Chinees Imperialisme

[Bach]

Dit is het hedendaagse imperialisme:

[Pandareus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach

En hebben de Chinezen al Filippijnse vissers uit het water geschoten zoals de Israëliërs regelmatig doen voor de kust van Gaza als Palestijnen zich meer dan 2 km van de kust wagen.

200 boten die daar samen opduiken zijn een onmiskenbare dreiging door china, de reactie van de filipijnen spreekt boekdelen, ze weten heel goed dat ze kansloos zijn als ze hierop toch zouden reageren. Duterte weet heel goed dat hij hier niets kan tegenin brengen.

Je whatsaboutism over Gaza is hier totaal off topic...

Hier de strijd tussen Franse en Britse 'imperialisten': https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1Tp-Fm_3Fvg

Voor zover ik weet ligt de noordzee niet in de zuid-chinese zee, en is dit dan ook totaal irrelevant.

Wacht tot China een reeks van militaire basissen bouwt rond de VS, eilanden bouwt in de golf van Mexico, komt paraderen met een vloot tussen Cuba en Florida en her en der wat landen naar de stone age schiet type Irak, Libië of Syrië....dát zou imperialisme zijn. Er is maar 1 imperium heden ten dage. Zich ertegen verdedigen is geen imperialisme.

China die zich ten koste van al hun buren de hele zuid-chinese zee wil toeïgenen via militair machtsvertoon ga je heus niet goedpraten door verhalen over cuba of irak erbij te sleuren hoor.

[Bach]

Dit is mijns inziens de achilleshiel van China. Het wil geen wig zien tussen Taiwan en het Chinese vaste land. De VS zullen die wig proberen te forceren in hun hoop alzo China te isoleren. Gevaarlijk spel.

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-w...21-3?r=US&IR=T



Taiwanees eilandje met op de achtergrond de Chinese stad Xiamen. De foto toont ook het national security probleem vanuit Chinees perspectief. Stel dat de VS kernwapens op Taiwan zouden willen installeren bv.

[Bach]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Pandareus

200 boten die daar samen opduiken zijn een onmiskenbare dreiging door china, de reactie van de filipijnen spreekt boekdelen, ze weten heel goed dat ze kansloos zijn als ze hierop toch zouden reageren. Duterte weet heel goed dat hij hier niets kan tegenin brengen.

Je whatsaboutism over Gaza is hier totaal off topic...





Voor zover ik weet ligt de noordzee niet in de zuid-chinese zee, en is dit dan ook totaal irrelevant.



China die zich ten koste van al hun buren de hele zuid-chinese zee wil toeïgenen via militair machtsvertoon ga je heus niet goedpraten door verhalen over cuba of irak erbij te sleuren hoor.

Het gaat niet om 'goed praten' het gaat om perspectief.

Ik kan het niet beter zeggen dan de scherpe pen van Caitlin een paar dagen geleden in een paar quotes.

Opposing US Imperialism Is A Moral Imperative: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix

If you’ve ever wondered whether you’re the sort of person who would have taken a stand against the Nazis in Germany, the answer is that you would have behaved however you’re behaving toward the murderous imperialist power of today, namely the United States government.

?

Words cannot describe my disdain for people who claim US imperialism is a “complicated” issue. It’s like, well, figure it the fuck out then asshole, you’re killing people. Isn’t it worth a few moments of your time to work out why they’re murdering people in your name?

?

Living in the US or one of its vassal states without opposing its imperialist warmongering is a morally indefensible position. “I just focus on domestic policy” is an illegitimate stance while your rulers are butchering human beings around the world.

?

I oppose western imperialism against China and Venezuela and they say it’s because I love communism.

I oppose western imperialism against Iran and they say I love theocracy.

I oppose western imperialism against Syria and Russia and they say I love autocracy.

Maybe I just oppose imperialism.

?

“I oppose ALL imperialism, not just western imperialism!”

So western imperialism and also imaginary fantasy world imperialism? Cool!

?

“I criticize all governments equally.”

Okay, well you’re a fucking idiot then. All things are not equal. Only one government is dominating the planet with nonstop military and economic warfare. It and its allies deserve more criticism than other governments.

Saying the US and China are equally bad is dumber than saying Nazis and Antifa are equally bad. Only one nation in the world is waging nonstop wars, circling the planet with hundreds of military bases, and working to destroy any nation which disobeys it. And it ain’t China.

?

China has the same government it had a few years ago. If you find yourself thinking more negative thoughts about China now, it’s not because it has been doing anything differently, it’s because you’ve been successfully propagandized.

?

Me: The western empire is running an aggressive and deceitful propaganda campaign against China.

My comments section: Okay but I don’t understand why you’re defending a government of genocidal organ harvesters who’s trying to take over the world and give me a social credit score.

?

If you oppose imperialism but are also parroting the US empire’s propaganda narratives about China, then you don’t oppose imperialism. The agenda to halt China’s rise is by far the single most crucial agenda for the empire, and you’re helping to grease the wheels for that agenda.

?

Imperialists are so, so happy that they get to call people questioning a major imperialist propaganda narrative “genocide deniers” now. You can see the glee in their tweets. Calling people “conspiracy theorists” has lost its punch since Russiagate, but now they have a new toy.

?

It sure would be nice if US liberals pushed as hard for an end to the Trump administration’s policies as they did for an end to the Trump administration.

?

Conservative pundit: Aha look at what I am doing to offend the liberals

The liberals: Rahh we feel offended by that thing he did

Imperialist mass murder: *continues unnoticed*

[Repeat]

?

Our problems don’t exist because of some deep flaw in humanity as a whole, but in the fact that a few humans lack well-developed empathy centers in their brains and then go on to obtain positions of power and influence. Most people understand that it’s wrong to judge an entire ethnic or religious group for the negative actions of a few of its members, but too few see that this also applies to humanity as a whole. None of our problems are due to any flaw in human nature itself, but to the actions of a few manipulative sociopaths.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with humanity itself that is making a mess of things. The problem is that we’re swimming in lies that we’ve been indoctrinated into by liars who benefit from our remaining deceived. All our problems can be solved by moving from lies to truth.

There are no human-generated problems that can’t be solved by truth. The truth about imperialism. The truth about power. The truth about propaganda. The truth about mental narrative. The truth about consciousness. There’s nothing wrong with us, we’ve just been confused by lies.

And sure, you can say we’re flawed because we haven’t yet awakened en masse to the truth, but in my opinion that’s just unhelpful victim blaming. Like the “Why didn’t you leave sooner?” question abuse victims too often get. The blame rests on the abusers.

?

We are surrounded by constant radiant beauty and have no ultimate understanding about anything we experience. Awe and reverence is the only sane response to any given moment. It would be a shame to miss this.

Discussie die daarop volgt is ook interessant

[Vlad]

Chinese ambassadeurs worden in heel Europa op het matje geroepen omdat een tiental Europeanen waaronder een Waals Ecolo-parlementslid op de vingers zijn getikt nadat ze de Oeigoerse kwestie aankaarten. De Oeigoerse moslims zouden gediscrimineerd worden. Maar ze worden helemaal niet gediscrimineerd. Europa doet alsof alleen de Oeigoeren in heropvoedingskampen worden gestoken maar dat klopt niet. In China wordt iedereen in een heropvoedingskamp gestoken die de partijlijn niet volgt, of dat nu moslims zijn, Falung Gong, Tibetaanse boeddhisten of anti-communisten. En dat is al decennia zo. Waarom dat nu plots zo belangrijk blijkt ...

[morte-vivante]

En Bach, zijn de Filipijnen nu ook aan het overreageren?

[parcifal]

BBC reporter verhuist naar Taiwan, omdat hij in China niet meer kan/mag werken.
Dictaturen houden niet zo van kritische pers.

[Bach]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal

BBC reporter verhuist naar Taiwan, omdat hij in China niet meer kan/mag werken.
Dictaturen houden niet zo van kritische pers.

Een aantal van de Chinese antwoorden op het vertrek van Sudworth bij monde van Hua Chunying op een Ministerie van Buitenlandse zaken persconferentie van 1 april.

http://eg.china-embassy.org/eng/fyrth/t1866323.htm

#1 BBC: You're comparing the prison labor in France to the camps in Xinjiang. Does that mean essentially they're like prisons? Is that the analogy that should be taken from that?
Hua Chunying: This is a typical logic of BBC. What I said was: why is it that the rights given to French prisoners cannot be enjoyed by ordinary people from all ethnic groups in Xinjiang? Do you get my message? This comparison reveals the deep-seated, noticeable double-standards and ideological bias of some people in Western countries. It makes no sense that ordinary Chinese people cannot have the rights that even French prisoners have.
#2 BBC: A follow-up on that last answer. There is one part of your answer I didn't quite catch. Could you just explain again the section about the court matter in Xinjiang. Is it you understanding there was to be court action definitely? Can you just clarify a bit more on that part of your answer?
Hua Chunying: It is only through media reports that I've come to know about it. I'm not aware of all the details, but John Sudworth did say that he was very nervous and afraid, didn't he? He told BBC so himself, and both the FCCC and the BBC statements say that he felt under threat in China. He even went so far as to say that the Chinese government threatened him. In what way did the Chinese government threaten him? You've been in China for years yourself, do you feel threatened? Even though you (BBC people) have produced so much news that is not friendly to China, we still provide convenience and support for your work in the same way as we support other foreign journalists.
As for John Sudworth, it is understandable that he feels nervous about media reports that some Xinjiang residents want to sue him. By producing a large amount of fake news, John Sudworth has not only hurt China's image, but also caused direct losses to the people in Xinjiang. As China is advancing the rule of law in an all-round way, there is stronger awareness among the Chinese citizens to safeguard their rights through the law. If John Sudworth deems his report to be fair and objective, what is he afraid of, and what is he running away from? There is only one explanation- he has got a guilty conscience for what he has done.
We have already refuted many times the BBC's false reporting, and we can go through some together.
The BBC journalist John Sudworth, with preconception and over-generalization, repeatedly concocted patchwork of far-fetched pieces that seriously deviate from facts, and claimed to have met with obstructions in every report. To give you a few latest examples. In making reports about the COVID-19 epidemic, John Sudworth made baseless allegation that the epidemic originated from China. He posted a footage of the police using nets to cover the heads of rioters in an anti-terrorism drill, and said it was proof of law enforcement brutality and human rights abuses by Chinese anti-epidemic authorities. In his Xinjiang reports, John Sudworth filmed footage without the permission of the interviewees. He alleged to have found solid evidence of mass "forced labor" in Xinjiang, when indeed what he had were no more than a few non-photorealistic satellite photos and a few so-called "witness" accounts, without even speaking to local Uyghur residents. He even went so far as to openly try to pressure foreign investors into removing their factories in Xinjiang, calling the vocational education and training centers as "re-education camps", technical schools as "places to conduct Uyghur cultural isolation and family separation", and efforts to renovate mosques as attempt to demolish mosques.
In May 2019, he went to Xinjiang with a pre-written script, filming footage of iron gates, walls, traffic cameras and even toilets all the way through, accumulating what he called "news materials", and then painstakingly editing them together. In November 2020, he questioned Volkswagen China CEO in an almost interrogation manner. After the interviewee said there was no such thing as "forced labor", John Sudworth came up with a very bizarre idea. He said that as long as one has a factory in Xinjiang, no matter where the workers are from, they are helping the Chinese government persecute the Uyghurs. He even employed moral hijack to compare hard-working Uyghur workers with free will to Jews subjected to forced labor by the Nazis during the World War II, and pressed company executives on why they hadn't left Xinjiang yet...MANY CHINESE PEOPLE NOW RIDICULE BBC AS "BIASED BROADCASTING CORPORATION " BECAUSE IT REPORTS SO MUCH MALICIOUS AND FALSE NEWS ABOUT CHINA.
Not surprisingly, such false information and libel by John Sudworth triggered public outrage in Xinjiang. It is understandable that those who suffered losses in reputation and interests due to his false reports would protect their legitimate rights and interests through legal means. John Sudworth might have felt that as a veteran Western journalist, he would be able to walk away from any consequence of whatever he fabricated. But China is a country under the rule of law. There is a price to pay for those who make rumor and defamation.
#3 BBC: Yes, if you're going to do a story about somebody, you give them the right of reply, no matter who they are. It's just basic principle of journalism. But we don't see that. If you're gonna be doing this sort of hit jobs on us, at least the state media organizations could have contacted us with some sort of reply.
Hua Chunying: I can get your feelings and logic, but I believe relevant Chinese media's reports on how BBC produced disinformation are based on what BBC already produced and aired.
But what you just said reminded me of an idea that I would like to share with you. Don't do to others what you don't want others do to yourself. When BBC produces programs, did it ever occur to it to get the facts from relevant Chinese authorities or individuals?
On Xinjiang-related issues, for example, to date, BBC's allegations against China are all based on what Adrian Zenz gave it, right? And also the false testimonies of a few fake actors. However, the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region has held more than 30 press briefings, China has published a series of white papers on Xinjiang and we've also talked so much about it here on this podium, and yet how much of all this did you cite in your reports? As I've stated, with regard to the video clip we played here last Friday, we noted that several mainstream Western media didn't even mention it. What does this show? It shows how you choose to look the other way and refuse to report on them when facts and truth are staring you right in the face. This choice itself betrays your political leaning. This is not right. Verity is the very life of journalism. You may not like something, but you cannot lie or slander, or even go looking for answers to your liking with preexisting bias and presumption of guilt, or even go to Xinjiang and other places to find "actors" and "props" to make up a play. The people approached have the right to say no to such ludicrous farces, don't they? So BBC should think about this seriously, how to produce real news, how to rebuild your credibility so that people would want to be interviewed by your journalists. Only by doing this can you make sure your reports will be more objective, just, balanced and neutral.
You used the term "state media" in your question, which reflects the bias against Chinese media in the UK, the US and some other countries. Whenever you talk about Chinese media, you refer to them as "state media". Chinese media serve the interests of the Chinese people, but can BBC represent the British people? Are you not one of those corporate media? You only serve the interests of a small minority, don't you?
BBC: It doesn't matter who controls the media, whether it's state owned media, private media, any media, you should ask the other side for comment and give somebody the right to reply. It's a basic principle of journalism. Is that something that you think Chinese media should do, asking the other side for comment?
Hua Chunying: Actually I believe you are right. Be it a state or corporate media outlet, it is first and foremost a media agency. So you should tell your colleagues not to have bias against Chinese media just because China is a socialist country under the leadership of the Communist Party of China. All media should uphold impartiality and objectivity. Just as you put it, verify the information before reporting on it and listen to all relevant sides. I hope BBC can do this. When reporting on China, verify first and present the facts and materials we provide in a balanced way in your reports. The last thing you should do is trust the lines of the few fake actors, because that will only lead you down a very dark path.
#4 (The Paper) BBC said on Twitter yesterday that John Sudworth has relocated to Taiwan and he remains their China correspondent. Sudworth also took an interview with BBC. The FCCC criticized China's "worsening working conditions" in a statement. Do you have any response?, Hua said : Although Mr. Sudworth departed without fulfilling the required procedures, we could have left it there. But then he tried to deflect the blame. And he's not doing it alone by posing as a victim, but has also rallied the BBC and the so-called FCCC to issue statements. All this is utterly unacceptable. We must point out that China is the victim when it comes to BBC's disinformation targeting China. In recent years, BBC has fabricated a large amount of immoral fake news and disinformation, especially on COVID-19 and Xinjiang, which has not only caused direct damages to the interests of some people in Xinjiang, but has also cast a severe negative influence on China's national image. China lodged solemn representations over this repeatedly with the BBC, asking it to correct its mistakes and uphold press ethnics to cover China in an objective and just manner. However, John Sudworth, instead of mending his ways and changing course, went from bad to worse. Now they are trying to extort and threaten China with the abrupt departure of Sudworth. Nothing could be more absurd. This only serves to show the character of Mr. Sudworth and HOW PATHETIC THE TIME-HONORED BBC IS.

"Biased Broadcasting corporation"

[Bach]

Ondertussen is het Brits Imperialisme ook "back" hoor. Het stuurt een vliegdekschip naar de Zuid Chinese zee, de Queen Elizabeth. Beetje grootheidswaan nog steeds?

[Bach]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door morte-vivante

En Bach, zijn de Filipijnen nu ook aan het overreageren?

Of wat met de Vietnamese vissers?

[parcifal]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach

Een aantal van de Chinese antwoorden op het vertrek van Sudworth bij monde van Hua Chunying op een Ministerie van Buitenlandse zaken persconferentie van 1 april.

http://eg.china-embassy.org/eng/fyrth/t1866323.htm


"Biased Broadcasting corporation"

Dank om mijn eerdere opmerking over de chinese dictatuur zo uitgebreid te illustreren.

Je had dat echt niet moeten doen, maar toch bedankt

[Bach]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal

Dank om mijn eerdere opmerking over de chinese dictatuur zo uitgebreid te illustreren.

Je had dat echt niet moeten doen, maar toch bedankt

Ik schat dat er ook mensen zijn die de tekst zelf lezen ipv uw bizarre conclusie blindelings over te nemen.

[Bach]

De BBC is het niet gewend om zo duidelijk van antwoord gediend te worden:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0oo8PsUKrA

[morte-vivante]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach

Of wat met de Vietnamese vissers?

Lol ja, met een China die hun verbiedt in hun eigen territoriale wateren te vissen, en dat af en toe met harde hand duidelijk maakt en een vissersboot laat zinken

[Bach]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door morte-vivante

Lol ja, met een China die hun verbiedt in hun eigen territoriale wateren te vissen, en dat af en toe met harde hand duidelijk maakt en een vissersboot laat zinken

Link?

[Pandareus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach

Een aantal van de Chinese antwoorden op het vertrek van Sudworth bij monde van Hua Chunying op een Ministerie van Buitenlandse zaken persconferentie van 1 april.

http://eg.china-embassy.org/eng/fyrth/t1866323.htm


"Biased Broadcasting corporation"

Ik moet één ding toegeven : de chinese propaganda kent een strakke regie. Die kerel had zijn lesje heel goed van buiten weten te leren.

[Kodo Kodo]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Elio di Supo

Het Amerikaans imperium is zo ook niet begonnen. Men wilde eerst zorgen dat er geen bemoeienissen waren van andere mogendheden in het westelijk halfrond. De zgn Monroe-doctrine waar de Spaans-Amerikaanse oorlog een gevolg van was.

Amerika was bovendien zeer onwillig om betrokken te raken in WO II. Wat ook niet meteen wijst op een imperialistische houding. Het duurde dus een hele tijd vooraleer Uncle Sam in zijn huidige vorm ontstond.

Mag ik tevens vragen waarom u steeds in een kramp schiet als het over China gaat?

Ik zie geen kramp. In de beginregels van de OP wordt China met de VS vergeleken, dus logisch dat Bach de vergelijking voortzet. Dat het VS-imperium ook vreedzaam begonnen is, OK, lijkt me een interessante aanvulling.

[Kodo Kodo]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Frankenstein

Verschil tussen mij en u is dat er een leeftijdsverschil tussen zit en ge waarschijnlijk ontwikkelingsprojecten waar ge bloed zweet en tranen in hebt gestopt door Amerikanen om zeep geholpen hebt zien worden. In mijn geval zie ik een stuk levenswerk kapot gaan door Chinezen.

Amen.

Deze draad is zo interessant omdat bijna iedereen hier, net als jij en Bach, grotendeels gelijk heeft.

[Bach]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Pandareus

Ik moet één ding toegeven : de chinese propaganda kent een strakke regie. Die kerel had zijn lesje heel goed van buiten weten te leren.

Het is een vrouw. De BBC viel serieus door de mand in de persconferentie.

[Boduo]

China geeft 69 ! landen vaccins cadeau
China heeft verkoopsovereenkomsten met 28 andere landen.
60 % van de Chinese vaccins wordt uitgevoerd.
China wil hiermee de degelijkheid van z'n politiek-ekonomisch model nog maar eens tonen aan de hele wereld. In crisistijden is een STERK bestuur nodig.