Notice that I said the CCP is imperial-"minded" and not necessarily imperial yet. We should hope that they don't try to take more territory after Hong Kong and (likely) Taiwan, but we should also be afraid that they will -- as we should be afraid of any nuclear power, including the US, doing the same.
> in terms of imperialism I'm much more worried about the USA
The US hasn't added/conquered territory since 1947, and it hasn't acquired a large, populated territory since 1898[1]. Whatever you want to call US foreign policy (certainly disastrous in the 20th century and early 21st), it's not imperial in the traditional sense of conquest and annexation.
> How many countries has China invaded in the last 20-30-40 years? How many has the USA?
The US hasn't unilaterally invaded any country since Panama in 1989[2]. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are horrific human rights disasters and unforgivable crimes, but they were not what I would call imperial. You may disagree.
China is in the process of taking over Hong Kong, and they already occupy Tibet, parts of Nepal, and parts of India[3]. They have shown aggression on many disputed borders in the last few years, and they have increased their naval presence in many parts of the world.
We should expect to see Taiwan annexed in the future, per Xi himself, although it's hard to know when or how they'll do it[4].
> in most countries the USA foreign policy isn't seen as something more virtuous than China...on the contrary, it's usually seen as worse. The USA's internal policy (human rights, democracy) is seen as better though
I am from the US and I do realize this. US foreign policy is certainly worse and more deadly than China's, but (as I've said in other comments) the US is not actively taking over new territory.
The two main differences are:
- US foreign policy trajectory is toward fewer wars, partly because we are a democracy and citizens are extremely against starting new wars now; Chinese policy is in the direction of aggression
- the US is not a dictatorship capable of ethnic genocide (at least in the modern era)
As I said above: I'm much much more worried about the USA invading my country than China invading my country.
The "they can annex more and more countries" is pure speculation (besides the obvious case of Taiwan). Do you think they'll annex Thailand? Vietnam? Russia? Japan?
>The US has its share of horrific history, and I wish it weren't so powerful and dangerous, but I am always opposed to power flowing from a democratic country to an authoritarian one.
I agree that the CCP is dangerous, but the foreign invasion is a really poor argument, both because there's no evidence that China will invade other countries (again, besides the obvious Taiwan case) and because the USA has invaded multiple countries in the past 50 years...with horrific consequences to the population
We should first of all reframe the notion that China has not engaged in wars of colonization and conquest since its independence. It has attempted and failed in the case of Taiwan, and has also managed to frame all of its armed conflicts, save its participation in the Korean War, in irredentist terms, meaning that they are simply trying to reclaim what already was rightfully theirs. I grew up in China and in the early 90s my maps had "South Tibet" marked as Chinese, Sikkim as an independent nation, and the maritime borders extending to the shores of Brunei. My parents were both mobilized for the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War but did not see combat because it only lasted 3 weeks, although an uncle was injured and claims to have called an artillery strike that gave him what we now know as PTSD ever since. All maps published in China kept meaningless (although shorter and easier on the tongue) Chinese names in brackets next to Russian ones in the Russian Far East. The historiography of the CCP simply is too built into the narrative that it is anti-imperialist and anti-expansionist to suddenly change course in its rhetoric. Actions are another matter, of course.
Also, notably, there's no singular American ruling ideology in terms of grand strategy, and individual opinions, even ignorant, racist, uninformed ones not espoused by elites, can have an impact. There are plenty in both the libertarian and the progressive camps who vehemently favor a policy of restraint in grand strategic terms. America did change its entire view as to the country's role several times between 1915 and 1941. China has a unified, mandated singular ideology that the state creates and makes official, sometimes for the sake of consistency the definition of words are changed to aid those efforts (like Mao redefining "democratic" and "the people" for the nation's constitution, unilaterally of course). The CCP's raison d'etre is rooted in ethno-nationalist grievance politics and just as most people in China know little beyond what's seen in the media about the US, the inverse is true as well, and so a lot of people will view the threat in a lot of ways, some blatant in its xenophobia and racism (hell, there's still a chapter in the US Code that's titled "the Exclusion of the Chinese"), some on more nuanced, ideological, liberalism grounds, some on zero-sum grand strategy hegemonic thinking. But it's important to know that CHina wants to portray itself as a bigger threat than it really is and while its citizens are quite used to and are usually cynical about officical messges the state sends out, America's lack of experience in discerning between real and embellished and conjured aspects of official lines pose a rael, atlhough surmountable, threat.
Meanwhile, ask yourself how is it that cryptocurrencies are so big in China, in spite of government efforts to intimidate founders and launch its state-backed competitor. Ask yourself how successful is the long-standing national ban of porn? Or even truly the anti-religion movement, est. 1945. China's real threat is America taking it at face value and not critically enough. They've had a lot of decades to hone messaging.
We have 1000s of years of history, wars, and imperialism to draw on. It is possible to evaluate the extent of China's imperialism without comparison to the US.
Is China increasingly imperial? Is China engaged in tactics to undermine, divide, or conquer other countries and peoples? Is China expanding their military presence around the world?
Right, congratulations on spouting straight-down-the-line CCP/Soviet anti-American tropes, while simultaneously conflating pre- and post-20th century / WWII world orders.
Oh, and revealing yourself as a complete fool citing anythign Trump says as if it were fact. Yikes.
And trying to claim that China is not expansionist despite it's post WW-II history? Yikes againb. Just look at the ACTUAL history in Korea, Tibet Uhigurs, "9-dash-line", Hong Kong, "Belt and Road Initiative" trying to take Africa, claims on Taiwan, and more. Again mistaking lacking the capability to project global power for the will.
I never disputed that the pre-WWII order was the Age of Empire, going back to times of Alexander, and that the Americas were basically stolen from the native populations, going back to Columbus.
That does not mean that things are the same, or that the Free World is not different from the Authoritarian regimes. I note that while you seem to love all these authoritarian regimes, you don't live there. I hope you're paid well for your trolling. Have a good day.
The favoured retort of the pro CCP group is American imperialism. No doubt, I agree it is no longer in America's best interest to defend foreign nations and to meddle internationally.
However, that does not excuse your ignorance. A totalitarian regime that has caused more death than any other regime in history; one that primarily values wealth over freedom; one that does not believe in the sanctity of human life (ie Uighurs) is not fit to be influencing global culture.
Moreover, I agree American foreign imperialism has caused awful things to happen, but one thing no one ever realizes:
this is the only time in human history that the world has had a monopole aka one dominant super power by far. Usually the world is bipolar or multipolar. Yet the last 70 years has yielded the fewest deaths from war as a percent of the global population in history. Should America be upset with its past? Sure. However, if China had been the global monopole for the last 70 years I do not believe the total death toll from war would be so low. thanks for ur opinion
What you're arguing is that, since China was previously a victim, China is incapable of being imperial. That's no comfort to countries which are staring down a gauntlet of Western imperialism being replaced with Chinese imperialism.
The funny thing is China isn't an imperialist country. They're primarily concerned with their internal affairs and with the rest of the world insofar as they need their raw materials and advanced technology. They're not very interested in leading and controlling the world like the west seems to be so obssessed with.
China does not have much of an expansionist history, but the Communist Party does. CCP has only controlled China for 70yrs, during which time China lacked the ability to get involved in international conflicts beyond its own borders.
As it becomes a great power it clearly has an agenda of extracting raw materials in Africa, selling manufactured goods across Eurasia and the rest of the world, and linking the supply chain from Africa <-> China <-> Europe more closely. It will likely guard those interests with force once it's able to.
Same as the US. Hard to complain when we've been doing it for 50+ yrs.
It's all lies. I used to believe this line of thought about China. "We aren't expansionist like the US, we just want to do things our way inside of the country". It's not true.
China as a unified country has never been as large as it is today. They are actively taking over parts of Nepal, they have taken pieces of land from India, they invaded and took over Tibet, the are nearing genocidal strategies to eradicate any semblance of culture or different-think amongst the Uyghur and people of Inner-Mongolia (bet you haven't even heard of that suppression! They have banned the Mongolian language in schools and nomads are no longer allowed to _ride horses_ as of a few weeks ago!). Not to mention what happened in Hong Kong.
If not for India, they would have already taken over Bhutan. If not for their fighting spirit, they would have tried to take over Vietnam. They are building islands and taking over the South China sea. They are practicing debt trap diplomacy in Africa.
They are the most expansionist, imperialist regime in Modern times second only to USA. Chinese people feed us this line, that they aren't expansionist, that they aren't imperialist, that they are only inward looking. For some reason we in the West take them at their word. Look at their actions, the picture is not so rosy. As much as I hate Trump, his pressure on China has been a welcome policy shift.
The comment belies basic geo political understanding. US for a change didn’t start the hostilities. It is China that has a stated policy of “de throning” the US and replacing the US led world order.
China’s actions have been equally concerning, the build up in South China Sea is a naked attempt at imperialistic expansion. Its activities on its land borders echo much of the same sentiment. It is a de facto revanchist power.
When an ex US colony Philippines invites the US to set up military bases it is not the US doing it, it’s because Philippines has concerns about China.
When S.Korea and Japan start putting differences aside it’s because they share a common threat perception of China.
Not to mention China’s abhorrent pillaging of technology, export of dystopian authoritarian control mechanism to government, and its human rights violations which you seem to ignore, yeah the US isn’t the problem here for a change. The CCP is an absolute challenge to liberal values it must absolutely be restrained. Taiwan is a small piece of that the game is much bigger.
As a naturalized US citizen who was born in China but intends to raise a family as full-bore Americans, it's hard for me to assess the China threat.
I believe China very much wants to assert it's influence in the Asia Pacific + MENA region, but I just don't it trying to conquer the United States directly. It's never really had a history of imperialism like the West has (excluding the Mongol empire that collapsed almost immediately).
That said, a country doesn't need to directly conquer another to be a threat. Still, it's hard to know how serious the threat really is—the post is compelling but also assumes as a forgone conclusion that China has aggressor ambitions.
Why do you think I have imperial interests? Is it because you think everyone does? If everyone does, does that mean you do? In that case, what is the answer? Do we just wait around until China somehow out-imperials the US and not be critical of anything? Then, do you think that will really be better?
People in many parts of the world will have the exact opposite impression. So far, Chinese domination looks like new roads, while US domination looks like coups and war. Of course, this reflects the current relative advantages of both and I have no illusions about the risks of being dominated by any imperialistic power.
Invading and annexing neighboring territories like Tibet, Sprately Islands. Committing genocide on ethnic minorities like the Uighars. Surpressing the political will of their own people by doing things like mass murder in Tiananmen Square. And these aren't even the fears but rather just the typical acts of the CCP. Keep in mind that China is a nuclear power that intimidates and wishes to invade its neighbors.
The US has invaded multiple countries and overthrown just as many in recent memory. China has done no such thing. For the rest of the world, there's far more reasons to fear the US than there is China...
I think it's much easier to like Chinese imperialism with things like Belt and Road, which actually helps little people despite all of the downsides, than it is to love American imperialism, which largely consists of coups against democratically elected governments, forced work on US companies' plantations, civilian infrastructure bombing, paying and training terrorists (the taliban, first and foremost), weapon sales to terrorist belligerent regimes (Israel, Saudi Arabia, historically Irak, Iran), forced kidnappings and interrogations, mining the harbors of Nicaragua and ignoring the International Criminal Court penalties for this proven war crime, and so many others.
Of course, it should go without saying that most people would much rather live in the US than China. But to most people who are not citizens, the US is much scarier than China. Exceptions such as Japan, Israel, South Korea, Republic of China (Taiwan), Federal Republic of Germany after WWII are just that - exceptions.
According to Gallup poles, the majority of the world fears the US more than any other country.
> in terms of imperialism I'm much more worried about the USA
The US hasn't added/conquered territory since 1947, and it hasn't acquired a large, populated territory since 1898[1]. Whatever you want to call US foreign policy (certainly disastrous in the 20th century and early 21st), it's not imperial in the traditional sense of conquest and annexation.
> How many countries has China invaded in the last 20-30-40 years? How many has the USA?
The US hasn't unilaterally invaded any country since Panama in 1989[2]. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are horrific human rights disasters and unforgivable crimes, but they were not what I would call imperial. You may disagree.
China is in the process of taking over Hong Kong, and they already occupy Tibet, parts of Nepal, and parts of India[3]. They have shown aggression on many disputed borders in the last few years, and they have increased their naval presence in many parts of the world.
We should expect to see Taiwan annexed in the future, per Xi himself, although it's hard to know when or how they'll do it[4].
> in most countries the USA foreign policy isn't seen as something more virtuous than China...on the contrary, it's usually seen as worse. The USA's internal policy (human rights, democracy) is seen as better though
I am from the US and I do realize this. US foreign policy is certainly worse and more deadly than China's, but (as I've said in other comments) the US is not actively taking over new territory.
The two main differences are:
- US foreign policy trajectory is toward fewer wars, partly because we are a democracy and citizens are extremely against starting new wars now; Chinese policy is in the direction of aggression
- the US is not a dictatorship capable of ethnic genocide (at least in the modern era)
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_territorial_acqu...
2. https://www.thoughtco.com/american-involvement-wars-colonial...
3. https://theprint.in/theprint-essential/not-just-india-tibet-...
4. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/11/china-taiwan-inv...
reply