3 ms·

China has not been "bullied for years". They have a imagined chip on their shoulders and a persecution complex. It reminds me a lot of how Russia describes it's

China has not been "bullied for years". They have a imagined chip on their shoulders and a persecution complex. It reminds me a lot of how Russia describes it's invasion of Ukraine. The messaging to the public is in terms of "Russia has always been attacked" and how "the invasion is actually defensive in nature because NATO has always been planning on attacking Russia" (note: NATO is a defensive alliance and never even had plans for invading Russia). What you're hearing is not truth, but is instead the internal propaganda that is used to defend against criticism of the national government by creating an external opponent for the populace to focus on. It's a time honored tradition of dictatorships the world over.

bloppe 4y ago
Opium wars, Japanese occupation, US Chinese exclusion act, etc. China was bullied. The extant generation of Chinese has not directly experienced most of it, but it's not just a chip on the shoulder. I think claiming the whole south china sea is ridiculous because there's no principle behind it. A coastal EEZ is a principle, but if China can claim the south china sea why can't Vietnam? I also struggle to formulate a strong argument against claiming and developing an uninhabited reef. China is by no means the only country participating in the spratly islands land grab, and to my knowledge no country has ever shied away from claiming uninhabited land. International Maritime law was not formulated to deal with this situation. I think China's neighbors will more likely than not be able to maintain their reasonable Maritime rights. If not, I think China will find wanton domination to be more trouble than it's worth.
- mlindner 4y ago
  Japan occupied many countries during WW2, it's only the CCP that still cares to the extent that they do about it. In fact in many of the countries that Japan occupied there is now strong pro-Japan sentiment, but not China. The US Chinese exclusion act can not be termed "bullying of China" as it was explicitly about internal US politics rather than international politics. If that is termed bullying of a country then any anti-immigration law throughout history would be bullying of some country or another.
somenameforme 4y ago
I'm not entirely understanding your position here. The series of "Unequal Treaties" [1] China regularly refers to are not imaginary. It started with the Opium Wars. These were a series of two wars in which the Brits insisted on selling opium in China, which had banned the trade. When China tried to stop opium ships, Britain invaded, plundered China, and forced them into a series of somewhat humiliating concessions. Among these concessions was Britain claiming Hong Kong for themselves (which was only returned in 1997). Interestingly enough this happened twice! The legality of the opium was not completely clarified in the first war. After the second war the Brits forced China to legally accept their opium. And it just gets more sordid from there, with various "Unequal Treaties" continuing onward into the 20th century. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Unequal_treaty https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Unequal_treaty
- BurningFrog 4y ago
  The Opium wars ended 163 years ago. It's long since time to move on. China itself has committed many horrific crimes during that time.
- mlindner 4y ago
  Those treaties and the end of them long pre-date the CCP. There is no one alive today that was around during that time period. That they are still talked about is part of the internal propaganda of the CCP to propagate the idea that the world is out to get them. Also, if they were so important to the Chinese people then they would still be talked about strongly in Taiwan which has a shared history going back to then and, as far as I know, they don't care nearly as much about it as the people living under the CCP. > Among these concessions was Britain claiming Hong Kong for themselves (which was only returned in 1997). Much to the dislike of the people actually living in Hong Kong. They would have preferred to never go back to being part of being China. This is another great example of CCP/Chinese aggression and colonialism against the world as opposed to their supposed persecution complex.
  - somenameforme 4y ago
    To imagine history, and all of its consequences, dies with one generation is a view you obviously do not hold. And so I do not believe you are arguing in good faith. I'm not doing this to 'mic drop' because I'm more than happy to continue this discussion, but because I think you yourself might not even be thinking about what you're saying - rather than just shooting, somewhat wildly, from the hip.

bloppe 4y ago

Opium wars, Japanese occupation, US Chinese exclusion act, etc. China was bullied. The extant generation of Chinese has not directly experienced most of it, but it's not just a chip on the shoulder. I think claiming the whole south china sea is ridiculous because there's no principle behind it. A coastal EEZ is a principle, but if China can claim the south china sea why can't Vietnam? I also struggle to formulate a strong argument against claiming and developing an uninhabited reef. China is by no means the only country participating in the spratly islands land grab, and to my knowledge no country has ever shied away from claiming uninhabited land. International Maritime law was not formulated to deal with this situation. I think China's neighbors will more likely than not be able to maintain their reasonable Maritime rights. If not, I think China will find wanton domination to be more trouble than it's worth.

mlindner 4y ago
Japan occupied many countries during WW2, it's only the CCP that still cares to the extent that they do about it. In fact in many of the countries that Japan occupied there is now strong pro-Japan sentiment, but not China. The US Chinese exclusion act can not be termed "bullying of China" as it was explicitly about internal US politics rather than international politics. If that is termed bullying of a country then any anti-immigration law throughout history would be bullying of some country or another.

somenameforme 4y ago

I'm not entirely understanding your position here. The series of "Unequal Treaties" [1] China regularly refers to are not imaginary. It started with the Opium Wars. These were a series of two wars in which the Brits insisted on selling opium in China, which had banned the trade. When China tried to stop opium ships, Britain invaded, plundered China, and forced them into a series of somewhat humiliating concessions. Among these concessions was Britain claiming Hong Kong for themselves (which was only returned in 1997). Interestingly enough this happened twice! The legality of the opium was not completely clarified in the first war. After the second war the Brits forced China to legally accept their opium. And it just gets more sordid from there, with various "Unequal Treaties" continuing onward into the 20th century. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Unequal_treaty https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Unequal_treaty

BurningFrog 4y ago
The Opium wars ended 163 years ago. It's long since time to move on. China itself has committed many horrific crimes during that time.
mlindner 4y ago
Those treaties and the end of them long pre-date the CCP. There is no one alive today that was around during that time period. That they are still talked about is part of the internal propaganda of the CCP to propagate the idea that the world is out to get them. Also, if they were so important to the Chinese people then they would still be talked about strongly in Taiwan which has a shared history going back to then and, as far as I know, they don't care nearly as much about it as the people living under the CCP. > Among these concessions was Britain claiming Hong Kong for themselves (which was only returned in 1997). Much to the dislike of the people actually living in Hong Kong. They would have preferred to never go back to being part of being China. This is another great example of CCP/Chinese aggression and colonialism against the world as opposed to their supposed persecution complex.
- somenameforme 4y ago
  To imagine history, and all of its consequences, dies with one generation is a view you obviously do not hold. And so I do not believe you are arguing in good faith. I'm not doing this to 'mic drop' because I'm more than happy to continue this discussion, but because I think you yourself might not even be thinking about what you're saying - rather than just shooting, somewhat wildly, from the hip.