The Future of China

[The JELLEAIN Republic]

I'd be happy if someone gave his opinions on my analysis. I spent time on it and I also see this debate as one of intellect and not pure rhetoric.

My analysis of your analysis is that you are painting a picture from things you have collected from media sources, not facts.
You seem to be apologetic for some of China’s “situations”
And believe that political views are entrenched in race.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
But this appears to be very biased.

[New Bremerton]

My take on China as a Chinese in Singapore

I see my people in the West do not understand China (I am not using this to deny some important facts on how the CCP has run the country or to justify but simply to state it is not a shock to see the events in China occur based on historical reference)

What are China's goals?

1) Stability

A bit of a backdrop. The CCP is like another dynasty and wants to ensure stability. Some might ask, why is it when China was liberalising under Deng Xiaopeng did 1989 happen? Well, the answer is simple, China knew a simple Glasnost policy like the Soviet Union would not work as it will only reveal the corruption within the party and the people instead of supporting the CCCP in the USSR went full nationalist and against it. Deng Xiaopeng knew at that time along with many leaders in China (moderates included) that China was not ready for liberalisation to that extent or they will end up like the Soviet Union. (This is why Deng also invaded Vietnam, he wanted the military to perform badly to have less leverage and legitimacy against him)

Now, another period of liberalisation was in post-SARS and 2008. If you recall, after SARS, China's media started opening up and this was seen in the free reporting of the unfolding events in the Sichuan Earthquake which killed 200,000 people due to poor building standards in 2008. For the first time, China opened reporting to foreign media too under Hu Jintao. China at this time was confident it could liberalise and free the media without losing stability due to confidence in the government from economic prosperity. That all changed in 2011. In 2011, China saw what happened in Libya and the Arab Spring. The close tied Gadaffi, a anti-colonial revolutionary (who did commit atrocities but the West seems to forget that for stability some atrocities are needed, the USA would be a lot more stable had the natives been completely wiped out if you think about it) was toppled despite being a popular leader and starting to gain closer ties with the West.

China saw the 2011 Arab Spring as a warning for authoritarian nations on the path to open media and "Glasnost". That was, even if the government is popular and you are close to the west, you can be backstabbed and everything can fall apart. It was with this setting that the CCP [Yes they elect within the party leaders whom they think are most suited - even Hu Jintao (who liberalised the nation voted Xi)] elected Xi Jinping as the next Chairman and President in 2013. He was to set a path of abandoning the 冷静观察、稳住阵脚、沉着应付、韬光养晦、善于藏拙、决不当头、有所作为 policy of Deng which means to observe the changes in the international situation calmly and stabilize the domestic economic construction and political situation. Dealing calmly with international diplomatic affairs. Hiding strength and never taking the place of the Soviet Union. Xi Jinping and the next-gen CCP leaders believed (with reasons) that the west cannot be trusted and only through strength will China be respected (This is flawed reasoning and I will explain later). Hence, you see under Xi a massive reversal in freedoms, yet with the power of technology, perhaps it is feasible.

2) Influence

In line with the abandonment of the policy of laying low, China aspires something else. Their historical position as the globally respected power. Maybe not through tributaries but close allies much like the USA has today. However, China has taken a path I believe is wrong which is the CCP believes that strength and might is right as the USA shows. However, they forget that along with strength, the USA also builds trust (especially post WW2 although Trump is throwing that away now, but I believe the next election will stop that trend - benefits of democracy, the smooth transition of power). That is why China has adopted such aggressive policies in their neighbourhood as they believe through intimidation they can secure allies (they also invest but usually that is with regards to 3rd world or 2nd world nations.) I feel bad for China in this aspect because if you know history, China's relations with Joseon (Korea) and Ayutthaya (Thailand) was also reciprocal in nature - they always helped one another, not based on complete fear.

3) Homogenity

In line with the first point on Stability, China wants to be a homogenous nation. A curious fact, Mongolia offered to join China (PRC) in the 70s but the PRC said no. Why? They want to secure their nations first. China has always been envious of Korea and Japan for being such homogenous nations (not always but since the 1900s with the rise of nationalism). That is why we have these Uyghur camps etc. In all honesty, the treatment of the people in Xinjiang is not like Hitler's treatment of the Jews but neither am I saying it is good in any way. China is not against you being Muslim as long as you assimilate and become a Chinese (as seen in the Hui Muslims). The problem is that in Xinjiang the mosque very much looks like those in Afghanistan and the middle east which is a symbol of separatism. China has always practised this idea of incorporating races into the Han race. That is why the people in the historical region of Nanyue (close to Vietnamese) are considered Han.

4) Socialism/Communism that works

This point may seem confusing at first. However, the backdrop of this is that China's rapid development through government-owned/ helped corporations has created a lot of income inequality which is one thing that really reduces internal stability and increases the population's discontent. China developed like South Korea and Japan through Chaebols and Zaibatsu's respectively with large firms (usually heavily government-sponsored) grew the economy. The wealth in the cities is high compared to that in the interior and rural areas and the GINI coefficient of China is one of the highest in the world (embarrassing for a "Communist" state) China sees the weaknesses in the USA and one of them is the inequality (especially since Reaganomics/ Thatchernomics) and does not want to repeat the mistakes of the USA. It is entirely logical to say that any advanced society of the future with no shortages would see communism as an ideal since it gives everyone a level start point for which they have the same opportunity (Hence the idea of meritocracy/Confucian values and "Chinese characteristics"). That is why Xi Jinping has been so controlling and also has been reigning in corruption severely. One historical issue of China has always been Corruption and the CCP does not want to repeat the mistakes of old collapsed dynasties.

Problem

Now here is the issue about China's future. I do not disagree that the CCP will eventually collapse but by that time the world will end tragically. You see too many Chinese people, when the West says, "We are against the CCP not the Chinese people" they laugh. Why? The same people who say that will in wanting to destroy the CCP, want Manchuria, East Turkestan and Tibet to be independent and shrink China like the Soviet Union. Let's be honest, even if the ROC was in charge, the USA would want to do the same to any rival superpower. That does not deny China's human rights abuses. (although you can argue the USA has quite a few on their belt because the western media dominates the world nobody sees that - eg. people think Douyin is the Chinese version of Tik Tok when it is the opposite.) Chinese people have no choice to support the CCP because it is the only legitimate authority controlling one of the two only civilisation states in the world - meaning most Chinese (almost all) stay in this country unless they want their lives to get a lot worse.

Sadly, no matter how logical China's side of the argument is, I believe the West will triumph unless there is an internal shock that knows no bounds. This COVID-19 and China's aggressive behaviour overseas only gives the radicals in the USA the casus belli they always wanted to start a new cold war with China in which they have a current advantage. There are many in the USA who believe China is a threat and want reasons to say so but up till Xi Jinping they had none. That is where I see China has gone wrong. if China followed Deng in staying low, the West would have no dirt against China and more countries would turn to China in a gradual fashion of trust-building. China cannot reverse the clock now and I see a new Cold War coming. Unfortunately, it is one neither side can win. If you ask US allies to decide who to turn to, eg South Korea, Japan and Thailand, it will be difficult.

Lastly on the idea of violent revolution. The reason why I think things are not good is that the CCP is a dynasty of multiple rulers. Only democracy has the ability to ensure a smooth transition of power (even then in Africa it is not always guaranteed). Think about Weimer Germany post WW1. Before that, the Germans only knew of a strongman in charge (the Kaiser) and they never had the concept of democracy and hence when it was very inefficient, many Germans turned to radical authoritarian leaderships as they did not see value in Democracy. Remember, this was only when Germany was 50 years old. Now imagine China, thousands of years of rooted imperial rule and institutions carried forth ironically by the CCP, seeing the inefficacies of the cross-strait counterpart which btw developed fast under authoritarian Chiang kai Shek but slowed down as a democracy in the 90s. Do you think the Chinese will accept democracy that quickly if the Germans did not? Yup.

There are many another points I want to share but I will wait for some new comments and insights to reply to. Thank you.

I was always under the impression that Chinese-Singaporeans are overwhelmingly pro-CCP in their outlook given how quickly Singapore developed under Lee Kuan Yew's authoritarian grip and given how they feel they've been well-pampered and looked after by the PAP. It, therefore, comes as no surprise that most Singaporeans see nothing wrong with the CCP in its current form and hold the position that "rioters" in Hong Kong ought to be gunned down in broad daylight for daring to rebel and fight for their basic human rights and dignity, and that the Tiananmen "terrorists" had it coming. There is also the cultural connection that many Malaysian and Singaporean Chinese have with China that predisposes them to defend China and conflate opposition to the CCP with anti-Chinese racism and hanjianism (someone on a different thread, whom I've since blocked, recently accused me of "selling out"). In the case of Malaysian Chinese, this is also juxtaposed against decades of anti-Chinese racism and corruption under a Malay-Muslim exclusive government. It's good to know that you are above all of that. Kudos to you.

I just want Hong Kong, my hometown, to go back to how it was before Carrie Lam, Xi Jinping and the Hong Kong Police Force fucked it up. Destroying the CCP is my top priority, over and above eliminating racism and corruption in Malaysia where I now live. As such, I'm one of those "radicals" who believe that a Cold War with China is long overdue. As for Trump, let's just say the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[Kamchakta]

I was always under the impression that Chinese-Singaporeans are overwhelmingly pro-CCP in their outlook given how quickly Singapore developed under Lee Kuan Yew's authoritarian grip and given how they feel they've been well-pampered and looked after by the PAP. It, therefore, comes as no surprise that most Singaporeans see nothing wrong with the CCP in its current form and hold the position that "rioters" in Hong Kong ought to be gunned down in broad daylight for daring to rebel and fight for their basic human rights and dignity, and that the Tiananmen "terrorists" had it coming. There is also the cultural connection that many Malaysian and Singaporean Chinese have with China that predisposes them to defend China and conflate opposition to the CCP with anti-Chinese racism and hanjianism (someone on a different thread, whom I've since blocked, recently accused me of "selling out"). In the case of Malaysian Chinese, this is also juxtaposed against decades of anti-Chinese racism and corruption under a Malay-Muslim exclusive government. It's good to know that you are above all of that. Kudos to you.

I just want Hong Kong, my hometown, to go back to how it was before Carrie Lam, Xi Jinping and the Hong Kong Police Force fucked it up. Destroying the CCP is my top priority, over and above eliminating racism and corruption in Malaysia where I now live. As such, I'm one of those "radicals" who believe that a Cold War with China is long overdue. As for Trump, let's just say the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

I am quite shocked. I showed no clear stance, I merely stated why I see China is acting the way it does and what I think will happen. Yet you blast me? How is that conducive at all? Maybe it is best to just stay off forums. The first thing people learn in studying sources is to not trust ones that are emotionally charged. (ALSO Including PRC Propaganda) and I tend to steer away from people like you. Only when you can understand the reasons and can one confront China effectively without starting an all-out war. Do you think I Like China? I hate them for banning K-pop and the multitude of stupid things they do. I believe they should implement democracy and free the media. As a Singaporean, I do not want to lose Instagram.

I think you only read the beginning about the backdrop of China's authoritarian and reasons for 1989 without reading the rest. Don't judge a book by its cover. It is very obvious you did not read everything. I never justified Tiananmen but I said context is needed. Quote Gwangju uprising, now South Korea is a democracy. China being a bigger nation will need more time so calm your tits down and read everything before you seem like a shallow-minded person. You are not helping the stereotype of most Hong Kongers who never had to defend their nation.

[Kamchakta]

I'd be happy if someone gave his opinions on my analysis. I spent time on it and I also see this debate as one of intellect and not pure rhetoric.

My analysis of your analysis is that you are painting a picture from things you have collected from media sources, not facts.
You seem to be apologetic for some of China’s “situations”
And believe that political views are entrenched in race.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
But this appears to be very biased.

Apologies if I sounded biased but I felt I needed to give much-needed context first which is often lacking in the West. Eg. Like how Ho Chi Minh was not a communist and wrote Vietnam's constitution after the US's. The West often gets involved without clearing things up.

My actual stance is that as an overseas Chinese, I want to see China transition to a democracy that can rival democracy of the West. Pan-Asianism I suppose. However, I don't see that happening soon and it angers me most overseas Chinese are apathetic towards politics.

[Infected Mushroom]

My analysis of your analysis is that you are painting a picture from things you have collected from media sources, not facts.
You seem to be apologetic for some of China’s “situations”
And believe that political views are entrenched in race.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
But this appears to be very biased.

Apologies if I sounded biased but I felt I needed to give much-needed context first which is often lacking in the West. Eg. Like how Ho Chi Minh was not a communist and wrote Vietnam's constitution after the US's. The West often gets involved without clearing things up.

My actual stance is that as an overseas Chinese, I want to see China transition to a democracy that can rival democracy of the West. Pan-Asianism I suppose. However, I don't see that happening soon and it angers me most overseas Chinese are apathetic towards politics.

In my time served in Vancouver, I met many overseas Chinese students who were fiercely supportive of the PRC

In fact, some even have family members in the communist party

Some overseas Chinese are very loyal to their true government

[-Astoria]

Some overseas Chinese are very loyal to their true government

I'mma let you finish, but... just no.

[Infected Mushroom]

Some overseas Chinese are very loyal to their true government

I'mma let you finish, but... just no.

I obviously cannot speak for all Chinese but at least some would equate China with their true government

It’s not an uncommon view; some support the PRC even from abroad

[Kamchakta]

I'mma let you finish, but... just no.

I obviously cannot speak for all Chinese but at least some would equate China with their true government

It’s not an uncommon view; some support the PRC even from abroad

This I can tell although, in my analysis, I did state it is because they probably feel a strong China means a strong identity as a Chinese they can use and the PRC is giving them that backing. However, I am referring more to the PRC Chinese that go overseas to study but do not return, instead starting lives in the USA/Western nations when they should be bringing these new ideas (liberal ones) back to China if PRC ever is to reform peacefully, they must be the next generation. Deng Xiaopeng spent time overseas as a student.

[Shanghai industrial complex]

I obviously cannot speak for all Chinese but at least some would equate China with their true government

It’s not an uncommon view; some support the PRC even from abroad

This I can tell although, in my analysis, I did state it is because they probably feel a strong China means a strong identity as a Chinese they can use and the PRC is giving them that backing. However, I am referring more to the PRC Chinese that go overseas to study but do not return, instead starting lives in the USA/Western nations when they should be bringing these new ideas (liberal ones) back to China if PRC ever is to reform peacefully, they must be the next generation. Deng Xiaopeng spent time overseas as a student.

No,thanks.If they accept liberalism, it's good to stay in America. Don't come back.They don't have any skills, they will be blablabla.

[Cameroi]

"always in motion is the future"

there is an inverse relationship between freedom and population regardless of ideology,
and no ideology humans can't find some way of screwing up.

[Vistulange]

This I can tell although, in my analysis, I did state it is because they probably feel a strong China means a strong identity as a Chinese they can use and the PRC is giving them that backing. However, I am referring more to the PRC Chinese that go overseas to study but do not return, instead starting lives in the USA/Western nations when they should be bringing these new ideas (liberal ones) back to China if PRC ever is to reform peacefully, they must be the next generation. Deng Xiaopeng spent time overseas as a student.

No,thanks.If they accept liberalism, it's good to stay in America. Don't come back.They don't have any skills, they will be blablabla.

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

[Infected Mushroom]

No,thanks.If they accept liberalism, it's good to stay in America. Don't come back.They don't have any skills, they will be blablabla.

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

China has over 1 billion people. It has a large pool of talent to draw from. Also, a lot of very intelligent and skilled people choose to serve the party.

[Albrenia]

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

China has over 1 billion people. It has a large pool of talent to draw from. Also, a lot of very intelligent and skilled people choose to serve the party.

Indeed, sadly being intelligent never stopped anyone from being willing to serve immoral masters.

[Kamchakta]

No,thanks.If they accept liberalism, it's good to stay in America. Don't come back.They don't have any skills, they will be blablabla.

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

Tyrannical? I think history will see that this China was the least tyrannical in its history. China's level of human rights abuses I would say is equal to that of the USA in the 1950s. That being said, I hope China can become democratic and form an Asian Bloc to rival the west. Problem is, it is hard to reform when the West is actively out to keep China weak, communist or not. You can see this in Japan's example in the 1980s. China must reform internally and peacefully if it is not to lose land to foreign powers or another century of humiliation will occur. That is why understanding history, I have small hopes China can do so but some can say those hopes are largely false.

Sometimes, I wish I could turn back the clock. What if Russia joined the European Union and was not alienated by the Clinton Administration by funding Chechnyan separatists in the 1990s. What if the Arab Spring never occurred and Gadaffi's successors slowly got friendly to the west. What if seeing this, under Hi Jintao, media was relaxed and Xi never came to power. The West could have seen a liberal world earlier if not for its want to keep rivals down and keep an enemy for politicians to rally their people against. Not saying some of these countries do not exploit open liberal democratic governance's weaknesses but the motto of the West should have been, "Stay Sharp, Let World Events unfold, Interfere when sure of the outcome".

[Ghost Land]

I think that the CCP's days are numbered. The CCP was already struggling to hold on to Hong Kong, and I saw a state-run propaganda program implying that they may have conceded defeat on that front. Countries which used to kiss-up to China are now really getting the shits with the way they've handled Covid-19. Lay people, who were ignorant to the CCP's scumminess have no woken up to the scumminess, thanks to Covid-19 Combine all this with the fact that most modern-day totalitarian regimes have a life expectancy of approx. 70 years, and China has just reached that milestone, I think that it's the beginning of the end of the CCP's reign of terror. I just hope that whatever replaces them is better. I would say that I hope that they're not worse, but from the oppression of ethnic minorities, to the disgusting social credit score system, to the debt traps set by the Belt and Road initiative, to bullying neighbours in the South China Sea, to actively going of their way to avoid preventing a deadly to spread globally, I don't see how any regime could get much worse.

Most current reliable sources place China's life expectancy at 76-79 years, so it's been above 70 for a while now and actually comparable to the United States' 78.

Ever since 10th grade when I learned about the Chinese Revolutions and Civil War that took up most of the first half of the 20th century, the answer has been pretty clear to me that the Taiwanese government is more legitimate than the CCP ever has been or will be. Taiwan to me is what China should have been.

Sometimes, I wish I could turn back the clock. What if Russia joined the European Union and was not alienated by the Clinton Administration by funding Chechnyan separatists in the 1990s. What if the Arab Spring never occurred and Gadaffi's successors slowly got friendly to the west. What if seeing this, under Hi Jintao, media was relaxed and Xi never came to power. The West could have seen a liberal world earlier if not for its want to keep rivals down and keep an enemy for politicians to rally their people against. Not saying some of these countries do not exploit open liberal democratic governance's weaknesses but the motto of the West should have been, "Stay Sharp, Let World Events unfold, Interfere when sure of the outcome".

I agree with the whole idea of not meddling in other countries' affairs. At the same time, why must everyone be all buddy-buddy with the cabal of Western countries? We're not the be-all-end-all of the world or its economics or politics.

[Vistulange]

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

Tyrannical? I think history will see that this China was the least tyrannical in its history. China's level of human rights abuses I would say is equal to that of the USA in the 1950s. That being said, I hope China can become democratic and form an Asian Bloc to rival the west. Problem is, it is hard to reform when the West is actively out to keep China weak, communist or not. You can see this in Japan's example in the 1980s. China must reform internally and peacefully if it is not to lose land to foreign powers or another century of humiliation will occur. That is why understanding history, I have small hopes China can do so but some can say those hopes are largely false.

Sometimes, I wish I could turn back the clock. What if Russia joined the European Union and was not alienated by the Clinton Administration by funding Chechnyan separatists in the 1990s. What if the Arab Spring never occurred and Gadaffi's successors slowly got friendly to the west. What if seeing this, under Hi Jintao, media was relaxed and Xi never came to power. The West could have seen a liberal world earlier if not for its want to keep rivals down and keep an enemy for politicians to rally their people against. Not saying some of these countries do not exploit open liberal democratic governance's weaknesses but the motto of the West should have been, "Stay Sharp, Let World Events unfold, Interfere when sure of the outcome".

Being the "least tyrannical" in Chinese history is an awfully low bar, to be honest. Moreover, I couldn't care less if China were a totalitarian police state, if it weren't trying to spread its form of tyranny elsewhere. Otherwise, China is the problem of its citizens, not mine. However, the moment anything related with the abhorrent ideology and practices of the CPC comes knocking at my door, yeah, no, I'm going to be taking a stance against it.

[Baltenstein]

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

Tyrannical? I think history will see that this China was the least tyrannical in its history. China's level of human rights abuses I would say is equal to that of the USA in the 1950s. That being said, I hope China can become democratic and form an Asian Bloc to rival the west. Problem is, it is hard to reform when the West is actively out to keep China weak, communist or not. You can see this in Japan's example in the 1980s. China must reform internally and peacefully if it is not to lose land to foreign powers or another century of humiliation will occur. That is why understanding history, I have small hopes China can do so but some can say those hopes are largely false.

Sometimes, I wish I could turn back the clock. What if Russia joined the European Union and was not alienated by the Clinton Administration by funding Chechnyan separatists in the 1990s. What if the Arab Spring never occurred and Gadaffi's successors slowly got friendly to the west. What if seeing this, under Hi Jintao, media was relaxed and Xi never came to power. The West could have seen a liberal world earlier if not for its want to keep rivals down and keep an enemy for politicians to rally their people against. Not saying some of these countries do not exploit open liberal democratic governance's weaknesses but the motto of the West should have been, "Stay Sharp, Let World Events unfold, Interfere when sure of the outcome".

Honestly, I hear this "if only we had pampered Russia enough, they would have become a liberal theme park" quite often, but I am not sure of this outcome at all. We did exactly that with countries like Poland and Hungary and even as EU and NATO members they indulge in styling themselves as non- and or anti-liberal "traditionalists" (while still grabbing any and all comfy advantages the liberal order offers them, of course). South Korea has been smiling at North Korea's constant threats and posturing since forever and despite that, the reconciliation process has been at an deadend also since forever.
In my opinion, Russia and China will always have an anti-Western/anti-liberal state ideology for as long they want to define themselves as independent global players with their own agenda.

[Loben The 2nd]

Tyrannical? I think history will see that this China was the least tyrannical in its history. China's level of human rights abuses I would say is equal to that of the USA in the 1950s. That being said, I hope China can become democratic and form an Asian Bloc to rival the west. Problem is, it is hard to reform when the West is actively out to keep China weak, communist or not. You can see this in Japan's example in the 1980s. China must reform internally and peacefully if it is not to lose land to foreign powers or another century of humiliation will occur. That is why understanding history, I have small hopes China can do so but some can say those hopes are largely false.

Sometimes, I wish I could turn back the clock. What if Russia joined the European Union and was not alienated by the Clinton Administration by funding Chechnyan separatists in the 1990s. What if the Arab Spring never occurred and Gadaffi's successors slowly got friendly to the west. What if seeing this, under Hi Jintao, media was relaxed and Xi never came to power. The West could have seen a liberal world earlier if not for its want to keep rivals down and keep an enemy for politicians to rally their people against. Not saying some of these countries do not exploit open liberal democratic governance's weaknesses but the motto of the West should have been, "Stay Sharp, Let World Events unfold, Interfere when sure of the outcome".

Honestly, I hear this "if only we had pampered Russia enough, they would have become a liberal theme park" quite often, but I am not sure of this outcome at all. We did exactly that with countries like Poland and Hungary and even as EU and NATO members they indulge in styling themselves as non- and or anti-liberal "traditionalists" (while still grabbing any and all comfy advantages the liberal order offers them, of course).
In my opinion, Russia and China will always have an anti-Western/anti-liberal state ideology for as long they want to define themselves as independent global players with their own agenda.

Trying to impose your views on a people with no interest in them is a lot like shitting in a wind tunnel.

[WikiPlay]

I never had one single problem with any Asian and I can't count how many relationships I had and have
China is too big so I can't compare Macau with Taiwan or Beijng: there are many culture and language differences inside China.

Asians...no they never change

[Shanghai industrial complex]

No,thanks.If they accept liberalism, it's good to stay in America. Don't come back.They don't have any skills, they will be blablabla.

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

The labor force is out of date.What we need now is STEAM engineers.It is expected to basically realize unmanned factory, unmanned logistics and unmanned service industry in five to ten years.Your idea is too old.It's not ten years ago now.

[-Astoria]

The labor force is out of date.What we need now is STEAM engineers.It is expected to basically realize unmanned factory, unmanned logistics and unmanned service industry in five to ten years.Your idea is too old.It's not ten years ago now.

I assume you meant STEM? It isn't the 1800s anymore...

[Vistulange]

I hope that this state of mind is pervasive throughout the CPC and its grassroots. Keeping the skilled workforce away from the People's Republic will hasten the downfall of its tyrannical regime, after all.

The labor force is out of date.What we need now is STEAM engineers.It is expected to basically realize unmanned factory, unmanned logistics and unmanned service industry in five to ten years.Your idea is too old.It's not ten years ago now.

That has nothing to do with my post.

Without skilled labour, such as those very engineers you speak of - by the way, the term is "STEM", not "STEAM" - there will be no automation. And then, there's also the fact that fully automated, zero-manpower workforces are still quite a distance away. China has managed to catch up, but innovation and creating anew is something else entirely, and they aren't showing much promise in that front, aside from the CPC-guaranteed corporations engaging in corporate espionage and IP theft.

But hey, I'm pretty much talking to a wall here.

[Shanghai industrial complex]

The labor force is out of date.What we need now is STEAM engineers.It is expected to basically realize unmanned factory, unmanned logistics and unmanned service industry in five to ten years.Your idea is too old.It's not ten years ago now.

I assume you meant STEM? It isn't the 1800s anymore...

STEAM Science,Technology,Engineering,Arts,Mathematics Steam education concept

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327351326_STEAM_Education_an_overview_of_creating_a_model_of_integrative_education

[Vistulange]

I assume you meant STEM? It isn't the 1800s anymore...

STEAM Science,Technology,Engineering,Arts,Mathematics Steam education concept

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327351326_STEAM_Education_an_overview_of_creating_a_model_of_integrative_education

"Arts engineers"? So you meant to say "Arts engineers"?

[Australian rePublic]

Yeah, they are distant relatives of the dinosaurs. They've evolved pretty far enough to be considered more separate in both classification and physical aspects.

If you pay more attention to paleontology, you will find that today's academic journals call birds dinosaurs.They are not independent.Body structure and Cretaceous dinosaurs are similar to dinosaurs because they also came from the Cretaceous.Birds are not an independent class now.As I just said, they are Theropoda dinosaurs .They were distant relatives of Tyrannosaurus, not Dinosaurs.You can't rob my cute dinosaur.

Me, personally, the only I would accept them as dinosaurs would be if they were direct decendants of dinosaurs