Sun Yat Sen, the first President of China and who was love and favor by both the communist and the nationalist, had stated that China should be a strong, unified and an independent nation. *Independent from foreign influence*
R. LH In 1945 after Japan surrendered, the KMT had control of all of China except for Manchuria and Tibet. After the Soviets withdrew from Manchuria China would have been a unified country if not for the CCP. In fact Taiwan is still not unified with the mainland because of the CCP.
@@johnmartin4233 No they didn't. KMT was on a verge of splitting China because they were totally incompetent. Most local regions had their own military and local lords. CCP actually was in talks with KMT opting for a joint leadership or at least given an legal political party status which KMT rejected. Not to mention the copious amounts of heinous crimes by military lords who gave allegiance to KMT against the poor in their local regions which KMT officials turned a blind eye to, only made them hugely unpopular among lower classes (which form the majority). China would have been unified if not for US shilling up KMT. KMT also committed a huge purge of communists (and suspected communists) in Taiwan who wanted them to talk with CCP to sort out an unification plan. That event is now remembered as White Terror.
flysmask Where did you get all that from? Most historians who write about that period agree, the warlord period was over by the 1930s. Then the two invading powers were Japan and the Soviet Union. Zhou En Lai even said to the Japanese foreign minister in the 70s that if Japan had not invaded then the CCP would never have come to power. The CCP only won because the KMT’s numbers were depleted by the Japanese Invasion. Then the Soviet Union armed and trained the CCP, then allowed them to occupy Manchuria.
@@LondonCityGirl Human rights abuses in China? The west, USA and UK has more human rights abuses than today's China. Not to mention the planned poverty for western citizens. Human rights and Economic rights need to go together for Real Freedom to exist.
I think we need to be careful comparing different countries and saying one is worse or better than others. It creates a damaging dialogue. But apart from that, yes, both human rights and economic freedoms for all are desirable.
@@LondonCityGirl As a Hong Konger, I honestly believe that the current "pro-democracy" protests are just one of the ways the United States of America attempt to secure its Global Hegemonic Empire. Democracy as promoted by the west isn't even real Democracy because it's "representative democracy" which more often than not do the bidding of the Oligarchs rather than the will of the common people.
@@mojito4493 you are a hongkonger,i am Chinese,broadly speaking we are living in a same country,but hongkong people actually have freedom of press,right of peaceful protest etc...which we don‘t owing to limitted autonomy that china gave to hongkong.you can see people been secretly arrested for criticizing the ccp in public.when you talk about human rights,political rights must be included.what ccp said can not explain what is happening in china.you can see liu xiaobo was inprisoned,wang quanzhang was disappeared while ccp claimed that china has freedom.I personaly am risking my own life to comment,hope you are not a fake account of national security agency.香港的政治制度和中国的不太一样,香港人在讨论中国的时候不能把香港的情况套用到整个中国来,这会得出很多矛盾的理论,香港人在政治权利和政治参与上虽然有一定的限制,但是总体上跟中国还是有很大区别,这点你可以在各种人权组织的报告中看到,香港和中国是单列出来的,你认为人权包含经济权利和社会利益,这点我认同,但是不可以机械地认为人权就是经济权利。况且中国的基尼系数也并不算低,中国政府虽然在过去几十年中发展了经济,但也出现了资源分配不均匀的情况。在公民政治参与上中国的情况不用我多说吧,任何政体都有缺点 代议制民主也不是完美的,但是反对代议制民主之前能不能也看看集权政府是否也有缺点呢?
Thanks for the video. I think it is very objective and well-rounded. Just two fact check tho: (1) searching "democracy" and "revolt" are allowed, however the results you can see is censored. (2) talking about Cultural Revolution and it's impact is now okay.
Now, China has a market economy in which capital plays an essential role. The political system remains as one party. In a Capitalism society, capital is above the political system. In China, the Political system is above the capital. That's the major difference.
A lot of what's covered in the video's pretty accurate - it's nice to see Tibet's status as the source of rivers being noted. There's also some delicious irony in that the CCP's old foe (the Kuomintang/KMT) are now their favored party to work with in Taiwan, since they're the ones who are at least in theory open to Chinese reunification. To expand on some of the points made in the video: With Tibet, they were screwed the moment 'China' got reunified. Whether it was the nationalists, communists or a new Imperial dynasty, the facts are as follows: the 'Chinese' state has a historical claim on Tibet (and the recognized borders of the Qing Dynasty). Modern states cannot afford to lend sovereignty to internal polities - it ties in with the monopoly on the legal use of force. It then follows that Tibet was always going to be crushed underfoot no matter which side won the Chinese civil war, especially since geographically they've got no one to turn to (India, despite proximity, is cut off by the tallest mountain range on Earth). (The counterargument is usually, what about Mongolia? To which I'll note more Mongols live in the PRC than Mongolia itself, and that Mongolia only got independence because the Soviets backed them, and Mao at the time needed the Soviets). - It's worth noting that aside from that one Sri Lankan port that caused the whole 'debt is to trick us into giving away territory' uproar, the BRI hasn't led to anymore 'land grabs'. You can point to cases where the collateral is permission to operate the ports, but that isn't the same thing as having a 99-yr lease on it. BRI loans that look like they'll default are generally renegotiated. Remember that the aim is to buy influence in these countries, in order to either flip them into allies/puppets (YMMV) or finlandize them. The ultimate goal will be for these countries to have base-rights agreements with the Chinese PLA(N). - With the case of Africa, it's a mite disingenuous for developed Western countries for whom the term 'neo-colonialism' was coined to turn around and accuse China of doing the same, especially considering the actual state of affairs is that China actually has _less_ influence in Africa than the US and Western European states collectively. For instance, the French still have de facto control of West and Central African economic policy, and regularly deploy military forces to intervene in the Sahel on a five-year basis (like clockwork). The reason that you see China being embraced by African states isn't that they're 'good people' or particularly generous, but that they offer an alternative to Western 'aid' that often comes with strings attached (usually in the form of implementing neoliberal policies that crash and burn local economies). That the Chinese 'aid' (and to be clear, most Chinese 'aid' is actually loans and investment, which isn't really aid because they're expecting an ROI) has few policy demands and that the CCP will turn a blind eye to local leaders' indiscretions are bonuses, not the main reason. Just having an alternative means that African states (and developing countries in general) have a better bargaining position against the West _and_ China, since it can now pick between 2 options instead of just having the terms imposed on them. - Tiananmen is more accurately described as an anti-government protest. While pro-democracy elements were there and given center stage in media coverage, there were also large contingents of Maoists who wanted a repudiation of the economic liberalization that Deng had put into motion. - The Uygur camps pointed out exist, and are conducting an exercise in cultural genocide. The real reasoning is to crush separatist ambitions in that community, not religion. Religious extremism is merely the convenient scapegoat - note that the Chinese first started cracking down on the Uygurs back during the peak of the War on Terror. It's not so much as the PRC hates and wants to crush religion, as much as it wants to keep religious leaders either powerless or under CCP control. For one, the largest Muslim 'ethnic group' in China are the Hui, and they actually get government funds to build mosques. The CCP also has their own sponsored Catholic & Protestant churches. Buddhism is the biggest faith in China, but most Chinese Buddhists are distinct from Tibetan Buddhists (different schools of religion). Also, keep in mind that Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism aren't really mutually exclusive like Christianity & Islam are (you can simultaneously be a Buddhist and a Confucian). This has bled over to other faiths as well - Chinese Christians often continue to practice traditional Chinese religious rites, even when that'd technically be heresy from an orthodox POV.
Vocational training centers that teach Uyghurs trade skills are not cultural genocide, please stop regurgitating this lie. Crushing separatist, extreme (aka ETIM) is not cultural genocide - that is an absolute insult to Muslims. It is like the equivalent of saying all blacks are gang members. People say the culture is being eradicated but tell me, when you have mosques, Uyghur language (in conjunction with Mandarin), food/clothes/customs intact, alongside massive economic development in the region, cultural genocide??
I'm from China, and it's good to see things well explained and in an unbiased way. Thank you. By the way though, people usually use the search engine Baidu instead of Google, and keywords like "democracy" and "revolt" do give results. Don't know where that part came from lol
@HQzelle It depends, since China is a big country; I'd speak from my experience in Beijing. On the daily life side, there's the huge population, and as a result students face fierce competitions since childhood, and housing prices are crazy high; but the good thing is we got good public transportation, cheap deliveries, shared bikes etc. in cities cauz the population makes them worth the investment. The average income is much lower than developed countries (GDP per capita similar to that of Malaysia, Brazil, and Mexico), but maintaining a life should be ok for most. Interestingly, for cultural/housing price reasons, people usually save a lot of money in banks, as opposed to, say, American style spending. About the negative views in the west -- I think most are simply ideology-driven. The truth is, the average person doesn't care much about participating in politics. And for those do care, the downside is the only way is to join the party and work their way up; working against the party, typically, would not be an option. The upside would be the efficiency and possibility of long-term planning done by the leaders. As for freedom, I think it's like not drinking in public when traveling to USA: different places, different rules, that's all. Personally, I think many of the judgy people are way too well-off compared to the majority of humans on this planet and thus are not in a position to judge their societies. Many like to point fingers, but few can take their time to empathize.
@@Isweir You're also right. But I wouldn't push too hard on that since it's kinda natural for ppl outside China to think that way, both because the way China is often portrayed by media, and because the ROC did not really have Tibet under their control. She did try to explain things without filling them with ideology-driven judgements (like many other videos about China on RU-vid), that was my point(苦笑)
Whom Can We Trust If No One Is Trustworthy? One of my favorite quips from Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Tom Sawyer is when Tom is defined as “a glittering hero…the pet of the old, the envy of the young,” and there were “some that believed that he would be President, yet, if he escaped hanging.” With these few words, Twain captured the essence of leadership in our world. Those who get to the top are the fiercest, most determined, and most ruthless. Today, the latter quality has become so intense that we can no longer believe our leaders, and certainly not trust them to have our best interest in mind. I am not accusing any leader in particular, or even leaders as a whole. It is simply that in an egoistic world, where people vie to topple one another on their way to the top, the one at the top is clearly the one who trampled over and knocked down more people than anyone else. Concisely, to get to the top in an egoistic world you have to be the biggest egoist. So how do we know whom to trust? We don’t know and we cannot know. All we know is that we are in the dark. In a culture of unhinged selfishness, any conspiracy theory seems reasonable, while truth is nowhere to be found. When every person who says or writes something is trying to promote some hidden agenda, you have no way of knowing who is right, what really happened, or if anything happened at all. The only way to get some clarity in the news and goodwill from our leaders is to say “Enough!” to our current system and build something entirely independent. The guiding principle of such a system should be “information only,” no commentary. Commentary means that information has already been skewed. Information means saying only what happened, as much as possible, not why, and not who is to blame and who we should praise. Concurrently, we must begin a comprehensive process of self-teaching. We have to know not only what is happening, but why we skew and distort everything. In other words, we have to know about human nature and how it inherently presents matters according to its own subjective view, which caters to one’s own interest. To “clear” ourselves from that deformity, we must learn how to rise above our personal interest and develop an equally favorable attitude toward others. This is our only guarantee that our interpretation of things will be even and correct. Once we achieve such an attitude, we will discover that the bad things we see in our world reflect our own, internal wickedness. Our ill-will toward others creates a world where ill-will governs, and so the world is filled with wickedness and cruelty. Therefore, all we need in order to create positive leadership-and to generally eliminate ill-will from the world-is to generate goodwill within us. When we nurture goodwill toward others, we will fill the world with goodwill. As a result, the world will fill with kindness and compassion. By changing ourselves, we will create a world that is opposite from the world we have created through our desires to govern, patronize, and often destroy other people.
Your videos are the most clear, thorough, and succinct that I have found. The scale of each piece is prioritized well to give a broad overview that makes sense. Thank you for making these. Very well done!
Very well done! I was hoping to see some of the latest news worthy and historical happenings between China and Hong Kong. I understand that it could very well be a video unto itself. There would be large amount to explain. Thank you for this well put together overview.
Thanks for watching and commenting. This has made me think about potentially creating anther video on what's happening between China and Hong Kong in the future :) Great suggestion!
The U.S. wars everywhere, and Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, and Vietnam still pretend to be so lofty. It’s fair that China went to Africa to build infrastructure in exchange for resources. You sold slaves from Africa a long time ago. Have you ever wanted to help them build good infrastructure and help them build schools? You printed U.S. dollars and bought goods from all over the world. , Reaping the world, have you ever wondered where the people of other countries in the world are fortunate enough to earn money? Soros shorted the Thai baht, just to make money, and indeed ruined the economy of a country. Have you ever been merciful?
My corrections/additions (unbiased); -The United States isn't a total democracy, it's much more of a republic. -That part about China not being communist in the modern day is correct. -North Korea is capitalistic. -The trans-national labor exploitations of Africa is a "market" dominated by America at the moment. That would likely explain the warning.
this video pretends to be objective yet it is not : 1. when it said that Tibet was independent until 1950, it magically omits the fact that Tibet was under direct Chinese rule for centuries up until 1900 when, guess who, the brits came and Tibet gradually broke off from Chinese government until 1950 ; 2. on the map at 11:23, Hong Kong is not marked as territories of China ; 3. Chinese claim on the south China sea was based on historical claims which predates the invention of international maritime laws, i know China seems to be bullying those small south east asian countries, but hey i dont see china making excuses and invading other countries to deliver "democracy" just because there is oil ; 4. u cant just compare China-Africa relationship to colonialism, china offers infrastructures and investments in exchange for raw materials and cheap labors, it's called global trade, China didnt force, nor exploit nor enslave the african countries, china is there to do business and provide development to african economics ; 5. u cant just talk about reeducation camps while leaving out the separatist movement and the terrorist attack those extremist did to others chinese citizens (muslim included, eg. the Hui people) ; 6. as a chinese citizen i actually praised the Great Fire Wall of China, to shield off chinese from biased and politically driven western media, people specially the young ones are easy to succumb to western narratives which only promotes sedition and disunity under the pretense of "democracy and freedom" (look at Hong Kong or the middle east), china's economic miracle was only possible because of stability, the collective will and the strong will of a single ruling party ; 7. chinese people are actually well aware of the mistakes committed by the CCP during the great leap forward or the cultural revolution, and most chinese people know well the incident that happened in 1989 (atrocities were actually committed by both sides), but chinese people are a pragmatic people, their lives are better now, and they dont complain. 8. and lastly dissidents in china dont magically disappear, there has been non confirmed reports from both chinese media and western media, yes they are harassed, and sometimes detained and imprisoned, but they are all accounted for, it's not good, but running a country as big as China, CCP's no.1 priority is always social stability.
This video is a hoax. I'm from Spain and I look at your country with admiration in many aspects. The truth is that not all Europeans swallow this propaganda. :)
@@raul6766 mucho gracias amigo, china is like any other countries in the world, there are good things and there are bad things; and yet china is so different from other counties because of its unique culture and history and its authoritarian way of a government, i just wish china get the respect that it deserves and to be treated equally and fairly.
@@ishangyan9051 it's simple, look at any Democratic country they always grow but not at faster rate delevoped countries grow at (1-3)% and developing countries if it's good then 4-8% and that too not constant
As Chinese, I would say even though I dont like some words you used, but basically, the video is decent and most of the content is true. But two suggestions: 1. Since you mentioned the political debating between China and Taiwan Province, you should have shown this on the map. 2. It's better to rename the video's title as China's Geopolitical instead of simply politics since you mentioned mainly about the relationship between and surrounding countries.
I appreciate the constructive feedback ... I have a few more videos in this series planned for next year - focussing on other regions and countries - and I will keep your comments in mind 👍
@@LondonCityGirl maybe some more about the structure of the Chinese government and how it is formed vs the west. pro and cons etc... you video is well made, though some different thoughts from me as a Chinese..
LondonCityGirl,...I suggest you investigate and do I video about the system of governance in China (maybe contrasting with the US) which has been completely misunderstood in the West. I discovered there are far more elections by the people there for their government officials. Just that they don't vote directly for the President which were voted by a large National People's Congress. China practises meritocracy. At the base, people in China would vote for their local village committees. And capable village leaders would move up the hierarchy until he became top government officials through various elections over the years by various competent committees of course. The wishes of the people at the bottom of the pile in China has a higher chances to be heard in this model of governance. Unlike the US, not any Tom, Dick and Donald Trump can be a Presidential or Premier candidate in China by throwing his/her hat in the ring. Contrary to the perceptions of the people in the West, there are far more check and balance preventing abuses in China than the US. The President of China is not as all powerful as POTUS. Unlike POTUS or Kim Jong-un, the President of China have no absolute power, cannot appoint his Prime Minister much less fire him and certainly cannot attack another country like Iraq or Iran now. We have heard many times Donald Trump authorised this, authorised that singly by himself. On the surface, this form of governance seems better relatively speaking. You may read this in-depth article written by a US journalist/author, www.unz.com/article/selling-democracy-to-china/
Devon Rusinek Far from it. They historically hate each other; almost fought a war over Mongolia; have disputed borders; and of course there is the Chinese „betrayal“ to Soviet communism. Also while Chinas economy continues to rise and will so in the future, I doubt the same can be said about Russia, as its largely dependent on oil and gas. Russia sees in China a threat, economically and also militarily. One of the only things that bounds them together is their hatred of the west
@@anoop1555 You do realize that Russia is one of the few countries with a positive trade balance, 196 Billion dollars in 2018 alone. Even the US is heavily indebted to Russia. Russia's economy has been on an overall uptick for the last 2 decades. Not to mention exporting 6 million barrels of crude oil per day as well as a 14 billion dollar iron and steel industry, exports of which total 6.5٪ of the world supply. These, among other reasons, is why Moscow has more billionaires per capita, than anywhere else in the world. Putin wanted Crimea, so he walked his troops in, took over and said to the world community, "What? Does anyone have a problem? ", while the rest of the world kind of looked the other way, because no one wants to tangle with a superpower.
@@sussekind9717 I think the people in the Crimea should have had a referendum with proper observers and protocols to decide their fate. I just don't think nations should unilaterally annex other's territory. This led to problems in the past and will lead to them in the future. People should work together instead of threatening one another with violence.
Purified News served an important role to social stability. There are always good or bad economically or politically, but you need to balance what is better for the country based on the collective social environment and cultures. That’s is where the ideology origin.
Video: China’s politics are so simple that we made a video about it Me: China is a republic, which implies that it’s democratic, but there’s only one party, so it’s fascist, but the party is communist.
This is one of your best videos in recent times. I have decided to maintain my subscription on Patreon P.s. I have no interest in the cast of old tv shows!!!!
Thanks for the feedback - really useful to know :D If I do do any more Where Are They Now vids I'll make sure that it's a bonus video and another Science / Educational video follows within the next day or two. I toyed with the idea of creating a separate channel for those vids but maintaining two channels is an inordinate amount of work and takes away from this channel which is my real passion. Thanks for your support - it's very much appreciated :D
This many deaths isn't accurate. Same with the deaths said to have taken place in the USSR. They had a famine. It happens. It's not a valid criticism of communism. I bet capitalism starves more people every 4 years then communism did in its entirety. Way too much capitalist bs being taught to our kids. This is just western propaganda.
Hi there, good job making a somewhat neutral description of the modern history about China. Could you make one about how Chinese administration is done? I mean how they select or elect their governmental officers and leaders. That would be very interesting topic too!
China have one unite political system, with capital playing an essential role in their market economy, while the US being capitalism, have capital above political system. In my perspective, capital is a great invention of human society, it has solved overwhelming problems of inequality, easing human's biggest drive of greed, thus pushing for innovation. But also for the collective good, the importance and influence of capital should be limited at some point, it's a handy and powerful tool, but shouldn't and cannot be the ultimate goal of human societies. If nations have some great ideals and goals greater than money, then the game would be who to best utilize the capital so to achieve their goals first. I just wish, that those ultimate goals are not devided, and should be focus on the very planet we inhabit, Earth, to protect its environment, species, for the thriving and wellbeing of humankind. And I hope, if so, the competing nations are just really.. kids in a large family, trying to impress their Mother.
That was an informative video. Thank you for that. The mention of Tiananamen Square in the late 80's sort of reminds me about what the Victorian state government (Australia) is doing to it's citizens in relation to 'freedom protests' and 'anti lockdown protests' right now, today in 2020
Hmm, I don’t think it’s quite the same. Those ill informed protests are putting communities at risk and are selfishly putting temporary curbs to individual freedom over the safety of vulnerable people. If you’re going to live as part of a society and take all the benefits you should be able to pull together and to respect the science and the frontline workers who put themselves at risk for everyone. Not the same thing at all.
I love your video, it shows most sides of Chine objectively, thanks. Just a few things to add/question, the "secret disappearance" part kind of lacks sources, i mean we can neither find credible information on wertern media nor on chinese national media, so we dont know yet, same thing with the "educational camp". I do agree that China isn't complying completely with human rights standard in ICCPR, and for me I'm extremely annoyed by all the censorship happening, but it is doing so much better than before especially with the most fundamental ones. To conclude, China did a great job in making lives better in recent years, and let's all hope that it'll do better. Things in China are not simply "evil", China is too ancient and too huge to be assessed in a single biased way.
An very objective view, China is a country that between ideal and pragmatic actions, choose the more bloody and pragmatic actions, the result is that it bought time for the rapid development and growth, but also left a lot of cultural and human rights devastation. I would say that it is fundamentally a choice by the people that arise under extreme conditions, with its pros and cons.
What makes you say "objective"? That it doesn't criticize anyone strongly and says both sides can be seen as right? There is no tendency for the moderate stance to be right; only for it to be seen as right.
Although it is meant to be a _simple_ explanation of 'Chinese politics' - an ambitious task in regard to any nationstate - the actual 'Chinese' culture appears to play no part - which isn't the way politics is shaped, anywhere. It is well researched to name the *May the 4th* movement as a major factor of modern politics in China - but the movement wasn't about 'socialism' , but a *popular nationalist* sentiment against the _semi-colonial rule by Western powers_ since the *Opium Wars* and the _double-standard_ of *Wilson's principle of national 'self-determination'* as a basis for a post-war order, granting German colonies in China to Japan as military spoils - as if the 'Meiji Restoration' was anything different than the _modernization and the imperialism_ of Imperial Germany. Similar differentiations could be made about the Western image of Mao Zedong who survived the US backed Guomindang purge of 1927 (also under German military advice). Unlike the urban 'ideologues' of the party, Mao build upon the *history of peasant uprisings* in order to form his own 'brand of *populism'* (e.g. with tactics like *'mass line'* , reinforcing popular sentiment) which arguably is miscategorized as Western 'socialism' (e.g. Marx), just as ancient Chinese 'legalism' isn't about the Western, liberal 'rule of law'. Mao was a _voluntarist_ , believing that effort can overcome _matters_ which renders the 'Cultural Revolution' not a struggle about _ideas_ but about _destabilizing the party bureaucracy_ (not unlike TROTZKI's analysis of Soviet society) in a _power_ struggle - while e.g. _military nuclear research_ continued without interuption of the 'Red Guards' ... Therefore the economic reforms of Deng after Mao's death were rather a _continuation_ of Mao's quest of *modernizing China* , hence the *rhetoric of 'Chinese characteristics'* . If this continuity from the 'Self Strengthening Movement' of the 19th century to the 21st century 'Communist Party' is _framed within Western political theory_ , the politics of China will be misunderstood (that is mostly *demonized* ). When it comes to the provinces of Taiwan and Tibet - these are as independent as Hawai, parts of Samoa, Puerto Rico ect. and are regarded as a matter of *national security* , ultimately decided upon not by local votes (e.g. German plebiscites on citizenship after 1918 were ignored by Western powers), but by military conflict. The current estrangement between the West and China is again not a matter of idelogy, but of political _power_ in international affairs - China was meant to be a junior partner and student of a *trans-Atlantic* order when it was promised a seat in a future UN Security Council - but but _the very same historical process_ that made the US *'heir to the British Empire'* also altered the US-China relationship from a sympathy between secular, revolutionary societies to the increasingly mutual resentment of economic and political rivals, escalating annually since the US bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrad - the beginning of a policy of US global *liberal hegemony* since the end of the Cold War - in which *Mao and Nixon* considered each other _partners_ with _legitimate interests_ ... One could argue that the revision of the *Law of the Sea* by the Western, _maritime_ powers - , increasing national waters until dispute is likely - is a meassure of _containing_ China, *destabilizing the Greater Middle East since 9/11* being another one. China isn't constantly _framed_ and _bashed_ in Western mainstream media because it actually 'enslaves' the natives of Africa or commits a _'genocide'_ on it's citizens - as Western powers did in the 19th and 20th century, but because a future war with China on maintaining the trans-Atlantic status quo would require popular support in the West. However, from a European *nationalist* point of view, just as the US hegemony during the Cold War was beneficial, a future shift of power towards Asia may not be the 'Communist World Revolution' as it is depicted - while Western 'enlightenment' was never _darker_ .
Really? I’m pretty careful with how many ads I allow on my vids as I think the topics covered are important and don’t want the viewer to be distracted. It’s a balancing act but I definitely err on the side of caution so this comment surprises me.
Yes, agreed the Chinese never wage war like the Western countries. See how they help the African countries and Iran, Iraq and Pakistan Alhamduillah.. 🙏🙏
If I were in charge of a country and given absolute power I wouldn't keep it. I would round up some very smart people can create a brand new government that is supposed to give the best life possible to its citizens. Blocking information and blocking protests is never a good idea. You want people to be informed and to be happy and to live the best life they can. You want freedom. You don't want a dictator.
@@riorio745 Well said. Most people have a myopic and dogmatic point of view when it come to political issues. They forget that no political or economical ideology is perfect and what works for one situation may not work for another with a totally different racial, cultural and religious background, history, resources, and other environmental influences. We should all learn from others but ultimately must decide what work best for ourselves, and if necessary modify, integrate or balance other 'best practices' to suit our own purposes and uplift the people's livelihood.
I say so much after me you won't find me but I find you in those bunkers that you put in and I keep all your pumps there you have to understand so I did that no one will escape any Chinese no you will escape You have to understand or make peace Or if you don't wipe me on the face of the earth you have to choose peace or war with me you want Well you are not the navel of the earth here must understand peace
Contradiction to politics, western plays chess, where u loss the king u failed chinese play " GO" where every mark does matter In the long run, we will see, which system is best effective for everyone in a certain society.
We have. Time and time again. Every single communist country has failed. The only thing keeping China alive is their willingness to play monopoly with the Americans. People tend to work harder when you pay them....
@@user-bc7cw2yq1g I'll agree, China isn't truly communist. If you were to say "every single one party country has failed", that is more applicable to China.
really good video , gave you a thumb up, one thing I would like to add is China has 17 disputes with all its neighbor countries and has committed countless IP theft in the west without any consequences