February 25, 2018 at 1:41 pm #61743
China…. Such a beautiful land, with wise people that have passed along ancient knowledge that is still revered today. Large numbers of people flock to China for vacations and learning adventures. President Xi is treated with great respect wherever he goes – such a quiet, calm man.
Meanwhile, the government has consolidated virtually total power in the man in recent changes, and is now about to finalize plans to eliminate the two-term limit to “presidential” power.
In that article are buried multiple little gems concerning the thinly covered consolidation of power and elevation in historical status of their gentle giant leader. In addition to that article, another (among many) one emerges from non-western sources showing the extent to which he’s consolidating power, and what his real aims are:
With Donald Trump’s nationalism on full display, China’s media and commentariat – and Xi Jinping himself – seek to distinguish the Chinese leader from the US president, painting him as a benevolent internationalist who deeply cares about the “shared future for mankind.”
. . .
In fact, the view that China is a coercive or even a bully state is widely maintained in many journalistic, academic, and political circles, especially those in the West.
Against this background, it is questionable, or even laughable, to depict China’s Xi as an idealist or internationalist.
And quietly (thanks to our [sarc/ON] open, informative “news” media [sarc/OFF] ):
Between 2012 and 2017-the first term of Xi Jinping, who in October began his second five-year stint in office after emerging at the 19th Party Congress as China’s tallest leader in decades-158 Chinese officials have committed suicide, according to official figures. Insiders say the actual number may be far higher, considering the officially “natural” deaths of many officials who were being investigated or were under detention.
Imagine that – Chinese government and Party officials offing themselves – in large numbers. One might wonder why. Or maybe not. It’s called fundamental evil, and “we” (not referring to this group of course – just the world in general) blindly sweep it under the carpet. Problem is, the bump keeps getting larger and larger, and soon we’ll be tripping over that bump in the carpet, perhaps with falls that result in serious injury. Watch the U.N. vote tentatively by the end of this week concerning the US plans to interdict ships doing illegal business with North Korea (carrying oil in, and coal out, especially):
But don’t worry, be happy….February 25, 2018 at 3:12 pm #61745
Its called Communism , the USSR also had “elections ” , but the outcome was decided long before , who would be the successor . Some people these days , see only business suits , and economics when they think of China , and forget that they are still a Communist nation , with all that goes along with that . Dont forget old Joe’s purge of the 1930’s ………………just today , you cant quite be as open about it , and still hope to maintain favorable terms with other nations . I wonder how many of those suicides were ” assisted ” . Ever see the movie , Enemy at the gates ? Remember when Nikita K took over the situation , the scene where he hands the former commander a pistol , telling him that he might want to save them all the ” red tape ” . That flashed into my mind just now lol .February 26, 2018 at 1:28 am #61746
Its called Communism
With all due respect, and understanding that you have considerable knowledge of the once and future CCCP, I have to differ in much more than just the use of one word vs. another to describe something. I strongly maintain that it’s not communism, and understanding that point is crucial. Communism is simply a theoretical economic system that’s never been enacted on a national level, and only briefly approached by a few small groups. It doesn’t exist, and can’t work simply because of at least one of human nature’s principal characteristics: greed.
What it is, is Marxism. Marx carefully camouflaged what he was really writing about by calling it communism, and thus it has become known. But that’s part of the brilliance – by labeling it communism, people get embroiled in endless debates about the economic aspect of it, or at least communism-lite (socialism), and the real fundamentals of the system are rarely if ever discussed in any detail. Marxism is not communism is not Marxism. Marxism is fundamental evil dressed up as a utopian system called the economic system known as communism, when in fact Marxism is fundamental evil, imposing total control over its subjects (ultimately the whole world, if possible). I have come to the conclusion that almost no one (except those that truly know what Marx was really writing about) really understands “The Communist Manifesto” – not even the scholars that teach and study it full time. It took more than 40 years to finally see what’s really in it – right there in front of anyone reading it, but totally missed by virtually everyone. I’ve covered that here before, and won’t bother anyone with it again. I’ll just say that Marxism is what the Soviets, the Chicoms, and others have been after, and they understand well enough to keep packaging it as “communism.” They are not interchangeable terms.
Otherwise, you obviously grasp the situation pretty well, as evidenced by the main body of your post. It’s what I call “fundamental evil” because it’s the easiest to explain and understand under that term. But it is NOT communism. Failure to understand what we’re really up against (and it goes much deeper than I will ever delve here), is to underestimate it by a long shot. And we (here at least) all know what danger there is in underestimating our enemy.February 26, 2018 at 3:38 am #61747
GS, the worst aspect of fundamental evil is the possibility, even the likelihood, of being in some way ensnared by it, while fighting it. I have encountered individuals who became entangled in aspects of it while trying to resist it in others, most often in issues of one wanting to control another. But it is the same fundamental Tar Baby, however it presents.
Cry, "Treason!"February 26, 2018 at 5:22 am #61748
LT, could not agree more. I don’t get into it with such people. It’s best left alone in direct confrontation. I have unexpectedly had insights along the way, particularly in very recent years, that suddenly put a great deal of it in place in a manner that it became quite clear. And that was only the result of studying various things that initially didn’t even seem particularly related. I hadn’t picked up my copy of the Manifesto in many years, but something seemingly unrelated suddenly appeared to parallel something I vaguely recalled from the Manifesto. I went searching, and began discovering things I’d never noticed before. Exactly how and why I came to read that last 3/4 page final chapter, I have no idea anymore (it’s now been several years). But things started jumping off that single page at me, almost literally. It was truly an amazing experience. Then I began a very singular study (singular in the sense that no one except my wife knew I was doing so – no outside discussion with anyone until it really began to come together). But it wasn’t singular in the sense that it was all I was spending my time on – my life was far more balanced than that, of course.
It’s a very long story, and not something I’d expect to make any sense here, but just know that it had nothing to do with direct contention – I learned long ago about the futility and even danger of that in some powerful ways (through other people’s experience for the most part, not my own thankfully).
I am willing to share it with others to a point, but am even careful with whom, when, and how much. But trying to resist it in others, is to effectively engage in struggle, and I’ve also learned that such people are incapable of being reasoned with. As it says in a place I trust, “from such turn away.” And those include large numbers within the so-called “liberal” population. Too many have passed the point of even being capable of critical thinking.
But returning to the main point, I strongly believe it’s important to understand that discussing something requires the right terms, or it’s easy to end up not understanding at all. And sometimes that can even include two (or more) people thinking they’re in full agreement, when they’re not even close. The issue of “communism” is just such a discussion. I’m not worried much at all about “communism.” But I’m particularly concerned about what’s being billed as communism in such places as the USSR, China, Cuba, SE Asia, and North Korea, and what the vast majority of Americans think communism is. They think they’re talking about an economic system that just happens to have a tyrannical government – and they’re missing the point and focusing on the wrong thing (exactly what the opposition hopes for). As long as the nation pursues policies consistent with battling “communism,” we’ll lose. But if the opposition is fully understood for what it really is – not the label that muddies the waters – we’re in a better position to properly defend.February 26, 2018 at 4:35 pm #61790
It’s been in the Asian press for a while now (the consolidation of power), but our “news” media has been too busy covering the essential news of the day to bother with something so far away. I’m supposing that nothing new has happened with Justin Bieber, the Kardashians, or Robert Mueller, over the weekend, so they had to fill in with something. Therefore we have this suddenly new story about China (that apparently the rest of the world has been reading about for over a month – I first saw an article about the consolidation of power at least that long ago, but not in the western MSM). Anyway, here it is from that keeper of journalistic excellence, the New York Times:
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.