RE: virus: The Ideohazard 1.1

From: Jonathan Davis (jonathan.davis@lineone.net)
Date: Mon Sep 15 2003 - 05:52:02 MDT

  • Next message: Kharin: "Re:virus: The Ideohazard 1.1"

     

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of
    Kharin
    Sent: 15 September 2003 10:24
    To: virus@lucifer.com
    Subject: Re:virus: The Ideohazard 1.1

    [Jonathan 1] "I was spooked by Hermit's Chinese-commit-genocide piece but
    for me it was ruined by its overt anti-Americanism (if that term can be
    applied to what appears *in my opinion* to be Hermit's pathological hatred
    of America)."

    [Kharin 1] As I've said before I am not particularly enthused by the term
    'anti-americanism.' Most nations are not in the habit of expecting to be
    unconditionally loved and one would not expect to hear terms like
    anti-british (especially at the height of its Empire when such concerns were
    blithely irrelevant) or anti-european. In fact, the only parallel that
    springs to mind is being 'un-amercian.'

    [Jonathan 2] Whilst most nations would not expect to be unconditionally
    loved, neither would they expect to be reflexively hated. Anti-Americanism
    is simply an abstraction of being anti-American . It means what it says.

    [Kharin 1] That said, the piece is an attempt to extrapolate trends from
    current events. Given that the axis of evil speech threatened both Iran and
    North Korea while ensuring that the US would be bogged down with Iraq for
    several years, some of those consequences are already evident; since both
    countries have responded by accelerating weapons programmes. It would be
    rather surprising if China did not view such events, note that it is the
    only state likely to be in a position to challenge the US in the future and
    prepare accordingly. Even though this is a creative work, I would be very
    surprised if no-one in the Pentagon was performing similar scenario planning
    regarding China. If they are not, I would be very worried indeed.

    [Jonathan 2] The piece is future history and therefore unfettered by
    reality. The truth is that it is near certain that the Pentagon has prepared
    scenarios to deal with an aggressive China. Why? Because it is already a
    reality. Sabre rattling over Taiwan, brinkmanship over the Spratleys,
    rampant techno-theft, massive internal repression, clearly stated objectives
    for world domination and hegemony (the Chinese want to be where the USA is
    today. If they ever get there those breathless from screaming at the
    putative US outrages better prepares for a whole new scale of reference when
    it comes to Chinese brutality and violation of international norms. Simply
    think about China's complicity in intellectual property violations as one
    example. For more information see: "The China Threat" by Bill Gertz and
    Howard Bloom's essay on China in "Everything You Know Is Wrong".)

    [Jonathan 1] "Incidentally: If history is to be a guide, then be assured
    China will amount to zero in terms of global power. It will invert itself as
    it has done so many times in its 6,000 year history. China has some
    advantages over the West, advantages easily wiped out by us: It is ruthless
    and devious, it is not a democracy, it is protectionist, it prostitutes
    promise of its markets to steal technology and advantage, its workers are
    prepared to work for very little. "

    [Kharin 1] An interesting question. China's economic performance has
    certainly been far more remarkable than you suggest. To quote the CIA World
    Factbook:

    "The result has been a quadrupling of GDP since 1978. In 2002, with its 1.3
    billion people but a GDP of just $4,400 per capita, China stood as the
    second-largest economy in the world after the US (measured on a purchasing
    power parity basis)."

    http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

    [Jonathan 2] I am fully aware of China's economic miracle. The problem (for
    China) is that the forces which sustain it are waning. Inward investment,
    techno-theft and protectionism are all losing their lustre. If China is ever
    seen a threat, the party is over.

    [Kharin 1] Within that context, the structure of the Chinese economy has
    changed rapidly since between 1991 and 1997 the size of the Chinese private
    sector grew by 71%. The growth rates of some Chinese areas, the Yangtse
    delta in particular, have been phenomenal. Of course, as you suggest there
    are factors that may retard this; for example, most of this growth is
    accounted for in terms of inward investment, while India may yet prove more
    attractive.

    [Jonathan 2] Indeed.

    Kind regards

    Jonathan

    ---
    To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 15 2003 - 05:52:37 MDT