Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China Apologist : U.S. Must Decline as China Returns to Former Greatness
US Business & Industry Council ^ | April 6, 2007 | William R. Hawkins

Posted on 04/09/2007 10:26:55 AM PDT by Paul Ross

China Apologist : U.S. Must Decline as China Returns to Former Greatness

By William R. Hawkins
Friday, April 06, 2007

The CNA Corporation is a non-profit organization that is best known for operating the Center for Naval Analysis, which for over 50 years has worked closely with the U.S. Navy to develop strategies and weapon systems to defend American security.  It opened a new China Study Center on March 27, which seems like a natural evolution of its work given Beijing’s rise as a global geopolitical rival to the United States.  China has the world’s third largest shipbuilding industry and its rapidly expanding its navy.  However, by choosing devoted Beijing apologist Chas Freeman to deliver its inaugural lecture, it raised doubts about the direction its research will take.  

Chas Freeman was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs during the first term of the Clinton Administration, and had been Director for Chinese Affairs at the State Department at the end of the Carter administration.  In between, he had been ambassador to Saudi Arabia under President George H. W. Bush.  He is Co-Chair of the United States-China Policy Foundation, a group “founded to ensure the continued improvement of U.S.-China relations.” Freeman embraces this mission, even though he was the diplomat chosen in October 1995 by Chinese General  Xiong Guangkai to convey a threat to use nuclear weapons against the United States over Taiwan.  

Freeman is also on the board of Projects International, Inc., a Washington-based firm that has helped broker a cross-investment agreement between major Chinese and Brazilian oil companies; set up joint ventures for American firms in China; and has provided advice to Chinese venture capital funds.  In his remarks to CNA, Freeman stressed business over any other consideration in China relations.  He argued, “Contrary to repeated forecasts, the many imperfections of China's legal system have neither prevented it from developing a vigorous market economy nor inhibited foreign investment – of which China continues to attract more than any other country, including our own.  China's failure to democratize and its continuing censorship of its media, including the Internet, have not stifled its economic progress or capacity to innovate, which are increasingly impressive.  China's perverse practices with respect to human rights have not cost China's Communist Party or its government their legitimacy.  On the contrary, polling data suggests that Chinese have a very much higher regard for their political leaders and government than Americans currently do for ours.”

If Freeman was polled, he would say the same.  Indeed, his speech was filled with criticism of the United States along side praise for China, taking on bizarre dimensions at times.  He claimed, “At the birth of the United States of America, what some then called ‘the Celestial Kingdom’ loomed large in our imagination....We knew little of China itself, but we had inhaled the European idealization of it as the most ethically advanced and orderly, as well as the most populous, realm on the planet.  As they designed our system of government, the brilliant political engineers who were our founding fathers drew on Leibniz' and Voltaire's musings on the secrets of the good society China exemplified to its Jesuit admirers.”

In Freeman’s view, “our founding fathers' ambitions to build a better system of government than those in Europe” led them to look to China for guidance! What an absurd notion! While there is mention of several European states in The Federalist Papers, there is no mention of China, which for all its opulence and stability, was ruled by a Emperor far more brutal than the British monarch against who the Founders rebelled.  The musings of the foolish Voltaire should be swept into the same dustbin as those of Hollywood dimwits like Shirley MacLaine, who once gushed over the blood-soaked reign of Mao Zedong for creating a more egalitarian and happy society than America.

But it is China’s future which beguiles Freeman.  “China had a couple of bad centuries, but it is back, and it is on the way to the center of global affairs.  As China restores itself to wealth and power, its leaders display a resolute confidence in the future,” he proclaims.  And in what should be a warning, he intones with optimism: “Our country came into being as the age of Atlantic dominance and the industrial revolution began to eclipse China and India.  Americans therefore have no experience with the more normal condition of human history, in which Asia was for millennia the global center of gravity.  One way or another, in the 21st Century, China and its neighbors will determine what the resumption of Asian leadership in more and more fields of human endeavor means for an emerging post-industrial world, including for us Americans.”

Anyone who might think there is danger ahead for the United States is treated disdainfully by Freeman.  “Sometimes, for example, in the matters of Taiwan, Tibet, or the democracy movement in Hong Kong, Americans are enlisted by lobbyists acting on behalf of separatist or dissident movements in greater China.  Those who wish America to go abroad in search of monsters to destroy can always find one worthy of our attention there.  China has become a screen on which Americans can project both our reveries and our nightmares,” he says.

On the question of China’s “authentic aspirations,” which Americans need to understand, looms the national security issue.  Freeman told his audience, “No one still dismisses the PLA as a ‘junkyard army.’ China's recent anti-satellite test, growing participation in UN peacekeeping missions, and near tripling of defense spending since 2000 mark its emergence as a considerable military power.” Yet, we should not react to this.  Indeed, he urged the CNA, whose job it is to worry about such things, to reject “our apparent nostalgia for the aggressive expansionism of our now inconveniently vanished Soviet rivals” and to avoid “writing narrowly focused and highly tendentious reports mandated by Congress to justify the single-issue agendas of our military-industrial complex or, for that matter, our humanitarian-industrial complex.”

He believes China is behaving as a “responsible stakeholder.....This is already the case with respect to the world monetary system, in which the Renminbi yuan is poised to emerge as a major trading and reserve currency within the coming decade.” This assessment flies in the face of reality.  Beijing sets the value of its currency by fiat, undervaluing it by 40 percent or more to gain competitive advantages in world trade.  It is not a convertible currency like the dollar or the euro.  China has built up a trillion dollar hard currency reserve through its trade surpluses, but maintains control of these funds for purely national purposes.  

“I am optimistic,” Freeman proclaims. “China's leaders are trying hard, in connection with the 17th Chinese Communist Party Congress to be held this fall, to develop a restatement of ideological principles that emphasizes the imperatives of societal and international harmony and the sinicization of Western-originated theories of innovation in science and technology.” Toward that end, the U.S. should not try to restrict the transfer of technology to Beijing, but welcome China’s further success.

Freeman seems to have fallen into that school of dissident thought that is looking for a foreign alternative to what his liberal sensibilities find distasteful about American preeminence.  

In a speech to other retired diplomats in February, he launched a marathon assault on every aspect of American policy and society.  “We have sought to exempt ourselves from the jurisdiction of international law.  We have suspended our efforts to lead the world to further liberalization of trade and investment through the Doha Round.  We no longer participate in the UN body charged with the global promotion of human rights.  We decline to discuss global climate change, nuclear disarmament, or the avoidance of arms races in outer space.”

His talk was in accord with his position as head of the Middle East Policy Council.  His twisted view of that region of the world matches his view of Asia.  He denounced the U.S. provision of “military support and political cover for Israeli operations entailing intermittent massacres of civilian populations in Lebanon and Gaza.”  No mention is made of the China-Iran-Hezbollah terrorist connection that is pushing Lebanon towards civil war, and which not only Israel and the U.S., but also most of the Arab world, are trying to contain.

Freeman also told his audience, ”There will be no American imperium.  The effort to bully the world into accepting one has instead set in motion trends that threaten both the core values of our republic and the prospects for a world order based on something other than the law of the jungle.”  Freeman is hopelessly deluded, however, if he thinks China’s rise under its current Communist regime will not continue to be conducted by the law of the jungle.  That is the nature of both economic and geopolitical competition, which Beijing’s leaders know very well from China’s long and violent history.





William R. Hawkins is Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the U.S. Business and Industry Council.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: china; communist; fifthcolumnists; freetraitors; newchinalobby; quislings
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 04/09/2007 10:26:57 AM PDT by Paul Ross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Freeman also told his audience, ”There will be no American imperium. The effort to bully the world into accepting one has instead set in motion trends that threaten both the core values of our republic and the prospects for a world order based on something other than the law of the jungle.”

So, no more attacks on Serbia? ;)

2 posted on 04/09/2007 10:28:29 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
"Freeman seems to have fallen into that school of dissident thought that is looking for a foreign alternative to what his liberal sensibilities find distasteful about American preeminence."

When, oh when, are we going to make treason a capital offense again? People like this make me sick to my stomach. They have not one ounce of loyality to their country nor to their fellow citizens, and no appreciation for the freedom and liberty we enjoy. Freeman should get to live out the rest of his life in China.

3 posted on 04/09/2007 10:31:19 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

China won’t return to greatness until they become democratic.


4 posted on 04/09/2007 10:32:38 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
You elect a Chinese-money-grabbing Dhimmocrat again to the Presidency and you'll get your decline.

And much, much more...

5 posted on 04/09/2007 10:33:03 AM PDT by kromike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

Former greatness? As in thousands of years ago?


6 posted on 04/09/2007 10:34:03 AM PDT by relictele
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole; chimera; Jeff Head; Travis McGee; ALOHA RONNIE; maui_hawaii; tallhappy; JohnHuang2; ...
On the question of China’s “authentic aspirations,” which Americans need to understand, looms the national security issue. Freeman told his audience, “No one still dismisses the PLA as a ‘junkyard army.’

Gee, I guess Freeman hasn't seen some of the posts here where there are always a few who still do....

China's recent anti-satellite test, growing participation in UN peacekeeping missions, and near tripling of defense spending since 2000 mark its emergence as a considerable military power.”

That's only what they have admitted to, Freeman.

Yet, we should not react to this. Indeed, he urged the CNA, whose job it is to worry about such things, to reject “our apparent nostalgia for the aggressive expansionism of our now inconveniently vanished Soviet rivals” and to avoid “writing narrowly focused and highly tendentious reports mandated by Congress to justify the single-issue agendas of our military-industrial complex or, for that matter, our humanitarian-industrial complex.

This China apologist has a little bit of trouble with the Law. And he gets his knickers in a twist when rejected by those people who are concerned for AMERICAN national security...and true liberty for the oppressed around the globe...and so he attempts to misrepresent and demean them when he calls them "Complexes".

H'mmmmm. Dwight Eisenhower he isn't. Seems to me that the guy has a "complex" of his own...

7 posted on 04/09/2007 10:35:43 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: relictele

They fantasize of China’s “greatness” during Mao’s “culture revolution”.


8 posted on 04/09/2007 10:35:48 AM PDT by SolidWood (Islam is an insanity cult that makes everyone act Arab)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

The Chinese will never surpass the US. They have neither the technology nor the ability to think outside the box like we can.


9 posted on 04/09/2007 10:36:36 AM PDT by stm (Believe 1% of what you hear in the drive-by media and take half of that with a grain of salt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Here is an interview with this Washington, D.C. based POS, in which he compares the Bush administration to Nazis:

Freeman’s view: "Calling our campaign against terrorists a "war" is a transparent deception, intended to ensure that political correctness will preclude questioning about either the conduct of the campaign or the governance of the nation. To an unconscionable extent, this has worked.

"As a political technique, what the administration has done is not in the least original. Herman Goering testified at his trial: "...the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders..." http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=179

10 posted on 04/09/2007 10:37:45 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
China has become a screen on which Americans can project both our reveries and our nightmares,” he says.

He then continued: "I've decided to project my fantasies of a benevolent Chinese Empire sweeping over the globe leading us into a new age of enlightenment."

11 posted on 04/09/2007 10:38:03 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Enoch Powell was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stm

The Panda is not tame. It is merely the Smiley face that the Dragon wears to hide its barbarism.


12 posted on 04/09/2007 10:38:42 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

When the Chinese can help 95% of their population that live in abject and horrible poverty and bring them to 30% of the standards of living level of the poorest people in the US, then we may consider talking about China as a real Super Power.


13 posted on 04/09/2007 10:39:14 AM PDT by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: relictele

The last time China contributed to civilization on its own was 2000 years ago.


14 posted on 04/09/2007 10:40:04 AM PDT by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
When, oh when, are we going to make treason a capital offense again?

Isn't it still...at least in theory, if not practice? Just unenforced.

People like this make me sick to my stomach.

Ditto.

They have not one ounce of loyality to their country nor to their fellow citizens, and no appreciation for the freedom and liberty we enjoy.

Which really calls me to question whether or not his affinity for China is the very thing which he would likely deny if asked...the fact that it is in fact the last major bastion of the Communist conspiracy. And becoming a real superpower. Which he says we shouldn't worry about...

Freeman should get to live out the rest of his life in China.

He, and a number of other Quislings likely have this very thought in mind...I just don't think, once the balloon goes up, that they are going to be getting the kind of treatment they expect...

15 posted on 04/09/2007 10:41:27 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: stm

Agree 100%, and anyone who thinks otherwise is an IDIOT and a Knee Jerk Reactionary. The Chinese are not as closely as innovative as the Russians were, not by a long shot, and the Soviet Union is no more.


16 posted on 04/09/2007 10:42:21 AM PDT by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross; Mr. Jeeves

Got waylaid into a rather hostile political argument at lunch last week with a Chinese expat co-worker.

“What gives you the right to invade another country?” she demanded, referring to Iraq.

“Numerous violated and ignored UN resolutions,” I replied, though a better retort might’ve been, “That’s nice, coming from the occupiers of Tibet.”


17 posted on 04/09/2007 10:42:57 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

Two words: Cultural Revolution.


18 posted on 04/09/2007 10:43:18 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
He [Freeman] then continued: "I've decided to project my fantasies of a benevolent Chinese Empire sweeping over the globe leading us into a new age of enlightenment."

This is indeed, an undeniable "Smoking Gun".

It is an abject admission of his irrationality...and mental illness.

19 posted on 04/09/2007 10:43:29 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

And just like the Russians, they build their stuff on the cheap. No self respecting US Submariner would ever set foot in a Rickshaw Rick or Ruskie submarine, they are just plain too dangerous.


20 posted on 04/09/2007 10:44:42 AM PDT by stm (Believe 1% of what you hear in the drive-by media and take half of that with a grain of salt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: stm

Agree 100%.


21 posted on 04/09/2007 10:47:24 AM PDT by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

People who live in Communist countries are a funny lot. They are quick to complain about the US but if you point out an error from their country, they are incredulous. They can’t fathom that anyone would dare to question their country. It is simply not allowed.

When religious groups knock on my door, I see the same treatment. I always start off by asking “What don’t you like about your church?”. Sometimes they leave skid marks.


22 posted on 04/09/2007 10:48:42 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
That the United States will remain on top shouldn't be taken for granted. It definitely isn't a given.

China has much more potential than the United States on account of its much larger population.

Back to the first point:

All nations, including the United States, serve at God's whim, and God decides which nation will be great and for how long.

Americans should still work to try to keep American dominance as long as they can. Enlarged United States of America.

23 posted on 04/09/2007 10:51:09 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( What is your take on Acts 15:20 (abstaining from blood) about eating meat? Could you freepmail?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves
I disagree with the statement that Asia has been dominant in the world except for a couple of hundred years. China was on par with the Roman Empire two thousand years ago. China has not been a central world power for half a millieum. Western Civilization has led the way since the Reformation. China is coming out of its Mao, self induced collectivist torture. China has adopted free enterprise as a means of economic expansion. Its leaders still maintain a parallel and increasingly worthless state sector. China has many more growing pains to work through. Hopefully, its people will demand some measure of political freedom to go with its economic policies.
Also, China has a huge problem within a generation of a huge imbalance in its male-female ratio. Also, its population will decline.
The anti-American statement in the post presumes an American imperium. There is no such imperium. Our country seeks only to confront those that threaten its existence: NAZISM, JAPANESE MILITARISM, COMMUNISM and ISLAMIC TERRORISM. We may be the only superpower now, and may not be the only superpower in 30 years, but we can only destroy our selves if we lack faith in our system.
24 posted on 04/09/2007 10:56:53 AM PDT by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
” China’s recent anti-satellite test”

Perhaps “mr fraser” could tell everyone which group has fought tooth and nail against America having anti-satellite capability

25 posted on 04/09/2007 10:57:26 AM PDT by sticker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Rather christian, republican and Christian.


26 posted on 04/09/2007 10:58:30 AM PDT by Pete from Shawnee Mission
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stm; jveritas; Jeff Head
The Chinese will never surpass the US. They have neither the technology nor the ability to think outside the box like we can.

Actually, it appears with our continuing hemhorraging of industrial...and military...secrets to Red China, it is likely that it is our own people that refuse to think outside the box and recognize a serious threat.

Remember the Cox Commission and the loss of the W-88 design, the Neutron Bomb, and God only knows what else [perhaps even Excalibur]? The loss of the SuperMagnet industry (Magnequench)? The Loss of our Aegis Phased Array radar technology? The loss of a wide range of ship-queiting motor and electronics technology? The loss just recently of our operational technology or missile interception on the Aegis ships? The loss of our B-2 thermal stealth technology? The loss of the passive radar technique for stealth-plane-detection? The loss of the science behind detecting our submarines by satellites using Synthetic Aperature Radars. The loss of the Terfenol-D technology (superior sonars, and a wide variety of immensely valuable other uses). The loss of our GPS technology? And oh, the loss of our manufacturing, not just the technology of our "Night Vision" equipment [ITT fined $100 million]?

And the attempted "poaching" of the Metal-Storm inventor...and his family for a paltry $100 million.

These are just some things which have surfaced to the MSM. What do you want to bet that they are simply the Tip of the Iceberg?

They routinely "Flood the Zone" of our vital-advantage technologies with thousands upon thousands of their "technology students" ...and they waltz off with it Scot-Free.

27 posted on 04/09/2007 10:58:30 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross; Constitutionalist Conservative; Gator113; Zhang Fei; DanielLongo; Tamar1973; ...
Asia pinglist.
28 posted on 04/09/2007 10:58:46 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( What is your take on Acts 15:20 (abstaining from blood) about eating meat? Could you freepmail?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu

If America continues its moral slide into complete decadence, it will also be torn down or more likely, rot from within.


29 posted on 04/09/2007 11:05:08 AM PDT by MBB1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
So, Freeman is a little wacky--but Hawkins ain't so rational himself (though more so than Freeman--not typing much).

China poses a huge risk to this country.

Freeman takes the point of view that China isn't a threat because it will be generally peaceful.
Hawkins recognizes the threat, but primarily from a militaristic (rather than an economic and cultural along with militaristic view).

Freeman does point out that Asia is the "natural" leading continent, Europe only taking the fore in the last half millennium or so, and North America for a some measly sixty years (Rome probably gave Han China a run for its money, though--still some of the Roman Empire was in Asia, and that continent included some of Rome's wealthiest provinces).

30 posted on 04/09/2007 11:08:07 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( What is your take on Acts 15:20 (abstaining from blood) about eating meat? Could you freepmail?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stm; cva66snipe
No self respecting US Submariner would ever set foot in a Rickshaw Rick or Ruskie submarine, they are just plain too dangerous.

Wether less-well-made or not...the seriousness of the threat is what has to be understood.

E.g., regarding "dangerousness" ...Not half as dangerous as being on the ships within the range of their torpedoes...as the U.S. carrier flagship of the Panda-Hugging Admiral who was suitably embarrassed....and demanded to know, in effect, "What's the Meaning of this, don't you know we're trying mighty hard to appease you Chi-Comms???"

31 posted on 04/09/2007 11:09:00 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross; Constitutionalist Conservative; Gator113; Zhang Fei; DanielLongo; Tamar1973; ...
Asia pinglist .
32 posted on 04/09/2007 11:10:48 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( What is your take on Acts 15:20 (abstaining from blood) about eating meat? Could you freepmail?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

There is a very obnoxious PRC bootlicking, anti Taiwanese, anti Japanese, and ostensibly, anti Western, forumite who goes by “freeman” over at the Asiawind “Our World” forum. Based on what this cat stated in the above article, I am inclined to think he’s the same Freeman.


33 posted on 04/09/2007 11:42:48 AM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Those who wish America to go abroad in search of monsters to destroy can always find one worthy of our attention there. China has become a screen on which Americans can project both our reveries and our nightmares,” he says.

What do you mean our nightmares?

A search revealed that there were references to corruption, unemployment, revolution, pollution, or unrest. Which China is this guy writing about?

One more unemployed, one more ton of pollution, one more yuan pocketed by a corrupt Party cadre village leader and -- it could happen -- KA-BOOM!

We've lived through sagging dollars, recessions, inflation, stagnation, stagflation -- that's our "nightmare." The Chi-Coms' nightmare is KA-BOOM! All the things and more that brought Mao's revolution to power and ended the Nationalist government are there. Tick, tick, tick. . . .

34 posted on 04/09/2007 11:45:28 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Rome was not democratic, but it did achieve greatness and dominance. China will not achieve greatness if she cannot eliminate nepotism and corruption. Two weaknesses in her society that lead to the downfall of all her dynasties with the exception of Chin and Yuan and Communist Rule is a dynasty. China is not ready for democracy because 90 percent of her people are rural poor and only 10 percent are middle class or better and they live in the coastal cities. If China became democratic, she will go the way of Venezeula because the pent up resentment of the well to do by the majority rural poor will lead her to “mob” socialism. China’s expansion will be limited by energy and a large elderly population that will be a burden on the smaller younger population (due to elderly longevity and the one child policy). All the Asian Tigers (except Japan) had authoritarian governments that presided over economic expansion and modernization, and once a large middle class is established, the authoritarian government either relinquished to democracy or were driven out. Democracy without a large middle class will lead to Venezeuala mob rule.


35 posted on 04/09/2007 11:47:35 AM PDT by Fee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia

Until Japan did it in the late 1800s, no Asian power has ever, in history, been able to exploit technology, commercialize and mass produce it, the way the West has done. We now see a few imitators of the Japanese success but that’s all they really are. This flaw has been the demise of the long term power of would be Asian hegemons. This is what makes the current era so troubling. Now, would be Asian hegemons seem to have, in a Germany or Stalinist Russia like manner, treated both military and non military technology. We face things never before experienced, the outcome of which is not likely to be good.


36 posted on 04/09/2007 11:51:24 AM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Fee
Rome was not democratic

Over the course of its 1000+ years it was just about everything one time or another.

37 posted on 04/09/2007 11:56:50 AM PDT by RightWhale (3 May '07 3:14 PM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Ancient empires do not as a rule return. They don’t entirely go away, but the conditions of their ascendancy would be near impossible to replicate.
38 posted on 04/09/2007 11:59:25 AM PDT by RightWhale (3 May '07 3:14 PM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

China can only sink into depravity as they murder their young and rid themselves of their females.


39 posted on 04/09/2007 12:01:52 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
“China had a couple of bad centuries, but it is back, ..."

Sounds like the Chicago Cubs...

40 posted on 04/09/2007 12:08:02 PM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

“Gee, I guess Freeman hasn’t seen some of the posts here where there are always a few who still do....”

There’s a difference between dismissing the PLA as a junkyard army and dismissing the idea that it is — or will be for decades — even a remote peer of the United States. For some reason there are always a few who can’t accept that difference.


41 posted on 04/09/2007 12:22:47 PM PDT by Sandreckoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu

“China has much more potential than the United States on account of its much larger population.”

I’ve never, ever understood this line of reasoning. It has never made sense historically. Its huge population could work against it just as easily over the longer term. If mere population size was the dictator of potential, history would look quite vastly different.


42 posted on 04/09/2007 12:26:32 PM PDT by Sandreckoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Sandreckoner
Population size isn't the mere dictator of potential, but it definitely is a big one.

All of the mentioned civilizations in the earlier bulleted post had (comparatively) huge populations, if not the largest population in their region. Both the Roman Empire and Ancient China were estimated to have a quarter of the global population, each. Western Europe "picked up steam" (appropriate for this sentence) after the Industrial Revolution allowed for an immense increase in population (more medicinal practices, more food, etc.). There is a large correlation between population and power.

43 posted on 04/09/2007 12:33:42 PM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( What is your take on Acts 15:20 (abstaining from blood) about eating meat? Could you freepmail?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu

China should, of course, try to be the greatest country on Earth. We should expect that everyone will do that, and that every country will think highly of themselves. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Of course we will make sure they don’t succeed at it because we’ll be better :-)


44 posted on 04/09/2007 1:14:16 PM PDT by mhx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD
I have read some Asian history and know that China referred to itself as the “Middle Kingdom.” In other words, the rest of the world revolves around China. The longer the PRC hangs on the the vestiges of Communist Dictatorial rule, the slower their progress.

I have read that some of the reasons that China stagnated are:
1) Their curtailment of China’s naval exploration centuries ago;
2) Confucius-ism is a positive and a negative for Chinese culture. The negative side of it was that Confucius-ism created a kind of tunnel vision. Education was focused on memorization, contrary to Western Enlightenment and the Socratic and Scientific methods. 3) The Chinese language is written with pictograms, and requires an enormous effort to learn (Western languages are phonetic based). 4) Contrary to European civilization, China became more isolated and failed to adapt by absorbing the best of foreign cultures, as did the West.

45 posted on 04/09/2007 1:20:06 PM PDT by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

molon labe


46 posted on 04/09/2007 1:20:41 PM PDT by chilepepper (The map is not the territory -- Alfred Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Good response. The Republic had evolved into a complex form of government that divided power between two Consuls, elected from the aristocracy (however new men were allowed), ten tribunes of the plebes that any one of which could veto a law, and an assembly where all citizens voted (some tribes had more members and tribes voted) on important measures.
Rome was not a pure Democracy like the Athenian Republic, but it divided power, and every citizen had some voice in the outcome in some way. By ancient standards, it was much more pluralistic than the absolute monarchies of Egypt, Persia or Hellenistic states in the Med.
Once of the reasons that Rome’s Republic collapsed was that its government was not able to handle the huge empire it had created. Two Consuls were elected every year, and until Gaius Marius in the early 1st Century BC, Consuls were not allowed to be elected in successive years, effectively limiting the time a commander could pursue a campaign.
47 posted on 04/09/2007 1:33:18 PM PDT by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
"When, oh when, are we going to make treason a capital offense again? When the hippies are kicked out of office because of their advanced age. Either htat or a miracle.
48 posted on 04/09/2007 7:49:52 PM PDT by Niuhuru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All; Paul Ross

.

NEVER FORGET

.

Then CLINTON National Security Advisor SANDY BERGER, after he had already been Chief Washington D.C. Lobbyist for the Communist Chinese,

...went on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ to “guarantee” the American People that there was “no way” the Communist Chinese could get our precious Missile and Space Satellite technology while launching U.S. Space Satellites from inside Communist China.

Which they, of course, prompty did.

For,
...the Enemy is now Within...
...and always has been.

And is planning to once again occupy our Oval Office for America’s last time.

.

NEVER FORGET

.


49 posted on 04/09/2007 9:00:19 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE ("ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer/Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.lzxray.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

Lesson for these morons: Geopolitics in not a zero sum game in a multipolar world.


50 posted on 04/09/2007 9:01:34 PM PDT by Clemenza (NO to Rudy in 2008! New York's Values are NOT America's Values! RUN FRED RUN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson