The Rise of China

[New haven america]

There is actually a logical reason for it. It's not right or humane, but it's logical.

A. Tibet controls China's water, B. If it wasn't controlled by China, it'd be controlled by India.

A. Most of the most important Chinese rivers, including the likes of The Yellow, Yangtze, Mekong, etc... all start in Tibet. So whoever controls Tibet controls China's access to to water that can be used for agricultural, power, drinking, etc...
B. India. If China didn't control or hold power over Tibet, India definitely would, as they're much closer culturally and politically than China is to Tibet. Which would give India a massive leg up over China, and China doesn't like India very much so having a percieved enemy power having that type of leverage over them would be a political/geographical disaster for China.

So it's logical why they do. Not right, but logical.

Here me out. Why not build better relations with them and not be a huge dick to people?

A. Authoritarians generally don't care about things like compromise or cooperation, especially when coupled with the idea of "Face."
B. The Century of Humiliation!

For the former, most authoritarians generally take a "My way or the high way" approach to politics, so if you don't appease them, then you are a political enemy. This is exacerbated by the Chinese idea of "Face", which is basically your public perception/respect and/or lack there of, and giving in or having to compromise to such an important issue like control over water would be a giant loss of face in Chinese society.

For the latter, China (Well, the CCP to be exact) has this idea going on that for 4000 some years, they were the most powerful/important country in the world, but then the age of colonialism hit in the 1800's and they were humiliated on the world stage for 100 years by the likes of Europe (UK, France, Russia, Germany, etc...) and their neighbors, Japan and Korea. This idea has lead to Chinese politics taking on a very "China First" policy, in which China should exert international control in order to take back its stolen power (Thus becoming the most powerful country on Earth, in China's pov) as well as give retribution/revenge for the century of humiliation by colonizing and holding economic power over areas like Europe, Japan, North America, etc.... (When in reality, China's spent more time divided than it has united, and has been conquered by several outside powers several times before the 1800's)

[Vikanias]

Here me out. Why not build better relations with them and not be a huge dick to people?

A. Authoritarians generally don't care about things like compromise or cooperation, especially when coupled with the idea of "Face."
B. The Century of Humiliation!

For the former, most authoritarians generally take a "My way or the high way" approach to politics, so if you don't appease them, then you are a political enemy. This is exacerbated by the Chinese idea of "Face", which is basically your public perception/respect and/or lack there of, and giving in or having to compromise to such an important issue like control over water would be a giant loss of face in Chinese society.

For the latter, China (Well, the CCP to be exact) has this idea going on that for 4000 some years, they were the most powerful/important country in the world, but then the age of colonialism hit in the 1800's and they were humiliated on the world stage for 100 years by the likes of Europe (UK, France, Russia, Germany, etc...) and their neighbors, Japan and Korea. This idea has lead to Chinese politics taking on a very "China First" policy, in which China should exert international control in order to take back its stolen power (Thus becoming the most powerful country on Earth, in China's pov) as well as give retribution/revenge for the century of humiliation by colonizing and holding economic power over areas like Europe, Japan, North America, etc.... (When in reality, China's spent more time divided than it has united, and has been conquered by several outside powers several times before the 1800's)

Fair enough.

[Stellar Colonies]

One concept I've always found kind of interesting to think about is how similar "the rise of the PRC" is potentially is to "the rise of the US" that we gradually saw over the course of the 19^th and 20^th centuries. The US having disputes with the European empires and other American countries possibly being similar to how the PRC today has disputes with the US and Asian countries? Any issues similar to what we see today with the Taiwanese and South China Sea crises pushed by the US?

Would have to delve more into this more.

[Infected Mushroom]

One concept I've always found kind of interesting to think about is how similar "the rise of the PRC" is potentially is to "the rise of the US" that we gradually saw over the course of the 19^th and 20^th centuries. The US having disputes with the European empires and other American countries possibly being similar to how the PRC today has disputes with the US and Asian countries? Any issues similar to what we see today with the Taiwanese and South China Sea crises pushed by the US?

Would have to delve more into this more.

So then if history follows the pattern, China will be the next superpower right?

[Vikanias]

One concept I've always found kind of interesting to think about is how similar "the rise of the PRC" is potentially is to "the rise of the US" that we gradually saw over the course of the 19^th and 20^th centuries. The US having disputes with the European empires and other American countries possibly being similar to how the PRC today has disputes with the US and Asian countries? Any issues similar to what we see today with the Taiwanese and South China Sea crises pushed by the US?

Would have to delve more into this more.

So then if history follows the pattern, China will be the next superpower right?

And have it’s golden age and once that happens it’ll fall.

[Stellar Colonies]

One concept I've always found kind of interesting to think about is how similar "the rise of the PRC" is potentially is to "the rise of the US" that we gradually saw over the course of the 19^th and 20^th centuries. The US having disputes with the European empires and other American countries possibly being similar to how the PRC today has disputes with the US and Asian countries? Any issues similar to what we see today with the Taiwanese and South China Sea crises pushed by the US?

Would have to delve more into this more.

So then if history follows the pattern, China will be the next superpower right?

Maybe, maybe not.

They certainly have more challenges in their neighborhood than the US does, though:

US bordered to the north and south by comparatively weak and/or allied countries, bounded to the west and east by large oceans linking it to major overseas markets (Asia/Oceania & Europe/Africa), no large competitors in their immediate vicinity. Relatively easy to project power outwards without worrying about threats directly next to them.

PRC only has one coastline to the east, and that coast is hemmed in by a chain of generally unfriendly to neutral countries, some of whom are allied with the currently established superpower. To the north is a somewhat weaker but still strong neighbor which it vaguely aligns with, but may have some disputes flaring up with it in the future. To the southwest is a country with an equivalent (soon to be larger) population which is weaker and less developed, but still capable of posing a fairly serious threat.

So the US is in sitting amongst smaller and not-very-threatening countries and in a comfortable position to project power outwards (when not strangling itself), but the PRC is currently boxed in with close to comparable unfriendly countries directly on their borders, although they seem to be making some degree of headway with dismantling some of the walls of that box.

Could be me misreading the current situation though out of limited knowledge, and things could always shift drastically, but that's generally how it seems to me.