Perhaps you should do extensive study of reliable informational reading materials to understand the "reflection of the times", instead of watching films commisioned by the the CCP. You wouldn't expect UMNO to give a reliable unbiased assessment of their achievements, so it makes no sense to now give the benefit of the doubt to the CCP who went so far as to create a "Great Internet Firewall" to control what chinese can and cannot see.
China is doing a great experiment to attain the Confucian ideal of 大同世界. Until now humans have tried using Confucianism, Democracy and Communism to achieve an ideal utopian society. All have failed.
Capitalism is very good in creating wealth but very bad in distributing wealth.
Communism focused on end result of equality. From each its best to each its need. Very idealistic. Not good in creating wealth. In the end it is "commom poverty".
Ancient Confucianism was government of the emperor, for the people but not by the people. Original Democracy was government of the people,for the people and by the people. Today's American democracy is government of the 1 %, for the 1% and by the 1%.
Communism was supposed to be government of the proletariat, for the proletariat and by the Party on behalf of the proletariat.
Modern China is trying to combine the ideas of Marxism and Confucianism to create what is called "Socialism with Chinese characteristics." The next 30 years will be crucial to its success or failure in achieving 共同富裕。
Posted by qqq3333 > Oct 20, 2021 9:15 AM | Report Abuse
Tobby > Oct 20, 2021 12:05 AM | Report Abuse
Qqq! The thing is chinese China are very enterprising race! ======
enterprising race but hand of sand in the century of humiliation.
Answer : All this claim of victimization by outside forces is pure baloney! Look, the British didn't force chinese China to consume opium! It was pure greed by chinese warlords of the time! Japan almost conquer China through Puyi! China civilization collapse in perfect storm of internal civil wars!
Cupcake....the positive transformation of China last 40 years is the greatest in human history even surpassing the expectations of its chief architect Deng. It covers 20 percent of human population and elimination of extreme poverty in China.
Generally China do not like to comment of other people internal politics unless they go interfere with China.
Doomsday predictions for China has been wrong like forever and will continue to be wrong. By 2049, they intend to be first in all aspects including materialism, environmental, consumption, health, equality, education, peace, stability, moral, ....no one as ambitious as the CCP.
For thousands of years, China not short of high quality political thinkers and philosophers....but only with peace and stability can they do their best ideas into action.
The generation who put up the Goddess of democracy in 1989 have now grown up to be national leaders. Ask to see if any of them still feels the same way?
"greatest in human history", yet living standards are still lower than Japan, South Korea, Singapore. Most Asian countries (including upper-middle income country, Malaysia ) also started from the bottom and reduced extreme poverty, not just China. So the question remains, why should developing countries follow China's development model when China itself have not manage to achieve high-income status like Japan, Singapore, and South Korea?
First in all aspects? That's nice and all, nothing wrong with being ambitious. Even Malaysia, in its 12MP, plans to be a high-tech and high-income country in just 4 years. But until those ambitions are actually realised, what is there to shout about?
Are you Malaysian? You seem waaaay too excited and defensive of China to be Malaysian.
Wonder why they are so many people like to carry xi ball , if you think here not good and there are so good why afraid to be,migrate?then you can share real experience to here winning thousand words isnt it? If not why you afraid for?
Some people really like to describe China as if it's some kind of Wakandian utopia, as if it's the richest, smartest, strongest, most advance, most moral country in the world, that can do nothing wrong and whose leaders will always get it right. It's downright crazy. Perhaps some critical thinking should be in order to understand the real reality of China.
Haha, I thought some people really like to describe USA as if it's some kind of Wakandian utopia, as if it's the richest, smartest, strongest, most advance, most moral country in the world, that can do nothing wrong and whose leaders will always get it right. It's downright crazy. Perhaps some critical thinking should be in order to understand the real reality of USA.
China CCP is pratical and pragmatic:
摸着石头过河, that translates to “cross the river by feeling the stones”. It is generally attributed to Deng Xiaoping, who used it as a metaphor to describe China’s approach towards the reform and opening (改革开放).
With opening and market economy China had reached a stage where many social ills of capitalist is showing it urgly self hence the need of common prosperity 共同富裕 China is doing a great experiment to attain the Confucian ideal of 大同世界.
Either way, our world is witnessing a grand experiment that’s now underway: China and the West, facing very similar societal problems, have now, thanks to Wang Huning, embarked on radically different approaches to addressing them. And with China increasingly challenging the United States for a position of global geopolitical and ideological leadership, the conclusion of this experiment could very well shape the global future of governance for the century ahead.
N.S. Lyons is an analyst and writer living and working in Washington, D.C. He is the author of The Upheaval.
qqq3, China is over 90% Han and the Han people believe in a common ancestor and share a common literature. We may not be able to understand each other‘s spoken language, but we share the same literature whether it is the Romance of the Three Kingdoms or the Confucian classics. This is unique to Chinese civilisation. No other country can be like China in this regard.
The CCP has to take as reality the nature of Chinese society which is deeply rooted in its own history and tradition. The CCP cannot operate in Western society or Russian society. It operates in the reality of Chinese society. So as Mao Zedong said very early on: in the end, practice leads theory. You begin with reality, seeking truth from facts. The CCP is capable of leading the Chinese people but it is certainly not capable of leading other people. By the way CCP do not wish nor has any obligation to lead other people so please mind you own business.
Most technocratic government? Then why still not developed high income country like Japan, SK, and Singapore?
The CCP took into account the nature of chinese society? You mean by destroying the The Four Olds: Old Ideas, Old Culture, Old Habits, and Old Customs of chinese people during the cultural revolution. Mao considered the Confucian belief system to be bourgeois and reactionary, a philosophy that had too long kept the chinese people backward. So “The Analects” was banned and Confucian texts burned. Qufu Confucius’s tomb was blown up by the Red Guard. Next, chinese architecture were destroyed, classical literature and Chinese paintings were torn apart, and Chinese temples were desecrated. With all that destruction of chinese culture and caused by the CCP during Mao's era, I think remnants of true traditional chinese culture can only be found among its diaspora, where Malaysian/singaporean/taiwanese chinese are more attuned to traditional chinese culture.
Taiwan didn't blow up Confusious' tomb, unlike the PRC. Traditional chinese culture in mainland China was destoyed by the CCP. They didn't just abandoned it or changed it, they went so far as to destroy it, and even killed people so that it doesn't even exist in the mind.
And btw, Taiwan is a high-income economy unlike China. So talks of the CCP government being the best form of government that can govern the chinese people is false. That's probably why the CCP wants to take over Taiwan, it a testament to their failure. That there is a viable and better alternative to one-party dictatorship rule. So your love for the CCP is not based on facts, but ideological driven.
Uniting Taiwan? You mean by invading and killing Taiwanese and taking everything the Taiwanese built through their own hardwork. As if destroying chinese culture wasnt enough, now thhe CCP wants to fight with other chinese. Barbaric. Let me guess, you expect the CCP to "adapt" or "reinvent" themselves out of that too XD.
Modern China is trying to combine the ideas of Marxism and Confucianism to create what is called an ideal utopian society "大同世界" common prosperity. =========
wang huning :
“Since 1949, we have criticized the core values of the classical and modern structures, but have not paid enough attention to shaping our own core values.” Therefore: “we must create core values.” Ideally, he concluded, “We must combine the flexibility of [China’s] traditional values with the modern spirit [both Western and Marxist].”
Then china won't get its supplies of advance semiconductors, very important in powering anything that needs decent computing power. How will factories assembling iPads in China run without supplies of Apple M1 chip that can only be manufacured by Taiwan. So China will only shoot itself in the foot.
Plus, China may be the biggest market (in PPP), but it's not the only market. And unless they control the financial system like the US does, sanctions wont work to the degree of collapsing Taiwan. It's more likely that Taiwanese will be more angry and hate China, making "reunification" even more unlikely.
Q1: What is the U.S. “One China” policy? Why does it exist?
A1: When the United States moved to recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and de-recognize the Republic of China (ROC) in 1979, the United States stated that the government of the People’s Republic of China was “the sole legal Government of China.” Sole, meaning the PRC was and is the only China, with no consideration of the ROC as a separate sovereign entity.
The United States did not, however, give in to Chinese demands that it recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan (which is the name preferred by the United States since it opted to de-recognize the ROC). Instead, Washington acknowledged the Chinese position that Taiwan was part of China. For geopolitical reasons, both the United States and the PRC were willing to go forward with diplomatic recognition despite their differences on this matter. When China attempted to change the Chinese text from the original acknowledge to recognize, Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher told a Senate hearing questioner, “[W]e regard the English text as being the binding text. We regard the word ‘acknowledge’ as being the word that is determinative for the U.S.” In the August 17, 1982, U.S.-China Communique, the United States went one step further, stating that it had no intention of pursuing a policy of “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan.”
To this day, the U.S. “one China” position stands: the United States recognizes the PRC as the sole legal government of China but only acknowledges the Chinese position that Taiwan is part of China. Thus, the United States maintains formal relations with the PRC and has unofficial relations with Taiwan. The “one China” policy has subsequently been reaffirmed by every new incoming U.S. administration. The existence of this understanding has enabled the preservation of stability in the Taiwan Strait, allowing both Taiwan and mainland China to pursue their extraordinary political and socioeconomic transitions in relative peace.
Q2: What is the U.S. position on who has sovereignty over Taiwan?
A2: In the San Francisco Treaty of Peace of 1951, Japan renounced “all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.” Neither the Republic of China nor the People’s Republic of China were parties to the treaty, and thus neither was declared a beneficiary of the Japanese renouncement.
While President Richard Nixon’s private notes show him willing to recognize the status of Taiwan as determined and part of China, subsequent U.S. documents and statements show the United States as having no position on the Taiwan sovereignty question.
The U.S. position regarding sovereignty over Taiwan remains steady and consistent with its “one China policy”: both sides of the Taiwan Strait should mutually and peacefully agree to a resolution of this as yet unsettled issue. The United States doesn’t agree with Beijing’s claim to sovereignty over Taiwan, nor does it agree with Taipei that the ROC is an independent, sovereign state.
Q7: Why is China so fearful of Taiwan becoming independent?
A7: With the return of Hong Kong to Chinese control in July 1997, Taiwan remains one of the few areas over which Beijing claims sovereignty but does not control. It is widely viewed by Chinese on the mainland as the last vestige of the century of humiliation that began with the Opium Wars in the middle of the nineteenth century. The persisting separation of the mainland and Taiwan is also portrayed as a hindrance to China’s reemergence as a great power, which President Xi Jinping has dubbed the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. The Chinese Communist Party’s legitimacy is linked to its pledge to achieve reunification of Taiwan with the motherland. A commonly held view on the mainland is that no Chinese leader could remain in power if he allowed Taiwan to separate from the PRC and be recognized by the international community as an independent sovereign state.
The Anti-Secession Law, adopted by Beijing in 2005, sets forth three conditions under which China would be justified in using “non-peaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity: 1) Taiwan independence forces cause Taiwan’s secession from China; 2) Major incidents entailing Taiwan’s secession from China occur; or 3) possibilities for peaceful reunification are completely exhausted.
This book is the result of the author's many years of experience and observation throughout his 26 years in the stockbroking industry. It was written for general public to learn to invest based on facts and not on fantasies or hearsay....