- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws#Amawi_v._Pfluger...
From your link:
"Documentary filmmaker Abby Martin was invited to speak at an event at Georgia Southern University on February 28, 2020. She was supposed to be paid $1,000 for her speech. She was asked to sign a pledge to agree not to boycott Israel which she refused to do and her speaking arrangement was subsequently cancelled. She therefore announced on January 10, 2020 that she had filed a free speech lawsuit against the State of Georgia and Georgia Southern University over its anti-BDS law. She was represented by CAIR Legal Defense Fund and the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund. On May 24, 2021, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ruled in Martin's favor, holding that Georgia Southern violated her First Amendment rights."
From what I understand they are now trying to alter the law so that it works around this ruling. These laws appear to be easy to implement but once challenged they are shot down. I think more lawsuits need to occur in each state unfortunately. That way we have clear cut precedence.
Otherwise, false assumptions replace the facts: "US allies would never interfere with our domestic education system, only bad guys do that!".
> China sits on the U.N. Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations, which authorizes groups big and small to participate at U.N. functions. At its publicly held meetings, any representative can hold up an application. Chinese bureaucrats scour each group that comes before the committee, scrutinizing every nook and cranny of their websites for references to Taiwan, say researchers who’ve studied the committee. If groups don’t include Beijing’s preferred language, China asks the committee to request changes.
I like Orwell, but people schematize real things into his examples too much, especially 1984. It's better to pay attention to the real thing as it is.
For instance, I think it's a serious possibility that China will mainly use economic power to expand its empire, by using markets to foster dependency in ways you can't really do if you've swallowed free market propaganda and your main motive is profit. The end goal could be something like China at the center of the world, with its ideology and system having prestige and setting the standard, surrounded by clearly-subordinate tributaries. That'd be great if your main ideological commitment is to Chinese nationalism, but not so great if you care about anything else.
China gives you the illusion it can target its people toward enemies, but the truth is we dont care all that much to "expand an empire". We'd do the minimum if forced, as always.
If we could first make Hong Kong happy, that'd be a good first step :D
Then the question is: what are your commitments and which empire is closer to them?
Also, it's not exactly the US, since the US has a different underlying ideology, and US's commitment to free markets was successfully exploited by the Chinese in a way I don't think they'll be dumb enough to repeat.
Blaming war preparation on totalitarianism...
Do you know why CCP geared up military? Because the bombimg on Chinese embassy by US  and war plane collision off Chinese border .
That scared the shit out of CCP. It just shows that US always retain military option against them. And plant the deepest resentment towards US in Chinese citizens. CCP literally need to actively suppress the anti US sentiment to avoid affecting the business relationship.
 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_circulation
It is very scary in the Asia-Pacific region. But in recent times the wars of note have been America v. [various smoking craters]. In the local area, China, India, Japan & Korea all know how war works, and the SEA nations might be surprising.
It is early to start worrying about China starting something. It is a scarier thought imagining them responding to something else.
But India has nukes, Japan can probably produce nukes in short order, Korea is in a state of hyper-militarisation for unrelated reasons and the US, insofar as they are active in the region, have nukes.
It doesn't matter what the CCP wants, they might get away with Taiwan but it is hard to see what the follow up would be where Shanghai still gets to have skyscrapers. Most of China's success in the last 40 years has been economic.
It takes a lot more to be a credible nuclear threat than just having some U235 sitting around...
It has a space program with rockets, a nuclear power sector, etc. It's the thing you do when you want all the pieces for a potential nuclear weapons program without signaling that you're looking to develop a nuclear weapons program.
I think the current contemporary estimate is that Japan could assemble a functioning nuke in 6-12 months.
Yes and therefore it stands to reason that they probably already have weapons ready (but maybe in a disassembled state) and simply don't disclose it.
History tells us that countries can and do declare war when it would be illogical for them to do so. There was a running theory before WW1 that the economic interconnection of Europe made war impossible, which was obviously false.
Does this mean China is gearing up for war? No. But to declare that China can’t declare war is fairly ahistorical.
> China is not trying to emulate the us … disregarding the propaganda
Ironically, I’d argue that this is propaganda. “We’re not like that other power, we’re so much better” is pretty classic stuff.
Although I’d argue that China isn’t emulating America, I’d argue that China is emulating 19th century Britain with its debt diplomacy.
Granted, I haven't read a ton of analysis on this, but my guess would be that you do if you're going up against someone with their own thermonuclear bombs. If China drops some of their own thermonuclear weapons on Tokyo, what's Japan's response? Dropping a fission weapon? If they got to that level, I'm sure that would be considered an acceptable risk for China. The converse is also true. If Japan dropped the fission weapon first, they'd instantly have a bunch of thermonuclear warheads headed their way.
I don't think it works that way. Fission bombs are perfectly capable of leveling a city. If a city gets leveled, no one's going to shrug it off because it was done with the "wrong" kind of weapon.
IIRC, modern thermonuclear warheads have yields along the lines of a couple hundred kilotons. Even through theoretically they can be made much more powerful, in practice they aren't.
The only way for a country of that size to resist a superpower is to ensure that that superpower loses their capital if they dare bite.
That's not MAD. Also I'm not sure if it's even plausible that Taiwan could successfully target Beijing even if it had nukes. Would their system be able to survive a first strike? Would it be able to penetrate hundreds of miles of Chinese air defenses or defeat an ABM system? IIRC, ABM systems are far easier to build if you're willing to put nukes on the interceptors.
From my armchair, Taiwan's best bet is to create an Israeli-style reserve army that can mobilize most of the population to fight a short, intense war.
do they need to target beijing? Targetting guanzhou would already wipe out any gains from capturing taiwan.
That doesn't address the lack of MAD nor any vulnerability to a first strike.
It's worth noting that China isn't just "a larger power," it has a particular fixation on Taiwan. It may not be deterred as easily as you think. IIRC, Taiwan acquiring nuclear weapons is one of their stated red lines that would trigger a war.
If Taiwan managed to nuke a Chinese city when it's invaded, it would probably just make the Chinese madder.
P.S. Their military might not even be willing to invade if Taiwan is going to be lobbing nukes left and right, and possibly right into the invading force. Look at how China had to redrawn from their skirmish with India after they lose a few people to weather - and simply because the troops wanted to head home for Chinese New Year.
Cruise missile flying 100m off the ground.
For practical purposes, cruise missiles are the real wunderwaffe which is impossible to stop, not ballistic missiles.
So, they have the capacity to have produced nuclear weapons in the past or to produce them in the near future, but if they have any is somewhat unclear. Still, I would expect Shanghai to probably get nuked at some point if China invaded Taiwan.
Taiwans nuclear industry was decimated as a result with a lot of the research facilities getting shut down and a lot of aspiring Nuclear scientists leaving the country or switching industries.
> "There is no evidence that Taiwan possesses any nuclear weapons or any programs to produce them, although it does have the advanced technological ability necessary to develop nuclear weapons as well as the high-tech ability to enrich uranium or process plutonium."
It's also doubtful that Japan has any weapons grade plutonium left seeing that they handed over a bunch of it to the US in 2016.
"On 24 March 2014, Japan agreed to turn over more than 700 pounds (320 kg) of weapons grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium to the US, which started to be returned in 2016. It has been pointed out that as long as Japan enjoys the benefits of a "nuclear-ready" status held through surrounding countries, it will see no reason to actually produce nuclear arms, since by remaining below the threshold, although with the capability to cross it at short notice, Japan can expect the support of the US while posing as an equal to China and Russia.
On 29 March 2016, then-U.S. President candidate Donald Trump suggested that Japan should develop its own nuclear weapons, claiming that it was becoming too expensive for the US to continue to protect Japan from countries such as China, North Korea, and Russia that already have their own nuclear weapons. "
As to Japan having weapons grade plutonium or highly enriched uranium, 5 years is a long time in a weapons program. At it’s peak the US was pumping out hundreds of nuclear weapons a year.
Even Little Boy had 64kg of highly enriched uranium. You can't just highly enrich uranium and have no one notice it.
But EVEN IF you could. Delivering a nuclear warhead is a world of difference 1945 vs. 2021. Air defense systems are massively better, so you can't just fly to chinese airspace and have them not shoot you down. You can't just build a delivery system silently without testing it that penetrates chinas S-400 without problems.
Yeah you can build something in your backyard and then where are you going to blow it up at? Japan can hardly keep chinese fishing boats out of their own waters.
Further we don’t know what intelligence the PRC has gathered. If China believes Taiwan has nuclear weapons or the capacity to assemble them quickly, there is going to be very little change in rhetoric from China.
To your edit: any credible nuclear break out threat from TW would be taken out within 10minutes from PRC rocketry. Of all PRC redlines, the most serious are TW ones. PRC has fought with nuclear USSR and US over less important core interests while PRC wasn't nuclear. PRC will absolutely preemptively crush any TW nuclear efforts.
As to a preemptive strike that’s extremely unprecedented for China. It would definitely be considered at the highest levels, but would they act is a much larger question especially if they discovered functional nuclear weapons. Taiwan meanwhile benefits of China did such a strike on a non nuclear weapon manufacturing factory so could be giving them false intelligence etc. This stuff just has a lot more uncertainty than you might assume.
There is also more assumed uncertainty than reality. In terms of degrees of espionage, modern PRC's intelligence gathering on TW is probably the most comprehensive apparatus anywhere. Every few years, minister level intelligence assets get exposed in TW defense. There is blind assumption and there is consensus for those that follow the space. There aren't any credible analysis that suggests TW has hidden nukes or can conduct breakout nuke development without PRC being aware.
> would they act
See edit of all the times PRC acted, with explicit prior warnings on when core redlines are crossed. It's not only precedent but interventions are near certainty. Respectfully, TW trying to bait PRC with false nuclear proliferation is counterproductive, just about the only consensus security council states and current nuclear powers have is they don't want more mid-tier nations getting the bomb. Of all the reasons the PRC could get away with attacking TW with relatively little cost, stopping nuclear proliferation is at the top.
I keep seeing this argument. Let me explain why Taiwan will be free from China's attack for the next 30-50 years (long enough for Xi JinPing to expire)
- US protection. If there's one thing both parties in US agrees on, it's against China. Biden just emphatically committed protection for Taiwan and peace in the south east Asia. There are many US warships sailing up and down Taiwan straits. There are many military deals and cooperations with Taiwan. TSMC is a critical part of the world's electronic supply chain. Taiwan is a critical part of the island chain strategy to contain China, since it acts as an unsinkable carrier against China.
- United democracies. US and its many allies are now coordinating naval exercises in the Region. Japan. Australia. India. UK, France, and Germany now have warships in the region as well. South Korea and Taiwan are now increasing its military defenses. These firepowers are 90% of the world's military right now.
- China's military is only starting up. It doesn't even have capability to produce its own jet engines or carriers. Its strength lies in the large # of soldiers, which have to be transported. And its large # of ships, which are mostly coast guard/civilian level, and can be sank relatively easily. China's military is about 3-4 generations behind US, and currently is no match for the 10X power from US and its allies
- Taiwan as a fortified island. Fortified islands are hard to take, as evident in the modern war histories. There are only a few times in the year that China can safely cross the straits without fearing typhoons or rough sea. And landing only on a few spots. Especially if the island is armed with the latest war technologies from US, and has the missile capability to strike Beijing, or the three gorges dam which will then wipe out millions of Chinese. Taiwan is now producing domestic submarines, long range missiles, and ship missiles. You'll want to remember that Taiwan has very sophisticated electronic capabilities, so the arms it is starting to produce will be very good.
- China only gets one shot at attacking. After which, it will get economically sanctioned into oblivion by the world economies. Because otherwise Japan, South Korea, and other island nations near China can be attacked with similar attempts as well. Since China mainly imports most of its resources, and is export focused, it will sank into a deep economic depression filled with local riots.
The pursuit of independence is just pursuit of conflict. No one in China, Taiwan, and US, can alter that trajectory.
Even if Taiwan managed to gain independence, most likely Taiwan, China, and US would be severely damaged (assuming all parties are still sane enough to avoid a total nuclear armageddon), democracy would simultaneously deteriet in all 3 regions. As economic downturn inevitably results into worsening social orders (more dictatorship, or more chaos), there has not been a single exception in human history anywhere, period.
Well, I guess EU would be happy to see that happening. It's a gamble, but if plays out correctly, EU would be left as the sole superpower. Not a bad outcome.
China has enormous manufacturing capacity, but rather fragile supply to make use of it should the seas around it become warzones.
What actually causes issues for modern armies is relatively low tech guerilla warfare, as we've seen in nearly every war (that any country has engaged in, not just the US) since Vietnam especially, but the hints were there since the second Boer war.
Forget even nukes for a second, I don't think anyone has the stomach for a regular conventional war between modern nation states. We've seen the pictures of what cities looked like in Europe after WW2. Now add modern bombs and missiles. Imagine Shanghai or LA just completely flattened. It's not worth it.
I find the lessons of our reliance on air support in the context of Afghanistan an interesting lesson that our military hopefully learns from.
There is some good reporting that reported the total collapse of their army was partially because without the US they couldn't reach their bases or provide support, let alone maintain their planes & helos.
The US brass were even bragging the the Taliban couldn't use even our guns that were left behind since they take so much special maintenance.
What happens to our 'fancy' planes with electronics/software attacks? Do we even have the capability to drop bombs if something like that happens?
They got pretty damn close. I’d say the outcome involved a lot of luck.
CCP certainly looks like wanting peace, judging against US, which CCP has always been open about to surpass or at least excel...
Xi is seeking 3rd term, he's initiating populist moves to appeal to the masses. That's more or less it on top of some medium/long term strategic shifts to improve self sufficiency (from US) which takes time to unfold.
>preparing for war
That's still 15-30 years away over TW, and by that time PLA will be strong enough to deter a big war with US. PLA is modernizing and preparing for war because that's what competent militaries do. PLA has been incompetent for too long. Keep in mind PRC military budget is still ~2%, if it's preparing for war expect this to double/triple. Plus PRC has been selling off oil reserves to control oil prices. It would be hoarding if preparing for imminent war.
In a parallel universe, and completely unrelated note, my friends in China, thinks their country can finally stand-up against the west. They cannot be more proud of their country. There is also the sentiment that the West would not doing anything concrete against China
I can dig up figures and references if anyone interested
Edited with reference:
 Clam down on Apple Daily, the only pro-democratic (that I know of) news outlet in Hong Kong
 Directors of Apple Daily arrested
 65,000 applications of BN(O) visa, the visa for HKers to move to the UK. HK population is around 7.5M
 Youtubers exodus, for fear of government prosecution in the name of the national security or for whatever reason.
 230 Democrats quitting local council.
 There are around 479 local council in total. So about half of them quit
 People were arrested in the name of national security here and there. A charity, formed last year, providing inmate visiting service, will be dismissed. Only Chinese source available at the moment
 During the peak of mass migration in the 90s, 62,000 people per year moved away from HK. Compare with 65,000 moving to the UK in the first 6 months
Apple Daily (Chinese: 蘋果日報) was a tabloid-style newspaper published in Hong Kong from 1995 to 2021.
If apple daily is the only pro democracy, which is a tabloid style newspaper, the conclusion is that HK democracy is likely a very poor one.
If apple daily is not the only pro democracy news outlet, I think shutting it down is contributing to a healthy democracy.
>  Directors of Apple Daily arrested
It seems the market welcomes that...
It either means the market cares little about democracy, or Jimmy is not really the friend of democracy as himself proclaimed.
>  65,000 applications of BN(O) visa, the visa for HKers to move to the UK. HK population is around 7.5M
Let's how bad this compares to the 1990s after Tiananmen square... I think it probably wont surpass that. Note the 1992 peak is 66000 actually leaving, your number is just applications.
>  Youtubers exodus, for fear of government prosecution in the name of the national security or for whatever reason.
Similar to the above.
>  230 Democrats quitting local council.
They seem are disqualified on the new oath rule? Which says that if they do not take oath to be loyal to the HK government, they'll be disqualified. So they decide to resign first.
Well, I believe CCP is very happy that they gave up so easily...
>  People were arrested in the name of national security here and there. A charity, formed last year, providing inmate visiting service, will be dismissed. Only Chinese source available at the moment
Your link is about a non profit disbanded fearing of crackdown.
>  During the peak of mass migration in the 90s, 62,000 people per year moved away from HK. Compare with 65,000 moving to the UK in the first 6 months
I guess if HK economy were hurt enough because of this exodus, it helps to guide the democracy sentiment of the society.
> If apple daily is the only pro democracy, which is a tabloid style newspaper, the conclusion is that HK democracy is likely a very poor one.
Hong Kong doesn't have true democracy. On surface it might follow the British system . The chief executive, the equivalent of mayor, is elected by the election committee of 1,200 members . Slightly over half of the legislative council, the equivalent of the parliament, is the "functional constituency", which means those members are appointed by selected member of selected industries . Hong Kong has been pushing for universal suffrage every year. Every year, peaceful demonstration is seen on 1st of July to ask for reforming the election
> It seems the market welcomes that...
It is more nuanced. Some are market manipulation. Some wants to support Jimmy Lai. There were people spreading rumours on lihkg.com, the hong kong reddit, that buying stock of apple daily can financially support the company. There are people thinking the company will soon be de-listed, which is more likely true, hence want a piece of history by getting a physical stock. Some want to make a profit by riding the market trend hence perpetuating the rising trend.
> your number is just applications.
You are right. Some factor to consider:
- the numbers I quoted is for the UK only. US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan are the other company choices
- There are around 300,000 Canadian in HK. They can leave anytime . And there are many holders of other citizenship whom returned HK after the 90s migration, sensing that HK weren't as bad as imagined.
> They seem are disqualified on the new oath rule?
The new oath rule was imposed after the election if I remember correctly. And there is no governance over the execution of the rule. It's basically up to whoever in position thinks you violated the rule. No proof is needed.
> non profit disbanded fearing of crackdown.
I might have misused the term charity. Non-profit fearing crackdown is still wrong, right? It was a non-profit for visiting inmate, so they feel cared, after all
> it helps to guide the democracy sentiment of the society
People leaving the city are those either who care about democracy or who care about economy. So I hold opposite opinion. Time will tell.
I never really understand these pro-democracy people. On the one hand, they seem wholeheartedly believe in the noble ideology. On the other hand, they seem are so timid that their only reaction under concrete threat is fleeing away.
Did they forgot how the American Forefathers fight for their independence, freedom, and democracy?
Are they really this naive that CCP are going to hand over democracy to them?
As for HK economy, CCP can make Macau prosper, I see no chance HK economy can flop. Good luck with fleeing HK and demonstrate the "pro democracy"...
Even now, we're not out of the woods yet. The west is still dealing with the lingering effects of Trumpism and Covid has balance sheets and attentions. Consolidating power now while nobody in the world will really challenge them. The democrats can't survive a recession on top of the Afghanistan disaster and prolonged Covid. They're not going to really sanction China.
Trump is legitimately unstable and so selfish as to try to use the military and provocations - even on US soil he wanted to deploy forces - to win or fulfill his deluded post election craziness.
Just today excerpts came out of Woodward's new book; one revelation is General Milley called up his counterpart in China, kind of roguely, in a Nixon esque attempt to say hey, this guy is freaking crazy let's use bureaucracy to try to maintain status quo and go around any dangerous orders.
China has been way less cautious over the past four or five years, and I do not think Trump being in office is a coincidence.
At the same time, Trump is deeply insecure, and is attached to the idea of military power somehow reflecting his own masculinity. Look at his tweets in response to North Korea's provocations, for instance, and how he made them all about him personally. So I think China was careful not to take action that would cause Trump to feel slighted or emasculated and feel a need for direct military action.
So within that narrow area of military pride and perhaps domestic manufacturing, Trump represented a real threat of retaliation and escalation, but beyond that he was pretty much asleep at the wheel.
At least we know that China calls Trump Trump the nation(china) builder.
Past couple of months?
Try past 40 years...
One of my earliest childhood concrete memories of watching a news event of global importance was the CNN, NBC and BBC coverage of the Tienanmen Square massacre.
I remember 15-20 years ago, my friends in China had hope that eventually it would open up but there's no longer any hope there. The few friends who are still outspoken (and are much much more careful than they used to be) now have no hope of this whatsoever.
Remember '03 when two thirds of Americans seemed utterly convinced that Iraq was an existential threat to the security and prosperity of the United States? Or '21, when half of Americans have suddenly remembered that they actually want other people's children to continue fighting a forever war in Afghanistan?
I did notice back then that graduate students who had completed undergrad in China tended to be much less pro CCP and not buying that much into things. This does seem to have changed.
There are many reasons you don't hear how majority Chinese think, it could be majority of them doesn't read/speak english, it could be toxic comments and community environment prevented them from speaking out, it could be media biased reports, and not mention a lot of advanced countries' supremacy.
If you are not faimilar with that, try to talk with people lived in super rich neighborhood and super poor neighborhood, you'd be amazed how difference people really think and speak out.
If the same thing happens in different regions/countries of the world are treated differntly, in a lot of ways, is called bias, not a serious thinking.
> I remember 15-20 years ago, my friends in China had hope that eventually it would open up but there's no longer any hope there. The few friends who are still outspoken (and are much much more careful than they used to be) now have no hope of this whatsoever.
Yes. I don't think they were ever exactly for liberalization, but Xi took a hard turn against it (and made that policy): https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/20/world/asia/chinas-new-lea....
Liberals (both the American and more classical kind) often seem to assume their ideals will eventually prevail, but nothing guarantees that.
History has no single evidence that pure ideology movement can shift public opinion substantially and maintain that change in serious historically meaningful time period (let's say 50 - 100 years).
I will go even further. What China is doing may become something US will at least partially adopt.
Aside from earning more profit doing business in China. Is there other support from US business?
Xi sees that too and is busy trying to knock China's wealthy citizens down a couple of notches.
> Xi sees that too and is busy trying to knock China's wealthy citizens down a couple of notches.
What do billionaire-wealthy citizens have to do with prosperity or democracy (besides the fantasies of pro-billionaire propaganda)?
I have long argued that too much power in one individual is a bad thing ( and that includes billionaires ).
I was talking more broadly about upper-class people in China. Generally anyone who lives in a tier 1 city and has a quality of life approaching that of people in developed nations.
It's easy to keep poor people happy through continued economic growth but once people reach a certain level of material wealth they're going to start demanding more personal freedoms.
I don't believe there is an active war plan in place. But it looks like at least CCP is laying the foundation for a war, so that there might be chance for US to concede wholy to relinquish their support for Taiwan Independence.
Well, I guess that's better than a nuclear war.
There is an island across a tiny strait away from China’s mainland that literally claims… the mainland. It has existed for 80 years. It’s now kinda sorta being dealt with as a power would, but even that’s questionable, and even that strait is not even important to the region. This entire struggle is happening while Malacca is just sitting right there in the US’s Infinity Gauntlet with the Hormuz, Suez, Panama etc. Wild.
As for how long is the actual distance, well, that doesn't matter much.
SCS is an export-everything/import-food-energy-also-basically-everything route for China.
Gulf of Mexico + Caribbean would be a far closer comparison with whatever non North American US exports that exist going out through there, and eg Cuba, Venezuela & all the other nations vs California’s fish.
But Lenin talks about using capitalism to increase the productive powers of a nation and use the generated surplus values to help the people get cheap healthcare, infrastructure and a better common prosperity. Instead of seeing the capitalist stash away in a bank account not being trickled down to general public.
If I'm not mistaken and I'm pretty sure if I am people will correct me, he actually praised capitalism for being a much more efficient economic system than what humanity had in feudalism and mercantilism. However he believed that capitalism has a hard cap where it starts to devour itself. He lived in a time when people where buying bonds from countries that did not exist.
> Capitalism is the market and the market are people.
Also I was saying what the goal wasn't.
Do you understand now?
China can sometimes seem arbitrary but its much easier to think of it as a theme park than what we respect as governments. At a theme park, run by a corporation, you understand there are rules that can be enforced, your participation is limited and conditional, anything exploitative or erotic will be policed swiftly and heavily, and some exhibits are cordoned off and empty. Even if we want to imagine that everyone is woefully oppressed actively thinking about how oppressed they are, the day to day experience can actually be pretty pleasant and everyone also understands that it would be dumb to challenge the stewards of the park.
It is extremely incorrect, untoward, and downright harmful to draw parallels between the CCP and, say, Busch Gardens.
In a theme park, run by a corporation, I understand that the proprietors of said park will not: drag me to a detention camp; do the same, or worse, for the unfortunate souls who share my relation; imprison and enslave millions of ethnic/religious minorities; make extremely aggressive overtures against other "theme parks," to the tune of building artificial land to claim (in whole or part) the international commons.
Xi was sent to hard labor in the countryside as a youth, and then went on to pretty strict education. He sees younger people today as weak and fun-seeking and that doesn't sit well with him and the other bigwigs. (This is all my own conjecture, take it with a grain of salt)
Where did you get this?
Socialism is installed in China in 1960s, as we were told in text book.
If there was such a plan to start socialism in China in 2050, that must be invented after 2008 after I left China.
As for what is really socialism, the definitions I see so far are as colorful as capitalism. You might be referring some definition of socialism you saw from Chinese source, or some translated sources?
It's becoming more and more clear that China is more of a political imagination for venting, at least on HN.
This article goes into a bit of detail on the current plan, which is now to reach the final state of socialism by 2050.
This has been a key aspect of internal CPC ideology since the 70s, so I'm not sure what you consider "venting".
I was born in China. I searched around for 2050 and all it shows was reach socialism modernization. The key is modernization. Not socialism.
Socialism as a social and economic order already reached it's height before 1980s...
Otherwise it looks like a sales pitch.
The factory complex Tesla has built in Shanghai has been funded with several billion dollars of local debt. If China were to seize the factory then Tesla would simply stop servicing that debt.
The fact is, China prevents money from leaving their country, so any western company in China is kind of a farce, because they can’t actually take their money out if they make any. What they do hope to get out of China though is intellectual property, which can pass boundaries without taxes.
If Musk really has a utopian goal of decreasing emissions, he couldn’t care less if China took over Tesla China, because he won’t be making actual money from Tesla China anyway. Instead, he hopes that manufacturing innovations and ideas can be shared to his other factories.
If china took over tesla China and didn’t share innovations, that would just be stupid on their part, because the rest of the world would be working together and sharing innovation without them.
West: in the sense everything but China.