NationStates Jolt Archive

Here is their music video for the Beijing Olympics, starring their top one hundred performers (including Jackie Chan):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ves9T9zjTR4

What a political statement.

This really hit the fact home to me - that China is certainly dawning as mankind's next great power...no matter how we feel about it.

Power has been transferred ever-westward, from Persia, to Greece, to Rome, to imperialistic Europe, (across the Atlantic) to USA....and further westward, across the Pacific, to China...the nation I personally believe will inherit America's once solid position.

China made its huge political debut yesterday, and this year will most likely be a defining moment in their establishment of a "new" reputation.

What do you think?
_________________
CoN Lord Chancellor
Delegate of The Council of Narnia

Isn't it more like shaking off the Century of National Humiliation than actually building a truly new reputation? China's had enough of being the Weak Man of Asia... as demonstrated by that Chinese woman who just a few minutes ago picked up about fifty gajillion tonnes over her head and broke an Olympic record. Hrm.

I wonder how doped up she was when she did that?

Despite that yes I do believe it will be the case and will not be surprised if China declares war on the rest of the world in the next 50 years.

I do understand how people feel negatively against China's human rights record, but they are gradually improving. Their human rights record is only due to Mao's strengthen in it's national security, and it has been leading to this year's Tibet riots.

I think China will gradually improve, as mankind progresses. And yes, because China is now in the world economy, yes, China can be a world economic power, but I don't think they can replace the US.

The US is the largest economy in the world. Much larger than China's. China, in a way to look at it, is just a bunch of sweat shops receiving massive investments from American companies. As economy is growing rapidly, their sweat shops are changing into more modern factories, but much of the nation is still under cultural ties, and modernization is not fully accomplished.

The US, in the other hand, is much more modernized, our economy is service-oriented, much more than China's handcrafted goods.

The reason why China isn't a military power is because they still lack the military strength compared to most European and American competitors. Compared to them, their technology is still somewhat outdated, which is probably why China is investing heavily on research and development.

Last time I went to China, they have better looking cell phones, computers, and cars. Their styles are much more unique than Americans, probably is what makes Asia so popular, because hotspots can be so stylish.

If China declares war on the rest of the world, expect another version of the 8-nations alliance.

i think its a good thing that they gave us a 200 year head start.

in another 200 years we'll all be chinese.

China made its huge political debut yesterday...

rea-ly?

Not their manned space launch, their fighting off the Soviets, the Cultural Revolution, their development of The Bomb... none of these things announced a political debut? Instead it was marked by 2008 drummers in a giant arena? Impressive yes, but nothing without the backing of their actual achievments. But that's just my opinion.

I think China's been moving in a good direction ever since Mao the butcher kicked the bucket in the 70s. To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if China became democratic by 2030.

I think China's been moving in a good direction ever since Mao the butcher kicked the bucket in the 70s. To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if China became democratic by 2030.
maybe but china has never had a history of being democratic.

maybe they will be religiously free by 2030.

maybe but china has never had a history of being democratic.

maybe they will be religiously free by 2030.

Well, most democracies weren't built in a single day, and maybe countries that have had no history of democracy have become democratic today. So I'm still being hopeful about China. =)

On the note of the video, WOW! That was beautiful! I guess it shows that Beijing truly wants to be a cosmopolitan society that welcomes everyone.

And did anyone notice all the pretty girls in that video? XD

yeah i don't think democracy is likely to happen in China in the medium-term without an extensive period of chaos, violence... and foreign intervention

Power has been transferred ever-westward, from Persia, to Greece, to Rome, to imperialistic Europe, (across the Atlantic) to USA....and further westward, across the Pacific, to China...the nation I personally believe will inherit America's once solid position.

I'll be waiting for this superpowerishness to travel further west, until Tajikistan rules the world! Okay, I'll settle for Kyrgyz world domination too... :D

Not their manned space launch, their fighting off the Soviets, the Cultural Revolution, their development of The Bomb... none of these things announced a political debut? Instead it was marked by 2008 drummers in a giant arena? Impressive yes, but nothing without the backing of their actual achievments. But that's just my opinion.

No, because most of those were never known to the outside world thanks to China's repressive Maoist policies and utter economic bungling. China was an isolated state with little political contact with the rest of the world until Nixon's visit in the 1970's. And a manned spaceflight really was only an accomplishment when it was done the first time; taking 50 years to do something first achieved with 1950's technology in a country with a billion-plus people and a $7 trillion GDP isn't any accomplishment.

Just like in Japan during the 1960's, the Olympic games represent China's growing integration in to the world community and the greatest to date extent of its opening up to the rest of the world. Not to mention it is coincident with the 30th anniversary of Deng Xiaopeng's reforms, without which China would have continued to mire in poverty and far more brutal repression.

I think China's been moving in a good direction ever since Mao the butcher kicked the bucket in the 70s. To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if China became democratic by 2030.

That rather depends on what you mean by democratic.

You can bandy around a term like 'democratic' until even a nation like the US fits under it's definitions, but that doesn't really mean it means anything.

China may become more democratic. Hopefully, what it will do is become fairer.

China covers a huge area and has a huge population - both of which actually become disadvantages to/in 'democracy'.

I wonder how doped up she was when she did that?

Despite that yes I do believe it will be the case and will not be surprised if China declares war on the rest of the world in the next 50 years.

I'd be surprised.

Why would China need to declare war on the World, when it's going to own most of it?

I'd be surprised.

Why would China need to declare war on the World, when it's going to own most of it?

Not to mention China's economy is still utterly reliant on foreign nations for its growth and continued development; almost 80% of all major businesses in the country's manufacturing and high technology sectors are foreign-owned. Although that ratio continues to decline steadily and at a fairly rapid pace thanks to new initiatives to encourage entrepreneurship and Chinese investment overseas, it's still a long way from approaching any kind of self-sustaining level. They won't even begin to move towards true economic competition with the US or other nations until they start innovating domestically and their companies become true global competitors.

And of course, once that happens they're even less likely to do things that would imperil their trade relationships with other nations. The chance of war with China is virtually nonexistent.

Not to mention China's economy is still utterly reliant on foreign nations for its growth and continued development; almost 80% of all major businesses in the country's manufacturing and high technology sectors are foreign-owned. Although that ratio continues to decline steadily and at a fairly rapid pace thanks to new initiatives to encourage entrepreneurship and Chinese investment overseas, it's still a long way from approaching any kind of self-sustaining level. They won't even begin to move towards true economic competition with the US or other nations until they start innovating domestically and their companies become true global competitors.

And of course, once that happens they're even less likely to do things that would imperil their trade relationships with other nations. The chance of war with China is virtually nonexistent.
the nutcase warmongers and the military industrial complex keep talking up the possibility of war with china but i really dont see it. they have never had a world domination agenda why would they start now?

the nutcase warmongers and the military industrial complex keep talking up the possibility of war with china but i really dont see it. they have never had a world domination agenda why would they start now?

Good question. I guess they need to keep finding new imaginary enemies in order to maintain the kind of fear that gets them more money.

the nutcase warmongers and the military industrial complex keep talking up the possibility of war with china but i really dont see it. they have never had a world domination agenda why would they start now?

Indeed. I've always been fascinated by China's history, and they've had points where they could have literally ruled the world. At one point, China had a navy, alone, that would have made them lord of the oceans - and yet, they destroyed it. China seems mainly to have been occupied with China, to a greater or lesser extent, for thousands of years.

No, because most of those were never known to the outside world thanks to China's repressive Maoist policies and utter economic bungling. China was an isolated state with little political contact with the rest of the world until Nixon's visit in the 1970's.

Thank you for the history leason but it was not required. BTW China's opening was based on their own initiative and Nixon's visit was in response to this as China had been pushing relations with the West beforehand.

And a manned spaceflight really was only an accomplishment when it was done the first time; taking 50 years to do something first achieved with 1950's technology in a country with a billion-plus people and a $7 trillion GDP isn't any accomplishment.

Perhaps from your privledged position you feel quite justified to poo-poo their achievements but some people are willing to recognise it as such.

Just like in Japan during the 1960's, the Olympic games represent China's growing integration in to the world community and the greatest to date extent of its opening up to the rest of the world. Not to mention it is coincident with the 30th anniversary of Deng Xiaopeng's reforms, without which China would have continued to mire in poverty and far more brutal repression.

Change of Human Rights in China was a change of culture, not change of economy (yes they're associated but not linked). I didn't disagree that the Olympics was an important symbol i just raised that were other preceeding events that backed up what this symbol ment and gave it substance.

And of course, once that happens they're even less likely to do things that would imperil their trade relationships with other nations. The chance of war with China is virtually nonexistent.

Oh really (http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end)? :p

I'd be surprised.

Why would China need to declare war on the World, when it's going to own most of it?

I think China's culture is too isolationist for war in terms of imperialism. Sure, it wants to become a major world player, but I just really don't see China declaring war on other nations for resources, etc such as Britain did in the 19th century or when America invaded Iraq in 03.

I think China's been moving in a good direction ever since Mao the butcher kicked the bucket in the 70s. To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if China became democratic by 2030.

Totally. After all, the Tiananmen Square Massacre was certainly a step in the right direction, right?

Maybe that's a bit unfair, it was less than 20 years after Mao bought the farm, after all. But even still, it remains a forbidden topic and the official line is that the military was necessary to keep things stable. Until they're willing to admit that they fucked up, or at the very least allow citizens to openly state that they did, then the PRC are never going to be anything but fascist thugs in my book.

Totally. After all, the Tiananmen Square Massacre was certainly a step in the right direction, right?

Maybe that's a bit unfair, it was less than 20 years after Mao bought the farm, after all. But even still, it remains a forbidden topic and the official line is that the military was necessary to keep things stable. Until they're willing to admit that they fucked up, or at the very least allow citizens to openly state that they did, then the PRC are never going to be anything but fascist thugs in my book.

What about the events leading up to Tiananmen? The way people treat it as an isolated instance is actually worse than the way the PRC have been dealing with it - at least they are willing to admit it happened.

Were the responses excessive? Even given the context, yes, they probably were. Is it unreasonable to claim that military intervention was needed to keep things stable? No - not really - the Chinese government wasn't just divided over how to respond, they were literally divided over where their sympathies should lie.

The June Fourth Incident isn't just the 't-shirt' it is often sold as in the West.

What about the events leading up to Tiananmen? The way people treat it as an isolated instance is actually worse than the way the PRC have been dealing with it - at least they are willing to admit it happened.

Were the responses excessive? Even given the context, yes, they probably were. Is it unreasonable to claim that military intervention was needed to keep things stable? No - not really - the Chinese government wasn't just divided over how to respond, they were literally divided over where their sympathies should lie.

The June Fourth Incident isn't just the 't-shirt' it is often sold as in the West.

That's not the point. Whether it was justified or not, it's a forbidden topic. Every government has done things it shouldn't be proud of. China isn't special. The difference is how the citizens are allowed to treat the subject--they aren't.

That's not the point. Whether it was justified or not, it's a forbidden topic. Every government has done things it shouldn't be proud of. China isn't special. The difference is how the citizens are allowed to treat the subject--they aren't.

That rather depends what you mean. If you want it to be called "Tiananmen Square Massacre", maybe. But, I've even seen government members talking about the July Fourth Incident.

The difference might be as simple as expressing sympathies for (what is being perceived as) a dangerous revolution, by choosing to phrase the debate in those terms. (Like loading the debate about abortion by talking about 'babykillers').

What would happen to Americans that set up a public platform to suggest that the 9/11 hijackers were actually right?

Any war with China will be economical firstly, and physical secondary

That rather depends what you mean. If you want it to be called "Tiananmen Square Massacre", maybe. But, I've even seen government members talking about the July Fourth Incident.

The difference might be as simple as expressing sympathies for (what is being perceived as) a dangerous revolution, by choosing to phrase the debate in those terms. (Like loading the debate about abortion by talking about 'babykillers').

Currently, due to strong Chinese government censorship including Internet censorship, the news media is forbidden to report anything related to the protests. The event has been almost completely absent from Chinese media, including the Internet. No one is allowed to make any websites related to the protests. A search for Tiananmen Square protest information on the Internet in Mainland China largely returns no results apart from the government-mandated version of the events and the official view, which are mostly found on Websites of People's Daily and other heavily-controlled media.

In January 2006, Google agreed to censor their mainland China site, Google.cn, to remove information about the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4645596.stm) as well as other topics such as Tibetan independence, the banned spiritual practice Falun Gong and the political status of Taiwan. When people search for those censored topics, it will list the following at the bottom of the page in Chinese, "According to the local laws, regulations and policies, part of the searching result is not shown." The uncensored Wikipedia articles on the 1989 protests, both in English and Chinese Wikipedia, have been attributed as a cause of the blocking of Wikipedia by the government in mainland China. The ban of Wikipedia in mainland China was lifted recently, but the link to this incident in Chinese Wikipedia remained dead.

In 2006, the American PBS program "Frontline" broadcast a segment filmed at Peking University, many of whose students participated in the 1989 protests. Four students were shown a picture of the Tank Man, but none of them could identify what was happening in the photo. Some responded that it was a military parade, or an artwork.

On May 15, 2007, the leader of the pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for Betterment of Hong Kong, Ma Lik, provoked much criticism when he said that "there was not a massacre" during the protests, as there was "no intentional and indiscriminate shooting." He said Hong Kong was "not mature enough" due to believing foreigners' rash claims that a massacre took place. He said that Hong Kong showed through its lack of patriotism and national identity that it would thus "not be ready for democracy until 2022."[1] His remarks were met with wide condemnation.


On June 4, 2007, the anniversary of the massacre, a notice reading, "Paying tribute to the strongwilled mothers of June 4 victims" was published in the Chengdu Evening News newspaper. (http://web.archive.org/web/20070620222407/http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20070616_05.jpg) The matter is currently being investigated (http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/china-investigates-tiananmen-ad-20070605-guf.html) by the Chinese government, and three editors have since been fired from the paper. (http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSPEK17464820070607) The clerk who approved the ad had reportedly never heard of the June 4 crackdown and had been told that the date was a reference to a mining disaster. (http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSHKG14616220070606) -- Wikipedia

That goes beyond a simple question of sympathy.


Ambrose Leung, "Fury at DAB chief's Tiananmen tirade", Page 1, South China Morning Post, May 16, 2007


What would happen to Americans that set up a public platform to suggest that the 9/11 hijackers were actually right?

They should be allowed to, IMO. It wouldn't go over too well with the populace, but freedom of opinion is important.

Good question. I guess they need to keep finding new imaginary enemies in order to maintain the kind of fear that gets them more money.
that seems very true doesnt it? after the collapse of the USSR and the warsaw pact the MIC needs a new boogeyman to keep us too afraid to cut back to a reasonable military budget.

I'll be waiting for this superpowerishness to travel further west, until Tajikistan rules the world! Okay, I'll settle for Kyrgyz world domination too... :DNo the way to go is Viking world domination.