China: The Sleeping Dragon

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

You can only have enemies if you emotionally prefer something to be other than what it presently is.

What if you prefer something to be other than the way that another strongly enough prefers it to be that the other personis willing to do whatever it takes to change it to his preference?

Lets say that you prefer to keep your belongings and a robber prefers that he have your posessions. You are not prefering anything to be different than the way that it is, but isn't the robber still your enemy, especially if he wants things to change badly enough that he is willing, able, and preparing to shoot you for your posessions? Is he not your enemy until he has you at gunpoint? Until after he shoots you?

[Tharan]

You can only have enemies if you emotionally prefer something to be other than what it presently is.

What if you prefer something to be other than the way that another strongly enough prefers it to be that the other personis willing to do whatever it takes to change it to his preference?

Interesting. If a person prefers what is not real, then what does that actually say about that preference?

And yet, what is actually/objectively real? What has potential at any moment? What is the moment of differentitation between what is perceived to be real and what is "really" real? Is there not always some unaviodable delay between the event and its functional interpolation?

IMO, this furthers the argument for the "illusory" nature of reality. Nature is the ultimate in impartiality.

Lets say that you prefer to keep your belongings and a robber prefers that he have your posessions. You are not prefering anything to be different than the way that it is, but isn't the robber still your enemy, especially if he wants things to change badly enough that he is willing, able, and preparing to shoot you for your posessions? Is he not your enemy until he has you at gunpoint? Until after he shoots you?

It is a philosophical question of achieving superiority via a defensive or offensive stance. Ownership is another illusion. Thus the answer is, as it can only be, physical.

It is a issue relating to expenditure of energy over time. The interval of time relates to the local intensity. It is a cost/benefit analysis that should be determined by understanding the time commitment your opponent has to their cause and weighed against your own commitment and potential output.

The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.
- Sun Tzu

[millipodium]

You guys are acting as if this is inevitable. Their economy is in runaway mode BECAUSE OF OUR BUSINESS. It's not mandatory that we empower our enemies, regardless of what the neocon noahide theocrats tell us.

There is no fate.

We should embargo china now.

Of course it will have an impact, but the long term benefit will be having saved the world from global fascist totalitarianism.

Having a large economy only translates to freedom if that's a value the leadership holds.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

We should embargo china now.

Of course it will have an impact, but the long term benefit will be having saved the world from global fascist totalitarianism.

Having a large economy only translates to freedom if that's a value the leadership holds.

An embargo is not freedom, it is governmental manipulation. Fascism would come in wearing a cloak. I see this as evidence of prodigality versus frugality. Do you save for what you really want or do you get what you want right now? Do you even know what you really want? Many Americans have not economically matured beyond being small children who go into the store, point at everything and say "I want that."

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Tharan wrote:

Ownership is another illusion.

In the realm of ultimate truth, this is true. Since we are on the worldly matters forum, I was referencing the physical plane of existance.

and

IMO, this furthers the argument for the "illusory" nature of reality. Nature is the ultimate in impartiality.

Yes. IMO reality has many facets, which also contributes to this theory.

[sky]

tharan

Ownership is another illusion.

my stuff tends to get stolen or lost so instead of getting upset as i once did - i just figure it isn't mine anymore or it just appeared to be 'mine' temporarily - lessons in impermanence

[millipodium]

We should embargo china now.

Of course it will have an impact, but the long term benefit will be having saved the world from global fascist totalitarianism.

Having a large economy only translates to freedom if that's a value the leadership holds.

An embargo is not freedom, it is governmental manipulation. Fascism would come in wearing a cloak. I see this as evidence of prodigality versus frugality. Do you save for what you really want or do you get what you want right now? Do you even know what you really want? Many Americans have not economically matured beyond being small children who go into the store, point at everything and say "I want that."

Nobody said an embargo is freedom. Yes, It is governmental manipulation. It's saying "we do not condone slave labor, it's wrong to become dependant on it"

That china will magically become free through fascist business practices is a lie.

I don't know why cricism of americans must reflexively follow criticism of the chinese. They are totalitarians. It's not cool. It's not enlightened.

We should embargo them now.

[Cory Duchesne]

Mill wrote:

Nobody said an embargo is freedom. Yes, It is governmental manipulation. It's saying "we do not condone slave labor, it's wrong to become dependant on it"

That china will magically become free through fascist business practices is a lie.

I wonder what percentage of America's income is derived from the sort of bussiness practices that out-sources to the point of being dependent on child-labor as well?

I here the chocolate industry pretty much rests on child labor.

I wouldnt be suprised if america profits a great deal from out-sourcing to China herself.

But I don't follow these things too closely.

Maybe someone can help me out here. In the meantime I'll do some searches.

[millipodium]

Mill wrote:

Nobody said an embargo is freedom. Yes, It is governmental manipulation. It's saying "we do not condone slave labor, it's wrong to become dependant on it"

That china will magically become free through fascist business practices is a lie.

I wonder what percentage of America's income is derived from the sort of bussiness practices that out-sources to the point of being dependent on child-labor as well?

I here the chocolate industry pretty much rests on child labor.

I wouldnt be suprised if america profits a great deal from out-sourcing to China herself.

But I don't follow these things too closely.

Maybe someone can help me out here. In the meantime I'll do some searches.

laogai

[millipodium]

And yes, Clinton did it. No matter what liberals try to do, it always ends in totalitarianism.

The moral relativism of the left combined with the business orientation of the right has produced something vile and nasty. This is sick and dehumanizing for the entire world.

DIVEST NOW!

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1533
In their enthusiasm for what they see as China’s move toward capitalism, many in the West seem to have abandoned their firm moral stance. In 1994, President Clinton—who had condemned despots from Baghdad to Beijing in 1993—reversed his position and de-linked human rights from U.S. trade policy. The President’s 1993 executive order required China to make “overall, significant progress” in human rights and prison labor to attain most-favored-nation status. But the evidence indicates that large number of laogai-made products—including chain hoists, tea, steel pipes, artificial flowers, hand tools and graphite—still enter the United States.

President Clinton’s executive order also required “ensuring humane treatment of prisoners, such as by allowing access to prisoners by international humanitarian and human rights organizations.” Senior Red Cross officials told me in February 1995 in Geneva that they were pessimistic about reaching an agreement with the Beijing government to visit laogai camps in China.

China’s cavalier attitude toward human rights is characterized by the re-arrest of many of China’s most important dissidents, such as Democracy Wall activist Wei Jingsheng, who after nearly 15 years in the laogai was released in September 1993, only to be re-arrested and sentenced last December to another 14 years. So long as the world averts its eyes, Chinese officials will have little incentive to stop the repression that Wei and countless others have fallen victim to.

Deng understands that China’s “capitalist” reforms risk ushering in unstoppable demands for political change. As Deng’s rule comes to an end, several potential political crises threaten to shake up the Communist Party. In the face of changed political beliefs, bureaucratic corruption, immigration pressures and the varied demands of local forces frustrated with regional lags in economic growth, the party’s next power struggle could result in violent surges sweeping and splitting the whole nation in civil war. Western businessmen who ignore this risk do so at their peril—and today their Western cash is just fuel in the tank driving the communist vehicle.

[Cory Duchesne]

Thanks for the Laogai link. Harry Wu was a very good man.

But to this day I think that the US profits from child labor by out-sourcing to china.

China and America are a perfect example of 'frienemies'.

They are friends, in the sense that their well being has depended on each other for many years - but they are at essence enemies and each would take the other out if they could.

[millipodium]

Thanks for the Laogai link. Harry Wu was a very good man.

But to this day I think that the US profits from child labor by out-sourcing to china.

China and America are a perfect example of 'frienemies'.

They are friends, in the sense that their well being has depended on each other for many years - but they are at essence enemies and each would take the other out if they could.

I used to be on board with all this china slave labor stuff, until i really looked in the mirror and realized it's evil. They are putting all other manufacturing out of business. Then they will cut us off, once we are dependant. Why are we being so stupid?

[Cory Duchesne]

Mill wrote,

I used to be on board with all this china slave labor stuff, until i really looked in the mirror and realized it's evil.

They are putting all other manufacturing out of business. Then they will cut us off, once we are dependant. Why are we being so stupid?

Why were you once ok with china slave labor?

The answer to that question will be the requisite neccesary to answer your other question:

Mill: Why are we being so stupid?

Because it's easy

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory wrote:

I would say that the consequence to having values, is having opposition to those values. That which is in opposition to your values is the enemy.

The word enemy is a little extreme, I don’t believe the wise man has any true enemies because enemy implies opposition or something that is in his way. An ignorant person is not a problem for a rational man. His imperfections are also not a problem or an enemy if he is rooted in a sane subjective state.

Elizabeth wrote:

Lets say that you prefer to keep your belongings and a robber prefers that he have your posessions. You are not prefering anything to be different than the way that it is, but isn't the robber still your enemy, especially if he wants things to change badly enough that he is willing, able, and preparing to shoot you for your posessions? Is he not your enemy until he has you at gunpoint? Until after he shoots you?

He wouldnt be my enemy; if he kills me and takes my possessions then that is his affair; I wish him all the best with my stuff.

[Cory Duchesne]

Ryan wrote,

The word enemy is a little extreme, I don’t believe the wise man has any true enemies because enemy implies opposition or something that is in his way. An ignorant person is not a problem for a rational man. His imperfections are also not a problem or an enemy if he is rooted in a sane subjective state.

A wise man knows who and what his enemy is and for that very reason he has no problems.

For the wise man, the greatest enemy is who and what is closest to him.

For the fool, the enemies are a bit farther away.

For the great fool, the enemy is nowhere to be seen.

[millipodium]

Mill wrote,



Why were you once ok with china slave labor?

Why are most people on here still ok with it? WHy is empowering china the only thing the two parties agree on? It must be really bad, for this many politicians to be on board.

[Cory Duchesne]

Cory: Why were you once ok with china slave labor?

Mill: Why are most people on here still ok with it?

What do you mean by 'most people on here'?

Mill: Why is empowering china the only thing that the two parties agree on?

Isnt it because 1) they currently profit from china and would profit more from China if they empowered her? and 2) By giving China favorable treatment you reduce the risk of China doing something violent.

The good news is that the US has supported China's resolve to incorporate solar and wind energy. This means that the rulers of china are thinking in terms of interconnectedness, balance and sustainability. China has also jumped on the organic farming bandwagon, contributing to the billion dollar organic food industry in places like america and probably in other more democratic capatilist places.

I think the situation will unfold in a way that does not conform to the worst of our fears.

[sky]

I think the situation will unfold in a way that does not conform to the worst of our fears.

i think so to

[sky]

cory

I think the situation will unfold in a way that does not conform to the worst of our fears.

i think so to

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory wrote:

I think the situation will unfold in a way that does not conform to the worst of our fears.

Perhaps Its not a matter of fear, but a matter of inevitable causality. Consider this: China has reached an unprecedented level of power, but the people/government have never been so fickle/confused/unstable. Power and instability are a bad combination. Think of Nazi Germany. History always repeats. There are currently genocides taking place in Africa.

Let us not forget that it was the Chinese army that dismantled the civilization of Tibet because it threatened their ideology. The only difference now is that the government has abandoned their communist ideology in favor of capitalist values.

Moreover China has recently become one of the most powerful countries in the world and I don’t believe China is even fully aware of how much power they have or could have.

Some economists have estimated that China may have more US currency stockpiled than the actual United States because of America’s atrocious deficient.

What will happen when they actually realize what they could have or what they could be?

It is only a matter of time before they realize that they have enough power to buy the most powerful corporations globally and move all the head offices of those companies to China.

If this happens it will cause some sort of depression in the west.

The American Economy is already struggling because of the war in the middle-east plus they have lost some of their biggest law firms and other giants offshore to India.

Over the last five years the American economy has been weakened; similar to how Russia weakened in the 70s right before its collapse.

The patterns are similar; that is all I'm suggesting.

Anything could happen.

However I'm also open to the idea that a burst innovative technologies may revolutionize the global economics of the world at the same time these collaspes are happening.

[millipodium]

I think the situation will unfold in a way that does not conform to the worst of our fears.

Why?

Wishful thinking?

Your politically corrected, brain-dead inability to ever say anything bad about another country?

[Cory Duchesne]

Perhaps Its not a matter of fear, but a matter of inevitable causality.

I think it's obviously a matter of fear for most people. Milli is obviously quite scared as I'm sure 99% of the other people who are aware of china are scared.

I can see your point with the 'Russia as an analogy for america thing', but at the same time, History does not repeat itself.

For example:

Stalin's cronies would shoot people randomly while they work in order to keep the workers going 15-20 hours a day.

America is obviously a much different place - - actually it is unlike any place that has ever existed.

the situation we are in is unique and predicting it by comparing it to past situations might not really help much.

Besides, even if your argument is sound Ryan - - how will it effect my action?

I can't really see what else i can do besides what I'm doing.

But i could be wrong.

[millipodium]

Perhaps Its not a matter of fear, but a matter of inevitable causality.

I think it's obviously a matter of fear for most people. Milli is obviously quite scared as I'm sure 99% of the other people who are aware of china are scared.

I can see your point with the 'Russia as an analogy for america thing', but at the same time, History does not repeat itself.

For example:

Stalin's cronies would shoot people randomly while they work in order to keep the workers going 15-20 hours a day.

America is obviously a much different place - - actually it is unlike any place that has ever existed.

the situation we are in is unique and predicting it by comparing it to past situations might not really help much.

Besides, even if your argument is sound Ryan - - how will it effect my action?

I can't really see what else i can do besides what I'm doing.

But i could be wrong.

You can advocate divestment and embargo from china as much as you pontificate about enlightenment, or half as much would still be a great help.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory wrote:

I can't really see what else i can do besides what I'm doing.
But i could be wrong.

ah what do you mean Cory? I thought you and I might team up by declaring a war in the name of American Liberty and then we could fly to China and start assassinating some communist scum. Come on, I’ll be John Wayne and you can be Clint Eastwood! Or better yet, I’ll be the Lone Ranger and you can be Tonto.

Take a little walk with me down memory lane: back in the times when everything made sense:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBnA5iHNSEM

[millipodium]

Cory wrote:

I can't really see what else i can do besides what I'm doing.
But i could be wrong.

ah what do you mean Cory? I thought you and I might team up by declaring a war in the name of American Liberty and then we could fly to China and start assassinating some communist scum. Come on, I’ll be John Wayne and you can be Clint Eastwood! Or better yet, I’ll be the Lone Ranger and you can be Tonto.

Take a little walk with me down memory lane: back in the times when everything made sense:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBnA5iHNSEM

I think intelligent pro-US survival trade policy would be sufficient. Without our billions in unconditional production orders, the totalitarians will implode on their own.