A couple of NPR executives, one now a former NPR executive, have been stung on tape criticizing the GOP and the Tea Party types. They are scary and racist, it seems. If that isn't an argument to completely defund NPR, then there isn't one at all. When the left has fell to simple hate mongering, and the label racist is a sure liberal move in that regard, then they have absolutely no credibility as a journalistic organization.
We are using less gas recently due to higher prices. That's kind of a good/bad thing, isn't it? It saves, or at least holds on reserve, a bit of petrol while keeping pollutants down. Then, too, traveling less means spending less, which is also a good/bad question: it keeps us from spending money on tripe, but surely can't help the general economy. Is there a real middle ground on questions such as these? Or does it all just devolve into trusting individual decisions?
We'll go with the individual choices.
China now has the world's largest mall, with a whopping 1% occupancy. Now Beijing intends to build 45 more airports, in response to the travel boom and the presumption that airports bring prosperity to the locals. They seem to working on the "If you build it, they will come" principle. Yet the one things you cannot easily do is command people to go somewhere or spend their money. That is the entire reason why command economies cannot work. You may well build the largest shopping center anywhere (which itself is a bit odd, considering that China is supposedly still communist) but that can't ensure success. All that does is mislead the people into thinking that their government actually does provide for them.
That's all, until the morrow, friends.
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
The China Dilemma
China has forbidden anti-government activist Liu Xiaobo from leaving to accept the Nobel Peace Prize. His wife, Liu Xia, is under house arrest with no contact with the outside world and will not be allowed to go to Oslo to accept the award on his behalf. Further, a small number of nations, told by China that there would be 'consequences' if they were represented at the ceremony, have declined to attend.
Meanwhile, many believe that within the next few years China will have the world's largest economy, which translates into that if we play nice we may get a share of the pie. Playing nice will also help Beijing turn away from its past and become more like us.
And then there's that whole North Korean problem, which China seems to feel can be solved through negotiation. When Japan and the West balk, we are told, essentially, that we're the ones in error. This from a nation, to go more or less full circle, arrests those who like free speech too much while also limiting the amount and type of Internet access its citizens may have. And all with no apparent concern for how the rest of the family of nations feel. What are we supposed to make of this?
Simply that China is interested in China to the exclusion of all else. Those in power there want to keep their power. What that bodes for the rest of civilization is subject to debate. But know this: great power and wealth, held by an oligarchy, cannot in the long run help the causes of peace and justice without a lot of outside pressure. Especially when dealing with an oligarchy intent on pleasing itself.
Meanwhile, many believe that within the next few years China will have the world's largest economy, which translates into that if we play nice we may get a share of the pie. Playing nice will also help Beijing turn away from its past and become more like us.
And then there's that whole North Korean problem, which China seems to feel can be solved through negotiation. When Japan and the West balk, we are told, essentially, that we're the ones in error. This from a nation, to go more or less full circle, arrests those who like free speech too much while also limiting the amount and type of Internet access its citizens may have. And all with no apparent concern for how the rest of the family of nations feel. What are we supposed to make of this?
Simply that China is interested in China to the exclusion of all else. Those in power there want to keep their power. What that bodes for the rest of civilization is subject to debate. But know this: great power and wealth, held by an oligarchy, cannot in the long run help the causes of peace and justice without a lot of outside pressure. Especially when dealing with an oligarchy intent on pleasing itself.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Perilous Times on the Korean Peninsula
The United States and South Korea are going ahead with planned military exercises in the Yellow Sea just days after a North Korean bombardment killed two South Korean marines and two civilians. Meanwhile, protests in South Korea have led to the resignation of that nation's defense minister, and promises from the commander of their Marines that revenge will be certain and severe.
Yet these are ultimately mere sideshows to the real issue, the one drawing relatively scant attention in American eyes. The real question surrounding the recent escalation of Korean hostilities is, how will China respond to how we respond?
Beijing has said, basically, that it has no problems with the military exercises so long as they do not violate its economic zone. Still, it would appear we need more than that. We need the Chinese to reign in their ally in order to cool passions in the region.
Apparently they have admitted, privately, that they believe North Korea has gone too far. But how does that help defuse the situation? It would seem that, in the long run, someone with enough sway to reign in Pyongyang offers the only creditable method of averting further turmoil on the Korean peninsula. China is likely the only nation which can offer a useful leash on the Northern will.
So, then, the most pertinent question may be: has China westernized herself enough to be willing to call out her nearest and longest ally? Or, perhaps, is China testing western resolve by proxy?
We are quick and willing to decry what look like mere reckless actions on the part of a rogue nation. We may be well to fear that such things are not rogue at all, but calculated. In the end, what matters most is not exactly how this situation is resolved, but in who is pulling strings.
Yet these are ultimately mere sideshows to the real issue, the one drawing relatively scant attention in American eyes. The real question surrounding the recent escalation of Korean hostilities is, how will China respond to how we respond?
Beijing has said, basically, that it has no problems with the military exercises so long as they do not violate its economic zone. Still, it would appear we need more than that. We need the Chinese to reign in their ally in order to cool passions in the region.
Apparently they have admitted, privately, that they believe North Korea has gone too far. But how does that help defuse the situation? It would seem that, in the long run, someone with enough sway to reign in Pyongyang offers the only creditable method of averting further turmoil on the Korean peninsula. China is likely the only nation which can offer a useful leash on the Northern will.
So, then, the most pertinent question may be: has China westernized herself enough to be willing to call out her nearest and longest ally? Or, perhaps, is China testing western resolve by proxy?
We are quick and willing to decry what look like mere reckless actions on the part of a rogue nation. We may be well to fear that such things are not rogue at all, but calculated. In the end, what matters most is not exactly how this situation is resolved, but in who is pulling strings.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Canada vs. China
The Winter Olympic Games began yesterday, and the differences between the opening ceremonies in Vancouver and those in Beijing at the start of the 2008 Summer Olympics were telling. It was a stark contrast of East vs. West, and the way of the west offered a compelling story of how much better off we are here.
The Beijing event, though impressive, was one of precision. It was mechanical; it was a display of what can be done when an authority holds absolute power over a people. Further, it was done a point: to show the world what a marvel Red China has become.
Vancouver's ceremonies on the other hand contained a sense of awe. They were an attempt to display the human experience of wonder at those things greater than ourselves. It was as though Canada was not trying to bring attention to herself, but rather offering us, through unique symbolism, a perspective on what was really important: friends and friendly competition, but most of all, a glimpse at what unites everyone on Earth. It was compelling because it spoke to the soul. Beijing, on the other hand, spoke to power.
Canada addressed celebration; China addressed order. It is well and fitting that we have such good neighbors to the north.
The Beijing event, though impressive, was one of precision. It was mechanical; it was a display of what can be done when an authority holds absolute power over a people. Further, it was done a point: to show the world what a marvel Red China has become.
Vancouver's ceremonies on the other hand contained a sense of awe. They were an attempt to display the human experience of wonder at those things greater than ourselves. It was as though Canada was not trying to bring attention to herself, but rather offering us, through unique symbolism, a perspective on what was really important: friends and friendly competition, but most of all, a glimpse at what unites everyone on Earth. It was compelling because it spoke to the soul. Beijing, on the other hand, spoke to power.
Canada addressed celebration; China addressed order. It is well and fitting that we have such good neighbors to the north.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
