NationStates

Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
That’s a pretty absurd claim. According to your claim the phrase “all of China” is meaningful and that whenever the class of China satisfies the singleton pattern aka there is one and only one China the China magically becomes more benign and less corrupt. This is clearly not true historically.

Thanks for once again proving that you haven't fully read everything and have just scrambled to type a response.

Reread my post and then maybe rebut it. In context with imperial corruption being different. I even said that it "uniquely existed," ergo it was an unusual circumstance.

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:

Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:Thanks for once again proving that you haven't fully read everything and have just scrambled to type a response.

Reread my post and then maybe rebut it. In context with imperial corruption being different. I even said that it "uniquely existed," ergo it was an unusual circumstance.

What’s your evidence that this is the case though?

C h ina wrote:

Yuzu China wrote:
We are discussing the Governance of India specifically, which is itself the joke of the century. As a Tibetan I don't want them to govern me at all, that is a terrifying suggestion. I'll repost the context of my quote which you conveniently cut out:

「You are not Tibetan unlike me, you understand nothing. India is one of the world's poorest, backwards and illiterate countries. It can't handle itself much less Pakistan or whatever. It is on the brink of collapse after the massive Covid lockdown protests. You must explain exactly how this country who has completely failed Covid control has to teach Tibet, who under China has one of the world's best responses? I don't feel very 「free」 choking to death from Covid, do you? Tibetans are ultimately not South Asian at all, there is no commonality at all. Mistreat what, go back to banning modern science while practicing literal monastic slavery? Go recheck the covid charts/econ indicators」

「P.S. Isolationism leading to such factually inaccurate beliefs is one of the “features” of China which has to be abolished along with China itself"」


Go look in the mirror. I'm not going to waste time redebunking stuff like who studies abroad in what numbers or who's publishing the papers because you refuse to read what others like me write at all, as proven above, so you end up wasting other people's time. Since you'd like to play the racism game: true racism is forcing this aforementioned failed incompetence onto us Tibetans, whether it's Indian or Western.

「Freeze don’t move, bring them all
It’s noisy, stop talking now
Your mind and heart
Even your every minute and second
Someone asks us who we are
We don’t necessarily have to explain
But proudly now freeze this stage
And break everything with a hand gesture」

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpIG9dq ... l=TOPMEDIA

Hello. Greatest enemy here.

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Why should East Turkestan choose what you think they should do?

That’s what they will choose on average anyway. They have even less reason to have anything to do with China compared to Tibet. Iran and Turkey have a lot of potential.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
That’s what they will choose on average anyway. They have even less reason to have anything to do with China compared to Tibet. Iran and Turkey have a lot of potential.

Turkey and Iran are both very repressive states that do not respect human rights. As much as I dislike the CCP, Turkey and Iran aren't exactly that much better.

Coradortodos wrote:I think That China will probably Spread Communism Before Invading Someone

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:If you want me to be blunt then different cultures are different due to their history and for ethnic Chinese Randism is about right. It doesn’t mean it is appropriate for Bedouins or Russians.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:If you want me to be blunt then different cultures are different due to their history and for ethnic Chinese Randism is about right. It doesn’t mean it is appropriate for Bedouins or Russians.

Why would China need Randism when they could actually be moral instead and follow the teachings of the Confucians?

Bienenhalde wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:If you want me to be blunt then different cultures are different due to their history and for ethnic Chinese Randism is about right. It doesn’t mean it is appropriate for Bedouins or Russians.

Why would China need Randism when they could actually be moral instead and follow the teachings of the Confucians?

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:Why would China need Randism when they could actually be moral instead and follow the teachings of the Confucians?

Exchange PRC's Psychotic Dictatorship rule with another. Top tier political decision-making.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:Why would China need Randism when they could actually be moral instead and follow the teachings of the Confucians?

Exchange PRC's Psychotic Dictatorship rule with another. Top tier political decision-making.

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Exchange PRC's Psychotic Dictatorship rule with another. Top tier political decision-making.

Randism (or we can label it Yangism after Yang Zhu) is pretty good for ethnic Chinese.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Exchange PRC's Psychotic Dictatorship rule with another. Top tier political decision-making.

Who are you referring to, Nekostan or me?

Bienenhalde wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
Randism (or we can label it Yangism after Yang Zhu) is pretty good for ethnic Chinese.

If Yang Zhu was so great, why were his original writings lost to history?

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:
Who are you referring to, Nekostan or me?

I am referring to the idea that Randism is in any way, shape, or form desirable. Or any more desirable than State Capitalism with PRC'ian characteristics.

Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
What’s your evidence that this is the case though?

The warlords? Hello?

After the fall of the Imperial System in China, China essentially was balkanized into many, many smaller states. Did this create prosperity for China like you predicted? No, it just led to rampant warlordism and corruption as everyone wanted to unify China and did everything they could (including bribe crime syndicates or even join them like Sun Yat-Sen did) to actually attain it. The result was that corruption was sky high, particularly in the provinces.

This issue wasn't solved until the RoC was exiled to Taiwan and the PRC essentially obliterated the warlords and fired them from living. After that, corruption shifted to the reasons that it happens today in China (i.e because of the rich and powerful influencing government like they always have in capitalist societies). Criminal syndicates weren't being paid to help unite China anymore, and the warlords were gone, so that Chinese unification type of corruption just collapsed.

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:I am referring to the idea that Randism is in any way, shape, or form desirable. Or any more desirable than State Capitalism with PRC'ian characteristics.

Ethnic Chinese merchants outside China often practice Randism anyway. I’m just formalizing it in a manner similar to Common Law.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
Ethnic Chinese merchants outside China often practice Randism anyway. I’m just formalizing it in a manner similar to Common Law.

So you think they should be allowed to exploit workers and rip people off without any consequences?

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:So you think they should be allowed to exploit workers and rip people off without any consequences?

His entire political ideology is based on the idea that capitalists can do no wrong.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
Ethnic Chinese merchants outside China often practice Randism anyway. I’m just formalizing it in a manner similar to Common Law.

So you think they should be allowed to exploit workers and rip people off without any consequences?

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:His entire political ideology is based on the idea that capitalists can do no wrong.

That’s not true. For example Shell hired mercenaries who murder locals in Niger Delta. That’s warlordism, not capitalism even though people who sponsored violence are also capitalists. However peaceful capitalists and intellectuals being in power is better than alternatives.

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:His entire political ideology is based on the idea that capitalists can do no wrong.

That’s not true. For example Shell hired mercenaries who murder locals in Niger Delta. That’s warlordism, not capitalism even though people who sponsored violence are also capitalists. However peaceful capitalists and intellectuals being in power is better than alternatives.

Cordel One wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
That’s not true. For example Shell hired mercenaries who murder locals in Niger Delta. That’s warlordism, not capitalism even though people who sponsored violence are also capitalists. However peaceful capitalists and intellectuals being in power is better than alternatives.

That's capitalism.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Nekostan-e Gharbi wrote:
That’s not true. For example Shell hired mercenaries who murder locals in Niger Delta. That’s warlordism, not capitalism even though people who sponsored violence are also capitalists. However peaceful capitalists and intellectuals being in power is better than alternatives.

Ok so just when capitalists are actively murdering people, and not robbing the nation and selling the proceeds to the highest bidder.
What's your take on Western capitalists engaging in trade with PRC?