Don’t dance around with indirect word salad. Just say what you think the disloyalty charge is about since you’ve already clearly stated corruption is insufficient qualification. Pointing to things you’ve clearly stated and asking you for further elaboration is not strawmanning.
Being against corruption is itself a political position. This idea that checking corruption can’t be genuine on its own terms because the process of doing so will inevitably involve politics is bizarrely contorted in its inherent logic 🤷🏻♂️
By far the most common distortion in how the average China pundit reads Chinese policy is whenever they see “boosting consumption” they presume that policymakers are talking about switching away from investment driven growth rather than repairing auxiliary demand dislocations.
-🇨🇳 caused the outbreak by constructing the 3 Gorges Dam, teh CCP deposed for it
-🇨🇺 turned “democratic” after being flooded by US refugees
-🇺🇸 leading world’s war on zombies
-🇮🇱 the only unscathed society because muh superior intelligence
The book is liberals’ Mein Kampf
@_linnamon_ the idea that the Chinese in 2006 are just a bunch of stupid flesh automatons who send human wave attacks of kids with knives against hordes of the undead while Israel is the bastion of peace and love and understanding was a uniquely American libshit viewpoint
I'll save you the read: Noah Smith's "argument", if you can call it so, is that the U.S. has lost any moral superiority over China, is building "a sort of gulag archipelago", attacks weaker countries and is run by people "far less competent" than the Communist Party.
His conclusion: "we" can still beat China, and the trick is "to let them beat themselves." Because it's China, you see, that apparently suffers from internal contradictions.
And all this after admitting, at the very start of his piece, that that he basically doesn't know anything about China.
You genuinely couldn't make this up. Puzzles me how anyone can still read this guy's slope unironically.
Anytime there’s a shitshow in global supply it’s producer states that can make things everyone needs which benefits the most. Producer power amplifies resilience and economic leverage.
Really good point. As fuel costs go up it changes the cost topology of global supply chain configurational efficiencies. The value of dispersing some activities into geographies with cheaper labor is no longer worthwhile relative to tradeoff cost of additional transit.
This is not just an AI scare story. It's about American Imperialism.
The US would have no business boarding a Chinese ship delivering anything to Iran.
This the price you pay for being collectively indifferent to the cabal of warmongering genocidal incompetent Zionist pedophile cannibals who own and run your country
*You* don't give a shit about them. They exist like everything else in your guys entire existence, as a contentless rhetorical device to own posters you dislike.
Una lógica increíblemente extraña: cuando la mayor potencia mundial es incapaz de salir de una guerra que ha iniciado imprudentemente, The Economist argumenta que la segunda mayor potencia, China, debería ser considerada responsable; de lo contrario, ¡es China la que está siendo irresponsable!
When you fuck up the dynasty it is widely recorded for example every Chinese kid has been forced to memorize this poem before even starting kindergarten
This story is actually far more important news for the Chinese economy than monthly growth figures, fwiw. The operational mechanics of China’s financial system is currently undergoing a fundamental structural transformation, something I’ve talked about for a number of years now.