Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
uziq
Member
+408|2504

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

blame western liberals for promoting market-based ideologies. we created the game and china are beating us at it.

do i hate black people? that’s news to me. i think china’s actions in africa are concerning enough; i’ve already mentioned that they’ve bugged and are spying on all the shiny new parliament buildings they’ve been building, ‘gratis’. but they’re not going to steamroll the west using military force, which is what dilbert’s rhetoric frequently invokes.

the west spent 30 years trying to open up china to market ideas and now we don’t like that they’re top dog at it. whoops.

i note australia is still dependent on their trade and we are all posting here on devices made in chinese sweatshops by serfs. that’s not irrelevant whataboutism. we have dragged them into the world system and need to think intelligently about how to disentangle ourselves, if that’s to be the political objective. i can’t see it happening myself.
We may say that military force is outmoded but also have to acknowledge that Chinese military spending is going through the roof, and that the constant cyberwarfare under the surface between the Chinese and the west can turn very ugly very quickly, even accidentally.
china is a threat, absolutely. but this escalating rhetoric about china ‘enslaving’ and ‘conquering’ the west is hyperbolic in the extreme. it’s in no one’s interests to devolve into full-scale military conflict. why does dilbert keep fearing a china man leaping through his parents’ window with an armed grenade? it’s complete fucking nonsense.

everyone engages in cyberwarfare and espionage. the last time i checked, the US was the one sending aircraft carriers to the china sea and massing their forces in the region, not china sending gunboats up the hudson bay. this idea that china are a unique military threat, made off the back of a century of ‘pax americana’, is fucking hilarious. hasn't america been sabotaging nuclear reactors in iran and deploying widespread surveillance all over the world?

the eminent global order is facing change. i would rather america lead the world than china. no question. but china aren’t the one with a long history of regime toppling, assassinations, client states with military dictators, hijacking or destabilising foreign elections globally, etc. calling them ‘the aggressor’ in the context of the cold war is fucking laughable. china was the least aggressive player in the entire 19th and 20th centuries. even napoleon noted what a stroke of good fortune it was that the china dragon slept and left everyone alone.

Last edited by uziq (2021-07-28 09:13:09)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,746|5158|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

China is catching up, and as Chinese gear is cheap as shit I'm sure they get a lot more for the money.

China has deployed its forces fairly successfully - Korea and Vietnam - they didn't lose anyway.

Now they're becoming more belligerent and reaching outwards.
china sided with allies in korea and vietnam. in both cases they were popular movements with widespread popular support. why do you keep presenting them as ‘the aggressor’ for defending socialists on their doorstep? what business did america have in vietnam for fuck’s sake, other than pure ideology and their own vested interests?

i’m not siding with communist china or suggesting north korea is a swell place. but how fucking blinkered do you have to be to scaremonger about china supporting popular elected governments on their doorstep? america and macarthur wanted to nuke the korean peninsula into a permanent stone age ffs. but you’re afraid of china because their military make glossy tv spots. OK.
In both cases were they not fomented and resourced by the Chinese?
In both cases sweeping down from the Chinese border?
#FreeBritney
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,746|5158|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

but china aren’t the one with a long history of regime toppling, assassinations, client states with military dictators, hijacking or destabilising foreign elections globally, etc.
Isn't that the whole history of China before it became China?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Han_Expansion.png

If there's one thing Han Chinese don't do its invasion and assimilation.

Whats happening in Tibet, Hong Kong and soon Taiwan?
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+408|2504

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

China is catching up, and as Chinese gear is cheap as shit I'm sure they get a lot more for the money.

China has deployed its forces fairly successfully - Korea and Vietnam - they didn't lose anyway.

Now they're becoming more belligerent and reaching outwards.
china sided with allies in korea and vietnam. in both cases they were popular movements with widespread popular support. why do you keep presenting them as ‘the aggressor’ for defending socialists on their doorstep? what business did america have in vietnam for fuck’s sake, other than pure ideology and their own vested interests?

i’m not siding with communist china or suggesting north korea is a swell place. but how fucking blinkered do you have to be to scaremonger about china supporting popular elected governments on their doorstep? america and macarthur wanted to nuke the korean peninsula into a permanent stone age ffs. but you’re afraid of china because their military make glossy tv spots. OK.
In both cases were they not fomented and resourced by the Chinese?
In both cases sweeping down from the Chinese border?
ho chi minh didn't need china. he had massive popular support. france were as much of an influence on north vietnamese politics as china. ironically, it was european or japanese imperialism that spurred on and 'fomented' communist revolutions in manchuria, korea and indo-china -- that ideology which you tacitly support.

no, north korea were not 'fomented' by china. all of these countries had autochthonous revolutions. juche is not the same thing as maoism. which wasn't the same thing as the khmer rouge, or the failed communists in thailand or indonesia ... i could go on. did i mention, by the way, that america 'fomented' and funded a genocide in indonesia as part of the same cold war activity?

i think you'll find china was perfectly embroiled in its own internal struggles for most of the 20th century. russia (and even cuba) had more of an influence on international communism. china didn't send troops to angola or put missile bases in the gulf of mexico. for most of the century they were at war with their 'fellow' neighbouring communists ffs.

Last edited by uziq (2021-07-28 07:12:03)

uziq
Member
+408|2504

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

but china aren’t the one with a long history of regime toppling, assassinations, client states with military dictators, hijacking or destabilising foreign elections globally, etc.
Isn't that the whole history of China before it became China?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Han_Expansion.png

If there's one thing Han Chinese don't do its invasion and assimilation.

Whats happening in Tibet, Hong Kong and soon Taiwan?
this is like tracking the multi-generational influence of plantagenets or norsemen and concluding that white europeans are uniquely violent and threatening. yes, the han chinese have achieved something like hegemony after centuries of civil war and strife. i already said above they are much more interested in 'reintegrating' with taiwan or hong kong than with armed conflict with the west. dum dum.

tell me about the boxer rebellion next! it's just a wiki link away!

wait until you check out the medieval history of korea or japan! wowsers! lots of factional violence! they must be uniquely dangerous people!

Last edited by uziq (2021-07-28 07:10:42)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,917|5824|USA

Pulling a rough map of imperial Chinese stuff from like 2000 years ago and roughly stitching it into an argument about a modern government, is a very Dilbert thing to do. This, regardless of its dissonance with his distaste of history books, history teachers, and historians in general.

Of course it's good enough when he thinks he's making a point, and still wholly disregards the complexity of state successorships over the period of time between then and the PRC (that can fill more than 10-20 books).

Best you can really hope for is a picture of a yawning cat.
uziq
Member
+408|2504
modern-day korea is literally the outcome of a northern medieval kingdom assuming regional dominance over 2-3 southern kingdoms. that's where the name 'korea' comes from (gogoryeo). people in the southern provinces like jeolla still have marked ethnic, cultural and linguistic differences from the 'mainstream' korean identity in the northern kingdom (i.e. modern-day seoul). i guess because over 400-500 years this power struggle occurred ... koreans are uniquely dangerous.

wait until you read about the shogunates of japan. literal clan or ethnic bloodshed for centuries. modern-day japanese 'homogeneity' was only achieved through millenia of tribal/clan/factional warfare. very scary!

but tell me again how the han chinese are a threat to the world because *checks notes* there were centuries of consolidating power.

not like anything happened in europe along similar lines, eh? christian sectarianism? guelphs and ghibellines, as mentioned previously? ethnic struggles between groups? so easy to be alarmist when you are fucking historically illiterate.
uziq
Member
+408|2504
https://64.media.tumblr.com/54ed77fa82eef0bb0c0b634c017216b6/22b0c1d0eee2e594-51/s1280x1920/18b265870e89c024f29437f4fef45ebae1c2d89f.jpg

good ... GOD! the normans were the problem all along! they'll never stop with their bloodthirst until they enslave the world !

Last edited by uziq (2021-07-28 09:04:39)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,917|5824|USA

I see an arrow pointing to Jerusalem. It all makes sense when you think about it: the root of all worldly conflict.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,917|5824|USA

I should also add that it seems weird to be so reticent to talk about stuff from maybe even less than 100 years ago "because that's in the past now, useless material." But, "oh here's a map of a Han expansion in 100 BC."

like,

e: I don't think I'm bullying dilbert. I just want an explanation.
uziq
Member
+408|2504
dilbert doesn't know a fucking thing about the han expansion ca. 100 BC. he found a picture in 2 minutes and linked it to support his dumbfuck tabloid fearmongering.

the CCP army recruitment video is hosted by ... the sun. that's where dilbert really gets his information from on world history. red-top tabloids owned by the likes of murdoch et al. may as well link RT or al jazeera scaremongering about the USA.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+490|2772
Have any of you ever been arrested for domestic violence? I'm asking because you are all committing historical abuse.

Dilbert is right in the fact that China has committed ethnic cleansings on a scale that the Romans, Catholics, and Caliphates couldn't do. China was still expanding and conquering alongside the west in the 1800's. I don't feel like listing every act of Chinese aggression in the 20th century since we all know them. The major difference between western expansion and Chinese expansion is that western countries are mostly repentant for the past atrocities. Of course they aren't going to cut any poor places a check for all of the trouble but western countries are becoming increasingly not white and allowing critical reexaminations of their past. Critical race theory, Black Lives Matter, etc. There is no equivalent movements in China to reexamine their past or how their society is structured today. You can blame that on the CCP but the problem is still there. The mindset of China today is more like Nazi Germany than Roaring 20's USA.

I agree that the Chinese aren't going to enslave all of white humanity once they have the power to. And that's almost disappointing since white people as a collective kind of deserve it but whatever. China will increasingly look to usurp the west wherever it can due to their Nazi-like belief in destiny and racial superiority. However right or wrong anyone is doesn't matter at that point. There will be some conflict from it. And it is in the interest of all of humanity, white, black, brown, Azn even if the Chinese don't totally take control of the world's political economy.

Finally, Chinese leadership today is probably smart enough to not invade Africa like we invaded the Middle East. But the wise leadership that guided the U.S. during the Cold War is all gone too and look at who replaced it. 40 years down the line when Xi and Putin are both dead, and the Chinese economy reaches the point where it is as sclerotic as the western one, whose to say that there won't be a leader from there who will try to flex Chinese military power for domestic political gains like we do? Again, it's in everyone's best interest they don't have the capability.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+490|2772
We are losing the Olympics because all of the black players are quitting.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,917|5824|USA

I don't feel like I'm committing the historical abuses here. I pointed out that:

- plugging 2000 year old stuff into context against a modern government many successions past that time period is dumb
- attempting to leverage history like that in your favor after repeatedly railing against historians, teachers, and history books, is hypocritical, and especially silly when done incorrectly
- 2000 year old stuff fine; much more recent stuff, "oh we can't talk about that, it's ancient history now" rofl

Further, dilbert for the past year has made super-unhelpful commentary on Chinavirus and "filthy Indians." Bigoted rants and comments on them can to some extent fold into the race thread, no?
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,746|5158|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

modern-day korea is literally the outcome of a northern medieval kingdom assuming regional dominance over 2-3 southern kingdoms. that's where the name 'korea' comes from (gogoryeo). people in the southern provinces like jeolla still have marked ethnic, cultural and linguistic differences from the 'mainstream' korean identity in the northern kingdom (i.e. modern-day seoul). i guess because over 400-500 years this power struggle occurred ... koreans are uniquely dangerous.

wait until you read about the shogunates of japan. literal clan or ethnic bloodshed for centuries. modern-day japanese 'homogeneity' was only achieved through millenia of tribal/clan/factional warfare. very scary!

but tell me again how the han chinese are a threat to the world because *checks notes* there were centuries of consolidating power.

not like anything happened in europe along similar lines, eh? christian sectarianism? guelphs and ghibellines, as mentioned previously? ethnic struggles between groups? so easy to be alarmist when you are fucking historically illiterate.
Han Chinese have thousands of years of history of toppling and assimilating their neighbours.
Recently they've done it to Tibet, had a good tries in Korea and Vietnam.

Centuries of consolidating power - I'm sure the Borg step back to consolidate now and then, must mean they're OK and not a threat.
During that period the Chinese were also knocked back repeatedly by Britain and Russia, its not as if they weren't trying.
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+408|2504
the english have thousands of years of history of toppling and assimilating their neighbours. what do you think the fucking united kingdom is?

none of it has any bearing on china's geopolitical ambitions in the 21st century.

cite some 13th century welsh nationalist historian about how big and scary the english are!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,746|5158|eXtreme to the maX
I'm fine with the english being on top, we brought civilisation to the world, and the Maxim gun, why would you think the chinese don't want the same?
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+408|2504
OK. good job mr. historian. link some more maps from the 2nd century in support of your racist theses.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,746|5158|eXtreme to the maX
Yes yes, white people bad, everyone else good.
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+408|2504
china is, almost without question, the worst state on earth today. china is bad.

but china isn't bad because of *checks notes* the movements of the ethnic han peoples from ca. 100 BC. you are so fucking dumb.

your analysis of major geopolitics today seems to be some vague ahistorical 'chinese communists are evil' line from 'the last century'. you try to discuss east asian history when the extent of your research and knowledge on the topic is seeing a hollywood movie about fu manchu.
Larssen
Member
+70|940
I raise you north korea, eritrea, the sudanese governments, mali, libya - the race to the bottom in governments is deep.

China is committing atrocities on the largest/most industrial scale though. But it's more subtle and subversive.
uziq
Member
+408|2504
i don't mean 'worse' as in 'failed state' or 'totalitarian nightmare', but, yes, on balance ... the fact of their size, influence, current political direction, etc. i would say china is much more worrying and has much worse potential than an eritrea. i agree that living in eritrea would be a helluva lot worse than being part of the upwardly mobile, patriotic new chinese middle class.

i'm not a china apologist, is what i'm saying. i will never visit that place or see much to desire there. but if we're going to analyse the next century in geopolitics, let's not start talking about the han chinese's history in the fourth century or china's support for north vietnam. that is dumb and totally irrelevant to the current picture. they are not even hard ideological allies anymore. it's not the cold war.

Last edited by uziq (2021-07-29 07:26:18)

uziq
Member
+408|2504
It’s not difficult to see how poverty became racialised. Maryland was a slave state, though not a confederate one. White people fled the city before capital left, taking flight in the 1950s from desegregation, and in the 1960s from riots. In 1950 Baltimore was 76 per cent white; today it is 27 per cent white, and the white people who left took their resources with them. In American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass (1993), Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton described five ‘distinct dimensions’ by which segregation might be measured: unevenness, which is the degree to which African Americans are over-represented in specific areas; exposure, the level of contact, or lack of contact, between blacks and whites in a neighbourhood; clustering, the extent to which black areas adjoin or are ‘scattered about in a checkerboard fashion’; concentration, whether a minority group occupies a very small area of a city; and centralisation, how close blacks live to the city centre. Massey and Denton labelled the metropolitan areas that scored highly on at least four measures as ‘hypersegregated’. Baltimore scored highly on all five, particularly centralisation and isolation. ‘Within a large, diverse and highly mobile post-industrial society,’ the authors concluded, ‘blacks living in the heart of the ghetto are among the most isolated people on earth.’

There are fewer hypersegregated cities in the US today than thirty years ago, but Baltimore remains one, and it is getting worse. Massey and Denton found its racial segregation particularly resistant to class advancement – even when black people earned more money it made relatively little difference to the degree of segregation they experienced. The idea that blacks could improve their circumstances by working hard at school, going to college and getting a good job was ‘movie stuff’, according to Antonio Shropshire, a drug dealer who routinely bribed police officers and partied with GTTF officers before being arrested on federal charges. ‘Very few make it out of the hood that way. Most of them do what they see – either become a killer or drug dealer. Their uncle, cousin, or friend of the family sells drugs, and the son sees that money and says: “I’m tired of living poor.”’ A third of young black men are unemployed compared to a tenth of young white men; black people earn on average just over half as much as white people. In fourteen Baltimore neighbourhoods, life expectancy is lower than in North Korea. Poverty is shaped by race; so is crime.

The demand of Black Lives Matter and others to ‘defund the police’ follows the logic that addressing the causes of crime – by funding housing, drug rehabilitation, education and mental health services – and ending the process of stopping, searching, shooting, arresting and jailing will end the cycle of criminalisation. To police a place like Baltimore in the absence of a welfare state and during a ‘war on drugs’ is an exercise in futility, brutality and impunity. In 2014, 24-year-old Steven Loney was convicted for assault with a firearm, among other offences. At his sentencing, he told the judge:

You all keep sending me to jail. Send me to jail. Jail is making me worse. You all can’t tell that? I ain’t been on the streets. I been locked up my whole life ... They say I’ve been a substance abuser since I was seventeen. I’ve been locked up since I was nineteen years old, Your Honour. From nineteen to now, I’ve been home for 120 days. The government never offer me no treatment. They never did nothing. They wonder why I still do stuff. You sent me to the same problem. You sent me to Baltimore City Detention Centre, where all that’s going on. And, obviously, I need help. Ain’t nobody can give me a chance to help me.

He was given nine years.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v43/n15 … ut-hunting
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,917|5824|USA

"Racism is over. It's all in the past. No sense dwelling. Move on. Now go back to where you came from."
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,746|5158|eXtreme to the maX
In 1950 Baltimore was 76 per cent white; today it is 27 per cent white, and the white people who left took their resources with them.
Yes yes. White people bad.

The other way of looking at is that white people didn't bring wealth, they created it.
The real issue is black people seem unable to create wealth

The idea that blacks could improve their circumstances by working hard at school, going to college and getting a good job was ‘movie stuff’,
OK

the logic that addressing the causes of crime – by funding housing, drug rehabilitation, education and mental health services – and ending the process of stopping, searching, shooting, arresting and jailing will end the cycle of criminalisation.
The white man brought civilisation to most places in Africa, every one has regressed since they booted the white devils out.

I really don't think white people are the problem here.
#FreeBritney

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2021 Jeff Minard