Comments on: How should liberal democracies deal with China and Russia? http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: ChinaSucksTV http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-92383 Thu, 18 Sep 2014 18:16:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-92383 How should liberal democracies deal with China and Russia?

Very good question and the article is on points. However, I would add that liberal democracies need not worried about these kleplutocratic societies. They will self destruct and implode. History is littered with them.

]]>
By: Neil_McGowan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57575 Mon, 23 Jul 2012 19:41:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57575 Flashrooster has it entirely correct.

Americans are so brainwashed with the belief that they, and only they, are ‘right’ on any matter, that they ignore the possibility of doing things any different to *their* way.

But the American Way is economically unviable – America has spiralling debts it is incapable of paying. Printing more dollars is the only thing that keeps the American economy afloat. But suppose America’s third-world-nation suppliers suddenly say that don’t want this worthless green money any longer?

That was what Saddam Hussein said. It had nothing to do with ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction” – which were a hopeless lie cooked up by George Bush and Tony Blair, and have never, ever, been found. What prompted the war was the Saddam priced his oil-barrels in Euros instead of Dollars. It hinted that the dollar was toy money – and no-one is allowed to say that. So when trade ceases, war begins.

It’s capitalism at the barrel of a gun, and those who will not accept the green dollar must instead accept the bombardment of their cities by Uncle Sam.

Welcome to the New World Order. The old politics is dead. There is no “left” or “right” any longer. Shillary Clinton is far more vicious than even Condi Rice was. The new politics is a military alliance of the rich nations – America, Britain, France, Germany, and some wannabes and hangers-on – against everyone else.

The BRIC Alliance – Brazil, Russia, India, China – didn’t arise out of opposition to America. It arose because they were countries who found themselves locked out of the New World Order… and decided to fight their corner, instead of laying on their backs and waiting to have their teeth kicked in by Uncle Sam.

Very, very few people here in Russia (where I have lived and worked the last 12 years, in preference to living in my warmongering puppet country of Great Britain) particularly “like” Vladimir Putin. And most of the intellectual community despise him entirely. But people have still voted for him, because he represents a force that will stand up sabre-rattling from Shillary Clinton, who wants to place ICBMs in Poland pointed at Russia… and, get this bit… she claims they are there to prevent attack by Iran. (HINT – try looking at a map of the world here? What route are the Iranian missiles going to take? The scenic route?).

It was American bombs, American threats, American shouts of “Old Europe” and “Freedom Fries” that backed your former allies into a corner.

“They hate us for our freedoms”?? Bwaaahahaha, you should be on the Disney Channel with that crapola. THEY HATE YOU BECAUSE YOU BOMBED THE CRAP OUT OF THEM.

Being allies and partners is a two-way process. “Love us or we turn your country to a potato-crisp” is a peculiarly unpersuasive argument.

Try making nice – like you used to?

]]>
By: Domsayshi http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57273 Thu, 19 Jul 2012 21:09:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57273 And the people of Greece are so content, as those in Spain are, now that they are bancrupt. No threats to those governments at all. They would rather drink from an empty cup that has the label democracy on the outside, than take a sip of sustainment from something a bit harsher.
There have been no riots, I just imagined them. There have been no turmoil, those were just rumors.
The fact is that all societies require capital to thrive.
The fact is that it was economic collapse and financial burden that brought the leaders to power in the 30’s, freely elected at that. The fact is that people like to eat first, and party second. But not being able to do the second, they still need to do the first. Europe had better straighten out its own house and fast, or people will kick the party girl off their laps and return home to the woman cooking potatoes.

]]>
By: Domsayshi http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57271 Thu, 19 Jul 2012 21:01:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57271 Russia and China depend for their stability, not on institutions, since there are none that are independent of the ruling elite, but on growth itself, on the capacity of the economic machine to distribute enough riches to enough people. They are regimes whose legitimacy is akin to that of a bicyclist on a bicycle. As long as they keep pedaling, they keep moving; if they stop, they fall off.

]]>
By: Kailim http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57195 Wed, 18 Jul 2012 02:48:41 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57195 @OneOfTheSheep,

Thank you sincerely.

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57191 Tue, 17 Jul 2012 16:24:44 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57191 @Kailim,

While I disagree with some of your conclusions, had I traveled the path you have I might well see the world as you do today.

May your analysis of people lead to not only your own further enlightenment but that of all who work with you.

The best solution for any challenge is that each party benefit appropriately and ethically. It is better to engage than overwhelm and to set a good example than a bad one.

]]>
By: Kailim http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57162 Tue, 17 Jul 2012 06:32:44 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57162 @OneOfTheSheep,

I am a common Chinese who is not interest in any political doctrines at all, be it liberal democracy, capitalism, socialism, communism etc. I just like to analyse people’s behavior, interactions, mentality etc basing upon my habitual way of work at management level inside companies in China including Hong Kong. I may have bigoty or prejudgment according to my experiences gained from business administration instead of relatively far larger scale in governance for a nation. Rational and impartial comments on my opinions are always welcome.

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57156 Tue, 17 Jul 2012 02:46:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57156 @Kailim,

OK, precisely WHO is YOUR “government”? Then we’ll have the frame of reference to judge the opinions you express.

]]>
By: Kailim http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57155 Tue, 17 Jul 2012 02:25:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57155 I agree with Qeds. I think the reason for fear driven policy is to divert the populace’s attention for the government’s own imcompetency.

From 50s to 70s roughly about 25 years, our government kept on telling us the American imperialism deployed troops at our doorsteps and was about to invade us. The whole nation prepared for this coming war. At that time the economy was the worst in our history even famine occured. But the spirit of the whole nation was high and patriotism was eminent.

Some of us know by now since the open up policy that imperialists are not that stupid to invade the poorest nation resulting in gaining nothing after spending high military cost. The British invaded China in 1850s after she had enjoyed social stability of over 100 years thus her government and people accumulated substantial wealths. Therfore the Qing government had the money to pay for the British costs of war and the people had ample cash to buy British imported goods after the Opium War. By the way I always tell my friends the USA is not that sort of imperialist compare with Britain. Because the USA deploys her military everywhere on earth and never stop waging wars without taking into accounts of profit and loss analysis as any business decision making carried out by the British long time ago.

If we look at the behavior and speeches of American politicians, it is very obvious that they are the disciples of Mao Tsedong in exercising fear driven policies for diverting people’s attention of chaotic economy at home.

]]>
By: RasTinny http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/07/12/how-should-liberal-democracies-deal-with-china-and-russia/#comment-57100 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 08:28:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=13542#comment-57100 Both Russia and China are attempting to demonstrate a novel proposition: that economic freedoms can be severed from political and civil freedom, and that freedom is divisible… Eh… Not that novel… The US and Israel are trampling the human rights of people in the Middle East for decades with impunity. US Marine Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich slaughtered 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha including 10 women or children killed at point-blank range. Six people were killed in one house, most shot in the head, including women and children huddled in a bedroom… The creature did not even suffer a pay cut.

]]>