The China Thread

[The Minsky Moment]

My understanding was that the policy was that the US was committed to supplying Taiwan with the means of resistance* but maintained ambiguity about whether the US would commit its own forces to oppose a PRC invasion.  There were hints of a change in policy at the beginning of the Trump admin, but that was chalked up to Trump being Trump.  There were additional hints earlier from Biden, but that was chalked up to Biden's speech issues.  AFAIK this the first clearly official and authorized statement of policy stating that the US "would" use its military forces to intervene.  As such, it seems to be a real change in the policy.  It still leaves open the level and nature of the commitment.


*The substance of this pledge can be questioned as the US does not always make available what Taiwan requests.

[CountDeMoney]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/23/politics/biden-taiwan-china-japan-intl-hnk/index.html

Is this a considered change in tone, or just Biden saying out loud (again) something everyone knew to be true but for diplomatic reasons has always been careful to not say out loud?

I dunno, but I'll take it.

Well, let's see...from being a player at Potsdam to having its UN Security Council seat taken away and given to one of the most obstructionist regimes in the UN, to reinventing itself from a staid dictatorship to one the world's driving economies, with a handful of diplomatic relations and constantly being undersold with commitments from the US in order to not ruffle any mainland feathers and their bullshit sensitivities, I'd say, yeah...it's time to say the quiet part out loud when it comes to Taiwan. 

There's no more room in the Southeast Pacific security picture for "strategic ambiguity."  Ambiguity leads to unintentional escalation, particularly by a China with a party-driven military engaged in an arms race with no history or training in the concept of brinksmanship.

LIBERATE WEST TAIWAN
DOWN WITH POOH

[Syt]

Long article by the BBC about Chinese treatment of the Uyghurs, based on a recent leak of data from the Chinese authorities:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/85qihtvw6e/the-faces-from-chinas-uyghur-detention-camps

[Jacob]

Long article by the BBC about Chinese treatment of the Uyghurs, based on a recent leak of data from the Chinese authorities:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/85qihtvw6e/the-faces-from-chinas-uyghur-detention-camps

It's pretty fucking awful.

[Jacob]

Beijing students protesting against excessive lockdown restrictions: https://twitter.com/fangshimin/status/1529622640675135491?t=fkLA_SITy6npNkV47aYnoQ&s=19

[Jacob]

Apparently university students in Tianjin University are protesting too.

As one commenter said "33 years ago students were protesting for freedom and political rights, now they're just protesting for the right to go home."

[Jacob]

Heading to the Statue of Liberty at UBC with the family shortly, to light some candles.

In the meantime, here's an instagram account collecting pictures and accounts from May 33rd, 1989: Northern Square.

[Jacob]

From the Department of Irony: After the Shanghai lockdown the PRC has banned "the Internationale" as being subversive.

So, for example, at this moment, a video of a man driving by Tiananmen Square while playing "the Internationale" on his car stereo is an anti-government statement.

[Josquius]

Chalk that one up for the China no longer Marxist side.

[The Larch]

From the Department of Irony: After the Shanghai lockdown the PRC has banned "the Internationale" as being subversive.

So, for example, at this moment, a video of a man driving by Tiananmen Square while playing "the Internationale" on his car stereo is an anti-government statement.

What? On what rationale?

[The Larch]

Chalk that one up for the China no longer Marxist side.

I doubt anyone still considered them Marxist.

[Josquius]

Chalk that one up for the China no longer Marxist side.

I doubt anyone still considered them Marxist.

I have seen it argued their current ultra capitalist/fascist setup is all part of putting Marxism into action and making sure the necessary stage of capitalism hits China to build up the economy needed for socialism to take hold.

Which imo is just wishful thinking and denialism from marxists.

[The Larch]

Chalk that one up for the China no longer Marxist side.

I doubt anyone still considered them Marxist.

I have seen it argued their current ultra capitalist/fascist setup is all part of putting Marxism into action and making sure the necessary stage of capitalism hits China to build up the economy needed for socialism to take hold.

Which imo is just wishful thinking and denialism from marxists.

Austounding levels of copium displayed there.

[Sheilbh]

I think they're still Marxist-Leninist. It's a vanguard party state and the party has the ultimate say over the economy, which they are using. And I think it shapes what they say and how party leaders think. I'm not sure it's cope for me because I'm fairly anti-tankie and think Marxism-Leninism is bad.

I'm not sure I'd say it's ultra-capitalist because I don't think there's any question that the capitalists don't have the power. I can't think of another ultra-capitalist state that has more or less disappeared it's richest man for what seem to be party/political reasons.

Edit: For example I think the state basically controls the 'commanding heights' of the economy and will continue to do so, but they may shift over time to also include more tech and hard research areas. I think the whole approach and attitude is shaped by a more Marxist economically determinist reading of the world (with Chinese nationalism), than simply being about race or 'action'/war in the way fascism was. They are not talking about unleashing market forces for the benefit of market players - it might be glorious and you might now be let into the party but it's for the benefit of China as determined by the party. Similarly they're not bigging up the sanctity of property rights which is typically the core of an ultra-capitalist dictatorship - the re-assertion and protection through the state of private property.

I know there's often a desperate desire to see left-wing dictatorships as somehow 'right-wing' but I think that's all it is. And I don't tink it holds up with a state built by Deng, especially as it's going into a cycle of asserting even more party-state control.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Austounding levels of opium displayed there.

this is more in character for china