What's new

Yep, the world has a new role model for political and economic development

This is funny...

The title of the thread clearly states that the world has a new 'role model', implying something worthy of importing and implementation at home. And yet, when point out the flaws, the Chinese are quick to retreat behind the shield of 'works only for China'.

So which is it, does it work only for China, or is it worth emulating at home ? :rolleyes:
Maybe whats it means is that China's development model demonstrate to the developing world that there is an alternative to Western electoral democracy.
China's model is that each country to progress step by step on its own by trial and error.
Like crossing the river by slowly feeling each pebble with the feet.

The China model is also known as the Beijing consensus.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Consensus
 
Last edited:
.
China is as communist today as North Korea is democratic. The correct description for the current Chinese model would be state guided capitalism with significant social safety nets.

As far as the firewall is concerned, I think it's mainly to protect their citizens from getting brainwashed by the West.

Ha, finally some sense of reality! Kudos to that. The same goes to the so called “freedom” as well. There’s no absolute freedom anywhere. How much freedom each individual can have depends on the surroundings and constraints. We are sacrificing a little bit individual freedom for our common good and it’s been paying off.

The west and Indian media paints us as a cruel dictatorship. But we’ve shown the world that just because we don’t do elections every few years doesn’t mean we can’t be a developed civil society.
 
.
How can you cede anything that never belongs to you?
1)YOUR VN gov does not make demands of such islands in 1945 ,1955,1965,1970 even1974,suddenly after your unification you make such demands of south CHINA sea islands,where have you been for those 30years?
During1974 south china sea battle with south Vietnam, when china taken xisha islands,your gov does not say those islands belongs to you but give congratulation to china for taking its own islands back

suddenly when you taken south Vietnam down you gov did,what a joke and hypocritical VN government!!!
what is next? hainan island?
2)you compare south china sea islands to outer manchuria,i think they are the same as well= they both belongs to CHINA...but you miss the point, outer manchuria is ceded by unfair but official negociation and it was recognized by stupid but official QING CHINA empire,where were you when Qing china was so weak? sorry but at that time you Vietnam is occupied by French empire!
3)The reason why you compare xisha and nansha islands to outer manchuria is because you VN is jealous, you see china is no more number one and you saw china was in chaos caused by culture revolution,and RUSSIA can takes CHINESE lands why can not you...well i tell you you miss your chance!
4)China has ceded significant lands by negociation to RUSSIA,outer Mongolia,Myanmar,Afghanistan,...
IF you VN were wise enough,maybe during Mao Zedong empire,through peaceful negociation,MAO of China would cede Nansha islands and part of xisha islands to you VN (it is stupid to cede lands to other but that was what MAO did), on the contrary,you want those islands in a hard way!!!!
5)China of today may still cede some lands to other country,but not by force of war but by peaceful negociation!
COZ ceding land after war means the end of CPC!
CHINA of today does not respond well under threat !
Thanks for your time!!!
 
Last edited:
.
Avoiding feudalism is about promoting capable people and giving the masses a good basic education/environment.
People love to extol the literacy rate in communist countries, particularly Cuba in comparison to the US, and yet it has been consistent that Cubans who risked their lives to come to 'illiterate' US and never the other way around.

There are elements of feudalism in USA and other developed western countries. Big political families, corporate families, banking families, investment funds like Vatican investment fund will continue to dominate the elite of Western society. Not saying the west is a bad place to live at all but its near impossible for an outsider to be at the top of Western society.
That is not true and if you live in Canada, you know that is not true.

Social mobility in the capitalist free market West is what made the West the desirable target for those who wish the escape whatever politico-socio-economic mire they came from. But the underlying attractant is that the West is free of the notional classes. Am not saying that strata do not exist, but that what made up those classes is wealth, of which the capitalist free market system make available for anyone willing to work for his/her wealth.

Being a boss of a company is not the same as being a member of the nobility. For the latter, the title and its assorted perks are hereditary. For the former, you can be borne into wealth and lose it all by your own efforts, or you can be responsible and build up even more wealth, and gain more respect.

Pointing out whatever alleged elements of the past that may exists today is not a credible criticism/defense of your position.

What you are advocating for China is a modern version of feudalism where while the lower classes maybe educated, establishment of a political elite, even informally, that clique of elites will make efforts to protect themselves and what the state gave them. But I guess that as long as this class allows ordinary Chinese citizens a little bit of freedom here and little bit more there, and make some money here and some more money there, ordinary Chinese will be too busy to realize how controlled they are.
 
.
People love to extol the literacy rate in communist countries, particularly Cuba in comparison to the US, and yet it has been consistent that Cubans who risked their lives to come to 'illiterate' US and never the other way around.


That is not true and if you live in Canada, you know that is not true.

Social mobility in the capitalist free market West is what made the West the desirable target for those who wish the escape whatever politico-socio-economic mire they came from. But the underlying attractant is that the West is free of the notional classes. Am not saying that strata do not exist, but that what made up those classes is wealth, of which the capitalist free market system make available for anyone willing to work for his/her wealth.

Being a boss of a company is not the same as being a member of the nobility. For the latter, the title and its assorted perks are hereditary. For the former, you can be borne into wealth and lose it all by your own efforts, or you can be responsible and build up even more wealth, and gain more respect.

Pointing out whatever alleged elements of the past that may exists today is not a credible criticism/defense of your position.

What you are advocating for China is a modern version of feudalism where while the lower classes maybe educated, establishment of a political elite, even informally, that clique of elites will make efforts to protect themselves and what the state gave them. But I guess that as long as this class allows ordinary Chinese citizens a little bit of freedom here and little bit more there, and make some money here and some more money there, ordinary Chinese will be too busy to realize how controlled they are.
1)
What Chinese people want the most is economic freedom for the moment,we do not give a st on your democratic propaganda.
Obviously China builds globally while yankees bombs globally!Carry on will you!
You USA used to and is behaving like a country who seeks hegemonism whereever you can,that is what we gonna do coz this is the rule layout by you yankees yourself:Bigger guns,bigger advantages,Take what USA want with force if necessary and do not give a shit on UN unless it suit your interests Iraq is the best exemple!
Where is the massive destructive weapons Saddam Hussein possessed?Do you yankees find them yet?
Thank you yankees teach us that Only a bandit country can survive and win!
2)
Cuba has been sanctionned by you yankees for more than 50 years! Why it did not collapse after all?
A bunch of Cuba traitors does not speak for the majority of the people of Cuba. Your democratic propaganda works only for GTNM prisoners.

People love to extol the literacy rate in communist countries, particularly Cuba in comparison to the US, and yet it has been consistent that Cubans who risked their lives to come to 'illiterate' US and never the other way around.


That is not true and if you live in Canada, you know that is not true.

Social mobility in the capitalist free market West is what made the West the desirable target for those who wish the escape whatever politico-socio-economic mire they came from. But the underlying attractant is that the West is free of the notional classes. Am not saying that strata do not exist, but that what made up those classes is wealth, of which the capitalist free market system make available for anyone willing to work for his/her wealth.

Being a boss of a company is not the same as being a member of the nobility. For the latter, the title and its assorted perks are hereditary. For the former, you can be borne into wealth and lose it all by your own efforts, or you can be responsible and build up even more wealth, and gain more respect.

Pointing out whatever alleged elements of the past that may exists today is not a credible criticism/defense of your position.

What you are advocating for China is a modern version of feudalism where while the lower classes maybe educated, establishment of a political elite, even informally, that clique of elites will make efforts to protect themselves and what the state gave them. But I guess that as long as this class allows ordinary Chinese citizens a little bit of freedom here and little bit more there, and make some money here and some more money there, ordinary Chinese will be too busy to realize how controlled they are.
In essence, Americans, like Hitler, are white supremacists.
 
Last edited:
. .
Took you long enough and many lives lost to realize that. :rolleyes:

Are you talking about that meme - Mao killed 30/50/70/1000 million Chinese!!! Yeah no. He didn't kill anyone any more than necessary to defeat the KMT.

There was a near famine in the 1960s and GLF was a failure. But given what Mao achieved during his run, Chinese will be grateful to him for a long time.
 
.
Took you long enough and many lives lost to realize that. :rolleyes:
It also takes Yankees 90 years to abolish slavery system from 1776 (the actual year is1624 but.well let us count from 1776)to 1865
How many black slaves been slaughtered ,raped,abused and tortured to death?!


Are you talking about that meme - Mao killed 30/50/70/1000 million Chinese!!! Yeah no. He didn't kill anyone any more than necessary to defeat the KMT.

There was a near famine in the 1960s and GLF was a failure. But given what Mao achieved during his run, Chinese will be grateful to him for a long time.
many life lost while 1 billions CHINESES no more slaves to western masters!
THE bottom line is we made enough hydrogen bombs under MAO for superpower fondation!
Without MAO,chinese would end up today like iraqi,syrian, afganistan people who live under no hope and worried every day and.night of been killed during bombardment!
With the inspiration of the mostrich chinese slave JACK MA(One of our Yankee friend claimed that all Chinese are slaves today), we CHINA look forward and work hard for a new era!
 
.
Nobody’s Quaking in Their Boots Before the US, Anymore

Oh, how the mighty are falling

Patrick J. Buchanan
Thu, Nov 9, 2017



A major goal of this Asia trip, said National Security Adviser H. R. McMaster, is to rally allies to achieve the “complete, verifiable and permanent denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.”

Yet Kim Jong Un has said he will never give up his nuclear weapons. He believes the survival of his dynastic regime depends upon them.

Hence we are headed for confrontation. Either the U.S. or North Korea backs down, as Nikita Khrushchev did in the Cuban missile crisis, or there will be war.

In this new century, U.S. leaders continue to draw red lines that threaten acts of war that the nation is unprepared to back up.

Recall President Obama’s, “Assad must go!” and the warning that any use of chemical weapons would cross his personal “red line.

Result: After chemical weapons were used, Americans rose in united opposition to a retaliatory strike. Congress refused to authorize any attack. Obama and John Kerry were left with egg all over their faces. And the credibility of the country was commensurately damaged.

There was a time when U.S. words were taken seriously, and we heeded Theodore Roosevelt’s dictum: “Speak softly, and carry a big stick.”

After Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in August 1991, George H.W. Bush said simply: “This will not stand.” The world understood that if Saddam did not withdraw from Kuwait, his army would be thrown out. As it was.

But in the post-Cold War era, the rhetoric of U.S. statesmen has grown ever more blustery, even as U.S. relative power has declined. Our goal is “ending tyranny in our world,” bellowed George W. Bush in his second inaugural.

Consider Rex Tillerson’s recent trip. In Saudi Arabia, he declared, “Iranian militias that are in Iraq, now that the fight against … ISIS is coming to a close … need to go home. Any foreign fighters in Iraq need to go home.”

The next day, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi responded:

“We wonder about the statements attributed to the American secretary of state about the popular mobilization forces. … No side has the right to intervene in Iraq’s affairs or decide what Iraqis do.”

This slap across the face comes from a regime that rules as a result of 4,500 U.S. dead, tens of thousands wounded and $1 trillion invested in the nation’s rebuilding after 15 years of war.

Earlier that day, Tillerson made a two-hour visit to Afghanistan. There he met Afghan officials in a heavily guarded bunker near Bagram Airfield. Wrote The New York Times’ Gardiner Harris:

“That top American officials must use stealth to enter these countries after more than 15 years of wars, thousands of lives lost and trillions of dollars spent was testimony to the stubborn problems still confronting the United States in both places.”

Such are the fruits of our longest wars, launched with the neo-Churchillian rhetoric of George W. Bush.

In India, Tillerson called on the government to close its embassy in North Korea. New Delhi demurred, suggesting the facility might prove useful to the Americans in negotiating with Pyongyang.

In Geneva, Tillerson asserted, “The United States wants a whole and unified Syria with no role for Bashar al-Assad … The reign of the Assad family is coming to an end.”

Well, perhaps? But our “rebels” in Syria were routed and Assad not only survived his six-year civil war but with the aid of his Russian, Iranian, Shiite militia, and Hezbollah allies, he won that war, and intends to remain and rule, whether we approve or not.

We no longer speak to the world with the assured authority with which America did from Eisenhower to Reagan and Bush 1. Our moment, if ever it existed, as the “unipolar power” the “indispensable nation” that would exercise a “benevolent global hegemony” upon mankind is over.

America needs today a recognition of the new realities we face and a rhetoric that conforms to those realities.

Since Y2K our world has changed.

Putin’s Russia has reasserted itself, rebuilt its strategic forces, confronted NATO, annexed Crimea and acted decisively in Syria, re-establishing itself as a power in the Middle East.

China, thanks to its vast trade surpluses at our expense, has grown into an economic and geostrategic rival on a scale that not even the USSR of the Cold War reached.

North Korea is now a nuclear power.

The Europeans are bedeviled by tribalism, secessionism and waves of seemingly unassimilable immigrants from the South and Middle East.

A once-vital NATO ally, Turkey, is virtually lost to the West. Our major Asian allies are dependent on exports to a China that has established a new order in the South China Sea.

In part because of our interventions, the Middle East is in turmoil, bedeviled by terrorism and breaking down along Sunni-Shiite lines.

The U.S. pre-eminence in the days of Desert Storm is history.

Yet, the architects of American decline may still be heard denouncing the “isolationists” who opposed their follies and warned what would befall the republic if it listened to them.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.

Source: The American Conservative
 
.
We will remember that.


The problem with this argument is that you opened the door to a modern version of feudalism.

I am USAF veteran, so you are using the wrong analogy. I may enter the military as the lowest ranking enlisted or commissioned officer, but unlike the feudal classes, I can move up the ranks based upon my own efforts, which includes intellectual and physical. Same with any corporation. If I do not like the military or honorably completed my contract, I can leave and enter another social class and move up its structure. If I do not like working for a company, I can leave that company and start my own and move up that social structure. Social strata is inevitable, but what make modern society different and better is the opportunities to move laterally and/or upward among the strata.

What you are advocating is nothing new. The communists said it before and so many people swallowed it.
what is the rank of MAO,DENG,XI and their father who?
if i am not wrong there are two BUSH in recent Yankee years!what the hell is that?! From father to son,and the later is the most stupid and shameless president over the years!

We will remember that.


The problem with this argument is that you opened the door to a modern version of feudalism.

I am USAF veteran, so you are using the wrong analogy. I may enter the military as the lowest ranking enlisted or commissioned officer, but unlike the feudal classes, I can move up the ranks based upon my own efforts, which includes intellectual and physical. Same with any corporation. If I do not like the military or honorably completed my contract, I can leave and enter another social class and move up its structure. If I do not like working for a company, I can leave that company and start my own and move up that social structure. Social strata is inevitable, but what make modern society different and better is the opportunities to move laterally and/or upward among the strata.

What you are advocating is nothing new. The communists said it before and so many people swallowed it.
New or old as long as it works for us CHINA ,i am ok with it!

People love to extol the literacy rate in communist countries, particularly Cuba in comparison to the US, and yet it has been consistent that Cubans who risked their lives to come to 'illiterate' US and never the other way around.


That is not true and if you live in Canada, you know that is not true.

Social mobility in the capitalist free market West is what made the West the desirable target for those who wish the escape whatever politico-socio-economic mire they came from. But the underlying attractant is that the West is free of the notional classes. Am not saying that strata do not exist, but that what made up those classes is wealth, of which the capitalist free market system make available for anyone willing to work for his/her wealth.

Being a boss of a company is not the same as being a member of the nobility. For the latter, the title and its assorted perks are hereditary. For the former, you can be borne into wealth and lose it all by your own efforts, or you can be responsible and build up even more wealth, and gain more respect.

Pointing out whatever alleged elements of the past that may exists today is not a credible criticism/defense of your position.

What you are advocating for China is a modern version of feudalism where while the lower classes maybe educated, establishment of a political elite, even informally, that clique of elites will make efforts to protect themselves and what the state gave them. But I guess that as long as this class allows ordinary Chinese citizens a little bit of freedom here and little bit more there, and make some money here and some more money there, ordinary Chinese will be too busy to realize how controlled they are.
USA constitution made it clear that none American born citizen whatever excellent he or she is can not be elected as president of USA whatsoever and the age must be above 45,etc.....
SO DO NOT tell us you are so free and so civilized have not been controlled! !
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom