Getting the old gang back together! Too bad Russia is on the other side this time.
They've always been "that acquaintance".
You only know each other for mutual benefit or a mutual friend, but when that's gone, there becomes literally no reason to hang out any more.
Considering Russia's past performance in naval warfare in the Pacific, we're probably better off without them.
Getting the old gang back together!
Germany, Japan, and Italy?
I don't mean to pick on you specifically with this comment, but good lord people, there's more to history than WW2. Anytime anyone tries to make a historical reference to current events it's awkwardly shoehorned into a WW2 framework. It drives me crazy. Anyway, sorry for the rant there. No, it's an older gang. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramble_for_China
Ah, you're talking about colonialism. You're going to have a hard time finding anti-colonialists on Lemmy, unfortunately.
Nah, it was just a throwaway joke, the west obviously doesn't intend to colonize China this time. What they did in the 19th century was egregious, though, and should be much more common knowledge than it is.
the west obviously doesn’t intend to colonize China this time
The Chinese state is a much harder nut to crack under the CCP than it was a century and a half ago under the Qing Dynasty. But there are plenty of John Bolton-esque figures in the American government who seem willing to give it the old college try.
What they did in the 19th century was egregious, though, and should be much more common knowledge than it is.
It's very difficult to talk about the English Empire as the world's premier opium cartel without taking a bit of the blush off the rose of liberal democracy and free market capitalism. These historical blemishes get dusted over for a reason.
It’s very difficult to talk about the English Empire as the world’s premier opium cartel without taking a bit of the blush off the rose of liberal democracy and free market capitalism. These historical blemishes get dusted over for a reason.
I agree, but that reflex is unfortunate because the ability to openly discuss and confront those things is what sets democracies apart from totalitarian states. You could never see that kind of frank introspection in China regarding June 4th '89, for example.
You could never see that kind of frank introspection in China regarding June 4th '89, for example.
You could and did. That moment radically transformed how the Deng Administration treated independent political movements, college student activism, and old guard Maoist organizations.
The argument that Chinese politicians and scholars simply don't acknowledge the events as happening is Western propaganda.
Cool, how long did you live there? Do you still have contacts on the mainland?
Two years, working abroad. And plenty of friends and relatives both on the mainland and in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
I must say I'm very surprised that your HK and TW people share your views. I don't know any Hong Kongers or Taiwanese but most people I know (generally northerners, which is ironic) have more, shall we say, nuanced opinions.
I must say I’m very surprised that your HK and TW people share your views.
I didn't say they share my views. I've seen every angle of the argument and quite a few of them have different opinions.
But they argue over a shared history. Mainlanders don't get confused when someone from Taiwan talks about Tienamen. Taiwanese people don't stare blankly at the name Chiang Kai-Shek. Folks from Hong Kong aren't unfamiliar with the British Occupation.
People aren't simply ignorant of the facts. They tend to be biased due to their material conditions. If you're a mid manager at the Houston branch of Sinopec, you didn't get there because you were a John Bircher. Meanwhile if you're on the payroll of the Foremost Group, you've got a very real financial incentive to oppose Chinese unification (but also a real incentive to oppose US tariffs on China).
Work as a contractor long enough and you'll get all different kinds of viewpoints. They'll be adversarial, not simply ignorant.
But they argue over a shared history. Mainlanders don’t get confused when someone from Taiwan talks about Tienamen. Taiwanese people don’t stare blankly at the name Chiang Kai-Shek. Folks from Hong Kong aren’t unfamiliar with the British Occupation.
Obviously. My reference to Tiananmen wasn't implying that people are ignorant of it, but rather that it can't be discussed openly in a public forum. Write an analysis of it on Weibo that criticizes the government and see where that gets you (whereas in the US you can freely write about the war in Iraq, slavery, or whatever else strikes your fancy)
People aren’t simply ignorant of the facts. They tend to be biased due to their material conditions. If you’re a mid manager at the Houston branch of Sinopec, you didn’t get there because you were a John Bircher. Meanwhile if you’re on the payroll of the Foremost Group, you’ve got a very real financial incentive to oppose Chinese unification (but also a real incentive to oppose US tariffs on China).
Also very true, but at least opposing viewpoints aren't actively suppressed by the government. Equating the two is off by several orders of magnitude.
The fact that Russia was ever on the winning side given their history was a fluke.
Eh, they were also instrumental in defeating Napoleon, which counts for a lot.
Russia was always on another side. The Ribbentrop Pact was a weak, untrusting handshake between two barbaric regimes with mutual hatred and a shared realization it would be easier to go rape and pillage more peaceful people instead of each other.
Getting the old gang back together! Too bad Russia is on the other side this time.
They've always been "that acquaintance".
You only know each other for mutual benefit or a mutual friend, but when that's gone, there becomes literally no reason to hang out any more.
Considering Russia's past performance in naval warfare in the Pacific, we're probably better off without them.
Germany, Japan, and Italy?
I don't mean to pick on you specifically with this comment, but good lord people, there's more to history than WW2. Anytime anyone tries to make a historical reference to current events it's awkwardly shoehorned into a WW2 framework. It drives me crazy. Anyway, sorry for the rant there. No, it's an older gang. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramble_for_China
Ah, you're talking about colonialism. You're going to have a hard time finding anti-colonialists on Lemmy, unfortunately.
Nah, it was just a throwaway joke, the west obviously doesn't intend to colonize China this time. What they did in the 19th century was egregious, though, and should be much more common knowledge than it is.
The Chinese state is a much harder nut to crack under the CCP than it was a century and a half ago under the Qing Dynasty. But there are plenty of John Bolton-esque figures in the American government who seem willing to give it the old college try.
It's very difficult to talk about the English Empire as the world's premier opium cartel without taking a bit of the blush off the rose of liberal democracy and free market capitalism. These historical blemishes get dusted over for a reason.
I agree, but that reflex is unfortunate because the ability to openly discuss and confront those things is what sets democracies apart from totalitarian states. You could never see that kind of frank introspection in China regarding June 4th '89, for example.
You could and did. That moment radically transformed how the Deng Administration treated independent political movements, college student activism, and old guard Maoist organizations.
The argument that Chinese politicians and scholars simply don't acknowledge the events as happening is Western propaganda.
Cool, how long did you live there? Do you still have contacts on the mainland?
Two years, working abroad. And plenty of friends and relatives both on the mainland and in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
I must say I'm very surprised that your HK and TW people share your views. I don't know any Hong Kongers or Taiwanese but most people I know (generally northerners, which is ironic) have more, shall we say, nuanced opinions.
I didn't say they share my views. I've seen every angle of the argument and quite a few of them have different opinions.
But they argue over a shared history. Mainlanders don't get confused when someone from Taiwan talks about Tienamen. Taiwanese people don't stare blankly at the name Chiang Kai-Shek. Folks from Hong Kong aren't unfamiliar with the British Occupation.
People aren't simply ignorant of the facts. They tend to be biased due to their material conditions. If you're a mid manager at the Houston branch of Sinopec, you didn't get there because you were a John Bircher. Meanwhile if you're on the payroll of the Foremost Group, you've got a very real financial incentive to oppose Chinese unification (but also a real incentive to oppose US tariffs on China).
Work as a contractor long enough and you'll get all different kinds of viewpoints. They'll be adversarial, not simply ignorant.
Obviously. My reference to Tiananmen wasn't implying that people are ignorant of it, but rather that it can't be discussed openly in a public forum. Write an analysis of it on Weibo that criticizes the government and see where that gets you (whereas in the US you can freely write about the war in Iraq, slavery, or whatever else strikes your fancy)
Also very true, but at least opposing viewpoints aren't actively suppressed by the government. Equating the two is off by several orders of magnitude.
The fact that Russia was ever on the winning side given their history was a fluke.
Eh, they were also instrumental in defeating Napoleon, which counts for a lot.
Russia was always on another side. The Ribbentrop Pact was a weak, untrusting handshake between two barbaric regimes with mutual hatred and a shared realization it would be easier to go rape and pillage more peaceful people instead of each other.
Please see my reply to UnderpantsWeevil
.
you mean the nazi gang?
2024 - 22 = 2002.
So probably not nazis. No.