Comments on: Only 124 More Days Of Militant China-Bashing to Go!

By: Merivale

Merivale — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:46:57 +0000

Tas, you missed the point of the essay. The point was that Chiang’s attempt to conquer the whole country and defeat the Communists in the Northeast was his great mistake. If he had kept them bottled up in the Northeast, they would have built a small Soviet client state and the Nationalists would have controlled the rest of the country. As soon as he invaded, his position was pretty much irretrievable, regardless of American intervention.

By: Mason Bridges

Mason Bridges — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:09:44 +0000

k9zxxy11ekrygf01

By: TAS

TAS — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:55:47 +0000

Track down the essay China Without Tears. It illustrates what might have happened had the US not interdicted Chang Kai Shek’s desire to finish off Mao.

By: Christopher Colaninno

Christopher Colaninno — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 02:56:22 +0000

“Because each nation’s oppression carries a different pet issue, racial apartheid and religious repression respectively, they do not actually serve as serious calls to moral arms, but rather the personal political barometer of the individual who picks up the cause.”

Peter-

There is a lot of truth in what you’re saying, but regardless sometimes sanctions, or other punitive action work (or have good prospects to work), and other times they basically have no chance of accomplishing their objectives.

South Africa wanted and needed to be connected to the world economy and thus sanctions made a lot of sense. Sanctions against Cuba are not only ineffective, but probably counter productive.

Obviously people are often motivated by irrational reasons in regards to their support or opposition to sanctions against a country, but there is no inherent contradiction between supporting sanctions in one country and arguing that sanctions against other countries is wrong.

By: Mr. Noah

Mr. Noah — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 00:14:45 +0000

This makes me wonder: Kerry, how much money would you accept in return for a signed statement saying that if you ever criticized the Republican party, you could be legally thrown in prison?

By: Peter

Peter — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 20:38:11 +0000

I think this is especially astute in terms of the tendency of Westerners, or to be more specific, the First World to use the circumstances of a developing country, communist state, or the like as a receptacle for its own insecurities. There is a large incongruity, for instance, in the thinking of those who continue to call for the end of embargo with Cuba, but on the other hand called for a similar trade boycott with South Africa, and now with China. Because each nation’s oppression carries a different pet issue, racial apartheid and religious repression respectively, they do not actually serve as serious calls to moral arms, but rather the personal political barometer of the individual who picks up the cause. For as I suspect is the case with Cuba would be a similar tragedy elsewhere: no amount of trade restriction succeeds in bullying a tyranny into changing its ways and, in fact, accomplishes just the opposite.

By: Christopher Colaninno

Christopher Colaninno — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 21:54:11 +0000

Of course, hundreds of millions of Chinese have nothing but dirt.”

I hate to defend the Weekly Standard, but I think you’re misreading this line. I think they’re making reference to generalized poverty, not the poverty of not being able to use Google without censorship. Although it’s hard to tell.

You’re right that the Weekly Standard is dismissive of material gains made in China, but it’s not like that forces them go back to 1980 or 1988 and cut some kind deal where we get a poorer China with Democracy.

The Weekly Standard is focused on what they think should happen moving forward, which is fine.

Looking backward you really aren’t describing China in 1978 very well. Life expectancy was already quite high, and I don’t think starvation per se, was much of an issue.

By: Nothing To Add « Matt Zeitlin: Impetuous Young Whippersnapper

Nothing To Add « Matt Zeitlin: Impetuous Young Whippersnapper — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 20:32:00 +0000

[...] by Matt Zeitlin on April 5, 2008 Kerry Howley on China. Just read the whole thing, here’s an excerpt: . In 1978, the majority of rural Chinese were living at subsistence, the [...]