- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 5382 Hour
- Reading permission
Why is it that every overbearing, arrogant opinion from the west, no matter how carefully crafted to sound ingratiating,|
also ends up being a call for China to put itself up for sale?
I've condensed the jest of this article, highlighted in blue, at the end of this post.
Here the author spends time putting the reader to sleep before slipping in some topsy-turvy definitions.
The CPC is considered conservative while the banksters from the west are the liberal ones? The only thing liberal
about the banksters from the west, who are behind this article, is the fact that they want to liberate you from
your hard earned money. Now that the banksters from the west have sucked the middle class dry in their own nations
they are zeroing in on China.
Since when is a liberal social policy in favor of a very few obscenely rich lording over wage slaves?
This is criminal capitalism, plain and simple. This is what the author is obviously in favor of.
The truly liberal policy is socialism and communism. This is a universal truth to all but a few propagandists who
are working at the behest of the super rich banksters from the west.
These filthy rich families that rule the west are eager to see the capitalist phase of communism extended indefinately
and have no concern for the Chinese people just as they have no concern for the middle and lower classes of the west.
Of course it is imperative for China to foster its state owned enterprises and to have control of the economy.
The author would obviously let the obscenely rich families from the west "pull the levers of the national economy" in
China. Those who control the levers of the ecomony in China should be the Chinese, not international banksters from
This is fooling nobody except the western propagandists themselves. If they want to keep fooling themselves, let them.
Enough with the words 'burgeoning ecomomic freedoms' when describing western interests
and 'threats to the continued political monopoly' when describing the Chinese government.
It's well enough the PLA of China be as opaque as possible. Is the auther is stupid enough to think his calls for the
selling of China be taken seriously, he tops himself by saying the PLA should be an open book for westerns to examine
and to plan for every possible counter measure.
And if this wasn't enough he goes on to say that "the current liberal internationalist order" has preserved
the global peace for two-thirds of a century. Well lets just forget about the Korean war, the Vietnam war, the Iraq
war (both I and II), the Afghanistan war.. did I forget any of those little nations America attacked because they
didn't like their form of government? What is this author taking for his delusions? Whatever it is, it's not working.
At least China hasn't gone beyond its borders to fight any wars or conflicts for the last two-thirds of a century.
Maybe that was what to crossed his foggy mind. The CPC has indeed fostered peace during its entire existence.
Something the capitalist west couldn't even begin to dream of and certainly not claim as this knucklehead has
in this tiresome article.
The majority of us are not fooled by the warm and sweet words that open this article. We are becoming less and less
amused at the never-ending efforts of the west to tempt China to put itself up for sale.
It should be obvious to everyone that these calls for weakening and dissolveing state owned enterprises,
especially the banks, is nothing more than an attempt to get China to put itself up for sale.
China successfully defended itself from the west militarily, China is not about to sell itself to a bankrupt west.
""It follows from this that another big competing force in the Chinese political debate today is one more critical of
the social impact of economic liberalisation, and one that is more conservative in its policy conclusions. This group
argues that the reform process has already gone far enough. It contends that any pretence of “socialism”, in what
formally remains a “communist” system, has long disappeared. Elements of this conservative group argue that to take
the economic reform process much further would endanger the interests of the still significant state-owned sector of
the economy. They say that, when push comes to shove, it remains important for the Chinese state to be able to pull
the levers of the national economy, not just through the classical forms of fiscal and monetary policy as we have
in the west, but by actively directing state-owned corporations and financial institutions to expand or contract
their economic and financial activity in direct response to government direction.
This group is particularly wary of the calls for democratic reforms arising from the burgeoning economic freedoms
that already have been created, because it recognises these as significant medium- to long-term threats to the
continued political monopoly of the Communist Party itself.
One last group that will be central to the question of China’s future place in the world is the military. Even as
someone who began studying China 35 years ago, I still find the country’s armed forces one of the most opaque
institutions in the world. That is also the conclusion of most China scholars and analysts around the world.""
""Second, we should argue clearly with the Chinese political elite that the current liberal internationalist order,
which has preserved the global peace and enhanced prosperity for two-thirds of a century, must be sustained.
This will entail enhanced co-operation with China on the world’s security, macroeconomic, macrofinancial, trade,
investment, social, environmental and humanitarian challenges, based on the agreed norms of the present global