China - and the dangerous drift to war in Asia

If you've the time to watch this theory of world domination, it may explain Chinese (and Russian) expansion,


and the second part,

 
If you've the time to watch this theory of world domination, it may explain Chinese (and Russian) expansion,


and the second part,

I can't watch it from here, but the web page points to an article written by the film's creator here: The father of geopolitics

In short, Mackinder's Heartland theory isn't so much an explanation of "why" than it is of "how". He writes of the "word-island", consisting of Asia, Europe, and Africa, and how the development of the technology of rail transport made it possible for the first time for a land power to project influence across large distances overland. Mackinder was primarily concerned about Germany and Russia. @KGB_resident has written about this before.
Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; who rules the World-Island commands the World.
I think it's best understood as a counterpoint to the proponents of sea power, who had theorised that, to re=phrase Mackinder "he who rules the sea rules the world". As Britain, and later the US, had based their own strategy for world domination on the primacy of sea power, Mackinder's ideas provoke a degree of panic among geo-strategists from those countries whenever they are dusted off and given a new airing.

But the preceding is why the US put so much effort into trying to gain influence in Central Asia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. American control of Central Asia would block the "world island" from consolidating under the influence of a single continental power.

The Chinese though don't seem to be particularly taken by the Heartland theory, placing more emphasis on sea trade with Southeast Asia and with investment in Africa. The Belt and Road initiative places a lot of emphasis on ports, as opposed to bypassing them.

Over the long run though the development of roads and railways across Asia and Africa will tilt the strategic playfield in a new direction, but I think this will be driven by economic factors rather than high level strategy.
 
I can't watch it from here, but the web page points to an article written by the film's creator here: The father of geopolitics

In short, Mackinder's Heartland theory isn't so much an explanation of "why" than it is of "how". He writes of the "word-island", consisting of Asia, Europe, and Africa, and how the development of the technology of rail transport made it possible for the first time for a land power to project influence across large distances overland. Mackinder was primarily concerned about Germany and Russia. @KGB_resident has written about this before.


I think it's best understood as a counterpoint to the proponents of sea power, who had theorised that, to re=phrase Mackinder "he who rules the sea rules the world". As Britain, and later the US, had based their own strategy for world domination on the primacy of sea power, Mackinder's ideas provoke a degree of panic among geo-strategists from those countries whenever they are dusted off and given a new airing.

But the preceding is why the US put so much effort into trying to gain influence in Central Asia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. American control of Central Asia would block the "world island" from consolidating under the influence of a single continental power.

The Chinese though don't seem to be particularly taken by the Heartland theory, placing more emphasis on sea trade with Southeast Asia and with investment in Africa. The Belt and Road initiative places a lot of emphasis on ports, as opposed to bypassing them.

Over the long run though the development of roads and railways across Asia and Africa will tilt the strategic playfield in a new direction, but I think this will be driven by economic factors rather than high level strategy.
Let's be honest here, BRI is not going to be as economical as massive container ships, but BRI and their railway efforts do have an interesting alternative.
 
In addition to all the other going-ons regarding China comes this (allegedly),


The days of hard-line communism in the PRC appear to be on the way back.

Mate, you'd be foolish to think it didn't.
it's always been about how they make themselves appear.
"We are poor little China, we would not hurt anybody, look at how mcuh money you can make from us mr west, we wont steal your property" "We are not so cummunist now, we drive wolls woyce"

Hook line and sinker.

They are communist, communism has always been subversive, and that should be the warning we wake up to every day, we dont.
We should, as a nation, make plans to stop doing business with them or at least get it down to 10%.
If you court communism, you risk being indoctrinated, If it breathes it breeds.

Christ, Anybody would think the west has forgotten the last century ffs.

They are totalitarian theives who hate what we stand for and are only doing business with us so they can get an unshakable upper hand. Selling us the rope with which we will hang ourselves indeed.

China...pfft. thier intention all along was to break up the west, aided and abetted by our own political class and communist inspired members of the middle class.*

And they almost did it. ;)

* a truth I believe will come to fruit very soon.
 
Mate, you'd be foolish to think it didn't.
it's always been about how they make themselves appear.
"We are poor little China, we would not hurt anybody, look at how mcuh money you can make from us mr west, we wont steal your property" "We are not so cummunist now, we drive wolls woyce"

Hook line and sinker.

They are communist, communism has always been subversive, and that should be the warning we wake up to every day, we dont.
We should, as a nation, make plans to stop doing business with them or at least get it down to 10%.
If you court communism, you risk being indoctrinated, If it breathes it breeds.

Christ, Anybody would think the west has forgotten the last century ffs.

They are totalitarian theives who hate what we stand for and are only doing business with us so they can get an unshakable upper hand. Selling us the rope with which we will hang ourselves indeed.

China...pfft. thier intention all along was to break up the west, aided and abetted by our own political class and communist inspired members of the middle class.*

And they almost did it. ;)

* a truth I believe will come to fruit very soon.
China in my personal opinion is one of the most old school type capitalist economies in existence, while masquerading as a communist/ socialist one.
 

Dafty duck

War Hero
Mate, you'd be foolish to think it didn't.
it's always been about how they make themselves appear.
"We are poor little China, we would not hurt anybody, look at how mcuh money you can make from us mr west, we wont steal your property" "We are not so cummunist now, we drive wolls woyce"

Hook line and sinker.

They are communist, communism has always been subversive, and that should be the warning we wake up to every day, we dont.
We should, as a nation, make plans to stop doing business with them or at least get it down to 10%.
If you court communism, you risk being indoctrinated, If it breathes it breeds.

Christ, Anybody would think the west has forgotten the last century ffs.

They are totalitarian theives who hate what we stand for and are only doing business with us so they can get an unshakable upper hand. Selling us the rope with which we will hang ourselves indeed.

China...pfft. thier intention all along was to break up the west, aided and abetted by our own political class and communist inspired members of the middle class.*

And they almost did it. ;)

* a truth I believe will come to fruit very soon.
I think they've jut about done it. I've said before, the West have been comprehensively outplayed by China in just about every regard. They've been building themselves up to become an almost unstoppable force while we've been too busy tying ourselves in knots arguing about third runways, the bad man Boris and which toilets people should be allowed to use.
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
Another item on the same lines as the story posted above by @Le_addeur_noir :



There are 31M Christians in China.....which is probably more than the UK.

( cue triggered Atheists using pro-word 'sky fairy' )
 

ARRSENIPPON

Old-Salt
They are communist, communism has always been subversive, and that should be the warning we wake up to every day, we dont.
We should, as a nation, make plans to stop doing business with them or at least get it down to 10%.
If you court communism, you risk being indoctrinated, If it breathes it breeds.
China is not a communist state in anything other than name. It is an autarchical centralised state that engages in a form of controlled mercantilist capitalism with the rest of the world.
This ain't what's in the communist manifesto, So let's not call it communism.
 
China is not a communist state in anything other than name.
It's not even that. It's a Socialist Republic in name, governed by a Communist Party.
It is an autarchical centralised state that engages in a form of controlled mercantilist capitalism with the rest of the world.
A form of statecraft which traditionally has served China very well. The nations which followed in its train, too.
This ain't what's in the communist manifesto, So let's not call it communism.
How about Socialism with Chinese Characteristics instead?

Nice to see you back, by the way. How's the land of the rising sun these days?
 
Last edited:
China is not a communist state in anything other than name. It is an autarchical centralised state that engages in a form of controlled mercantilist capitalism with the rest of the world.
This ain't what's in the communist manifesto, So let's not call it communism.
Yeah whatever, You can sugar coat it all you like.

Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era consists of a 14-point basic policy, as follows:[55][56]

  1. Ensuring Communist Party of China leadership over all forms of work in China.
  2. The Communist Party of China should take a people-centric approach for the public interest.
  3. The continuation of "comprehensive deepening of reforms".
  4. Adopting new development ideas based on science and for "innovative, coordinated, green, open and shared development".
  5. Following "socialism with Chinese characteristics" with "people as the masters of the country".
  6. Governing China with the rule of law.
  7. "Practise socialist core values", including Marxism, communism and "socialism with Chinese characteristics".
  8. "Improving people's livelihood and well-being is the primary goal of development".
  9. Coexist well with nature with "energy conservation and environmental protection" policies and "contribute to global ecological safety".
  10. Strengthen national security.
  11. The Communist Party of China should have "absolute leadership over" China's People's Liberation Army.
  12. Promoting the one country, two systems system for Hong Kong and Macau with a future of "complete national reunification"; and to follow the One-China policy and 1992 Consensus for Taiwan.
  13. Establish a common destiny between Chinese people and other people around the world with a "peaceful international environment".
  14. Improve party discipline in the Communist Party of China.
Ideology of the Communist Party of China - Wikipedia

The theoretical system of socialism with Chinese characteristics (Chinese: 中国特色社会主义; pinyin: Zhōngguó tèsè shèhuìzhǔyì, literally zhōngguó tèsè, meaning "Chinese characteristics"; and shèhuì zhǔyì meaning "socialism")[1] is a broad term for political theories and policies that are seen by their proponents as representing Marxism–Leninism adapted to Chinese circumstances and specific time periods. For instance, in this view Xi Jinping Thought is considered to represent Marxist–Leninist policies suited for China's present condition while Deng Xiaoping Theory was considered relevant for the period when it was formulated.[2]
The term entered common usage during the era of Deng Xiaoping and was largely associated with Deng's overall program of adopting elements of market economics as a means to foster growth using foreign investment and to increase productivity (especially in the countryside where 80% of China's population lived) while the Communist Party of China retained both its formal commitment to achieve communism and its monopoly on political power.[3] In the party's official narrative, socialism with Chinese characteristics is Marxism–Leninism adapted to Chinese conditions and a product of scientific socialism. The theory stipulated that China was in the primary stage of socialism due to its relatively low level of material wealth and needed to engage in economic growth before it pursued a more egalitarian form of socialism, which in turn would lead to a communist society described in Marxist orthodoxy.
Socialism with Chinese characteristics - Wikipedia
 

ARRSENIPPON

Old-Salt
It's not even that. It's a Socialist Republic in name, governed by a Communist Party.
There's no arguing with this.

A form of statecraft which traditionally has served China very well. The nations which followed in its train, too.
Again, no argument here. I totally agree. This method of government has been remarkably successful for China over the 'longue durée', but began to break down quite rapidly upon contact with the west from 18th century onwards.

How about Socialism with Chinese Characteristics instead?
I have a problem calling this socialism. It's a particularly Chinese approach to governance, and I'm someone who believes firmly in calling a pan a 鉄鍋.

Nice to see you back, by the way. How's the land of the rising sun these days?
Thank you, it's nice to be back. Real life intervened with a vengeance in 2018, but things are back on a more-or-less even keel and plan to be a little more active again. We do live in interesting times after all.
We're still hanging ourselves out to dry... Jgov has spent (v. rough estimate) 5 trillion USD over the last 50 years on infrastructure improvements for Tokyo (flood, earthquake, fire essentially), and yet last month we were a foot or so away from catastrophe either side of the Tama river levees designed to withstand what had been considered to be a once in one thousand year level event. Interesting times.
 

ARRSENIPPON

Old-Salt
Yeah whatever, You can sugar coat it all you like.
If describing a regime as "an autarchical centralised state that engages in a form of controlled mercantilist capitalism with the rest of the world" is 'sugar coating' then guilty as charged m'lud.
BTW, I'm more interested in trying to describe the Chinese government for what it is than what the PRC PR department describes it as.
 
This method of government has been remarkably successful for China over the 'longue durée', but began to break down quite rapidly upon contact with the west from 18th century onwards.
I'd take issue only with the description of historic China as 'autarchic'. It's been a trading nation from before there was such a thing as an agreed-upon 'China' to talk of and for the vast majority of that time it's been the centre of extensive trading networks throughout Asia, Asia Minor and extending into Europe. The Silk Road was the most high-profile manifestation but things like the presence of silks and porcelain from Tashkent to Lisbon also testify.

I'd also go so far as to say that the 18th Century breakdown followed the usual pattern, that China's external problems only impacted China's well-being when they were combined with extensive internal problems that prevented the government structures from mobilising resources. In the case of the 18th and 19th centuries, these kicked off with the epic corruption of Qianlong's court, the massive expansion of population without the government infrastructure to cope, the well-intentioned but ultimately ruinous fiscal reforms and perennial rebellions draining the treasury set the stage for 'Enter stage left: divers carpetbaggers.'
I have a problem calling this socialism. It's a particularly Chinese approach to governance, and I'm someone who believes firmly in calling a pan a 鉄鍋.
In truth, I think that was just a sop Deng gave to the remaining Maoists for whom the colour of the cat was still important. Nowadays, cadres mostly argue that they're still pursuing Socialism according to the evolutionary approach of classical Marxism, rather than having achieved it through radical Leninism.
Jgov has spent (v. rough estimate) 5 trillion USD over the last 50 years on infrastructure improvements for Tokyo (flood, earthquake, fire essentially), and yet last month we were a foot or so away from catastrophe either side of the Tama river levees designed to withstand what had been considered to be a once in one thousand year level event. Interesting times.
Is that expenditure for the Greater Tokyo region or the city alone?

Hals und Beinbruch, in any case.
 
China sabre rattles in the Taiwan straight again,

I read about that carrier just a few days ago. A bit half-assed by all accounts, more likely to be used for HADR than warry stuff. Plus, the Reagan is in Jap at the moment.

I know jack about ships, so am probably missing something, mind.
 

overopensights

ADC
Book Reviewer
On a smaller scale, I recently saw a Chinese infantry Division moving by what we would call an A road. It took about an hour for them to pass by at about 35MPH , all were in trucks and in Company Groups. I saw them approaching led by dispatch riders. I have never seen such immaculate display of troops nor vehicles, and never such arrogance. We were two Europeans in the area of Shijiazhuang. We were near but just off a round -about standing by a car to watch the spectacle, We were told in no uncertain way to 'get away' out of it! by the dispatch riders, this was done with much shouting in Chinese and aggressive gesticulating with arm movements and whistles. This Military display; a Division with supporting arms; artillery, engineers, was very impressive, not a thing was out of place, in all my years in the army I have not seen the like. My mate with me an ex Green Jacket remarked: They can 'talk the Talk' but can they Walk the Walk'? It looked to me as if they could?
 
I read about that carrier just a few days ago. A bit half-assed by all accounts, more likely to be used for HADR than warry stuff. Plus, the Reagan is in Jap at the moment.

I know jack about ships, so am probably missing something, mind.
The USS Ronald Reagan is based at Yokosuka, near Tokyo. She has just returned from a cruise.
 
Now Chinese intelligence operatives are jumping ship. This, apparently, is the first time someone from their intelligence agencies has defected. Dead man walking ?

Could this be the start of another Cold War?


 

Latest Threads

Top