The General American Politics Thread

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I already said that China and the US are neither allies nor enemies, and that war between the two any time soon would be a dumbass decision for either one to make.

 

But I want to know what is up with this portrayal of China as the bad guy? I'm well aware of China's government heavily censoring things from the outside that it doesn't want it's people to know of, but it seems a lot of people have in their minds that China is going to attack the US some time in the future so that it can control the world and be the most powerful nation unopposed.

 

Now if what I read in Mark Mazower's "Governing the World" is any indicator, that shit isn't gonna happen so easily, if at all, since other nations aren't going to sit idly by and let China expand aggressively like that, and even if they did there's a lot of the international community that would resist them similar to how much of Europe resisted Napolean and Hitler when they tried to unite Europe in what they felt was best.

 

I personally doubt that China would be an aggressor any time soon like a lot of fiction thinks they will. Their economy will be massive, and they'll have a lot of growing influence in the globe, but not such to where they'll try to run unopposed so soon. But there's a lot of grey that I'm seeing that makes me wonder if that's true or not, and I personally blame the fiction I keep reading. So I really want a more concrete answer if they would even try to be anything like an aggressor any time in the future.

 

Maybe I should read more of Governing the World and see if I could find a clue to my question.

Edited January 18, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Stacy]

I already said that China and the US are neither allies nor enemies, and that war between the two any time soon would be a dumbass decision for either one to make.

 

But I want to know what is up with this portrayal of China as the bad guy? I'm well aware of China's government heavily censoring things from the outside that it doesn't want it's people to know of, but it seems a lot of people have in their minds that China is going to attack the US some time in the future so that it can control the world and be the most powerful nation unopposed.

 

Now if what I read in Mark Mazower's "Governing the World" is any indicator, that shit isn't gonna happen so easily, if at all, since other nations aren't going to sit idly by and let China expand aggressively like that, and even if they did there's a lot of the international community that would resist them similar to how much of Europe resisted Napolean and Hitler when they tried to unite Europe in what they felt was best.

 

I personally doubt that China would be an aggressor any time soon like a lot of fiction thinks they will. Their economy will be massive, and they'll have a lot of growing influence in the globe, but not such to where they'll try to run unopposed so soon. But there's a lot of grey that I'm seeing that makes me wonder if that's true or not, and I personally blame the fiction I keep reading. So I really want a more concrete answer if they would even try to be anything like an aggressor any time in the future.

 

Maybe I should read more of Governing the World and see if I could find a clue to my question.

 

Why China? It could kick off anywhere. If it were to kick off either side would be as shrewd and aggressive as the other. It would be like the Cold War where the lines would be so blurred to who was actually the aggressor in the first place.

 

China is portrayed as the bad guy in lots of fiction for the past 20 years of so because they are Communist and a Superpower that's not Russia. Not that Russia has changed much since the disband of the USSR nor has America in terms of how they do politics and view each other.

 

If hostility kicked off between China and America all I know is the rest of the world would be used as a giant Football pitch.

Edited January 18, 2013 by BW199148

[Tornado]

U.S. debt props up what is almost certainly an overvalued Chinese economy. China would never invade the United States. There are very valid reasons to portray China as the bad guys (human rights violations that are miles long, repeated attempts to try to use U.S. dept to forcibly devalue the US dollar as a trade currency) that work if you're talking about one of those things rather than in the broad sense; but mostly it's just because writers write what is familiar and equate modern China with the Soviet Union, completely ignoring that the modern Soviet Union still is pretty much just modern Russia. It also gives fiction writers an easier thing to write about, since the common newsmakers (North Korea) are too inept to do anything to threaten U.S. allies and Middle Eastern storylines aren't as black and white so are more difficult to pull off. There is also some tension still over Vietnam.

 

 

 

That being said:

They're not like the USSR in trying to expand their territory in conquering other nations despite the border dispute I hear they had with India or how they still consider Taiwan a part of China (or are they secretly like the USSR?)

 

They do do this. Not outright conquering, no, but there is a reason that so many of the countries surrounding China are communist, and it's the same reason that so many of the countries surrounding the USSR were; and China was heavily involved with the Korean and Vietnam wars.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Tornado

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Why China? It could kick off anywhere.

Because China is the one getting the most attention. It's the only one that's growing powerful enough to challenge the US, and is rapidly advancing. That's why.

[turbojet]

They do do this. Not outright conquering, no, but there is a reason that so many of the countries surrounding China are communist, and it's the same reason that so many of the countries surrounding the USSR were; and China was heavily involved with the Korean and Vietnam wars.

I'm just going to say Africa and leave it at that.

[Tornado]

I'm just going to say Africa and leave it at that.

 

Africa as in "British Colony #3" or Africa in some other meaning?

 

 

 

 

Because if it's the former, than I'm not saying that China is the only one that does it. The massive political influence the U.S. exerts on Latin America when it actually cares about what is going on down there is evidence of that.

[turbojet]

Africa as in "British Colony #3" or Africa in some other meaning?

 

 

 

 

Because if it's the former, than I'm not saying that China is the only one that does it. The massive political influence the U.S. exerts on Latin America when it actually cares about what is going on down there is evidence of that.

Africa as in some other meaning. China is using African land to farm in exchange for rinky dink schools and hospitals. So they are clearly attempting to spread their influence in an imperialistic way similar to neo-Colonialism. 

Edited January 18, 2013 by turbojet

[Stacy]

Because China is the one getting the most attention. It's the only one that's growing powerful enough to challenge the US, and is rapidly advancing. That's why.

 

So is India.

 

China may be economically powerful and not to mention having a huge population (I think nearly a million Chinese "Volunteers" died in the Korea War) and is re-modernizing its military but the people are hardly prospering from their fruits of their Nations labour.

 

At the moment you are more likely to have a large conflict kicking off in Africa and the Middle East than a war betweem China and America.

 

If they did have a big fall out they would probably got into a Cold War full of Proxy Wars not a all out war because that would likely result in a Nuclear Holocaust. Remember China has Nuclear weapons as well as America and Russia.

 

China has been setting shop in Africa although not Politically they are there to compete with other Countries Economically. China is fighting an Economic war for influence over America they are avoiding actual conflict through Proxy Wars. Communist Africa Countries were support by the USSR and mainly Cuba. China strangely was absent probably because it didn't want to clash with both the Soviet Union and the West at the side time.

 

China wants to kick America in the arse and America wants to kick China's arse. However both are afraid to go to war or start another Cold War which could damage both sides interests in the rest of the world.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Africa as in some other meaning. China is using African land to farm in exchange for rinky dink schools and hospitals. So they are clearly attempting to spread their influence in an imperialistic way similar to neo-Colonialism. 

Wasn't there a topic on this where you said the same thing?

 

So is India.

Yes, but no one in America would expect India to attack them militarily and India has somewhat close ties to the US and has had border disputes with China. Unlike China who is indifferent and therefore unpredictable in the future to come as fare as being a friend or enemy, India is more of a friend than China is, so that's why we're not particularly worried about them despite their growth.\

Edited January 18, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[turbojet]

Wasn't there a topic on this where you said the same thing?

Yes and the situation and my understanding of it still hasn't changed.

 

There are 3 sure fire things that countries can do that will surely piss me off. China does two of these things so I'm not a huge fan of them neither despite(or maybe because I am) being a socialist.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Yes and the situation and my understanding of it still hasn't changed.

 

There are 3 sure fire things that countries can do that will surely piss me off. China does two of these things so I'm not a huge fan of them neither despite(or maybe because I am) being a socialist.

And they are? I'm assuming one is the colonial actions China is doing. But the other two?

[turbojet]

And they are? I'm assuming one is the colonial actions China is doing. But the other two?

Calling themselves Communist when they have clearly abandoned that ideology. 

 

Championing the Liberal Economic theory on countries that are poor on resource(Globalization).

[Stacy]

Calling themselves Communist when they have clearly abandoned that ideology. 

 

Championing the Liberal Economic theory on countries that are poor on resource(Globalization).

 

Since when have Communist Countries ever followed their ideology to the latter? 

[turbojet]

Since when have Communist Countries ever followed their ideology to the latter? 

Exactly my point.

 

The closest has been Cuba except for the fact that they don't trust their own citizens and had no business being Communist to begin with.

[Patticus]

Obama was formally sworn in yesterday, and today was the big televised event. I didn't watch it, due to spending quality time with the wife, but I did catch this video later.
 
Speaker Boehner (which I always pronounce 'boner') tries to talk friendly with the Obamas, despite spending the past four years dedicating himself and his congressional colleagues to ousting them via all manner of shitty and underhanded tactics... and gets a well deserved response (I'd have preferred a rant or bitch slap though):
 

[Nepenthe]

That look on her face is pure "whatever."  xD

 

But in other news, a Democratic Seat in Virginia was eliminated today due to rewritten districts that were rushed through the House while a Dem Senator made the miscalculation of attending the inauguration on a federal holiday. This now gives Republicans a slight majority in that state, and Dems have avowed to oppose the move in court.

Democracy. 

[Gaming Misfit]

I think it's funny people are making such a big deal out of that little clip.  It couldn't be less of a "meh" than anything else in the news today.

[Autosaver]

 

So Obama sang the Pokemon theme on TV...

[Tornado]

lol Brock Obama.

[-Robin-]

American Crossroads is going on the offensive in the "Republican vs. Republican" donnybrook with a new project called the Conservative Victory Project. It's meant to promote candidates and incumbents that aren't susceptible to making game-changing gaffes the way Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock did, and fight against deemed-as-such representatives that are already in office, such as Steven King of Iowa in an upcoming Iowa Senate race.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/us/politics/top-gop-donors-seek-greater-say-in-senate-races.html?hp&pagewanted=all

Edited February 5, 2013 by Joshua

[Nepenthe]

In case anyone was still unsure about why minorities have largely stayed away from the GOP for awhile. And yes, this man has doubled down. If nothing else, it's refreshing to see such blatant bigotry without any buttering up or halfhearted back-peddling.

[Linkabel]

 

So Obama sang the Pokemon theme on TV...

 

I'm sorry I was bored and instead of doing my work I did the most productive thing I could think of:

[Candescence]

So, I'm sure most of you are aware of the amusing anti-US propaganda video released by North Korea.

 

Funnily enough, once again, they stole footage from popular culture - this time from Modern Warfare 3. And Activision has had the video taken down.

 

Excuse me while I laugh. North Korea are a bunch of idiots, aren't they?

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Excuse me while I laugh. North Korea are a bunch of idiots, aren't they?

[Solly]

So, I'm sure most of you are aware of the amusing anti-US propaganda video released by North Korea.

 

Funnily enough, once again, they stole footage from popular culture - this time from Modern Warfare 3. And Activision has had the video taken down.

 

Excuse me while I laugh. North Korea are a bunch of idiots, aren't they?

Yeah, its title translated to something like "We Are the World." One of the strangest parts of the whole thing was that the MWF3 footage showed New York City in ruins. I really didn't get that part. 

 

What message is that sending? "We can cause a fuckton of civil death?" That kind of, like, objectively makes them look like the bad guys.