CAN CHINA AVOID THE SOVIET UNION'S FATE?

he People's Republic of China likes to compare itself with the United States. Both governments were forged to throw off the imperial yoke. Both are amalgams of many races and nationalities. Both are great continental powers capable of harnessing immense resources to promote national agendas around the world.
     Beijing's bosses cite these parallels to justify China's ambition of returning Taiwan to the fold -- forcibly if necessary -- and violently suppressing movements for Tibetan independence, Moslem separatism and religious tolerance. The party line: "In a few decades we will be as prosperous, unified and democratic as you Americans."
     Unfortunately, some observers see closer parallels to the former Soviet Union.
     Founded in 1910 to free Russian peasants from oppressive landowners and a weak imperial government, the Soviet government quickly and ruthlessly expanded into a superpower that rivaled the United States in military might and reach. On top of nearly 300 million citizens of several dozen captive nationalities, the Soviet Union became the puppetmasters of virtually every Eastern European government. By 1989 it was buckling under the burden of superpower competition. In 1991 the communists lost power to the reformist Yeltsin. The Soviet Union broke apart into Russia and a dozen independent republics. Today Russia is a nation of 150 million struggling to build a capitalist economy from the rubble of the communist meltdown.
     Among the Soviets' earliest converts were Mao Tsetung, Zhou Enlai and other young Chinese intellectuals who saw in communism salvation for the Chinese people from western imperialism and internal corruption. Mao's long struggle against Chiang Kaishek and the Kuomingtang would have ended disasterously without the support of dozens of ethnic minorities in northwestern China who believed his promise of ultimate political autonomy. Their help proved more valuable to Mao than the billions in American aid and direct military assistance to Chiang. By 1949 the Kuomingtang had fled to Taiwan and the PRC ruled the mainland.
     Beijing's bosses have been as ruthless as the Soviets in consolidating territory and suppressing separatist movements. But they have been far more successful in creating a functioning economy. They began capitalist reforms in 1979. By 2001 China's economy had become free enough to enter the World Trade Organization. For the past two decades it has grown at an average annual rate of 9%. Few of China's 1.25 billion go hungry and about 125 million enjoy living standards comparable to Malaysia and the Philippines. By some measure China has just surpassed Japan in GDP and will surpass the U.S. by 2025.
     But China's future as a united nation is far from assured.
     Even assuming peaceful reunification with Taiwan and victory over Tibetan separatists, Beijing's leaders face some big hurdles. They must integrate a billion subsistence-level farmers and workers into the consumer economy of the east coast or face ethnic discontent on a scale that would dwarf America's racial strife of the 1960s. Yet burdening the developed regions could breed separatist sentiment in Guangdong, Fujien, Manchuria and other regions. Over 100 languages and dialects are spoken in China. Long-suppressed religious minorities are becoming better organized thanks to the internet and other communications technology.
     Are China's prospects for staying united more like those of the U.S. or of the former Soviet Union?

(Updated )

Lemme just take Phil & the so called "Rock". You two obviously have just read one or two posts of mine and decided to nitpick details. I don't have time to shoot down every one of your trivial points in a forum type setting.

However, in general, if you read all my past posts (past 2 weeks or so), it will be clear 1) I am not Jewish 2) I am not pro-Judaism.

Stripped of the religious stuff, each religion/philosophy is just a value system. What I do is take a look at the best ideas from each, that's all.

Now there are two good areas about Judaism that other religions don't have: 1) it's updated 2) unlike other religions which are all sort of "universal love" & altruism, Judaism promotes: the primacy of looking out for yourself and your own group, allows cut-throat tactics with in all sorts of settings, business, etc, condoning and promoting scheming/lying to better yourself, and such. This is just a very, very brief overview.

Next time you wonder why a handful of Jews seem to run everything, well, you will remember gzus tried to give you one angle on this issue, to give you an idea of one area of their relative strength vis-a-vis everyone else, and that is the Talmud is very pro-business.
And the best is, like I mentioned, Hamilton's rule is weaved into the fabric of Judaism.

Back to the value system/operating system concept. Everyone has one. Whether it's religion or your own made up atheist OS you have one. As you can imagine, most of the operating systems people try to write on their own stink. That means most atheists, especially Chinese. You have a crappy operating system, well, no matter how good your hardware is you're greatly limited. Let me leave it at that.

With regard to religions, since they are only value systems to me, and they are just the sum of the ideas contained within them, and how adaptive these ideas are. I can tell you in a comparison Buddism, Confucianism, and Taoism lack MANY critical ideas. In fact, they don't even touch upon multiple areas of significance at all. Now Judaism/Christianity is far from complete as well. What is clear it's possible to do better than all of them.

Btw, the Talmud is only a small part of what I suggested contained good ideas, and some out there just got fixated to this detail- the Talmud is far from complete or perfect;it just has many valuable ideas other religions/philosophies doesn't.

Okay, I'm done with this religion debate, this really is not something easy to debate in a forum setting or with batamweights around like the "asian rock".
Phil- decent points, but all are irrelevant to what I'm saying.

NYhomeboy- I gave u a very general outline, you seem like u can take it from here if u wanted to.

AC- "superior MIGs" tee hee hee
gzus in NYC
   Sunday, May 26, 2002 at 12:41:21 (PDT)
gzus in NYC,

ROC has no military capability to stop PRC military assualt. ROC cannot stop 500 missles being lauched on the island.

Yes and how many USA fighter jets does ROC have. And you think all ROC pilots go to TOP GUN training?

Assuming the worst case situation. USA 7th fleet would never arrive in time.

USA will not sell top weapon systems to ROC because they also know the reality of ROC/PRC unification is a possibility. And I doubt they want PRC to get all of USA technology for free.

At least we agree on Bush.
AC Dropout
   Sunday, May 26, 2002 at 12:03:02 (PDT)
positron,

"However, though the Mig-29 itself is a better plane, the electronics suite installed in the F-16 is actually superior to that of the Mig-29. So, in light of that, AC Dropout was not entirely correct."

To elaborate on my stance the former USSR philosophy of all-condition equipment and their simplicity of design is also what make the Mig-29 a better fighter. In prolong conflicts the more simplistic electronic gear will make them easier to maintain and have a higher tolerance from breakdown.

It is similar to the AK assualt rifle and US M-16 rifle. USSR philosophy and ability to produce military equipment is not to be taken lightly on the world stage.

AC Dropout
   Sunday, May 26, 2002 at 11:56:47 (PDT)
SoCal Asiam
What you can't seem to get through your head is that there are plenty of good-looking people outside the US as well. My extended family is mostly in Taiwan.

I never made any comment about Asians not in the U.S. Also, I know many New York Jews aren't that hot, thanks, many of them are swarthy with darky curly hairy, btw I'm ABC, not Jewish. Well, since ur frank, I'll be frank as well, IMO the hottest group ON AVERAGE, are the nordic/WASP whites.

gzus in NYC
   Sunday, May 26, 2002 at 11:30:37 (PDT)

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS