4 ms·

I don’t think this is necessarily true, but what is true is that China is increasingly engaging in trade wars against countries that do things they disapprove

• bigcat12345678 4y ago
  > engaging in trade wars against countries that do things they disapprove > China has stopped buying a lot of stuff from Australia because of politics They disapprove? That's a fundamentally flawed gloss over an otherwise simple fact: Australia takes a political stance that fundamentally treat China as an enemy, the same way as what the West's stance towards USSR, at a moment China has not taken any political stance like USSR towards the West. Imagine that you frequent a bar, often engaging in chat with all sorts of people. For whatever reason (let's for now not mud the discussion on why some countries decide to take the above mentioned political stance) some guys used to chat normally with you, suddenly reject you altogether, and are plotting to label you an unwelcome person to the bar, so that you are disallowed to enter the bar. Would you start picking the weak guys of this small clique and try to thwart this plot? > I wouldn’t want to rely on China for chips Sure, but you dont need to, you depend on TSMC. And you still not answer the simple question. Given the fact that depending on China for advanced chip manufacturing is security issue, why China herself depend on their own chip manufacturer a national security thing for US? Isn't that a thing has nothing to do with US national security?
  • JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > Australia takes a political stance that fundamentally treat China as an enemy Australia spent decades gearing their economy to China’s [0]. The fury that erupted due to Xi’s string of fuckups, from trade disputes [1] to domestic meddling [2] to security encroachments after breaking its agreement with Hong Kong and threatening Taiwan [3] was significant enough that its people chose to incur economic pain for self preservation. > some guys used to chat normally with you, suddenly reject you altogether, and are plotting to label you an unwelcome person to the bar, so that you are disallowed to enter the bar Well yes, if they learn you beat your wife at home and then beat up their buddy at the bar all while never buying anyone drinks as they purchase you rounds, you’re going to be told to fuck off. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia–China_relations#Economic_relations https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia–China_relations#Ec... [1] https://amp.scmp.com/news/asia/australasia/article/3136010/australian-exporters-eye-pivot-southeast-asia-impossible-do https://amp.scmp.com/news/asia/australasia/article/3136010/a... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/chinas-influence-on-campus-chills-free-speech-in-australia-new-zealand/2019/08/09/3dad3a3c-b9f9-11e9-8e83-4e6687e99814_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/chinas-inf... [3] https://www.voanews.com/amp/china-a-military-threat-to-australia-according-to-new-poll/6637802.html https://www.voanews.com/amp/china-a-military-threat-to-austr...
    • bigcat12345678 4y ago
      You are still addressing outcome without given the cause. You citations are also not supporting your claims. > Australia spent decades gearing their economy to China’s [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia%E2%80%93China_relations#Economic_relations https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia%E2%80%93China_rela... What's the point economic ties between 2 countries are tied from both ends. Are you suggesting Aus is friendly to CN, as friendly as CN is towards AUS? I see no point of this in supporting any claim regarding AUS' change of political stance. All things considered, it should be clear that it was AUS that starts to act threateningly towards CN, without CN provoking. > The fury that erupted due to Xi’s string of fuckups, from trade disputes [1] to security encroachments after breaking its agreement with Hong Kong and threatening Taiwan [3] Trade disputes was triggered by AUS' political stance. You got cause and effect wrong. > domestic meddling [2] This is amusing report. You cannot label natural increasing of influence with intentional political manipulation. That's why Hollywood can affect nation's sentiment and culture, so much so that modern young people are strikingly resemble each other at different countries. The countries affected by Hollywood can censor the movie, but they never claim Washington's "meddling", or that claim is anyway sensible. But the same thing does not apply the reverse. Or any White countries. Now you reveal where the white supermacy lives. > security encroachments after breaking its agreement with Hong Kong and threatening Taiwan [3] Those are domestic issues, let's not mudding the water by mixing international and domestic affairs. But anyway, these are normal operation taken routinely by any sovereign nations. National security law, sovereign integrity, etc. > significant enough that its people chose to incur economic pain for self preservation. What? Where is the logical connection from someone becoming rich with someone else feeling unsafe?