How much do you actualy know know about the attitudes of the Chinese?
I have been to China, about half the people I know are Chinese and I read the Australian Chinese newspaper every weekend. I know that China has a past of upheval, but that makes it no less stable in the present.

I think the question is unanswerable as we simply do not have enough information on China given we cannot trust their figures, nor do we know the extent of current unrest.

While the PRC's figures are certainly unreliable, it's possible to make educateed guesses.

I agree with previous posters in that it won't happen as long as the economy grows and, to be honest, I can only see it growing in the foreseeable future.

I fully expect Alan Greenspan to be correct about China's economic bubble collapsing in the next few years.

However, if there was serious unrest...

...an interesting result would be whether the South splits from the North.

The more interesting fault lines are rural/urban and costal/interior.

I'm not saying that China will definately collapse, but the current situation there, viewed through the lens of China's history of collapsing into chaos, would give a strong indication that China is due for another round of chaos soon.

That comment, in fact the OP itself, makes no sense.

The CCP is well on it's way to becoming a gang of kleptocrats.


Exactly.

How much do you actualy know know about the attitudes of the Chinese?
I have been to China, about half the people I know are Chinese and I read the Australian Chinese newspaper every weekend. I know that China has a past of upheval, but that makes it no less stable in the present.

I know my share of Chinese as well.

What makes it unstable is the confluance of the exploding wealth/income gap, the huge economic bubble that keeps growing, the kleptocratic CCP, the environmental problems, the demographic issues, etc., etc.

While the PRC's figures are certainly unreliable, it's possible to make educated guesses.

I fully expect Alan Greenspan to be correct about China's economic bubble collapsing in the next few years.

I honestly wouldn't be comfortable making that prediction; admittedly I have no credence on the Internet nor in global economic circles so you don't have to place any value on that :)

The more interesting fault lines are rural/urban and coastal/interior.

I don't think so, for all that it is, China is not a place that would just leave the interior to itself, there's an historical split between North and South though. Think of Chongqing, Chengdu, Wuhan, you need to have control of lines between these and coastal cities and that would mean overall control of the entire area.

Xinjiang and Tibet might gain independence but Han Chinese China has always wanted to be unified - so I don't see them deserting Han Chinese just because they're rural/interior.

NAW COMMIEZ ARE TEH SUZORZ

Sees this becoming another anti-Chinese conservative circle-jerk.

Leaves...

Leaves...

Crowd cheers.

Using the cyclic nature of chinese society to explain possible future events is silly. I can use the very same arguments upon almost every old nation or civilazation upon this earth.

Also to say that China rises and falls maybe true for the chinese themselves but upon a global scale, China was the principal power culturally, economically and technology wise well until the 16th century. But ofcourse if we start to judge every nations succes upon their achievements of the last 3 centuries or so then its no wonder western nations look better.

Also like many china bashing posts I can't help but feel that the scent of the fear for "The Yellow Peril" pervades here.

So does this mean America is going to suddenly break up in civil war between North and South?

Also to say that China rises and falls maybe true for the chinese themselves but upon a global scale, China was the principal power culturally, economically and technology wise well until the 16th century. But ofcourse if we start to judge every nations succes upon their achievements of the last 3 centuries or so then its no wonder western nations look better.
Woah there!

You're telling me there was world history before 1776?

Using the cyclic nature of Chinese society to explain possible future events is silly. I can use the very same arguments upon almost every old nation or civilization upon this earth.

Not really - the history of revolutions in China is quite different from those in the rest of the world, in terms of length as one example, since China is such a vast, populated country that overall control has rarely been a long-lasting situation, as well as the fact that there's never been a middle-class revolution in China, among many others.

The Chinese have a term 'luan' - it feeds into the idea that Chinese would rather have a 100 year oppressive yet stable dictator than a state of revolution, because there have been so many - from the Taiping Revolution to the Communist revolution, China was in a state of perpetual war - I can't think of many other countries that have gone through this. There's a long history of such periods. For example the Eastern Han dynasty was toppled after a 97 year war, the Tang after a 104 year civil war.

There are riots in rural villages already, figures differ vastly as to how many there are, it's hard to ascertain the underlying feeling of most Chinese about the party given a history of suppression of dissent. If, as many economists, seem to think, that China will have an economic collapse, how will that resentment work itself out?

It's a valid question.

Also to say that China rises and falls maybe true for the Chinese themselves but upon a global scale, China was the principal power culturally, economically and technology wise well until the 16th century. But of course if we start to judge every nations success upon their achievements of the last 3 centuries or so then its no wonder western nations look better.

These points don't relate to each other, it could conceivably be said that China was a global power under the Yuan dynasty, which wasn't even Han Chinese but, before and after that, it really didn't meddle too much in other countries as China was enough to deal with in the first place.

There haven't been any global powers until, arguably, the Spanish, although perhaps Genghis Khan can be considered the first global power - there have been regional powers.

Rise and fall against what?

It's not a question of whether China looks better or not, it's a question of whether China can continue in stability and, if not, what might happen?

Also like many china bashing posts I can't help but feel that the scent of the fear for "The Yellow Peril" pervades here.

This is not, so far as I can see, a China-bashing post - I think a good sample of the posters here are either Asian or living in Asia, there's nothing to suggest, as far as I can see, that people are writing from any fear of China - it's one of the more reasonable threads in fact.

Barringtonia, you say 'many economists think' and this, but you and certainly the OP have no source whatsoever to back this up, all I just read is idle speculation about things that happened about 50 years ago.

Barringtonia, you say 'many economists think' and this, but you and certainly the OP have no source whatsoever to back this up, all I just read is idle speculation about things that happened about 50 years ago.

Here you go:

Alan Greenspan (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6686453.stm)

Some books (http://www.amazon.com/Coming-Collapse-China-Gordon-Chang/sim/037550477X/2/ref=pd_cp_b_sexpl/105-3426596-3283656) you might like to read before you comment next.

As an American that lived in Beijing for five years as an expatriate, I can verify that China is indeed a very confusing entity, and that attempting to compare it to any other nation is an exercise in futility. While the coastal cities have seen massive growth, the vast majority of the population making that growth possible have seen virtually no improvement in their financial situation, and indeed the affluent lifestyles of China's new middle class are driving up prices all over the nation.

Although the government is not nearly as oppressive as the DPRK, you can still see many signs of socialism. CNN continues to be censored, as does a great number of websites (especially blogs). Moreover, the economic boom has utterly escaped the control of the PRC and now rides largely on the whims of market forces and corruption. Although token steps have been taken to improve the living situation of rural workers (especially farmers), most of these cash subsidies disappear into the pockets of local party officials. There is virtually no oversight.

Steps are also being taken to control the flood of rural workers looking for work in the major urban areas, inspiring further resentment. Although hard numbers are difficult to obtain, as the information is quickly suppressed, several violent protests have taken place all over the country. My school was blockaded for several hours by farmers, angry at the price they had been paid for their land.

The newest example of the uncontrolled capitalism taking place lies in wealthy real estate developers, apparently with ties to the local government and organized crime. Locals are kidnapped from their homes in the middle of the night and driven to a remote location. They are then forced out of the car; by the time they find their way home (sometimes before the sun rises) their home has already been demolished and the land has a new owner.

It's an interesting combination, the last vestiges of a socialist society rubbing shoulders with unregulated capitalism and rampant foreign investment, and it seems more and more likely that sooner or later it will become an extremely volatile combination. Until then, however, I'll enjoy my cheap goods. :D

Not really - the history of revolutions in China is quite different from those in the rest of the world, in terms of length as one example, since China is such a vast, populated country that overall control has rarely been a long-lasting situation, as well as the fact that there's never been a middle-class revolution in China, among many others.


Overall control hasn't been a long-lasting solution in every other part of the world aswell so I fail to say how your "rise and fall" theorem should only apply to China. As for the middle-class revolution I don't quite understand what it has to do with the issue at hand. Less equality between economic groups? There are larger income gaps in the world.


The Chinese have a term 'luan' - it feeds into the idea that Chinese would rather have a 100 year oppressive yet stable dictator than a state of revolution, because there have been so many - from the Taiping Revolution to the Communist revolution, China was in a state of perpetual war - I can't think of many other countries that have gone through this. There's a long history of such periods. For example the Eastern Han dynasty was toppled after a 97 year war, the Tang after a 104 year civil war.


Which is something not only Chinese prefer but something every nation-state has flirted with. Even today many people would rather have social and economic stability than political liberty. I doubt there is anyone who enjoys a chaotic period of revolution, but they eventually appear when the tyrant became to excisive. This happend in europe and it also happend in china under the guise of the mandate of heaven. So again I fail to see what makes the chinese so special in this regard. Also "luan" just means chaos. There is little mystery behind that word and it can "feed" into that idea pretty the same way chaos can.


There are riots in rural villages already, figures differ vastly as to how many there are, it's hard to ascertain the underlying feeling of most Chinese about the party given a history of suppression of dissent. If, as many economists, seem to think, that China will have an economic collapse, how will that resentment work itself out?

You are quite true about the riots and its figure it's according to the latest objective polls quite high, however it has not so much to do with resentment against the central goverment but discontent with local corrupt officials and goverments that ignore the rule of law. The Chinese do hate the party today due to the fact they had a history of suppresion and dissent but because now in the age of materialism they hate the condensending nature of their goverment. However you are right to see that a problem will occur if they economy collapses due to the fact the goverment now appeases their population with promises of a Chinese renaissance. The point is...will it? You might use the baseless argument that "many" economists might think its fall is certain but then again I can use my "many" economists to refute the same. Best to write down those arguments and compare them.
(Edit: Which you now have done to an extent with your last post, however my point still stands that people shouldnt say too general things like "Somebody said that")


These points don't relate to each other, it could conceivably be said that China was a global power under the Yuan dynasty, which wasn't even Han Chinese but, before and after that, it really didn't meddle too much in other countries as China was enough to deal with in the first place.

Your idea of a global power seems to mean imperialism, what I ment was that compared to other nations and civilazations, China has been consistingly a powerfull nation up until the 16th century.
However this is merely to refute your point that although china has a choatic history, the same can be said for other nations and China nevertheless still fared quite well for a long time.




This is not, so far as I can see, a China-bashing post - I think a good sample of the posters here are either Asian or living in Asia, there's nothing to suggest, as far as I can see, that people are writing from any fear of China - it's one of the more reasonable threads in fact.

I'll agree with you that is one of the more reasonable threads which in turn is actually quite sad considering the contents of some of these posts which contain lovely material for b-rated sci-fi novels when they make guesses as to the future of china. Somehow always a strong tyrant takes over power, invades south korea and starts nuking some place, at some time.

If that isn't remotely seated in fear of China then I don't know what is.

So this comment was not as much directed against you but more towards our aspiring authors.

Also quoting Greenspan is laughable. We are talking about the man who cheered on the ICT bubble in the nineties and couldnt see it's collapse coming from a mile. In effect according to the Ecomist the economic bubble of China is even less severe.

Thanks for the response but I ask you to consider this:

Read up on the Taiping rebellion as an example, and let me know where else something similar has happened - where an ordinary person has risen up and conducted his own personal rebellion against an entire state, that lasted near 20 years and resulted in the death of an estimated (low) 20 million.

That's just one example in a myriad of examples throughout Chinese history.

Chinese revolutions have a genesis and repercussion unlike any other, started by individuals or gangs unlike any other. You may say it's a question of scale, and I agree, but that still makes it unlike any other.

You have taken a very literal definition of 'luan', most would understand it in the context I've given.

So it's a very real question as to whether it may happen - which was all I was really saying, that the question was valid and not necessarily indicative of China-bashing.

A country cannot be rich and authoritarian simultaneously. Prosperous countries naturally become free...
Singapore?

Sorry. Can't resist.

Chinese history has shown a cyclical nature of rise and collapse, which has been repeated more rapidly recently. The last period was in the l;ate 60s and early 70s (the "Cultural Revolution").

So how long before the next collapse and how bad will it be?

Well if they do not get their corruption under control, not that much longer and it will be very very bad both for CHina and the rest of the world.

i dont think that "when will china collapse" is the correct question.

china has been in chaos for close to 100 years and for almost 100 years before that it was ruled by a weak dynasty.

the question should be "when will china stabilize?"

when china establishes a new dynasty, it will not rule just china but the whole world. then things will get interesting.

Thanks for the response but I ask you to consider this:

Read up on the Taiping rebellion as an example, and let me know where else something similar has happened - where an ordinary person has risen up and conducted his own personal rebellion against an entire state, that lasted near 20 years and resulted in the death of an estimated (low) 20 million.


Isn't the Taiping rebellion actually a very -un-chinese rebellion? First of all it was rooted in christianity with a leader who believed he was the son of God. Second of all it was against a central authority which wasn't chinese, so it is therefor debatable even it shouldnt be considered a liberation war.
And thirdly it was also a response against Qing defeat and national humiliation at the hands of western powers.

All 3 points I made are all foreign related and none are exclusively chinese.

As for 20 million, indeed that is a high number, but as you said we need to take in account scale here. China had a population about 400 million of which (A conservative amount) 20 million died. That would 1/20 of the total population.
If you take some time to look it up, there a great deal of civil wars which emulate or even exceed that amount.

Nevertheless I do agree with you that China, is unique in its combination of size, population size, culture and size, but still I can see no reason why this sets a precedent for the future.


That's just one example in a myriad of examples throughout Chinese history.


Yes well to come back to your point of scale, Chinese history is ofcourse very long....


You have taken a very literal definition of 'luan', most would understand it in the context I've given.


I understand it perfectly in your context, however my point is that it differs little from our western words for chaos in whatever language it may be.
What you could have said was that the Chinese culture puts more emphasize on order against chaos than in western culture and therefor the word has more bagage than our on word for "luan".
My problem was that you put in a chinese word for no apperent reason what so ever in what seems to be an effort to sex up your argument. I felt the need to demystify that for other readers. Ofcourse if such wasnt your intent then I stand corrected.

I doubt how much of "economic prosperity leading to aspiration for political freedom" = "breakup of China / Chaos" during the transition from one-party rule to multi-party/two-party democracy.

The Han Chinese make up the majority and they have been fed good ol' nationalism from childhood ("One China", "Middle Kingdom" etc)...the Uighurs and Tibetans don't have a chance...

Not to mention that they have invested heavily into Bonds with the US Government. If they do collapse they can demand we pay them, thus causing a collapse of our own economy. We'd have to turn on the printing presses and make them work on over drive, thus generating inflation through the roof and a second Great Depression. Yeah, another of my doom and gloom theories....:(

Do you think the US would actually pay them?

*snip*
Nevertheless I do agree with you that China, is unique in its combination of size, population size, culture and size, but still I can see no reason why this sets a precedent for the future.

Here (http://insideasia.typepad.com/ia/2006/06/a_new_peasant_r.html)

If one remembers that every dynasty in China's imperial history was destroyed by discontented peasants and drifters, the threat of a ‘peasant uprising’ posed by the ever-widening wealth gap between urbanites and rural-dwellers is a real one and should not be underestimated. Therefore, any policies formalised at the National People's Congress (China’s parliament) in March need to make real inroads in elevating the rural dwellers out of poverty and not be mere token policies.

If you don't believe me, you can research yourself on this - it's a threat and it's one felt by China itself, not just others and myself asserting it.

I understand it perfectly in your context, however my point is that it differs little from our western words for chaos in whatever language it may be.
What you could have said was that the Chinese culture puts more emphasize on order against chaos than in western culture and therefor the word has more baggage than our on word for "luan".
My problem was that you put in a Chinese word for no apparent reason what so ever in what seems to be an effort to sex up your argument. I felt the need to demystify that for other readers. Of course if such wasn't your intent then I stand corrected.

It's not just within my context - that's like saying that using holocaust as a reference to WW2 is just within my context, and that it just means burnt sacrificial offering - it's an accepted context and the point of using the word is to show that China itself fears uprisings due to a long history of them, ones that are different compared to other countries.

The real difference is that local unrest can spill over into regional conflict that can topple dynasties, and has done so time and time again - I'm not really debating this, I'm saying this as accepted fact if you read up on Chinese history.