Well, MoA has quite a few trolls, so of course there will be anti sentiment there. China to me is the devil we don't know as opposed to the one we do in the form of the USA. A recent article on the very pro Russia blog Strategic Culture asked the question as to why China will not fairly settle the maritime disputes in SE Asia, one that drives some countries into the US camp, or the one on the Indian border. The gist being that it could easily resolve these disputes and then move forward without suspicion of its motives. Quite frankly I agree with their synopsis.
As to China that aside though, we all hope that it and Russia will truly create a multipolar world and break the stranglehold the US has, causing nothing but pain and destruction to others as it returns profits to indigenous multinationals. Again though we need look to actions rather than words.
As to religious philosophies, China, India, the Middle East and the Greeks all originally practiced philosophies far different to the Abrahamic religions that currently have a lock on the world. A genuine return to those could do nothing but help humanity.
Please explain what is this maritime disputes in the SEA that China refused to settle. As far as I know, coming from an SEA country myself, China has no border disputes in SEA.
And as to the Sino Indian border dispute there's nothing China can do as India demands nothing short of unconditional surrender on India's terms.
"Abstract
The Nehru government sought to decide for itself where India's borders with China should lie and then impose the alignments it had chosen on Beijing, refusing to negotiate them. That meant that unless Beijing surrendered to India's territorial claims to Aksai Chin and areas north of the McMahon Line conflict was inevitable. China's military action in 1962 was reactive and pre-emptive, and that India suffered 'unprovoked aggression' is a self-serving myth. That there has been no settlement of the Sino-Indian borders is the consequence of Nehru's policies, to which successor governments, except Narasimha Rao's, have strictly adhered."
I read that same article and had a similar reaction, but upon further thought decided China doesn't want to be seen as apeasing anyone, which is why it continues to follow its initial policy of solving the issue via dialogue over the Code of Conduct Treaty that's taking too long to be consumated.
Yes, my term for them is fleas, which was coined earlier this year by another astute barfly. Such a response is normal but ineffective. I rarely engage them anymore as one of their goals is to clog the discourse and create an unreadable thread.
As a long-time MoA lurker, admittedly somewhat intimidated by the 'Smarter Than Me' crowd thus obviating my commentary, I've admired Bernhard's (and the rest of you barflies) measured response to the trolls which have notably increased lately. As a student of history, it is apparent to me that the 'fleas' haven't read much on the subject. At present, I feel fortunate to be witness to the tectonic changes wherein PRC is and has been (and will be) proven to be a major plate.
MoA--and you, Karl--are among the most trusted news source for this Amerikansky.
This is a map from Republic of China. Contrast itwith today's map of PRC and we should ask why the CPC gave up such huge amount of territory That it should have inherited from the Republic of China.
Yet today, all we hear is China aggression, China unwilling to negotiate.
The "China aggression" garbage has existed since 1949. I suggest reading the material related to China in Kolko's "Politics of War" to get an idea of how the KMT was seen by the US from roughly 1942 onward. It's very revealing. The book is available at the Internet Archive, which is free to join.
Thanks, as ever. Good stuff. The continuity-innovation theme is key because you cannot have one without the other. Indeed, that is partly why the Yi Jing is regarded as perhaps the most seminal of China's many Classics (Jings). The Yi is often translated as 'Changes' but could also be:
Process..... Interdependent Origination....Constant Impermanence. Meditatively it could be termed 'ever-present' or 'ever-presence' aka 'nowness'. Nowness is an ever-changing continuity from one (non-existing) moment to the next.
I think this relates somewhat to your civilization issue too in that one sine qua non of any type of civilization is continuity which means that language and custom is transmitted over the generations. This means there is a culture, a worldview into which people keep reincarnating (in old style thinking). In any given iteration, young people are always coming in, fresh and new, bright as a button, and as they grow into early adulthood, pretty much always shaking things up, finding new ways, creating new babies, cultivating new enemies, hashing out new arguments and causes. So that sort of continuity comes first which can occur at a tribal level (like the Kogi people, the Hopi, the Mi'qmak and so on). But then a great civilization does tend to build cities and exhibit sophisticated, multi-layered class system which go to a different level than the tribals. Not necessarily more sophisticated but far more complex. In any case, to be continuous over long periods of time requires continuous adaptability, aka change. It's art far more than science.
The deep levels of Chinese wisdom came from the tribal shamans and yogic practitioners who uncovered acupuncture (which Otzi the 5,000 year old iceman in the Alps knew about), shamanic powers and much more. They developed the core principles of Asian civilization and spirituality, namely the Three Treasures Heaven, Earth and Man, probably the first well articulated notion later manifesting as the Trinity in Christianity. There is the eternal (Heaven) there is the Relative and Particular (Earth) and there is Man living in between.
This in between nature has legs, though. In both Buddhist and Hindu cosmology (the former lifted it from the latter), we live in what is called 'The Realm of Desire'. Desire for what? For experience. And experience means there are differences in flavor, texture, variety, content, form. There is also higher and lower in terms of sensitivity and morals, for there is pain and pleasure, good and bad. The human dwells amidst all such things.
One of the great dangers of utopian notions is that they end up trying to Outlaw evil. It may seem like a good thing to do but it is just another form of Evil itself. Put another way: if you are waiting for a new type of Homo Pacificus you will also be wanting one that doesn't feel, doesn't fear, doesn't fight and doesn't fuck. It won't happen or if it does, we won't be humans any more.
So just as there is a balancing act involving continuity and change, so also is there a similar dance involving good and evil, pain and pleasure, enlightened and perverse. And that means that any bona fide utopia understands that each and every individual along with each and every family and each and every town in each and every civilization must promote good and overcome (or transform) evil each and every moment. The ever-presence continuously arising presents this never-ending drama, this dance between males and females, good and evil, wise and foolish. Trying to set something up that only favors one side - that never ends well and I hope the modern Chinese don't make that mistake.
Yes, I was going to provide a yin-yang picture but didn't. There's an effort to articulate the need for balance present in Xi's speeches that I find admirable. Putin and most other Russian leaders exhibit similar views. I just posted the into to Xi's speech on modernization to the MoA thread which could easily be a Putin speech. I hope to find time tomorrow to venture into something different if events will allow.
Well, the problem with the yin-yang business is that, as far as I can tell, Chinese officialdom frowns on anything too spiritual in tone or content. It's one thing to study Tai Chi or modernized TCM (all the spiritual stuff excised and made to look more scientific), but it's another to wax too philosophical. Now they must still be studying some of it at least in China (though I've met a few Chinese spiritual teachers who left because they found they just couldn't manifest the way they wanted in China - and this is within the past 20-10 years) but they certainly don't talk about it in public as far as I can tell. Again, it doesn't sound scientific.
So China has embraced modern materialism. It has good qualities, not least of which is being practical and fostering good engineering, but I wonder if they don't get too draconian at times and also suppress too many spontaneously arising cultural and religious expressions because materialism tends to promote overly literal and controlling mentality. If they are, as some say is the case but I really don't know, that will put a lid on their development potential culturally speaking.
In any case, they tend to avoid talking non-scientifically these days.
As the teacher in the text stated...'they can't understand. Western orientation has as I would say extreme ignorance regarding basic philosophical understandings that are innate to Chinese culture and customs.
True. But that's a rather universal aspiration. It remains to be seen how much of that heritage they can both access and share whilst also remaining within the sort of constraints that CPC culture has established.
Basically, we are in a type of wartime right now, so much that is said is propaganda. Which doesn't make it untruthful but it does infer that only things helpful to the cause will be permitted. I am more cynical about all this than you, but quite open to being proven wrong. The Eurasian initiative is calling for mutual support and cooperation among nations for the betterment of humankind. That vision is all they tend to be sharing to the wider world, though presumably in their many conferences there are far more process-related discussions. Right now there is resistance to their initiative from the previous 'hegemonic' world leader, the Western finance-and-military based Plunder regime.
So first that Plunder Regime has to be defanged somehow. Whether a deal (as I suspect) has been done or not, by fair means or foul, dancing with or exorcising the devil. So it is not a time for philosophical niceties. A huge infrastructural lift is being proposed creating a new era in global civilization and Xi is putting China forth as the principal leader of this thrust. Standing in the way is the Wicked West. So that is what has to be dealt with first and we shall see how it plays out between now and 2030.
There is no question the 'Wicked West is being consumed by China. Comparatively as a Swamp nourishes the beautiful Lotus flower. Ancient Chinese saying.
Response to Karlof1's "At MoA: China's 'Shared Future' & This is China" post.
"I dispute the definition of civilization..."
There is a line in one of Eric Van Lustbader's ninja novels where a character declares that civilization was a concept invented by the Chinese as well as the Europeans as a cover for their behavior toward other peoples, their perceived superiority toward other peoples. I'm inclined to agree.
"When humans evolve beyond their current level of morality and interrelations with each other..."
That ain't gonna happen.
What will happen is the replacement of the human body and brain by an inorganic version which is not subject to either biological death or biochemical control of the brain and thus rampant emotionalism. The resulting species will not be "pacifist" but merely logical - and it's not logical to fight when you can cooperate. Nor does such a species need to fight or cooperate in an age of ubiquitous nanotech where anything can be produced by general assemblers and subsequently removed when the need for the specific device is over. The only differences between these entities will be specific knowledge acquired over its existence. Some will know things others don't know and will likely freely share that knowledge when encountering others if asked. With no need for control over resources or territory or control over other entities there will be no conflict.
All this should be achievable by the end of this century, at least the technology development. Presumably there will be a war between the first Transhumans and humans which the Transhumans will win handily, but after that most of the remaining humans will transmogrify into Transhumans - since the benefits will start to become obvious, including immortality at the least - and thus conflict will be eliminated.
People who don't comprehend what nanotech is capable of don't understand any of this so completely misunderstand the future of the human species.
I very well comprehend the "delicacy" of nanotech, just as I do AI. It's a race between the barbarians and humanists for the survival of humanity it would seem.
Only if we let them do so. There've been times when fleas tried to initiate a plague but were stopped after about 1500 comments over the space of 3 threads--we kept on going and they dropped-out.
Well, MoA has quite a few trolls, so of course there will be anti sentiment there. China to me is the devil we don't know as opposed to the one we do in the form of the USA. A recent article on the very pro Russia blog Strategic Culture asked the question as to why China will not fairly settle the maritime disputes in SE Asia, one that drives some countries into the US camp, or the one on the Indian border. The gist being that it could easily resolve these disputes and then move forward without suspicion of its motives. Quite frankly I agree with their synopsis.
As to China that aside though, we all hope that it and Russia will truly create a multipolar world and break the stranglehold the US has, causing nothing but pain and destruction to others as it returns profits to indigenous multinationals. Again though we need look to actions rather than words.
As to religious philosophies, China, India, the Middle East and the Greeks all originally practiced philosophies far different to the Abrahamic religions that currently have a lock on the world. A genuine return to those could do nothing but help humanity.
Please explain what is this maritime disputes in the SEA that China refused to settle. As far as I know, coming from an SEA country myself, China has no border disputes in SEA.
And as to the Sino Indian border dispute there's nothing China can do as India demands nothing short of unconditional surrender on India's terms.
"Abstract
The Nehru government sought to decide for itself where India's borders with China should lie and then impose the alignments it had chosen on Beijing, refusing to negotiate them. That meant that unless Beijing surrendered to India's territorial claims to Aksai Chin and areas north of the McMahon Line conflict was inevitable. China's military action in 1962 was reactive and pre-emptive, and that India suffered 'unprovoked aggression' is a self-serving myth. That there has been no settlement of the Sino-Indian borders is the consequence of Nehru's policies, to which successor governments, except Narasimha Rao's, have strictly adhered."
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4407848
I read that same article and had a similar reaction, but upon further thought decided China doesn't want to be seen as apeasing anyone, which is why it continues to follow its initial policy of solving the issue via dialogue over the Code of Conduct Treaty that's taking too long to be consumated.
Did you also read the anti China trolls who are all experts on China because they read US propaganda?
Actual history of China being insular and inward focused means nothing. China is just another evil super power.
Uyghur! Uyghur! Uyghur! China economy collapsing! Communist govts never succeeded! Yah!
Yes, my term for them is fleas, which was coined earlier this year by another astute barfly. Such a response is normal but ineffective. I rarely engage them anymore as one of their goals is to clog the discourse and create an unreadable thread.
"... many fleas have settled into the thread..."
As a long-time MoA lurker, admittedly somewhat intimidated by the 'Smarter Than Me' crowd thus obviating my commentary, I've admired Bernhard's (and the rest of you barflies) measured response to the trolls which have notably increased lately. As a student of history, it is apparent to me that the 'fleas' haven't read much on the subject. At present, I feel fortunate to be witness to the tectonic changes wherein PRC is and has been (and will be) proven to be a major plate.
MoA--and you, Karl--are among the most trusted news source for this Amerikansky.
Thanks, but as for news I'm mostly a repeater, not a reporter.
I live in China. I got the grand seating.
But of course those reading western MSM know China better than me.
Read Western MSM?
That's all Chinese to me. ;]
This is the current map of the Republic of China which Taiwan claims to represent.
Note that the ROC map has the 11 Dash Line which strangely western China experts failed to see. Strange kind of blindness.
And note that the ROC Constitution declared the territory indivisible except by 3/4 of the Legislative Yuan.
The 7th Revision to the Constitution was in 2004.
https://i.imgur.com/OqwWybw.jpg
https://english.president.gov.tw/page/93
As usual, historical documentation foils the Establishment Narrative, but people need to be shown it for them to understand.
This is a map from Republic of China. Contrast itwith today's map of PRC and we should ask why the CPC gave up such huge amount of territory That it should have inherited from the Republic of China.
Yet today, all we hear is China aggression, China unwilling to negotiate.
https://i.imgur.com/IM1PtAh.jpg
The "China aggression" garbage has existed since 1949. I suggest reading the material related to China in Kolko's "Politics of War" to get an idea of how the KMT was seen by the US from roughly 1942 onward. It's very revealing. The book is available at the Internet Archive, which is free to join.
Thanks, as ever. Good stuff. The continuity-innovation theme is key because you cannot have one without the other. Indeed, that is partly why the Yi Jing is regarded as perhaps the most seminal of China's many Classics (Jings). The Yi is often translated as 'Changes' but could also be:
Process..... Interdependent Origination....Constant Impermanence. Meditatively it could be termed 'ever-present' or 'ever-presence' aka 'nowness'. Nowness is an ever-changing continuity from one (non-existing) moment to the next.
I think this relates somewhat to your civilization issue too in that one sine qua non of any type of civilization is continuity which means that language and custom is transmitted over the generations. This means there is a culture, a worldview into which people keep reincarnating (in old style thinking). In any given iteration, young people are always coming in, fresh and new, bright as a button, and as they grow into early adulthood, pretty much always shaking things up, finding new ways, creating new babies, cultivating new enemies, hashing out new arguments and causes. So that sort of continuity comes first which can occur at a tribal level (like the Kogi people, the Hopi, the Mi'qmak and so on). But then a great civilization does tend to build cities and exhibit sophisticated, multi-layered class system which go to a different level than the tribals. Not necessarily more sophisticated but far more complex. In any case, to be continuous over long periods of time requires continuous adaptability, aka change. It's art far more than science.
The deep levels of Chinese wisdom came from the tribal shamans and yogic practitioners who uncovered acupuncture (which Otzi the 5,000 year old iceman in the Alps knew about), shamanic powers and much more. They developed the core principles of Asian civilization and spirituality, namely the Three Treasures Heaven, Earth and Man, probably the first well articulated notion later manifesting as the Trinity in Christianity. There is the eternal (Heaven) there is the Relative and Particular (Earth) and there is Man living in between.
This in between nature has legs, though. In both Buddhist and Hindu cosmology (the former lifted it from the latter), we live in what is called 'The Realm of Desire'. Desire for what? For experience. And experience means there are differences in flavor, texture, variety, content, form. There is also higher and lower in terms of sensitivity and morals, for there is pain and pleasure, good and bad. The human dwells amidst all such things.
One of the great dangers of utopian notions is that they end up trying to Outlaw evil. It may seem like a good thing to do but it is just another form of Evil itself. Put another way: if you are waiting for a new type of Homo Pacificus you will also be wanting one that doesn't feel, doesn't fear, doesn't fight and doesn't fuck. It won't happen or if it does, we won't be humans any more.
So just as there is a balancing act involving continuity and change, so also is there a similar dance involving good and evil, pain and pleasure, enlightened and perverse. And that means that any bona fide utopia understands that each and every individual along with each and every family and each and every town in each and every civilization must promote good and overcome (or transform) evil each and every moment. The ever-presence continuously arising presents this never-ending drama, this dance between males and females, good and evil, wise and foolish. Trying to set something up that only favors one side - that never ends well and I hope the modern Chinese don't make that mistake.
Yes, I was going to provide a yin-yang picture but didn't. There's an effort to articulate the need for balance present in Xi's speeches that I find admirable. Putin and most other Russian leaders exhibit similar views. I just posted the into to Xi's speech on modernization to the MoA thread which could easily be a Putin speech. I hope to find time tomorrow to venture into something different if events will allow.
Well, the problem with the yin-yang business is that, as far as I can tell, Chinese officialdom frowns on anything too spiritual in tone or content. It's one thing to study Tai Chi or modernized TCM (all the spiritual stuff excised and made to look more scientific), but it's another to wax too philosophical. Now they must still be studying some of it at least in China (though I've met a few Chinese spiritual teachers who left because they found they just couldn't manifest the way they wanted in China - and this is within the past 20-10 years) but they certainly don't talk about it in public as far as I can tell. Again, it doesn't sound scientific.
So China has embraced modern materialism. It has good qualities, not least of which is being practical and fostering good engineering, but I wonder if they don't get too draconian at times and also suppress too many spontaneously arising cultural and religious expressions because materialism tends to promote overly literal and controlling mentality. If they are, as some say is the case but I really don't know, that will put a lid on their development potential culturally speaking.
In any case, they tend to avoid talking non-scientifically these days.
Seems to me that the concept of a shared community and future for humanity is extremely philosophical and reaches up from China's cultural roots.
As the teacher in the text stated...'they can't understand. Western orientation has as I would say extreme ignorance regarding basic philosophical understandings that are innate to Chinese culture and customs.
True. But that's a rather universal aspiration. It remains to be seen how much of that heritage they can both access and share whilst also remaining within the sort of constraints that CPC culture has established.
Basically, we are in a type of wartime right now, so much that is said is propaganda. Which doesn't make it untruthful but it does infer that only things helpful to the cause will be permitted. I am more cynical about all this than you, but quite open to being proven wrong. The Eurasian initiative is calling for mutual support and cooperation among nations for the betterment of humankind. That vision is all they tend to be sharing to the wider world, though presumably in their many conferences there are far more process-related discussions. Right now there is resistance to their initiative from the previous 'hegemonic' world leader, the Western finance-and-military based Plunder regime.
So first that Plunder Regime has to be defanged somehow. Whether a deal (as I suspect) has been done or not, by fair means or foul, dancing with or exorcising the devil. So it is not a time for philosophical niceties. A huge infrastructural lift is being proposed creating a new era in global civilization and Xi is putting China forth as the principal leader of this thrust. Standing in the way is the Wicked West. So that is what has to be dealt with first and we shall see how it plays out between now and 2030.
Interesting times!
There is no question the 'Wicked West is being consumed by China. Comparatively as a Swamp nourishes the beautiful Lotus flower. Ancient Chinese saying.
Response to Karlof1's "At MoA: China's 'Shared Future' & This is China" post.
"I dispute the definition of civilization..."
There is a line in one of Eric Van Lustbader's ninja novels where a character declares that civilization was a concept invented by the Chinese as well as the Europeans as a cover for their behavior toward other peoples, their perceived superiority toward other peoples. I'm inclined to agree.
"When humans evolve beyond their current level of morality and interrelations with each other..."
That ain't gonna happen.
What will happen is the replacement of the human body and brain by an inorganic version which is not subject to either biological death or biochemical control of the brain and thus rampant emotionalism. The resulting species will not be "pacifist" but merely logical - and it's not logical to fight when you can cooperate. Nor does such a species need to fight or cooperate in an age of ubiquitous nanotech where anything can be produced by general assemblers and subsequently removed when the need for the specific device is over. The only differences between these entities will be specific knowledge acquired over its existence. Some will know things others don't know and will likely freely share that knowledge when encountering others if asked. With no need for control over resources or territory or control over other entities there will be no conflict.
All this should be achievable by the end of this century, at least the technology development. Presumably there will be a war between the first Transhumans and humans which the Transhumans will win handily, but after that most of the remaining humans will transmogrify into Transhumans - since the benefits will start to become obvious, including immortality at the least - and thus conflict will be eliminated.
People who don't comprehend what nanotech is capable of don't understand any of this so completely misunderstand the future of the human species.
I very well comprehend the "delicacy" of nanotech, just as I do AI. It's a race between the barbarians and humanists for the survival of humanity it would seem.
Yes. The question is who are the barbarians and who are the humanists? Or is there a difference?
Practitioners of Zero-sum would be the barbarians while those espousing Win-Win are the humanists.
I can get behind that definition.
The trolls on MOA are making MOA unreadable. Intelligent life is missing there. Same reason I gave up on Fecesbook.
Troll farms do work to shut down real information.
Only if we let them do so. There've been times when fleas tried to initiate a plague but were stopped after about 1500 comments over the space of 3 threads--we kept on going and they dropped-out.