4 ms·

This has come up before on hn, but I always find it interesting how hard China is pushing into Africa economically: http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-an

This has come up before on hn, but I always find it interesting how hard China is pushing into Africa economically: http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21639554-china-has-become-big-africa-now-backlash-one-among-many http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/2163955... http://thediplomat.com/2015/01/china-embracing-africa-but-not-africans/ http://thediplomat.com/2015/01/china-embracing-africa-but-no... http://qz.com/217597/how-a-million-chinese-migrants-are-building-a-new-empire-in-africa/ http://qz.com/217597/how-a-million-chinese-migrants-are-buil... (that third article is probably the most interesting)

wahsd 11y ago
They don't have the baggage of all the atrocities of the past, they aren't overtly racist on principle, and they have no qualms taking advantage or the situation and participating in the corruption and exploitation. How is that surprising?
- rakoo 11y ago
  While all you say is true, don't forget that by doing this China is slowly building itself a reputation for UN votes. A major goal is to enter the permanent council and/or preventing Japan from having one.
  - jonathanyc 11y ago
    China is already a member of the permanent council.
    - dct 11y ago
      since 1971
    - maratd 11y ago
      Yup. From the very beginning. Remember, the UN is a product of WWII. All the winners got a seat at the table.
      - hydrogen18 11y ago
        That is incorrect. The word 'China' after WWII referred to what is now called Taiwan. Nixon eventually normalized relations with mainland China and arranged for Taiwan's seat to be swapped for the mainland Chinese.
        maratd 11y ago
        That is incorrect. The PRC (People's Republic of China) came into being in 1949. The UN was founded in 1945. That's a 4 year difference. At the time, there was only one China and the government that signed the treaty was the same as the one that was eventually exiled into Taiwan.
        hydrogen18 11y ago
        You're assuming the ROC actually controlled mainland China in its entirety. The only reason it took so long for them to be forced out was the Japanese starting the Pacific theatre of WWII. You can't really fight a civil war and expect to fight another empire at the same time. The temporary halt to the power struggle over mainland China was just a self preservation tactic on the part of both parties.
- jerf 11y ago
  "they aren't overtly racist on principle," Are you saying that because you have some sort of evidence of their highly egalitarian nature, or because "They aren't Americans/Western Europeans, therefore they can't possibly be racist."? If it's the former, I've heard an awful lot of complaints from non-Han in China about racism, and I'd be curious how you reconcile that with your statement.
  - meric 11y ago
    I suppose it implies they can be subtly racist.
- barry-cotter 11y ago
  This is ignorant of both history and the present. Speaking as a three year resident of China they are a hell of a lot more racist than is common in the West. The only reason China doesn't have atrocity baggage in Africa is that they didn't have the opportunity. The Qing were all about genocide when it was useful. I'd say ask the Oirat or the Dzhungars except these groups no longer exist.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- jrs99 11y ago
  American businesses exploit Americans. Do you really think they would have qualms about exploiting Africans?
bitL 11y ago
If you want to see Chinese Tang architecture, visit Japan. If you want to see Chinese Ming architecture, visit Korea. If you want to see Chinese Qing architecture, visit Beijing. If you want to see contemporary Chinese architecture, visit Africa ;-)
breitling 11y ago
You're right, the third article was very interesting. I'm tempted to buy the book just to learn more about this guy. He comes across as a very ambitious guy and he seemingly has a plan (to use his children to get more "local" offspring)
zaczac 11y ago
I guess it is similar as U.S pusing into the rest of world.

wahsd 11y ago

They don't have the baggage of all the atrocities of the past, they aren't overtly racist on principle, and they have no qualms taking advantage or the situation and participating in the corruption and exploitation. How is that surprising?

rakoo 11y ago
While all you say is true, don't forget that by doing this China is slowly building itself a reputation for UN votes. A major goal is to enter the permanent council and/or preventing Japan from having one.
- jonathanyc 11y ago
  China is already a member of the permanent council.
  - dct 11y ago
    since 1971
  - maratd 11y ago
    Yup. From the very beginning. Remember, the UN is a product of WWII. All the winners got a seat at the table.
    - hydrogen18 11y ago
      That is incorrect. The word 'China' after WWII referred to what is now called Taiwan. Nixon eventually normalized relations with mainland China and arranged for Taiwan's seat to be swapped for the mainland Chinese.
      - maratd 11y ago
        That is incorrect. The PRC (People's Republic of China) came into being in 1949. The UN was founded in 1945. That's a 4 year difference. At the time, there was only one China and the government that signed the treaty was the same as the one that was eventually exiled into Taiwan.
        hydrogen18 11y ago
        You're assuming the ROC actually controlled mainland China in its entirety. The only reason it took so long for them to be forced out was the Japanese starting the Pacific theatre of WWII. You can't really fight a civil war and expect to fight another empire at the same time. The temporary halt to the power struggle over mainland China was just a self preservation tactic on the part of both parties.
jerf 11y ago
"they aren't overtly racist on principle," Are you saying that because you have some sort of evidence of their highly egalitarian nature, or because "They aren't Americans/Western Europeans, therefore they can't possibly be racist."? If it's the former, I've heard an awful lot of complaints from non-Han in China about racism, and I'd be curious how you reconcile that with your statement.
- meric 11y ago
  I suppose it implies they can be subtly racist.
barry-cotter 11y ago
This is ignorant of both history and the present. Speaking as a three year resident of China they are a hell of a lot more racist than is common in the West. The only reason China doesn't have atrocity baggage in Africa is that they didn't have the opportunity. The Qing were all about genocide when it was useful. I'd say ask the Oirat or the Dzhungars except these groups no longer exist.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
jrs99 11y ago
American businesses exploit Americans. Do you really think they would have qualms about exploiting Africans?

bitL 11y ago

If you want to see Chinese Tang architecture, visit Japan. If you want to see Chinese Ming architecture, visit Korea. If you want to see Chinese Qing architecture, visit Beijing. If you want to see contemporary Chinese architecture, visit Africa ;-)

breitling 11y ago

You're right, the third article was very interesting. I'm tempted to buy the book just to learn more about this guy. He comes across as a very ambitious guy and he seemingly has a plan (to use his children to get more "local" offspring)

zaczac 11y ago

I guess it is similar as U.S pusing into the rest of world.