About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 20

Friday, March 25, 2005 - 9:24amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Kurt,

I just read your last post with a great deal of interest. As much as I want to follow your reasoning, I can't help but hear a little voice in my head saying:

"Peace in our time!"
(Neville Chamberlain)

Michael




Post 21

Friday, March 25, 2005 - 10:19amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit

That’s right, Michael. Chamberlain believed that applying any pressure on Hitler would antagonize him and set off his belligerence. He believed that Hitler could be kept tame by giving in to this one, reasonable demand to be reunited with the German-folk who lived in the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. Then Hitler took all of Czechoslovakia. At every step before this event, and after, the argument was repeated: We must not antagonize Hitler because that will only make him even more belligerent.

The lesson I get from that is: Don’t allow any belligerence. Don’t send signals that you are backing away from the principle that Taiwan must never be forced. Don’t trade Taiwan’s freedom for the removal of Kim or any other benefit. If we fail in this, the first step of China’s emboldening will be under way. It will be infinitely more difficult to keep them in line by our words and posture after that.

Jon



Post 22

Friday, March 25, 2005 - 1:41pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Well, Jon - I just don't see that as being the same situation in any way.  I don't think current day China is remotely close to Nazi Germany, and as I said I support military action against Iraq, and doing whatever it takes to eliminate Kim Jung Il.  I think that China and the US can have common cause there, and that Taiwan is a relic of cold war thinking that is just a lightning rod for radical PLA guys to point to as an excuse for arming - yes it could be a flash point, we just need to make sure it doesnt become one. 

Also, as a comparison there is no further "part" of Taiwan that would be threatened (like the rest of Czechoslovakia).

Like I said, I knew I would take flak for this - lets see how it plays out over the next decade.  I think I will be proved correct.




Post 23

Friday, March 25, 2005 - 2:19pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Kurt,

But there –are- other “parts.” Selling out Taiwan would not be the end. As I’ve said, Singapore is majority Chinese, as are parts of other countries. (There are some islands way down south near Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei, (those countries argue over whose they are) and China, who sits quite far to the north recently (maybe ten years) occupied them! The point being that China obviously has regional aspirations. The idea that all they want is reunification with their brethren in Taiwan, and that we will see no further outrageousness from them if we just give them that, is counter-historical. Tyrants always start with the most reasonable-seeming demand.)

I hope I don’t come across as flak. I too think you may be proved correct, if that means China never actually using force. I just disagree as to how and why that will be the outcome. I think we can ensure that outcome by being very clear in our protection of Taiwan. China fears our reaction and never attacks. Eventually, if China becomes free, Taiwan will want to integrate, and we will have a no-force outcome that is good for all.

I think your route will appear to some as just as good, just as no-force: We sell-out Taiwan and they cave under overwhelming pressure to the mainland against whom they have no chance anyway. They make the best deal they can, under coercion, and they integrate. Many will say, “See, peaceful, and all.” But in fact what will have happened is a free country will have done it’s best to survive after having been abandoned and will have surrendered to a totalitarian state that will now be walking very tall, that much more powerful with the resources of Taiwan at its disposal. At best, the fall of that nasty regime will be delayed by decades.

Again, I hope this isn’t taken as flak, I just disagree. I respect your take on it. We can agree to disagree.

Jon



Post 24

Friday, March 25, 2005 - 2:51pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
 I don't think current day China is remotely close to Nazi Germany.
Flak #1 Go tell that to all the political prisoners imprisoned in Chinese slave labour camps! 

We need China to agree to get rid of Kim, and backing off on Taiwan is the best way to do it.
Flak #2 Oh yeah, let's all dance with the devil!




Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 25

Friday, March 25, 2005 - 3:36pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
For the record, here is the Communist China of 2005:

1. The PRC detains individuals for exercising their rights to freedom of association, freedom of religion and freedom of expression, including the right to impart and receive information, and other basic rights. The total number of persons in China detained without charge, sentenced administratively to reeducation or reform camps, or held by other means, solely for peacefully exercising these rights is unknown - some estimates are in the millions.

2. Unofficial labor groups have been a particular target for suppression. In December 1994, the Beijing Intermediate People's Court imposed severe sentences of between 15 and 20 years' imprisonment on three prisoners of conscience, convicted of "leading counter-revolutionary organizations."

3. On 4 June, 1994, the fifth anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown, China promulgated new implementing regulations for the 1993 State Security Law. The repressive new measures threaten the few legal means of operation left to democracy and human rights activists, independent religious adherents and other independent voices, by criminalizing: contact with and funding from foreign organizations defined as "hostile"; the publication or dissemination of "written or verbal speeches" or "using religion" to carry out activities "which endanger state security;" and the creation of "national disputes." The regulations also give state security officials virtually unlimited power to detain individuals, confiscate property and determine what constitutes a "hostile" organization.

4. Although the PRC's 1982 Constitution guarantees citizens freedom of expression and of the press, its preamble mandates adherence to "four basic principles"-- the CCP's leadership, socialism, dictatorship of the proletariat and Marxism-Leninism Mao Zedong Thought. The primary mechanism of control over the news media and publishing is self-censorship. Chinese journalists, editors and publishers are expected to make the information they disseminate conform to CCP Propaganda Department guidelines. For example, news coverage is required to be "80% positive and 20% negative." Dissidents who make their opinions known to the foreign media are often subject to threats, detention, harassment, intensive surveillance, or imprisonment.

5. The PRC prohibits all religious activities outside establishments registered under the official branches of four state-recognized religions (Buddhism, Taoism, Christianity and Islam), established by the PRC government during the 1950s, through which Chinese and Tibetan religious adherents are required to practice their faith. Individuals conducting or participating in public worship without government authorization, including Catholics loyal to the Vatican and Protestants who worship in house churches, have been arrested, detained, placed under close police surveillance or internal exile, fined and, in some cases, tortured. PRC police have also confiscated religious literature and church property, and human rights organizations have documented the closure of hundreds of house churches since 1989. 

6.  Torture of detainees is endemic in Chinese detention centers and prisons. According to prisoner reports, methods commonly used by guards include: beatings using electric batons; rubber truncheons on hands and feet; long periods in handcuffs and/or leg irons, often tightened so as to cause pain; restriction of food to starvation levels; and long periods in solitary confinement. Furthermore, corrupt authorities at detention centers, prisons and labor camps have extorted large sums of money from families of detainees for the state's provision of "daily supplies" and "medical expenses." PRC authorities acknowledge that there are some 1.2 million prisoners and detainees in China. (this does not include the estimated millions that are detained for "political crimes").

7. During the past two years, there has been a dramatic increase in the use of the death penalty in China. This growth in the number of death sentences and executions is partly due to anti-crime campaigns launched by the government. Defendants can be put to death for criminal offenses, including nonviolent property crimes such as theft, embezzlement and forgery. In 1993, 77% of all executions worldwide were carried out in China. On a single day, 9 January 1993, 356 death sentences were handed down by Chinese courts; 62 executions took place that day. During that year alone, 2,564 people were sentenced to death. At least 1,419 of them are known to have been executed. The total number of death sentences and executions is believed to be higher. Defendants do not always have access to lawyers, and when a lawyer is available, he or she usually has no more than one or two days to prepare a defense. Death sentences have been imposed based on forced confessions and are often decided in advance of the trial by "adjudication committees," thereby circumventing defendants' rights to a fair and public hearing and presumption of innocence.

8. In Tibet, hundreds of Tibetans have been incarcerated for peacefully expressing their political and religious beliefs. Conditions in prisons are reported to be dismal, with numerous accounts of torture and ill-treatment. In particular, PRC law enforcement officials have perpetrated violent acts against Tibetan women in detention centers and prisons.

9.  The Chinese Constitution mandates the duty of couples to practice family planning. Since 1979, the central government has attempted to implement a family planning policy in China and Tibet that the government states is "intended to control population quantity and improve its quality." Central to this initiative is the "one child per couple" policy.  Methods employed to ensure compliance have also included the forced use of contraceptives, primarily the I.U.D., and forced abortion for pregnant women who already have one child.

The above is ONLY the tip of the iceberg; add to these; the political crackdown on Hong Kong, forced euthanasia in mental institutions and orphanages, and the continued military threats against democratic Taiwan.

Comparing present day China to Nazi Germany is very appropriate. Imagine a Nazi Germany that lasted nearly fifty years, 40 million deaths later - the result would be similar to the one you see before you now.

George

(Edited by George W. Cordero on 3/25, 3:52pm)




Post 26

Friday, March 25, 2005 - 5:19pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
If we are talking about applications of US foreign policy, the primary concern should be the security of the American people (threats to our borders, our fundamental way of life, etc). 

In the absence of a global communist movement, it's harder to make the case that China is a serious threat in this regard (harder, but not impossible).  Throughout the Cold War, there was a sizable contingent of American intellectuals who viewed the Soviet Union as a morally superior society.  During the 1960's, there were radical Marxist revolutionaries who sought the violent overthrow of the American government, and such groups received sponsorship from the USSR.  In this context, a Communist super power is a true threat.  (Fortunately however, most of the radicals' potential brethren-in-arms were too caught up in getting high and getting laid to want to engage in paramilitary operations and high level infiltration of the government).

With the fall of the Soviet Union, the vast majority of Western Leftists now conclude that communism doesn't work.  They view markets as a necessary evil which exist to fund wealth distribution schemes (Euopean style mixed economy is essentially what they stand for). Therefore, I find it hard to imagine that any organized opposition movement sponsored by China would emerge that would attempt a radical proletarian revolution in America. 

If the US were to adopt a hands off approach to the China situation, the likely outcome would be Chinese hegemony in Asia.  The question then becomes: is Chinese hegemony in Asia  a mortal threat to America, its citizens, or its borders?               

(Edited by Pete on 3/25, 5:19pm)

(Edited by Pete on 3/25, 5:20pm)




Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1
User ID Password reminder or create a free account.