"ChiCom" Demystified

[*T*]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

My summary:- the Chinese on the whole view their government as legitimate & civil unrest is only at the margin.

Thanks for an interesting post.

[Master Shake]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

They could not comprehend why Ahmadinejad could win the election in Iran. How could this Islamic extremetist, evil man who wants Israel "wipe off the map"(actually He was misquote by the western media propoganda machine: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...xt=va&aid=4527), American's enemy number one(or two) win the support of majority of Iranian people? CNN ran 7x24 news reports alleging "election fraud", yet failed to provide any concrete evidence for the allegation.

They could not comprehend why Hamas could wind the election in Gaza Strip. They are the terrorists, for God's Sake! Are Gaza people all terrorists?

The could not comprehend the communists in Red China would have the support of the majority of people in China. Anyone mentioning the fact are called "ChiCom apologist", or they must be paid by the the communist government.

I can certainly comprehend all of that, just as I can comprehend that Adolph Hitler came to power via the ballot box and had the support of a majority of the German people.

[sutro]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

Hitler won a plurality. The last election on the table was a few days after the Reichstag was burned and habeas corpus and other basic rights had been suspended. I would not characterize the Nazi rise to superior, democratic, free and fair electioneering.

Nazi Party Election Results
Date	Votes	Percentage	Seats in Reichstag	Background
May 1924	1,918,300	6.5	32	Hitler in prison
December 1924	907,300	3.0	14	Hitler is released from prison
May 1928	810,100	2.6	12
September 1930	6,409,600	18.3	107	After the financial crisis
July 1932	13,745,800	37.4	230	After Hitler was candidate for presidency
November 1932	11,737,000	33.1	196
March 1933	17,277,000	43.9	288	During Hitler's term as Chancellor of Germany

Nor, Amadinejad's rise, either. Both "candidates" positioned themselves with extreme rhetoric in the service of nationalism. And both countries are/were
in conflict with the West, Germany over WWI denoumout and Iran over the coup in 1954.

[Master Shake]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

Hitler won a plurality. The last election on the table was a few days after the Reichstag was burned and habeas corpus and other basic rights had been suspended. I would not characterize the Nazi rise to superior, democratic, free and fair electioneering.

Nazi Party Election Results
Date	Votes	Percentage	Seats in Reichstag	Background
May 1924	1,918,300	6.5	32	Hitler in prison
December 1924	907,300	3.0	14	Hitler is released from prison
May 1928	810,100	2.6	12
September 1930	6,409,600	18.3	107	After the financial crisis
July 1932	13,745,800	37.4	230	After Hitler was candidate for presidency
November 1932	11,737,000	33.1	196
March 1933	17,277,000	43.9	288	During Hitler's term as Chancellor of Germany

Nor, Amadinejad's rise, either. Both "candidates" positioned themselves with extreme rhetoric in the service of nationalism. And both countries are/were
in conflict with the West, Germany over WWI denoumout and Iran over the coup in 1954.

Correct. Note that I didn't say that Hitler won a majority of the vote which brought him to power. From what I've read, he did have majority support in the early days of the Third Reich.

[sishya]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

Most Indians never believe the chinese especially after the Indo-China war of 1962. They talk one thing, while thinking and acting differently. I was not born then, but my elders told, China were all the while saying there was no territorial dispute, but then suddenly will claim anything and attack.

I can never trust them, If their Govt has any internal polical or economic problems, they can always whip up using mass propoganda and start a Taiwan issue or India issue. Look here - the starteer of this thread is showing some maps and claiming territory - how convenient ?

[Slimprofits]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

What the election of Obama shows, in my view is that the basis for trust has shifted some in America, to what can be portrayed via various media, most of which involve video of the person speaking and being in public. No doubt Obama speaks and carries himself in public better than McCain.

Awesome post.

[MulaMan]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

I thought you economists where all about numbers, statistics, trends, and believe historical data has value?

Can anyone find examples of an ethnic minority (skin color) being elected to the top political office in any country? (not gender)

from Wikipedia:

China Presidents: All Chinese (I don't see any Tibetan guys in the list)
Japan: All Japanese (no anglo-saxons nor black guys)
Canadian PMs : All White (most look anglo-saxon)
British PMs : All White (anglo-saxon looking)
French PMs: All White (french looking)
America : All White except Obama (1/2 white, skin 100% black)

If you believe Obama's skin color is not significant nor reflective of an American virture, then you don't deserve to live in America (assuming that you do).

If Obama was not black, I believe Clinton would have won. The Clintons underestimated America in the aggregate - as it seems many of you do.

There was a large anti-establishment and anti-republican and next generation vote. Obama positioned himself as the polar opposite of the McCain/Bush/Cheney/Clinton grumpy middle-age white man/femal political establishment type.

It is 8 years of George Bush's poor speaking skills that makes Obama look like a political God - go back and look at the public speaking skills of many prior Presidents, most seem within the ballpark of Obama.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

If you believe Obama's skin color is not significant nor reflective of an American virture, then you don't deserve to live in America (assuming that you do).

I live in America, and I'm proud to be an American. I like to think that I vote based on the views, capabilities and qualifications of the candidates, not on their skin color, either way.

As Martin Luther King said "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

If Obama was not black, I believe Clinton would have won.

Likely so. And if both Obama and Clinton had been non-charismatic old white men, there's a good chance that McCain would have won. Not all political facts are to be held in the highest honor.

[touchring]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

Are there are blacks or native american in Canada or America ranked among the wealthiest people in the country?

http://www.uyghuramerican.org/forum/...ead.php?t=8530

Once China's eleventh richest person, Mrs Kadeer lives in exile in the US. She travels the world and has become the voice for the Uyghurs, who she says have been subjected to systematic "cultural genocide" for almost six decades in China.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/books/23fren.html

On one level Ms. Kadeer’s book is a routine account of recent Chinese history. Much more interesting is its core autobiographical story: the remarkable rise from modest roots to a life as, the author claims, the wealthiest woman in China and a politically prominent member of the National People’s Congress.

I thought you economists where all about numbers, statistics, trends, and believe historical data has value?

Can anyone find examples of an ethnic minority (skin color) being elected to the top political office in any country? (not gender)

from Wikipedia:

China Presidents: All Chinese (I don't see any Tibetan guys in the list)
Japan: All Japanese (no anglo-saxons nor black guys)
Canadian PMs : All White (most look anglo-saxon)
British PMs : All White (anglo-saxon looking)
French PMs: All White (french looking)
America : All White except Obama (1/2 white, skin 100% black)

[skyson]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

Thanks for all your comments. Sorry for the late reply. In the middle of moving, very busy.

Regarding the Amethyst Incident, I was aware that it was a small vessel. Instead of "battleship", I should have used "battle ship", as I really meant :"military vessel". The significance of the incident was not about the size of the ship, but it was the political will that Mao wanted to display to the west: STAY AWAY, OR ELSE.

In 1942, the British won the Opium War over China, and China was forced to sign the NanJing Treaty, and the major points were: 1.the British gained the right to "export" opium to China. 2. Hong Kong would be leased for 99 years, and then ceded to the British. Oh yeah, you read that right: this is NOT the "War On Drugs" in which the US government fought to stop drug trafficking. It IS the war the gave the British(and Americans too) the right of trafficking drugs! This was in any sense, mafia drug lord nations using brute force to gain monetary benefits, totally unjust and immoral.

Since them, the western powers would use any excuse to play this money-making game: find or make an excuse -> start a war ->demand "special trade considerations" and payment of "indemnity of war". This reached a climax when in 1902, after the Boxer Rebellion, the "coalition of willing" forced the Qing Chinese government to sign a treaty for payment of 450 million taels of silver (approximately once ounce for every Chinese people), to be paid in a course of 39 years, at 4% interest rate(would roughly double at end of term).

The Chinese as a people had fallen into the hands of the western vampire, their blood and dignity being slowly sucked away.

As it was not enough, in the 1930s, came the Japanese invasion, and the Rape of Nanking, where 300,000 Chinese civilians and surrendered troops were brutally slaughtered. The Chinese people were pushed to the brink of total collapse, psychologically and physically.

This is the background of Amethyst Incident. The thunder of the cannons, had terminated the days of western imperialism in China. If this incident signaled the end of our national nightmare, Korean War would have instilled confidence back into our collective soul.

In 1950, Mao's troops entered Lhasa, and simultaneously, hundred of thousands of army forces gathered at the north shore of Taiwan Straight. The PLA was in the advance stage of preparation for the Taiwan Offensive, the final thrust of the Chinese civil war.

At this very juncture, Korean War broke out. This caused great dilemma to the Communist leadership. Historically, the Korea Peninsula was considered the sphere of influence of China, and the ideal staging place of invasion into the mainland by foreign powers (eg. Japanese). To go ahead with the "Taiwan Offensive" or re-deploy the troops to the northern border? This decision was made easy by the Americans, when President Truman ordered the 7th Fleet to the Taiwan Straight. This action dashed any hope of PLA carrying out an effective cross sea invasion, as they had no meaningful means of neutralize the American sea power. Two hundred thousand troops were promptly deployed to the Korean border, while General McArthur's troops crossed the 38 Parallel and advanced to the north, despite repeated warning from the Chinese government. Clash of the "imperialism" and "communism" forces, in the mountain ranges of North Korea, ensured.

Most of the peasant soldiers of the "People's Volunteer Army(PVA)" had never seen a white guy in their life, and that is why they gave the name of "American Devils", as that was the closest thing they could come up with in their imagination for their enemies. They just won the civil war by defeating the 4.5 million National Party troops, so over-confidence was obvious in all ranks of the PVA. The success of Campaign I,II,III proved that their strategies and tactics were very effective in neutralizing the vastly superior fire power of the Allied forces: infiltrating in the middle, encircling from the flanks, then splitting the enemy in small groups and eliminating them one by one; they mostly attacked at nights and in close range. However, General Ridgway discovered that the PVA was only capable to carry out the famous "One Week Offenses" due to the weakness of their supply lines, and he played this to his advantage. In Campaign IV and V, the PVA sustained heavy losses, and they were forced to retreat to the 38 parallel.

I found this on Youtube quite objective in documenting this historical event. The only disagreement would be the casualty numbers. In the film it stats that PVA and the North Korea sustained 1.5 million casualties while the "coalition of willing" about 400,000. I am not sure where they get this numbers, but have to point out that the total PVA forces sent to Korea was only 1.5 million. So if they had that much casualty, they probably would not be able to hold the line at 38 parallel. The Chinese official numbers was in the range of 300,000-400,000.



There was many PVA heroes: the lone soldier who captured 67 US soldiers during American's chaotic retreat; the soldiers who destroyed the Royal Tank Regiment tanks with grenades(http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2009-02/02/content_10748637.htm); the company that frozen to death in their trenches while waiting to ambush the enemies. These are pure heroism, because the commies were atheist. They knew there were no martyrdom or God waiting for them after death. They willingly died for their brothers and their nation.

It was from this war that the Chinese people had regained their long lost confidence. It was Mao who literally remade the psyche of modern China -- a nation full of pride and without fear.

Chinese Military Parade - 1999




My childhood was filled with imaginations from bedtime stories of my father marching along with his comrades, in the forest of Guang Xi province, the mountains of Hai Nan Island, and the snow fields at the side of Ya Lu River. A few years back, when he was in Canada, I took him to the US-Canada border between Washington State and British Columbia. Crossing the Peace Gate, I pointed to the US Customs station, and joked:" The front soldier of PLA enters US. Enemy targets within shooting range". He laughed wholeheartedly.

60 years is almost a live time for an individual, but it is only a blink of eye in history.

Back to the topic of independence movement of the Urghurs and Tibetans. I don't see any possibilities of their success. The official PLA arm force number is 2 millions. If including the paramilitary, reseverist, and police, I am not surprised the number could easily surpass 6 millions. The population of the Urghurs is about 8 millions, and Tibetans about 2 millions. Even in the extreme case of these two groups' simultaneous uprising, the arm forces could easily overwhelm them.

During last year's Si Chuan earthquake, at the edge of Tibetan Plateau, 130,000 troops were mobilized and sent into the disaster zone within 3 days, despite landslides destroyed nearly all roads connecting the area with outside world. This fact alone proves the PLA's ability to project vast amount of forces in extremely short time within the border of China. In addition, just look at google earth for the characters of Tibetan Plateau, you will see Tibetan essentially surrounded by Himalaya Mountains. The only access point for mass transportation is on the side of China. As far as I can see, there is no hope for the "Free Tibet" or "Free XinJiang" movements.

As a side note, I was shocked to see after the Katrina disaster the slow motion of the National Guard moving into New Orleans, fully armed and in combat mode. Comparing this to the vastly vastly larger scale disaster in Si Chuan earthquake, there was no riot, people were helping people, and the troops did not carry weapons other than the rescue gears. I think the over-the-top individualism of the super power's population is ill-equipped to deal with disasters.

Why the riot now? People in China speculate the US is behind this, as well as the tension currently developing in the South China Sea(countries around the area each claiming their sea territories). US creates all these troubles to enhance its bargaining position in dealing with the Chinese in formulating the new financial world order. As the Russians and Chinese pushing a new world currency, we will expect more and more similar geopolitical events happening in the hot spots of these two regions. Interesting time, indeed.

Enough rambling. Hope this will provide some insight of why the Chinese do what they do. Nothing come from thin air, you know, except the Federal Reserve Notes.

[c1ue]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

They just won the civil war by defeating the 4.5 million National Party troops, so over-confidence was obvious in all ranks of the PVA.

You're neglecting that between 50% and 70% of the so called patriotic PVA troops in the Korean conflict were actually captured Nationalist Chinese soldiers.

A convenient way to make use of an otherwise drain on Communist China's resources - and one of the reasons why manpower losses were not considered as significant by the Chinese army command as might have been.

These troops were part of the at least 2.25M soldiers captured in the last 2 years of the Chinese civil war.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

In 1942, the British won the Opium War over China

I suspect a clerical error here -- perhaps it was in 1842, not 1942?

[jpatter666]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

It was Mao who literally remade the psyche of modern China -- a nation full of pride and without fear.

Skyson, you make some interesting points, but I take issue with this one. Mao turned China into a disaster, a country *based* on fear. It was his successors who created the modern China of which you are justifiably proud.

I wonder if you have been "captured" by a similar historical revisionist propaganda that you state Westerners of being subject to.

[flintlock]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

Good post Skyson, with maybe just a little propaganda mixed in.

The "strategy and tactics" used by the Chinese in Korea consisted mainly of huge numbers and human wave assaults. Very little tactics to it. Allied forces were definitely caught off guard, and punished for it. But Chinese casualties were still a lot higher despite their "victory". We'll never really know the true numbers of losses on the Chines side as the communists tend not to print bad news.

As far as the Boxer rebellion, it wasn't all just about fighting imperialists:

The Taiyuan Massacre was the mass killing of foreign Christian missionaries and of local church members, including children, from July 1900, and was one of the more bloody and infamous parts of the Boxer Rebellion. 48 Catholic missionaries and 18,000 Chinese Catholics were murdered.^{[citation needed]} 222 Chinese Eastern Orthodox Christians were also murdered, along with 182 Protestant missionaries and 500 Chinese Protestants known as the China Martyrs of 1900.

While I think communism is a very bad system, I feel it was probably better than what China had before, and probably the only way they could pull themselves out of the rut they were in for so many years. It united a very fractured society.

[skyson]

Re: "ChiCom" Demystified

You're neglecting that between 50% and 70% of the so called patriotic PVA troops in the Korean conflict were actually captured Nationalist Chinese soldiers.

A convenient way to make use of an otherwise drain on Communist China's resources - and one of the reasons why manpower losses were not considered as significant by the Chinese army command as might have been.

These troops were part of the at least 2.25M soldiers captured in the last 2 years of the Chinese civil war.

You are right about the number of nationalist troops in PLA and PVA. This was exactly where the "commies" should deserve the credit. They had amazing ability to turn their enemies into part of their own. Once they were assimilated, they were treated with respect and trust. In the before mentioned documentary, the American historian rightly observed: the PVA had no apparent ranks; they addressed each other as 'comrades'; in battles, details of strategy and tactical objectives were briefed to every foot soldier.

Once in the battle field, the soldiers knew intimidately what to do. There were no guns pointing at them to force them to fight, and they willingly sacrificed their lives for their comrades.

I suspect a clerical error here -- perhaps it was in 1842, not 1942?

Yes, it was a typo.

Skyson, you make some interesting points, but I take issue with this one. Mao turned China into a disaster, a country *based* on fear. It was his successors who created the modern China of which you are justifiably proud.

I wonder if you have been "captured" by a similar historical revisionist propaganda that you state Westerners of being subject to.

No, I am not trying to portrait Mao as a semi-God. He had done terrible things in his later years. But this does not invalidate his achievements in pulling the Chinese people back from a totally collapse. Without the confidence and pride the Chinese people regained in those years, I could not imagine how the modern China could be as strong.

Good post Skyson, with maybe just a little propaganda mixed in.

The "strategy and tactics" used by the Chinese in Korea consisted mainly of huge numbers and human wave assaults. Very little tactics to it. Allied forces were definitely caught off guard, and punished for it. But Chinese casualties were still a lot higher despite their "victory". We'll never really know the true numbers of losses on the Chines side as the communists tend not to print bad news.

As far as the Boxer rebellion, it wasn't all just about fighting imperialists:

Quote:

The Taiyuan Massacre was the mass killing of foreign Christian missionaries and of local church members, including children, from July 1900, and was one of the more bloody and infamous parts of the Boxer Rebellion. 48 Catholic missionaries and 18,000 Chinese Catholics were murdered.[citation needed] 222 Chinese Eastern Orthodox Christians were also murdered, along with 182 Protestant missionaries and 500 Chinese Protestants known as the China Martyrs of 1900.

While I think communism is a very bad system, I feel it was probably better than what China had before, and probably the only way they could pull themselves out of the rut they were in for so many years. It united a very fractured society.

Who doesn't enjoy propoganda? Only if it is to your advantage.

"...huge numbers and human wave assaults" is actually the correct description of the PVA battling tactics. Mao's military theory has two main points: 1. eliminate the enemy in movements. 2. concentrate power to overwhelm your enemy.

In his early years, Mao was a master in fighting enemies usually largely outnumbered him. By moving his troops around, he could then confuse his opponent and expose(or find) their weakness. Once weakness was found, then he would concentrate all his troops targeting that area, and destroy his enemy.

In Korean War, the total number of troops on both side were actually about equal. In most of the battles, the PVA would first indentify the weakest link(usually the south koreans), then attack from there to create a few openings in the enemy line. Once there were openings, the PVA troops would rush through to the back of the enemy, and create encircling of groups of enemy troops. During and after the encircling, more enforcement troops would arrive, and finally establish the often 5 or 3 to 1 advantage to the enemy groups being encircled. That was why during the final attack, "human waves after human waves" PVA were witnessed by the Allied troops.

Again in the before mentioned documentary, the American soldiers stated they saw long lines of PVA troops raced to their back in distance, and they were forced to retreat even faster to avoid being cut off from their main troop. They were witnessing a typical PVA fighting tactis - fast movement, to the back of the enemy. By doing this, the enemy troops often need to retreat, and hence create more weak points to be explointed.

They also were very good fighting at nights and often at very close range, and these were the shortcomings for the Allied forces.

So, "human waves" of PVA in battles and their double or even triple casualty rate are simply myths, created by the west to mainly save face. Using Mao's famous military strategies of "destroy enemy in movements" and "concentrate absolute power at a focal point", the PVA were able to neutralize the American's monsterous military power consists of thousands of airplanes, numerous sea battle groups, and volumes of tanks and cannons. This fact, to the weapon obssessed westerns troops, is not a easy one to swallow.


Regarding those foreign Christian missionaries killed by the Boxers, the last time I heard, was that they were more like cult leaders, often engaging in maximum exploitation of the local people. I don't have absolute knowledge about this, but after seeing this video, I am more inclined to believe they were not exactly saints:

Kevin Annett and Canada's Genocide



For those of you thinking that I am some sort of "apologist", I want to make it very clear, I do not like the current political system in China, and feel that much need to be done, in terms of enabling everyone enjoy the fruit of economic growth. However, I take issues when someone generally blame the "communist" for every single problem in China. China is a very complex society, to understand it, you must realize the number one factor in defining the nation is nationalism. After this, then you can talk about "communism", "dictatorship", "democracy", and "freedom". To use a black and white approach, is a repeat of the mistake of cold war thinking. Oh, maybe this is what the American ruling class exactly have in their mind?