Black Lives Matter, Marxist?

aquarius7000

Well-known member
China's dangerous. And N.Korea is now a nuclear threat under China's influence. Why is Trump poking the Dragon???
I think Xi, as normal for a dictator, is trying to sort of continuously establish his position to his people through a 'display of power'. More territory means more power. Of course it hurts India and Bhutan, especially as they seem to be peaceful towards China, but for Xi - it is all about exerting China's dominance not only in the region, but in the world.

From the perspective of just America, Trump 'prodding' China sure appears somewhat dangerous, but if I look at AppLeo's post and also the way I like to think, from a macro perspective, China needs to be 'checked', as such dominance will not only hurt India and Bhutan, but also America. Initially, I was thinking that China is trying to keep India in check due to the latter's economic success and growth, but then you look at China-Japan relations, Tibet, etc., and it is quite clear what China might be up to - re-balance or re-establishment of power - perhaps also to prove itself to the US.

At some point, China could get out of control. I am fairly curious to know what Putin thinks.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
My point exactly. Would China sit idly by while India replaces it as a manufacturing giant?

Armed conflict? don't think so. It is a possibility as always, but not the go-to response the chinese would use.

China isn't stupid. They don't go for armed conflict which would devastate both nations, unless they know they can win at ease. They go for ideological subversion. They are trying to expand their sphere of influence to other nations.

Now in 30-40 years... who knows. If Trump doesn't win, the entire world will end up being a communist sh... so...

"He who knows when when he can fight, and when he cannot, will be victorious- Sun Tzu, literally a chinese guy.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
I
From the perspective of just America, Trump 'prodding' China sure appears somewhat dangerous, but if I look at AppLeo's post and also the way I like to think, from a macro perspective, China needs to be 'checked', as such dominance will not only hurt India and Bhutan, but also America. Initially, I was thinking that China is trying to keep India in check due to the latter's economic success and growth, but then you look at China-Japan relations, Tibet, etc., and it is quite clear what China might be up to - re-balance or re-establishment of power - perhaps also to prove itself to the US.

I like the new red-pilled aquarius7000
 

aquarius7000

Well-known member
What is also interesting is that Xi has not only got N. Korea 'under its wing', but is also ganging up with the Communist Party govt. of Nepal and the likes of Pakistan on the other side of India. Its political leanings seem quite reflective of what China is about and might be up to.
Economically, per my understanding, China is much stronger than India and all those it is encroaching upon put together.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
What is also interesting is that Xi has not only got N. Korea 'under its wing', but is also ganging up with the Communist Party govt. of Nepal and the likes of Pakistan on the other side of India. Its political leanings seem quite reflective of what China is about and might be up to.
Economically, per my understanding, China is much stronger than India and all those it is encroaching upon put together.

They are "stronger". India is better connected though.

That is why ideological subversion is the normal strategy for China.
 

aquarius7000

Well-known member
India might have better relations with other countries incl. some of its peaceful neighbours, but if India were not to receive the backing of such 'friends', can it survive a real attack by China? Perhaps it could put China in its place. Or will China prevail?

There is something about Xi that is 'ominous'
 

Dirius

Well-known member
India might have better relations with other countries incl. some of its peaceful neighbours, but if India were not to receive the backing of such 'friends', can it survive a real attack by China? Perhaps it could put China in its place. Or will China prevail?

There is something about Xi that is 'ominous'

India has nuclear weapons - so survive? yes.

China has a larger navy (larger than the U.S.). In regards to the airforce, it has triple than india, same as infantry.

But India wouldn't be an easy country to take over. Its population is large, and in cases of occupation it is not uncommon for miltias to rise up for local defense.

Thing is you can't disregard India's allies. As a former british commonwealth member, the other british nations are bound to assist India, at least with supplies and weapons.
 

CapAquaPis

Well-known member
In the USA, we're frequently told racism and communism are evil, immoral and taboo to not be in our political system and sociocultural norms. However, social democracy and a sense of homogenity has became forbidden thoughts in a free country where we shouldn't ban non-extremist ideologies, we never outlawed the far-left and far-right anyway. Antifa tends to have a lot of anarchists and the KKK are classified as religious fundamentalist, both may be too radical for the majority of Americans, but they have rights to peacefully protest by law.
 

CapAquaPis

Well-known member
I can tell that you've never even been to the Deep South!:biggrin:
You don't think there's racism against jews, asians, native people? But for the most part, people are tolerant and accepting, all over the world. You know who doesn't accept other faiths and other ethnic groups? They throw gay people off roofs of buildings. But all you can criticize is the U.S. Maybe you want to move to Ethiopia along with aquarius7000? :andy:

And in California (my state), racism against our southern neighbors Mexico and Hispanics/Latinos as a whole is quite common, despite our "PC multicultural Liberal" culture. After 9/11 there was a sharp rise in anti-Arab sentiment and Islamophobia in the USA, which is prevalent anyway. The USA is a diverse country with many kinds of ethnic and racial groups from the Irish and Italian Americans to Native Hawaiians and Samoans. It's like a fraternity when one has to go through being bullied to show they can "fit in" and join the club. Our past history of racism against Blacks or African-Americans in various forms: slavery, segregation, stereotypes, scapegoating and stigma continues to haunt the USA to this present day.
 

AppLeo

Well-known member
Here is the part I disagree.

China and the U.S. don't need each other in the same manner.

Any cheap manufacturer could replace China, such as India. It is much harder for China to replace U.S. technological development and natural resources.

Also China has, through economic development, corporate espionage, and currency manipulation become a competitor with the U.S. in the last two decades.

The U.S. and China are now direct competitors, so conflict is bound to occur. Not necessarily war, but on the very least diplomatic.

You may very well be right.

My opinion on the relations between America and China is uninformed because I don’t keep up to date with any news or information between them.
 

waybread

Well-known member
I don't trust anything that comes out of the mouth of career politicians, or mass media conglomerates - because they make their living through the use of politics, and manipulating public perception. I also don't trust corporations who are in bed with politicians.

Which is one of the reasons I like Trump: he is not a career politician.

Just brilliant.

The great majority of Americans are not career politicians. That doesn't mean they are qualified to be President.

You sound like an anarchist.

Or maybe just paranoid.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Yes, I'm aware.



Yes, and that responsibility is upholding individual rights, not collective rights.



No, police are necessary. Otherwise, we'd devolve into anarchy in which the most physically powerful would rule. Even though these rulers would be at the top, their lives would be better served in a free society.

Having police is an agreement of every individual that force is monopolized and owned by everyone. This force, then, can only be in the interest of the collective. The collective of individuals.

Since force is monopolized, there is no competition or demand for force. Force stagnates and declines. Everything becomes voluntary in which only individuals can only deal with one another rationally and consensually. Anyone who uses force outside of this monopoly is considered a criminal and will lose their individual rights.

Time for a sociology class! Are you still a university student?
 

waybread

Well-known member
China has been busily and quietly buying up mineral rights to strategic minerals all over the world. Including in my backyard.

The US has an enormous national debt, which has ballooned even more under Republican president Donald Trump. Much of this is foreign-owned.

China doesn't have to go to war with the United States to dominate it economically.

Not that this relates to Black Lives Matter.
 

tikana

Well-known member
The idea behind that theory is that as long they need each other through commerce, war can only cause mutual destruction.

China is dependant on the U.S. for oil, gas, copper, vehicles, gold, etc. imports. Without them, they can't naturally produce such products.

If the chinese were to go to war with the U.S., that trade would stop, which would only hurt themselves. It goes the same way for the americans. Such possibility will, in theory, prevent the chinese from starting a war with the U.S.

The thing about the U.S. is that, although they get a benefit from trading with the chinese, they could replace China with other cheap manufacturers (such as India), or produce it themselves.

The "golden arches" theory proposed by Milton Friedman's is the idea that two countries with "McDonalds" franchises (meaning both countries accept international commerce) are unwilling or unlikely to go to war.

Dirius please check your facts before posting madeup facts
Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iraq, Angola plus Brazil are supplying gas and oil to china not US.
copper ??? are you aware that China is 2nd or 3rd in producing copper? they dont need the US for it
gold? China has a lot of gold mines of their own they are buying gold in insane amounts
 

AppLeo

Well-known member
I don't trust anything that comes out of the mouth of career politicians, or mass media conglomerates - because they make their living through the use of politics, and manipulating public perception. I also don't trust corporations who are in bed with politicians.

Which is one of the reasons I like Trump: he is not a career politician.

To add on to what Waybread said...

Just because Trump doesn't take deals from politicians doesn't mean he's serving the people. He's obviously there to serve himself and only himself. Who's to say he's not making deals to benefit his own businesses?

Trump is supposed to be a civil servant, but that's not the impression I get from him.

Also, Trump lies and misconstrues many things – he's not that different from a lying politician. Actually, his overt narcissism makes his lies that much more obvious and ridiculous.
 
Top