The imbecile Kraut and Tea actually made a video on China a few months ago, and it's all over my recommendations:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=hhMAt3BluAU [Embed]

But how this happened?

There are plenty of places in the world that have cheap labor and unlimited demographic resources, but only China could rise from outsourcing haven to something bigger.

India has same large population and even better starting position - no communism, better English language knowledge in population, open market economy and economical ties with UK. It has industry and science, but it is nothing compared to China. Eastern Europe (non-USSR part) started in same position as post-communist land, but still remains outsourcing haven for EU and nothing more, while having better educated people than China on average. Latin America struggles for years in constant growth/crisis cycles, also has no cultural and political restrictions as China, but overall it still undeveloped. USSR even had similar reforms (Perestroika) but it didn't help, and even now country is just an oil exporter and nothing more. Africa... oh, you all know.

Maybe first reason is a strong but adequate government. Top part of government decided to achieve the goal and had enough control to stop lower levels from failing it by corruption. Government also had no pressure from internal competitors, while in other countries it is more about "survive and win next elections, and who cares". But it couldn't be sole reason of course.

China also isn't a backwards country overall, it is country with thousands years of history, including imperial periods with large bureaucracy and half-religious legalism. It just had bad period in 18-20th centuries, but there were times when they were almost best in the world in development sense. Western historiography often ignores it because eurocentrism. And even communist disaster couldn't really destroy all thousand years of state legacy. Also it must be noticed that China is an Empire that didn't break, not a national state like European countries.

>>36033
From the start of the video, I can tell something's wrong, mainly in that India was once a bigger country than China. China simply expanded and remained undisturbed and giant, plus because it expanded it took over old trade routes to a very valuable region which traded with India through both land and sea. India was conquered and so China started to become irrelevant after the Mings and Qings.

>Actually, it would be better to see someone with Chinese background to discuss this, because China is pretty "closed" to outsiders, but has large amount of historical materials and cultural things that we don't know.
What happened to Taiwanbernd? He just disappeared a year ago.

>>36036

India and China have many similarities. Both is some kind of "multicultural" (in classic terms) Empires with rich history of state building and with existing culture (compared to Africa for example). They both experienced European pressure, India was simply conquered and made into official part of British Empire, China was forced to became colony-like dependent state by Europeans and neighbors in 19th century.

But for some reason India didn't progress much as China. Maybe root is in culture and historical background. I don't know about India much, but people said that it is more "anarchistic" inside, i.e. people have more laid-back attitude overall. Chinese, on other side, have rich legalist history.

Of course is it hard to compare countries, because even some small happenings in history may end in different outcomes.

But there are other large populated countries like Indonesia or Nigeria, and they still don't show Chinese-style economic growth. Although in terms of outsourcing they better on paper for cheap labor.

>>36038
>What happened to Taiwanbernd? He just disappeared a year ago.

Yes, he could give much better insight into this thread. Sadly, he is missing.

Taiwan is also interesting. It is technically still China in cultural and historical terms, and show same economic grow. Yet it doesn't have strong communist rule or something, so that rule isn't a real reason for Chinese success.

They've had large continuous US investments (mostly for political purposes, i.e. to be a Chinese enemy and US base), but overall it is just a small island with no resources. Yet they still look much better than many others.

So, I guess, there is something more than just cheap labor and resources. As far as I know, even "democratic" Taiwan still show some specific Chinese state and society traits.

>>36039
Hinduism was attacked by Buddhism in India (which merged once Islam came in, and thus destroyed traditional Aryan Hinduism) while in China, it just contemplated Confucianism etc.
Plus China is geographically more limited and thus more militarist than India. India is surrounded by mountain ranges which are in-turn surrounded by deserts in the west and north, and jungles in the east.

>>36034
>>36035
I'd assume China's businesses have to face less regulations which would tie them and make production more expensive. Human life is cheap, so why bother with safety or health regulations or whatever.
EU is a bureaucratic mess with bs like pigs needs "movable objects" in their pens so they can play with them and recommendations on the optimal curve of cucumber and such.

>>36035
>ant-like
This illusion might come from their numbers and the overcrowded giant cities many of them live in.

>>36036
>>36039
I think China has more arable lands, while large part of India is desert. Also colder climate.
India is also a "miracle" in itself. Lots of billionaires risen in the past decades.

>>36038
Yeah. There is a Taiwanese on Kohl, but I haven't catch any "useless news on Taiwan" threads, which were posted on KC main. So not sure if it's same guy.

>>36040
How those Asian countries were called? Small Tigers or whatever?

>>36040
>As far as I know, even "democratic" Taiwan still show some specific Chinese state and society traits.
Taiwan was under autocratic rule for decades, they also had a strong and determined leadership. In the brief period the KMT had previously gotten a semblance of hegemony over the mainland (the Nanjing decade) China was already gearing up for fast development, and at the same time Japanese-controlled Manchuria had its industrial boom. Other Far Eastern economies ahead of mainland China's (Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong) were for most of the second half of the last century or up to this day either autocratic or democratic but incomplete/monopolized by a single party. It might not have much to do with autocracy: those states have good governance as demonstrated by their reaction to this year's pandemic being the best in the developed world.

>>36056
>This illusion might come from their numbers and the overcrowded giant cities many of them live in.
And also from the Maoist period. Mao didn't implement his ideas through simple top-down legalistic imposition like Soviet collectivization, but got the masses to his side and had them enthusiastically carry out his campaigns at the local level. Hence one fatso in Beijing orders the murder of sparrows and immediately hundreds of thousands are putting all their hearts to kill sparrows. This was also part of his power strategy as he got ideological zealots at the bottom of the political hierarchy to fight with their superiors, weakening the superiors' ability to oppose him. As an outsider it's hard not to get an impression of ants at first sight.

>>36056
So he totally disappeared. Also Bogdan disappeared as well not that I miss him. As did the Englishbernd (we have a UK flag now, but he's Welsh), etc. have all disappeared. The Turkbernd made his appearance a while ago, so he's not totally gone, but all those other people have just vanished.
>>36058
Kind of like South Korea and South Vietnam. The USA used to be a lot more pro-authoritarian republican (or monarchist when it comes to Ethiopia/Iran/Saudi) in the cold war than wanting to spread "democracy".

>>36040
What of all the stuff "made in Taiwan"? What about all the companies located there like HTC? Are they just stuff mostly made in China and then shipped there to be finished?
It's also odd that the ROC (the actual state that wanted to preserve thousands of years of Chinese imperial culture) was relegated to a small island that wasn't even originally Han Chinese until a bunch of Dutchmen found it.

>>36063
>What of all the stuff "made in Taiwan"? What about all the companies located there like HTC? Are they just stuff mostly made in China and then shipped there to be finished?

Taiwanese Bernd said that there are ties between Taiwan and mainland, students go for education and people travel to work. I was surprised, because I thought that relations between countries are far from normal. But looks like time changes everything.

At least in 90s Taiwanese stuff was mostly made in Taiwan. I guess now China overtook them in terms of development and tech, and in future will absorb Taiwan by economical force, not military. Pretty good strategy actually.

>>36039
India is far more diverse than China, while China does have many ethnic groups the vast Majority are from one.

They are also less authoritarian which nations like that actually need to succeed.

>>36062
>So he totally disappeared. Also Bogdan disappeared as well not that I miss him. As did the Englishbernd (we have a UK flag now, but he's Welsh), etc. have all disappeared. The Turkbernd made his appearance a while ago, so he's not totally gone, but all those other people have just vanished

Maybe people get tired of posting and just leave. It's happened before. Or they have too many things going on in their lives and can't post here anymore

>>36082
>Or they have too many things going on in their lives and can't post here anymore
No. I always find time to read here despite being busy, always have since day one. We tend to lose people in down periods. Norf and chong were lost when endchan lost .xyz IIRC or whenever that last big crash happened.

Very good rus-bernd, but it still raises the question, why the fuck are we trading with them, essentially empowering them, if we don't like their politics or relate to their culture?

On a personal note, the Chinese really do not give a fuck about anyone but themselves. A strong attitude to have in a way but not a nice community, if you can even call it that, to live in. I saw a man dying in the street and people literally walking over him to go into shops. If the Chinese ever had souls, they must have lost them in the cultural revolution. Truly they have no shame, like a nation of dogs. I think this is why Buddhism, which respects living things, was such a radical idea and an important one to China but the regime drove the Buddhists out, smashed their temples and burned their parchments.

Perhaps this is why China is stronk economy, because they are a large nation of soulless consumers.

>>36120
Might be worth mentioning, there was an interesting theory on /pol which tried to explain our sudden and dramatic dependence on China and its' subsequent rise. Basically, the USD is fucked and going to collapse so the jews are trying to move to China as a backup plan. Why not Russia instead? I have no fucking clue.

>>36121
Because Russia died too, 20 years ago. Also, it's just too cold for jews, while China's just like New York or Tel Aviv.

>>36120
>On a personal note, the Chinese really do not give a fuck about anyone but themselves
>If the Chinese ever had souls, they must have lost them in the cultural revolution.

Yes although there was that an Australian bernd that said that they rioted against them because they seemed to have the same characteristics you mentioned now. It was during the gold rush period there, but I can't remember the name of the conflict

>>36120
>>36131
Also
>why the fuck are we trading with them, essentially empowering them, if we don't like their politics or relate to their culture?
BLAME THE U.S.A
BLAME THE U.S.A
BLAME THE U.S.A

As this american said >>32828 , America was instrumental in propping up the Soviet Union, which in turn propped up the current regime in China. Everything's been done by proxy, so nobody can know exactly who did, nor can they take blame since technically "they didn't do it". My guess for the end goal in all of this is that every single economy in the world tanks in comparison to China due to everything discussed in this thread, most important being cheap labor, cheap materials and cheap lives.

Let me see --> America funds the commies --> commies rekts everythings --> Make everyone depends on commie supplies since they're so cheap compared to the things in your own country--> Control all commie things in the backseat and laugh when people still can't get that you're responsible for everything --> hell on earth --> It's ogre-ville

Personally, I blame satans for everything

>>36132
Technically the Chinese themselves are also to blame, as they caused the Boxer Rebellion and thus the Wuchang Uprising by jointly massacring Prussian/Japanese/British diplomats, and then overthrowing their own government for being invaded by them. Then the said Japanese invaded again, which left the power vacuum to later establish the PRC.
I wouldn't really blame them, as China always hated foreign merchants, spies, and diplomats and so do I, but don't blame it solely on the USA. They weren't even involved in the Boxer and Wuchang rebellions.

>>36120
>why the fuck are we trading with them
The "free" market fixed that way. As I wrote in the other thread it's advantageous to choose them as a source, buying their stuff is cheaper than produce them locally.
While OP questioned the cheap labor, there are other factors. One probably is the incentive the Chinese govt. hands out for setting up companies. One other, that with every new piece produced the production gets cheaper, and they can produce in such a huge volume the cost of production is low. And then transportation is similar, those giant ships can bring such massive amounts that the transportation cost per one item is trivial. Probably some other stuff in play, but the underline is local companies cannot compete.
Btw the large possible volume comes from consumerism. Since we use a product for a short time (planned obsolescence) and purchase another again this ensures more stuff has to be churned out than the actual needed amount (if the they would be durable, or feasibly repairable, or just repairable at all).
With conscious decisions the customer can pick goods that aren't from China, but it's not easy, and not possible in case of certain products (liek computer parts and such).
Why governments don't stop Chinese goods? Because tariffs are part of the income. And relations with China is more than simple buying their stuff. Now they are foreign investors. Chinese companies are established worldwide. They create jobs, and help development.
For now that's all what came to mind.

>>36158
I hear the chinese fought with hula hoop

>>36158
Britain did because they wouldn't want to trade with India, which included opium. Portugal did centuries before and they were fine with that, you did as well, you got your shit beat in in Taiwan. Japan beat China in the Sino-Japanese war, which allowed them to take over Korea which was previously Chinese. It was in-fact the attack on the German embassy that was a part of the Boxer Rebellion, which is why they led the attack, and the Meiji restoration that led to Japan conquering Korea was Prussian influenced with the addition of the old Samurai honour system. Technically it was the US that forced the Shogunate to become weak, but they had nothing to do with the Meiji restoration otherwise, it was a German-influenced monarchy and culture (which is why they were so similar before WW2, and why the Germans and Japs are still both a pair of faggots today). Anyways, The Germans, Japs, Austro-Hungarians, Russians, and Frenchmen all teamed up to take out the Qings after Chinese massacres of westerners was used as a casus belli, and they succeeded in taking giant cities in China. Thus, the Qings were weak and susceptible to rebellion.
About the Wuchang rebellion, it's wholly Chinese. Not only was it performed by people already from the Qing government, but it was done by HAN CHINESE people from the Qing government. You see, the Qing dynasty wasn't Han Chinese, it was Manchu, quite like how the Yuan dynasty was Mongol, or how Charlemagne was actually not French or German but a jew, etc.; now the Qings were literally a continuation of the Jurchen Jin dynasty, and the emperor Hong Taiji even called himself the Great Khan. The Chinese "revolutionaries" weren't overthrowing China, they were overthrowing Manchu rule of China. This culminated in mass-massacres of Manchus by Han and other groups like Hui Muslims, Mongols, etc. Thus, the Republic of China was established as a Chinese republic, for Chinese people. Taiwan is a direct continuation of this state, but all that war left a power vacuum for Mao Zedong to take over.
>>36166
Both the Mings and Qings had pretty advanced breechloaders in the 16th century, don't underestimate their technology.

Why is China the greatest society on the planet Earth?

Many nations pride themselves with their rich history and long lasting civilization, but one nation above all has the right to claim the title of the first and longest lasting civilized culture on this planet - and that is China. Chinese civilization is so ancient that the only nation that can barely compete is Persia. There is no western country that can even come close in terms of rich history. While Chinese people were developing writing and philosophy, Europeans were just bunch of savages scratching each other's backs in a forest. While Chinese people were developing agriculture and complex gastronomy, Europeans were picking worms from tree bark and eating those. While Chinese people developed mathematics, Europeans held mass sex orgies and were killing babies in religious pagan rituals. While Chinese people were developing physics, mechanics and engineering in order to build complex war machines, Europeans were hitting each other's heads with rocks. While Chinese people were developing chemistry, leading to invention of gun powder, Europeans thought that urine must contain gold, since it's yellow.

For the bigger part of history it was China where all the world changing inventions came from. It was only in the 20th century that Europeans gained a slight edge, but that is only temporary, since as Chinese philosophers say: All the things that are against nature are only temporary and short-lived. Speaking of philosophers, notice how the greatest philosophers of all time who created whole schools of thought like Lao-Tzu, Confucius or Han Feizi are all Chinese, while Europe gave birth only to trashy philosophers like Nietzsche.

High intelligence of Chinese people together with typical Asian hard working nature also played a crucial role in China's steep economic rise that we all could witness recently. It is called "Chinese miracle" for a reason. Getting from poverty to economic prosperity so extremely fast has no precedent in the history of mankind. The only society capable to achieve such miracle is the Chinese society.

And why is it that the only society capable of achieving all these miracles is the Chinese one? It's because the Chinese society has the best social structure and the right cultural values which allows it to go much further than the Western societies. Chinese people don't waste their time with silly individualism. Unlike Westerners Chinese people are aware that individualism is a path leading straight to hell. Chinese people made the correct choice when picked an ideology of strong collectivism. By combining communism with strong nationalist tendencies, they have created an ideal society that can withstand even the hardest of times. Collectivism is like a thread that ties and binds a society together and helps it to go through any storm, it keeps it afloat even in bad times. Collectivism is the answer for every crisis. The western societies could never withstand as much as the Chinese society can. They would shatter into pieces and burn in flames of internal conflicts completely almost immediately. Individualism always fails in time of crisis.

Recently China was able to demonstrate that their collectivist ways are the right way to go yet again, when they defeated the coronavirus swiftly, by utilizing their strong government and its abilities to use necessary regulations in order to solve this kind of crisis. And they managed to do it perfectly. Western countries on the other hand are still struggling with the virus. Even tho the Western countries had much more time to prepare than China, they are actually doing very poorly. Their silly individualism is not just silly in this case, but it is an obstacle that stops them from putting necessary regulations in place in order to avert the crisis. That's why as Chinese people celebrate the victory in a war against the virus, the Western countries are digging mass graves. The difference could not be more obvious.

And don't give me that crap about China being responsible for the existence o

And don't give me that crap about China being responsible for the existence of the virus itself. Virus epidemics are natural disasters, nobody is responsible for that. If anybody is responsible, then it's God. God probably created this virus as a way to punish America for their crimes.

>>36178
>And don't give me that crap about China being responsible for the existence of the virus itself. Virus epidemics are natural disasters, nobody is responsible for that. If anybody is responsible, then it's God. God probably created this virus as a way to punish America for their crimes.
But they're not, they just don't exist at all. There is no coronavirus, and there never was any coronavirus. All of that is just propaganda.

>>36179
Germanics really can't stop being retarded, can they?

what about germ many?

>>36176
Actually many aspects of Chinese civilization are not that old, for example by the time bronze trickled down to them through the north even C*lts in Britain were working with Iron and most of the famous buildings in China are also relatively recent, often even less than 500 years old, there really isn't much in China that's older than that and still in decent condition. Chinese society itself comes across more as a extant ancient society like Egypt or Mesopotamia in the way it functioned and such rather than a modern nation, well formerly it's modern now.

Also, even the technology they are credited with is vastly overrated.

Yes, they invented the crossbow but it really was just a bow on a stick(literally a bow, often repurposed from a bow even). They didn't have dedicated limbs for them, they didn't have any kind of stirrup for a very VERY long time, and even that was just a loop of sting at the end. Up until then(it could even have been the 13th century or later) they were reloding by spanning the bow from their backs using their feet. Even the famous Chi Ko nu was a worthless as anything but a toy, far too weak to be able to do much and the bolts not even being fletched.

>>36176
>sponsored by Winne the Pooh
Kekked tho. Reminding me a little of our Sammurai friend. I wonder what he would say reading all this.
While you have points I can agree with you made those in a tone that it feels if your actual purpose was trolling (but such a long post just for that? I don't think so).

>>36185
I'm not from Korea. I'm from the anonyous-proxy-land.

*anonymous
Can't even spell properly

>>36189
Many people consider my ideas to be "just trolling", but that is only because normies can't believe that other people hold radical beliefs.
If you read my NazBol manifesto, I'm sure that you would consider it a some kind of elaborate joke, but it was meant completely seriously.

>>36189
No, it was not trolling.
People often consider my posts to be "just trolling", but that is because normies can't handle my radical views.
If you read my NazBol manifesto, you would probably consider it "just an elaborate joke", even tho I meant it completely seriously when I wrote it.
http://endchan.org/.media/c84e532da350d1a541ead6777a71c38f-applicationpdf.pdf
http://endchan.org/.media/0d270b114f8b94ca35cba6279aaab9d3-applicationpdf.pdf
http://endchan.org/.media/2183071f56cb5d5c16ba3c0c4c7ec42a-applicationpdf.pdf
http://endchan.org/.media/b0388c36ba8ef8b2407712bf2a3f51a4-applicationpdf.pdf

>>36167
>Britain did because they wouldn't want to trade with India, which included opium.

Nod really. Chinese emperor Daoguang Emperor or Prince Zhi of the First Rank 智親王 decided to ban opium around 1729 because it was harming his citizens and was embarrassing him seeing people of the royal court being addicted to it. England then decided to invade since Opium was around 20 percent of the British Empire's revenue at that time. It wasn't just because they wouldn't trade with India. They traded with multiple countries. They just decided that they wanted to be a healthy society instead. You can read it all here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium#Prohibition_and_conflict_in_China

>In response to the ever-growing number of Chinese people becoming addicted to opium, the Qing Daoguang Emperor took strong action to halt the smuggling of opium, including the seizure of cargo. In 1838, the Chinese Commissioner Lin Zexu destroyed 20,000 chests of opium in Guangzhou

>Given that a chest of opium was worth nearly US$1,000 in 1800, this was a substantial economic loss. The British queen Victoria, not willing to replace the cheap opium with costly silver, began the First Opium War in 1840, the British winning Hong Kong and trade concessions in the first of a series of Unequal Treaties

The current emperor of that time was just trying to look out for his own people

>you got your shit beat in in Taiwan

You win some, you lose some

>But was in-fact the attack on the German embassy that was a part of the Boxer Rebellion, which is why they led the attack,
But dude that was done by rebels. They only supported the Boxers because they lost so much freedom and strength as a nation after they lost the 2nd Opium war. They were popular because the Chinese thought they could get rid of "Western imperialism". Now, I don't agree with them at all, but that's just what I gathered researching the subject.

>About the Wuchang rebellion, it's wholly Chinese. Not only was it performed by people already from the Qing government,
No that was done by revolutionary groups fighting against the then Chinese monarchy. The Tongmenghui and the Hubei Military Government doing the fighting against the Qing. Doesn't show up that they belonged to the Qing government

>The Chinese "revolutionaries" weren't overthrowing China,
That was done as a reaction to the incompetence and general hatred they had for the ruling class at that time

>You see, the Qing dynasty wasn't Han Chinese, it was Manchu
They've been invaded and have had their rulers assimilate themselves dozens of times though. Nothing out of the usual actually

But those are just the conclusions and data I gathered after doing some lengthy research on each subject mentioned

>>36166
>I hear the chinese fought with hula hoop
kek
It was just that they fought with literal medieval gear while most Western countries and Japan used modern equipment, for that time at least.

They had an isolationist policy for the most part so they barely had any contact with other countries.

>>36176
You may want to read what's said elsewhere in this thread about Chinese collectivism.

>>36192
>>36193
>t. FSB
>>36198
>Nod really. Chinese emperor Daoguang Emperor or Prince Zhi of the First Rank 智親王 decided to ban opium around 1729 because it was harming his citizens and was embarrassing him seeing people of the royal court being addicted to it. England then decided to invade since Opium was around 20 percent of the British Empire's revenue at that time. It wasn't just because they wouldn't trade with India. They traded with multiple countries. They just decided that they wanted to be a healthy society instead. You can read it all here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium#Prohibition_and_conflict_in_China
The emperor declined to buy from India before the opium trade started, but the royal court was addicted to Indian opium. It was both for health reasons and for opposing the British.
>But dude that was done by rebels. They only supported the Boxers because they lost so much freedom and strength as a nation after they lost the 2nd Opium war. They were popular because the Chinese thought they could get rid of "Western imperialism". Now, I don't agree with them at all, but that's just what I gathered researching the subject.
It was Han Chinese rebels, many of whom were within the government.
>That was done as a reaction to the incompetence and general hatred they had for the ruling class at that time
But the Wuchang rebellion came from within the ruling class.
>They've been invaded and have had their rulers assimilate themselves dozens of times though. Nothing out of the usual actually
The Manchu emperors weren't really assimilated though. They wore Manchu dress, literally enforced a Manchu hairstyle among Han Chinese, had Manchu titles, considered themselves Manchu, even the royalist battle in Peking during the Wuchang rebellion was called the "Manchu restoration". There were massive massacres of Manchus by Han Chinese and Hui Muslims after the Wuchang rebellion.
Again, the Qing dynasty was basically a Manchu empire that ruled China, Mongolia, Xinjiang and Tibet.
>>36199
>literal medieval gear
The Ming dynasty used breechloaders in the 16th century, and by the time of the Boxer rebellion, the Qing even had ironclads from trading with the non-British Europeans.

>>36199
China actually did produce their own cannons and muskets and had substantial quantities of them. It would have been less embarrassing if they actually did fight with Hula hops, less embarrassing, I don't think even that would explain things like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Zhangjiawan

>>36203
Henry VIII had a breach loader and many early cannon were breach-loaded. It's nothing that revolutionary.

>>36192
>>36193
I don't write you were trolling due to your radical beliefs, I wrote it because what you wrote looks as if it was designed for pissing off people by exaggerating Chinese civilizational achievements (their ancientness) and European backwardness. Sometimes I do similar in short quips just for the fun so I'm familiar with this technique but you really drag this long.
Also has nothing to do with radical beliefs when you wrote the Chinese did right with the virues, they solved the crisis, and defeated it. First they failed to contain it, second now that the world media has attention elsewhere they just shut up about their current situation so we don't know and can't know what is their current situation really is.
Btw they don't combine communism with anything, there is no communism left in China, it's just dictatorship with red flags and stars, and hardcore capitalism.
This here >>36200 is a solid advice.

Chiners invested heavily into sponsorship, advertisement this Euro Cup. Quite a few companies of theirs in the top 10 investors. I saw in the Hungarian arena the Antchain banners (or how those boards placed around the field called), even in Chinese.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57697509

>>36032
>average Chinese now lives much better than in past
It went from africa tier to balkan tier that's something big. Especially if you consider this happened in 30 years. I can understand why Chinese population is content, they never had freedom to begin with but now they have money. This is the part what the west don't understand. They think their perspective is somehow official world view and everyone have to look from their perspective.

By all means China is very flawed country when it comes to valuing human beings but good luck telling them that with whole "your country is meanie+you are a bot" even when they are not. Yeah they will totally disregard huge wealth spark just because some zoomie on internet called him a bot.

>>44291
That in itself could be an issue though. The CCP is essentially legitimising itself through prosperity but that prosperity will not last forever, how will the people react when the housing bubble crashes or the economy slows due to an ageing population or maybe even if the west finally gets their act together and produces goods elsewhere to stop feeding China?

There are systematic problems within even the current China as well, there is a Lie Flat movement which is growing as young people are essentially giving up on life due to how difficult it can be to get a good job and how hard that will make you work and how difficult it is to get a house.

>>44291
>they never had freedom to begin with
Neither they have any now.
>but now they have money.
If we talking about average Chinese, then:
The first step of creating competitive economy is to create a unified inner market and exploit it. So they built up transportation and gave money to buy the consumer products of Chinese companies. Essentially they do not have money, they have garbage.
>good luck telling them
Noone is telling them. Barely anyone speaks to any Chinese person at all. What you are talking about is non-Chinese people on the internet expressing their opinions about China to each other.

>>44292
>how will the people react
Will they say: "the CCP lost the Mandate of Heaven"?
>Lie Flat
Tell me about this.

The problem with China: she's yet another predator we don't want to predate on us. Three things on their side: they are far, they are new not yet established, the more predators around each has less power over us. We should know how much to invite in each powers. Another thing Orbán seems doing well, keeping each suitor (EU, Ameriga, Russia, China) jealous enough, by letting each courting (while 99% sucking EU's titties).
The problem with China disregarding human life: they won't care if the pacifier you shove into your beloved kid's mouth is made of 100% carcinogen materials.

>>44292
> That in itself could be an issue though. The CCP is essentially legitimising itself through prosperity but that prosperity will not last forever, how will the people react when the housing bubble crashes or the economy slows due to an ageing population or maybe even if the west finally gets their act together and produces goods elsewhere to stop feeding China?
If the market crash obviously some shit will be stirred up. I disagree about the west supposedly feeding China, it's competitive market doing it's own thing. Remember despite we are scared of China's takeover we all want to acess cheap labor and cheap prices, it's not feeding it's trade and I think it will eventually just disappear and china knows this. Hence they invest in innovation and culture imperialism, education by overfunding Confucius Institutes. Prosperity without China is of course viable but short term politics in small countries prevent such big step. People keep complain about EU, but thanks to their appointed eurocrats they will curb trade with china regardless of unpopularity of such act, atleast in short term.

>>44293
>Neither they have any now.
Never said otherwise, I thought this was clear.

>Essentially they do not have money, they have garbage.
?

> Barely anyone speaks to any Chinese person at all
The word gets spread around, many chinese travel overseas and acess their internet, not to mention of popularity of paid VPNs. Yes Chinese people know this attitude on internet.

>The problem with China disregarding human life: they won't care if the pacifier you shove into your beloved kid's mouth is made of 100% carcinogen materials
wtf

>>44301
>?
Not just them, but we mostly have a choice. Somewhat.
It's the nature of consumerism. Everything quickly turns into garbage. Planned obsolescence, and the urgent need to sell shit over and over again, to make the wheels of economy turn. There are some regulations, standards, here and there, but I doubt China has much in place, I bet they can "feed" anything to their own population, whom given money to serve as market to the big firms. They promptly trade in their money in return for stuff that becomes garbage very soon.
>wtf
It's related to the previous. Without regulations, without consideration of human life, but being profit oriented products can be potentially made from dangerous, poisonous, carcinogen, etc. materials. I remember some smaller scandal when imported Chinese toys were such. The pacifier is a bit stretch from here, but I doubt they had any qualms to produce them similarly.
Also if they don't give a shit about human life, they would experiment with whatever on the general population without any second thoughts as well. Since we're here in EU, we are somewhat protected, but the Chinese people aren't.

>>44303
Oh, and not brcause they wannapoison anyone, it'sjust they won't be bothered if those the most cost effective materials.

>>44303
I get and generally agree with that you say. But why the resentment? I would understand if you feel some kind of connection with Uygurs but that seems very unlikely for you.

>>44310
>resentment
Not sure the word I would use.
I write the same about the Hungarian govt., the opposition, Brussels, US govt., Big Tech or other multis, etc. Why is it shocking in case of China? Or rather the Chinese establishment.
I like the Uyghurs, and Tibet, but they have nothing to do with anything discussed here.

Obligatory image for old Chinese thread about work/products quality.

>>44312

Although it was posted before (by me, heh) >>36035

Anyway,
>>44303
>Also if they don't give a shit about human life, they would experiment with whatever on the general population without any second thoughts as well. Since we're here in EU, we are somewhat protected, but the Chinese people aren't.

Considering how west is "easternizes" in terms of politics and society now, maybe future EU will be same as China in terms of quality of products and regulations. EU products already going down in quality (like Bosch and Braun devices with plastic gears), because managerial class sees how effectively they can use Chinese methods in economy (do cheapest half-working shit and get rich).

>>44310
>>44311
>resentment
It's just healthy cynicism.
That's the appropriate word.
And the appropriate reaction when dealing with power.

>>36034
Anon it's as plain as the nose on a Jew's face.
CHINA DOESN'T ALLOW THE JEWS TO AFFLICT THEIR NATION
Simple as.

All these other, better-positioned nations suffering from """mysterious reasons""" they can't get ahead -- do.

>>44313
>future EU
I can imagine that. And "muh Urpian values" are change with the wind. Although they are really fond of their regulations and make some effort on looking for the supposedly least harmless solutions. And if green gains more on the playing field (it is expected in Germany) maybe the "organic" stuff is gonna get pushed more. On the other hand "green" can become another empty phrase quick.

>>44314
>healthy cynicism
We can go with that.

>>44316
>Anon
Wrong board.
What if China is The Jews? You think communism can exist without Jews?

>hungary: muh heartless chink predators, such western hooman wights, btw here's another BBC link
>hungary: they have no fweeeedum, they have no mooooney, all they have is work, roads, bridges, trains, state-of-the-art telecom tech, national confidence and solidarity, and a space program, pure garbage!
>hungary: muh gommunism
china is capitalist, the rest deserves no comment
>amerimutt: being successful and achieving (moderate) prosperity is veeewy pwoblematic, here's why
>amerimutt: wage economic warfare """stop feeding them"""
>turkey: china's takeover
hilarious, this like amerigolem generals screeching about how Ominous China is just about to dominate and rule the world any second now, while all continents are dotted with their military (and bio-military) bases and it is they who are putting their armies/weapons next to the borders of those countries eebul enough to wish to remain independent and sovereign
then, economically-speaking china is still far behind in terms of market penetration compared to the collective "west" specially when it comes to high-end, "o-ring", industries
and then, culturally-speaking china is basically non-existent compared to the zio-empire's almost complete and almost world-wide takeover
but it's fine when is the western zio-empire doing it, right? well, that's what they themselves say, so it must be true
>turkey: they never had fweedum
what freedom do you have in mind? freedom to sell national banks and industries to (((foreigners)))? freedom to relinquish the nation's media to (((foreign))) interests? freedom to welcome rapefugees? freedom to vote against mass immigration, and then get flooded anyway? freedom to promote homo lunacy? freedom to crossdress, hormonally poison, and chemically castrate your children? freedom to bribe """lobby""" politicians and buy """donate""" to parties? freedom to choose every 4 years for either of 2 zio-puppets?

>>44301
Even if it is the competitive market that is doing it, it is still feeding. The market also has been allowed and encouraged by the Governments of the west as has technological and educational exchange(exchange in the broadest possible term there as it is mainly one sided). They have seen this now though and also are acknowledging that the plan to democratise China through prosperity and trade isn't going to work. But yes it can be difficult for people to move beyond short term gains particularly in an open market and with a democracy.

>>44318
Achieving moderate prosperity isn't an issue it is how one goes about it and Communists China has never done this well, from the great leap forward to now. At least they are improving but at huge environmental and structural costs. The industrial growth of China has come at the expense of the very water people need to survive, the pollution of China's ground and River water is a ticking time bomb and there are many such issues that China is facing. As hinted at before, many of these issues may not be huge issues now(well huge in the way it directly and immediately threatens the party) but they will catch up to China if she stops growing. I don't think we should wage economic warfare we should just diversify our supply chains which is what we should have done anyway, we should not let China have such a sway over such things and we should make it clear that we want to work with them on equal footing and that means that like any other nation, if we feel that they are not doing their part for society, the environment or regional stability, we will look less favourably upon them for our future and current economic endeavours.

I'm not American either, my flag just plays up in this site.

>>44318
>china is capitalist
What is that have to do with anything? Are you implying that capitalism somehow equals to freedom? Or are you implying that capitalism is the opposite of communism? Or what other nonsense?
>while all continents are dotted with their military (and bio-military) bases and it is they who are putting their armies/weapons next to the borders of those countries eebul enough to wish to remain independent and sovereign
Do you just recycle memes, infographics, and battlepics?
Also if the Zionists control the world how come they do not control China? Isn't China part of the world? And while we are here you should reply to my previous questions as well.
Rated to +1 Social Credit/10

>>44321
>I'm not American either, my flag just plays up in this site.
Don't mind that. He tries trolling by countryballing while hiding behind Tor. You don't need to enlighten him, just leave him in his intellectual darkness.

>>44318
>what freedom do you have in mind?
freedom of speech cuckoldry and faggotry excluded : DD

They live in a totalitarian state obviously it's not a good thing. You can just ban or combat with such mental diseases you mentioned that is no excuse for wresting for total control of the population.

>but it's fine when is the western zio-empire doing it, right?
It's actually not. Though I adhere western values I mostly disagree with western politicians and process of their decision making as their politicians were very okay with advocating islamist regime in my country. Also their politicians also alienating from their populations but since rest of the world is doing worse it's hard to notice it. The world is being unnecesarily authoritarian in many aspects, the middle class is shrinking world wide and by no means the western politicians and mega corps are innocent.

>>44317
Heh, sorry B.E.R.N.D.

>You think communism can exist without Jews?
Plainly it can. Besides, this isn't Mao's day. China of today is dramatically different than back in the '50's. The fact they disallow the typical CIA/Kike vectors of Twitter and Facebook into their land is a clear sign of their separation from ZOG.

>>44324
>Heh, sorry B.E.R.N.D.
If in Rome, behave like Romans.
I heard Mao was Jewish, and from the governing body of four blokes after him three were.
Why would they need Twitter and Facebook if they can create their own? Those are just consumer products.

>>44345
Afforestation and hydro power can be a bit misleading, particularly when it comes to China. China is planting forests in the north west solely to prevent desertification(and they do this poorly often as well, they often use monocultures which caused a quarter to die from one disease, plus monocultures are not the best plant or animal habitats), they don't care about the forests they are removing in the interior. Hydro power as well is just seen as a cheap and simple power source, they don't care what that is doing to the environment either. Plus they are one of the largest countries on earth, they are naturally going to be on the top lists in the world. Most of their energy still comes form coal.

>heh, i think a brazil poster around here already made it perfectly clear: western countries developed with fuck all goncern about damaging biodiversity, the environment and what not, yet now they *demand* that every other country be held to their post-modern (often unhinged, see germany) eco-preservation standards
pure wectern-centric hypocrisy, used as a polemic tool for geopolitical leverage, which you repeat
Western countries knew nowhere near as much as they do now back then and were also doing nowhere near as much damage.
>why shouldn't one expect that if chinese people and/or authorities find they are consuming their environment beyond control they will self-correct, like the west did
Because they know yet they haven't.
>nevermind that, per-capita, the rich west still consumes more resources, energy and produce more waste than the Chinese, who are in average not nearly as rich
I don't know about waste and if they are then clearly it is being managed far better, European rivers are not lined with cancer villages and they ground water is not pretty much all polluted.
>nevermind that many of those companies in china that produce waste and pollute belong to western capital!
And many don't. It's irrelevant either way because it's within the laws and control of the nation that production happens in, I'm not defending these big companies at all they know what is going on but just because a foreign company owns a factory does not mean it is solely responsible for the waste disposal practices of the factory nor the laws of the nation itself.
>(meanwhile europe already lost the majority of its "old forests" due to expanding agriculture and industrialisation)
So did China... That was happening long before industrialisation and is still happening. The forests it does have are usually in places very difficult to get too, like in the rough topography of the south.
>Countries with the most high-speed rail
>1. China - 25,000 km; 2. Spain - 3,100 km; 3. Germany - 3,038 km
China is a big place. The US is too and so is Australia but they are culturally different as they are car cultures. Chinese infrastructure keeps collapsing as well.

I'm not even going to address that rant, it's not even relevant...

Found two great additions for source materials to this thread.
China Daily: https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/
The Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party guarantees it's absolute lack of bias. Proofs of highest
China Watch: https://www.chinawatch.cn/
Think-tank created by a core group of independent journalists of Chinese Daily.

>>44350
>The Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party guarantees it's absolute lack of bias
Who doesnt?

>>44351
It's the old joke truth that something can't be biased if it's state owned.

I forgot to finish the sentence here: >>44350
>Proofs of highest
...amount commence.

>>44352
Many western think thanks and news channels are very biased despite being private owned, in fact I can't recall any unbiased one. It's just pot calling kettle black because a particular group makes their propoganda in a less obvious way which is mistaken for "totally not propoganda".

>>44352
Australia's national broadcaster is actually the least biased Australian media due to the fact that it is state run and therefore not beholden to the support of mining companies or any other company so it will even criticise the government for their close relationship with said mining companies.

Wanted to find a site dedicated to Chinese issues, but from the other side of the fence. My search was unsuccessful. However I figured, the most closely involved countries' papers must have dedicated Chinese blocks, or at least more frequently publish news about China.
Three examples.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/
https://www.hindustantimes.com/
https://hongkongfp.com/
Beside these it would be nice to find Taiwanese and South Korean news sites in English, maybe from some other countries as well.

This one basically monitors the Chinese internet censorship:
https://en.greatfire.org/
And here's a list about the blocked websites:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_mainland_China
Mysteriously blocking this one guy from Nepal:
https://kiranpantha.com.np/
https://blog.kiranpantha.com.np/
What's up with this?