By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: Logical dis-connect with the ccp message?
we all pretty much know who are the flag bearers are for the CCp. I notice some logical disconnects in their arguments. example: they talk up how china is a powerful and soon to be world super power, but they use the "developing country " excuse whenever it suits them.
what are some other logical disconnects you've picked up on with the CCP message?
Have you any understanding of economics, including something as simple as GDP and GDP per Capita? China has a very high population. It can become powerful and a superpower long before it's entirety is as 'developed' as 'the West'.
nevermind:
I think there's a point in that it should stop being given aid from other nations, which it still recieves.
OldMajor:
Obviously some better juice than you. :) China already is a superpower of sorts. They invest a lot of money in other countries, and are THE most lucrative growth market for global retail companies. As such they have a growing amount of hao guanxi with other nations. Countries like the UK and others in Europe for example are desperate for investment and/or more exports to China to kickstart their stifled economies. Do you think that China can't use this to sway decisions in their favour on other matters?
Oh,and watch this space, because this superpower of sorts is only going to get more powerful.
Nessquick:
Major, they just giving back the money they received for decades in support from others. Only =Germany itself paid every year hundreds milions of euros in aid to china. be real man. and "investing" as is considered by some, are just spending the accumulated dollr reserves and helping back to those in need. Any real investing i see maybe just in Afrika, for the purpose get rude oil, gold and diamonds for their hungry leader :D Not for real assets for future in those countries.
OldMajor:
Nessquik, yes, I'm sure those Western European Countries are thinking the exact same thing with regard to Eastern Europe. What a mistake that was joining forces with them, yes? or do you not understand that either?
And of course I know about the investment in Africa, I was trying to keep it short, but show the connection between money and power.
The problem is in the terminology. When somebody says superpower, what exactly do they mean? All at once its means relatively large percentage of economic output when measured against its peers and competitors, the ability to project military power across the globe, and prosperity manifested in quality of life (itself and abstract concept) and access to consumer goods. The US, the traditional western European colonial powers, and even, debatably, the Soviet Union all scored pretty well in those categories across the board. Yet when people speak of China as being a they mean it in economic terms only superpower, and even on those grounds its something of a long shot. In practical terms China is the second or third largest economy in the world, depending upon how you count on the EU, yet it should be remember that its only about half the size of either of those economies. By 2018 it may be different. It could conceivably be larger, but it could just as likely see the bottom fall out of the economy if (but really when) the housing bubble bursts in 2015. But even if things go well China is going to end up existing in a multi-polar world where it and its nearest 10 or 20 competitor nations each have of the world's total economy split fairly evenly between them. Beyond that though, China really isn't interested in building or participating in the sort of international institutions needed to project military force across the globe, to say nothing of the money it would need to spend. And on development end China's still probably a good 50 years out anyway. What this means though isn't that China is the next great superpower, but rather that the accession of the Chinese economy, and other economies like it, signals the end of the age of superpowers. I'll leave it to the rest of you to guess at exactly how much butthurt is going to be felt by the Chinese for their inability to catch something that was always going to be just out of their reach to begin with.
Well the name "Communist party of China" in itself is ludicrous. There's nothing communist about this place.
xinyuren:
I think they call it socialism with Chinese characteristics?
BHGAL:
when it is all about cash .... everybody is focused on money, getting rich, I call it scary and doomed to fail, and certainly nothing to do with communism
vale1:
Totally agreed with you, nevermind.
A link for those who still think that PRC is a communist country.
http://sites.duke.edu/niou/files/2012/04/huanghai-feng-2012-Signal-Left-Turn-Right-SSRN.pdf
OldMajor:
Vale, its a name of a party, thats all. The party that united the country after a long period of struggle and stagnation. No matter what its called, it's becoming more and more apparent to Western thinkers that their way of government may not be so bad after all!
nevermind:
Are you drunk?
It is not "just the name of a party" it's a name kept and purposely intended to fool a massive population. And I don't know ANYONE who thinks it's a better way of doign things, simply because it isn't.
crimo making up the wu mao word and pretending like he's an american...we all know you are from nigeria...
The Chinese government is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.
It has become a kleptocracy disguised as an autocracy disguised as a communist state.
Tell them what they will believe and silence the rest.
The next generation of educated youth know the truth.
