Can China Avoid the Soviet Union's Fate?
(Updated )

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? obviously, nicholi is scared of china, that's the reason he tirades this site with china insults. notice, he never says anything good about china, only bad.

my friends, china has made alot of progress, but, they still have alot of progress to make. but, right now, u.s , russia, and china are the most influential in the world.
the truth about nicholi
   Monday, January 20, 2003 at 21:02:58 (PST)    [209.29.85.138]
TSJ,

Hey dude! I've been busy with work so I'ven't been on this site for a while, but I did manage to see some earlier posts of urs.

The fact of the matter is, China has always defied Westernization, and today it still does! And NO, KFCs and McDs in major Chinese cities is not what we call Westernization. What China does is that it borrows Western concepts to suit its own culture. Communism was used to contain the large Chinese population and to drive out certain ruling elite clans from power so that Chinese rule can be centralized. I guess it's safe to assume that South Korea and Japan also borrowed Western concepts, but unlike China, they have become subservient to White people.

I think the Chinese are too clever and progressive to be in Russia's fate. As history has proven, the Chinese were never united, but somehow we managed to see ourselves as Chinese. The country has survived major turmoils due to disunity and foreign invasions, so China cannot be in a worse situation than before.

Hahaha..Canto pride again! Let me tell u, many other Chinese groups envy the Guangdong Chinese. Whether ur Toisan, Hakka or Teochow, we call ourselves the 'Tangs', a term that the Northerners, Shanghainese, Fujianese, and Taiwanese do not use too often, in fact rarely! These other groups dislike us because we have become too 'wordly' or too 'influential'. We hog up the spotlight for everything that is Chinese. Every major overseas Chinese community is Canto of some sort. When u think of Chinese food, Cantonese cuisine comes to mind. When people refer to Chinese pop or celebs, it's those cheesy HK singers and actors again, but hey, at least they're famous! Most of all, the other Chinese dislike us because we have more benjamins than they do. We're risk takers, and have been rewarded for being so!

What's up with the Taiwanese hitting the Hkers again! Ok, HK was a British colony at one point in time, and Brits are like gods to some HKers.

Taiwanese are more independent than HKers? Hahahaha....Do people actually think Taiwanese history is all that rosy? In fact, Taiwan has been ruled by the Japanese and then the notorious corrupt mainlanders. Many of the older Taiwanese folks have a slave mentality towards the Japanese. The ga los forced them to speak their lingo and follow their customs. Then the corrupt mainlanders who invaded the island, raped and pillaged the natives like animals. Now tell me, how dare the Taiwanese say #~@@ about HKers!
LSD
   Monday, January 20, 2003 at 11:35:48 (PST)    [208.10.65.132]
Everyone should realize "Nicholi" is too pathetic for real debate. He's a troll with no real insight or cogent argument. He focuses purely on military power and ignores economic growth, which is the most important phenomenon happening within China. He's merely seeking attention and spewing forth xenophobic racist BS seems to be his only avenue for expression. I pity him. Anyone who has a brain realizes his claims of personal accomplishment are utterly false; it is unnecessary to continually point out how ridiculous they are. OK, he's a convenient punching bag and always good for a laugh; but always there's the tint of pathos to his incoherent rants.

TSJ, on the other hand, is not unintelligent and rather is the sort of "Weak Link" discussed in the article on this very site:

http://goldsea.com/Features/Essays/weak.html

He would rather attack China than support Asian American causes. Attacking "Phil Chen" for a Mandarin-sounding surname, then extrapolating to Taiwanese origin, then attacking Taiwanese; such is TSJ's little game. I would never disparage anyone based on their Chinese origin; those who dissed Cantonese in retaliation against TSJ, please realize you are stooping to his level. Dr. Sun Yat-sen was of Cantonese origin, and I have only the greatest respect for those patriotic Cantonese who gave their lives for the unification of China divided under the warlord regimes. Many Overseas Chinese are of Cantonese origin, including the early immigrants to America. We owe them respect for their efforts to create a place for Chinese Americans. These people fought hard for their rights, mostly a losing battle because of the overwhelmingly racist nature of Caucasian Americans, but they hung on tenaciously. Virtually every racist law against Chinese Americans was legally challenged in the courts by these plucky people.

For TSJ, on the other hand, I have absolutely no respect. Whatever his motives for attacking China and fellow Chinese, people like him are a great impediment to Asians and Asian American causes, further dividing us in the face of adversity. It is important to be able to spot these folks and be on guard against them. I can only hope that he may grow more mature in the future; but there seems to be little hope of that.

The mention of Zheng He is interesting; we should note that Zheng He's family name was Ma Sanbao, and he was a Chinese Muslim from Yunnan, of the Yi tribal minority. Louise Levathes' excellent book "When China Ruled the Seas" is highly recommended for anyone with further interest on the voyages of Zheng He.
Yeah Right
   Sunday, January 19, 2003 at 14:09:11 (PST)    [68.53.7.96]
another voice,

I think Nick has us both confused. If you read some of his post from a few days ago. You will see he has improperly credited us with each other actions on goldsea.

I guess since both our handles begin with "a," he is easily confused.
AC Dropout
   Sunday, January 19, 2003 at 09:45:11 (PST)    [24.136.115.189]
Nicoli Servia PHD EMP,

"I personally would like to see China become more like America"

That's nice Nick. But time and time again China has said it doesn't want to be like America. It wants to be like Singapore.

So face that facts. China no want to be like USA. okey dokey....

"I remember having a professor in Philosophy who was hell-bent on proving that the philosophical way was corret and that the world that ignored philosophy was totally wrong.
A throw-back to Socrates.
Sometimes I wonder why people like Socrates and my proffessor just couldn't leave things alone. Apparently, I know why and your question is simply reciprocal."

Actually I hold a degree in philosophy so I think you are talking about the debate about the Socratic vs. Dionysian thinking. Logic vs. Creativity. However, I fail to see the relationship in our discussion about China. Since one can just say China never had a concept about Socratic and Dionysian thought. The were more about Meng vs. Lao. But you don't hold a degree in philosophy so why do you bring it up?
AC Dropout
   Saturday, January 18, 2003 at 10:01:15 (PST)    [24.136.115.189]
Nicki, you said,

"You have repeatedly called me everything from a liar to a farce yet, you choose to accept anything you can make light of whether it is true or not. You are the one who is full of **** considering hat you call a man a liar yet need his lies to insult him."

So, you are a liar. You just admitted it. How did I use your lies to insult you? All I mentioned was that you are a Blk man, and I don't remember (me personally at least) ever racially taunting you. But it seems like you are trying to say you are not Blk in this statement up there. If you lie about this, than how can we believe anything you say?

How bout bringing in you CIA/NSA boss to vouch for you?

Oh and by the way, I thought you were in the NSA. Now, suddenly you break us into the CIA world as well?

"The truth is fluid and subject to change if we want it to."

HUh?? The truth is not fluid and subject to change. What is fluid and subject to change is people's interpretation and understanding and expression of truth.
Truth is wishy-washy to only the demented and the pathalogical liar or both.
hmm
another voice
   Saturday, January 18, 2003 at 09:59:58 (PST)    [68.9.169.159]
"The fact remains.... he can postulate all he wants like some wannabe academic. In the meantime Asia will rise to unforseen heights while cobwebs form over his face. Then he will die and go away forgotten."

This is basically pretty much the bottom line. China may still be a poor country, but it has already become, among other things:
1. the sole reason why the Asian financial crisis of the late 90s didn't get worse and didn't spread to the rest of the world. If China had devalued its currency to stay competitive, the end result would be a spreading of woes to America and the loss of billions if not trillions in investment value.

2. biggest holder of U.S. dollar reserves outside of the U.S.

2. the fourth largest economy

3. the country attracting the most foreign investment

4. the biggest market for cell phones

5. with a middle class that surpasses some European countries

6. a huge exporter and producer of not only cheap goods, but of high tech

7. the second-best rockect and space program

8. projected to continue its trend by ACTUAL ECONOMISTS AND EXPERTS and not people who prtend to be academically sufficient but fail by a long shot

The above is what really matters, despite this endless dribble about dirty Chinese buildings, hookers, sagging Chinese women, racial taunts, how China has a lack of heat in its buildings, how Chinese DVD players break down, the Falungong, the Maglev train and how bad it is to have it, ...and on and on and blah and blah

Think about it TSJ. You seem to be impressed by Nicki's knowledge, but he talks about all useless information...tidbits of fact from a newspaper here and a picture he took there. Do you have a college degree (community colleges doesn't count)? Do you know what it is to really analyse and hold a decent, intelligent conversation, not to mention being an expert/professional economist, political scientists, and whatnot? The stuff that Nicki brings up is just childish and ridiculously petty, not to mention having nothing to do with anything at all.

(Has anyone ever seen that show Cheers? There was this loser postman, Cliff, who would quote useless facts just like Nicki. ANd he was definitely an idiot to almost anyone beside him. )

My advice to you all is just to ignore him. You have to realize that he wants the attention; he wants people to debate him over meaningless minutia. Just ignore him.
another voice
   Saturday, January 18, 2003 at 09:17:44 (PST)    [68.9.169.159]

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS