| Backward nations are sure to be bullied? | |
|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2008 02:39 |   |
 | History tells us that those who lag behind were sure to get beaten up. The Qing Dynasty ,especially during the Opium Wars, was a good example to illustrate this theory. What does 'be bullied' or 'get beaten up' mean here? The invasion of those western nations and Japan to China. Moreover, the invasion in recent Chinese history started from the Opium Wars. At that time, China was far lagging behind those developed imperial nations. That is why China was 'bullied' by them and input much opium into China. However, a scholar recently publicized his new research. In his research, he declares that China was 'bullied' by those western nations during the Opium Wars not because of its backward economy. According to his source, China's GDP in 1820 was about 32.9% of world GDPs. It proves that Chinese economy was not lagging behind at that time. What's more, the original purpose of lauching Opium Wars was to resolve its deficit against China and open Chinese domestic market. Does he want to prove that Backward nations are NOT sure to be bullied? Here 'Backward' means one nation's economy is lagging behind others. What do you think of Opium Wars and his assertion? |
| Jan 5, 2008 14:14 | #1 |
| GUESTEVANS | china is rich now. china will bully backward nations now? |
| Jan 9, 2008 03:13 | #2 |
| Quote: china is rich now. china will bully backward nations now? It seems that you have some negative views about China. Personally, I don't think China has become a rich nation. Just as I stated in another thread, the disparity between the rich and the poor is widing though the GDP is growing rapidly. If this problem can't be solved properly, serious results will be brought. |
| Jan 9, 2008 06:54 | #3 |
| ((It seems that you have some negative views about China. Personally, I don't think China has become a rich nation.)) Nothing-negative Jimmyb, the individual is well informed. The guest asks you a very good question to be answer, Jimmyb. By the way Jimmyb, China it is now days one of the riches countries on the planet. Just to help you a little bit, Chinas reserves standings are high as, $$795,100,000,000 for the 2006 year. Rich and poor is another issue, do not you agree. |
| Jan 10, 2008 02:26 | #4 |
| History shows that weaker nations will be bullied, there is no question of that. China was weak enough to be bullied at the time of the Opium Wars, perhaps in it's political structure rather than its economic strength. China is rich as a nation and it's power is growing. China is already a bully on one issue dear to its heart. Regardless of the issue itself you cannot trade with China unless you say you agree with the One China Policy. Everyone knows this, but they must trade with China so they 'agree'. In the future, China will bully more, just as the UK (and some other European countries) did and then the USA in modern history. Why should China be any different?? |
| Jan 10, 2008 13:26 | #5 |
| >>China is rich as a nation and it's power is growing. China is already a bully on one issue dear to its heart. Regardless of the issue itself you cannot trade with China unless you say you agree with the One China Policy. Everyone knows this, but they must trade with China so they 'agree'. In the future, China will bully more, just as the UK (and some other European countries) did and then the USA in modern history. Why should China be any different??<< I would have to agree with your assessment. Translation: I believe it to be accurate, but still it would be unfortunate if it comes to pass. And on the other point; rich nations etc. I think most here realize that you can have a rich nation and still have many poor people living in it. As has been pointed out above though, if this disparity increases over time, a boiling point will be reached. |
| Jan 11, 2008 03:31 | #6 |
| Quote: China is rich as a nation and it's power is growing. China is already a bully on one issue dear to its heart. Regardless of the issue itself you cannot trade with China unless you say you agree with the One China Policy. Everyone knows this, but they must trade with China so they 'agree'. In the future, China will bully more, just as the UK (and some other European countries) did and then the USA in modern history. Why should China be any different?? May I conclude that those nations will surely bully other weak countries once they become powerful? Is it a cycle? Judging from the modern history, it is true. |
| Jan 12, 2008 08:40 | #7 |
| I was waiting for Jimmy"s answer, but I think he forgot about this thread, To all of you people in this thread, I certainly agree, China has to bully the many around in order to preserve its power. |
| Jan 12, 2008 23:11 | #8 |
| People of China: don't take our comments personally, but this is the way of the world. In a similar vein many of my students have said to me 'the people of China don't want to dominate the world', and 'Chinese people only want peace'. Absolutely, because that goes for most people in most countries. The problem is that national leaders didn't get to the top by being softies, they put the boot in when they find it expedient. There is no reason why they should change at the international level. AND maybe they shouldn't change: their responsibility is to the people they reperesent - so until we get a masive change in the the psyche of people worldwide, this will hold good. In a capitalist competitive world this cannot, by definition, happen, because it is a system of competing interests. Of course, when China achieves the still professed goal of the CCP and becomes a truly communist state, the rest of the world will see the benefit a co-operative rather than co-operative approach and there could be a change in the world wide psyche. From a Hegelian perspective this can only come about as a clash resulting from the contradictions in the new globalised society (that harmony is required but the system is competitive) and a synthesis to a new better world can be achieved. While in Marxist terms the contradictions will only come about as a result of the imperatives of the continued working class struggle....by an industrial working class movement to overthrow the exploitative capitalism. However, strong government measures ensure that there is no possibility of a Marxist type industrial workers revolution, and as such a revolution is a necessary prerequisite to achieving the ideals of the CCP. Therefore, China will dominate rather than attempt to achieve the wellbeing of all mankind. My students are required to attend classes in Marxism so I have tried to raise some of these questions with them. With the teachers, I have asked why the students are being taught Marxism as it is a contradiction , a Hegelian contradiction perhaps - it is a subversive philospopy in the modern China. Unfortunately, the students can only remember that their teacher told them they should not buy Japanese goods, and the teachers said it is a government requirement (which of course doesn't answer the real queston). (OK, so I have written a bit tongue in cheek, but the bottom line is we had better get used to the idea of a world led by a highly competitive and powerful China - soon.) |
| Jan 15, 2008 02:44 | #9 |
| Quote: I was waiting for Jimmy"s answer, but I think he forgot about this thread. Sorry for letting you wait so long, JCL. "The guest asks you a very good question to be answer, Jimmyb." Yes, JCL. But I don't know how to answer him or her. Every Chinese hopes that China can become richer, stronger and powerful so that we will not be bullied by others. It is history that has told us. According to your words, China has become a rich nation and China will start to bully others. Personally, I wouldn't like to see this. But I am not the national leader and don't know what they think about. "By the way Jimmyb, China it is now days one of the riches countries on the planet." Judging by its GDP and foreign exchange reserve, China has become one of the richest countries. But how about per capita GDP or foreign exchange reserve? If we measure China in this way, China is not as rich as those developed nations. And |
| Jan 15, 2008 02:54 | #10 |
| Sorry, I clicked "Submit" button. If we measure China in this way, China is not as rich as those developed nations. And I think that should be the criterion to judge whether a nation is rich or not. Of course, that is my understanding of being rich. Personally, my examples of rich countries are those northern European nations, such as Finland and Sweden. Their total GDP per year doesn't rank as the first place in the world. But they have perfect social welfare system and people there live happily. Will China bully other nations? Let's witness together! |
Page 1 of 2 < Previous Next > Page:
Post a Reply to: Backward nations are sure to be bullied?
Copyright © 1998-2024 All rights reserved.