About once a month, I enter a state of trance where I just think about really, really serious stuff. What I thought about for the past couple of days is the thorny issues between the United States and China. The more I think about it, the more I realize that some of the issues cannot be solved by simply tossing out the words "freedom" and "democracy."

So here are the questions for discussion:


1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

Not currently. There is no open hostility that I can see between the two. I would consider China a rival of the United States. I believe that the Chinese government is willing to go to almost any lengths to surpass the United States economically, militarily, and/or politically. The United States naturally is trying to maintain its advantage, but I believe the system of Democracy(sorry, have to use that word) keeps the US from disregarding the needs and wants of its citizens to achieve this.

2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

A relationship requires mutual dealings with each other. Both sides determine its health.

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

I think that the situation would be better if China were a democracy. This would make the government’s actions legitimate since they are backed by the will of the people. This would remove any appearances of abuse that the world may perceive.

 
1. Is China an enemy of the United States?


Yes and No. China is not an "enemy" in the sense of binary opposition but China is the most likely candidate to replace the US as the "Empire". British Empire replaced the French, and American Empire replaced the British Empire. Empires rise and fall, it is only a matter of time before someone else takes US's place.

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

Forgive me for being a cynic but if you do a Ph.D on History, you usually end up being a cynic.

Democracy is a term we use to fool ourselves. In every society in every era of the world, there are those who rule and there are those who follow. Religious Monarchs, Absolute Monarchs, the Bourgeoisie, the Corporate Industry.... The same people with different methods...

If China does indeed become a "democracy" then very few things will change. Sure, it will be better for the people in China but its attitude towards outside nations will not change. Britain changing from an Absolute Monarchy into a Constitutional Monarchy did not seriously effect its colonial ambitions.

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

Yes. It is an opponent that seeks to counter US geo-political power. That it is not using the method of military superiority proves nothing beyond that China has learnd the lesson of what befell the USSR.


2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

Ooooh. Tough one. In order for equilibrium to be maintained between them, the USA must allow China to grow, but by doing this, the Chinese will, inevitably be taking from the Americans. Whether its just jobs or regional influence is a detail, but none the less an important one. As a democracy, the USA keeps its leaders at the mercy of its people which means the USA cannot afford to just let China take over.

We see the same in Europe. China's sudden take over of the global clothing industry, although it was no surprise, had a far greater impact here than any one imagined. Every one seemed to think China would gradually move on the European clothing industry, but what they've seen has been an avalanche of Chinese produce under cutting all competetion and forcing thousands of Europeans into unemployment.

Its gotten so bad that even ethnic fabrics made in African backwaters are now labelled 'Made in China'.

Clearly, whilst the USA (and the rest of the world) must allow China to grow, this aggressive tactic cannot be tolerated by any one. All sides must come to an understanding which allows both sides to continue to make money.


3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

Yes. It would take China much longer to reach the level of the USA if the Chinese leadership were accountable to the people.


er... yes it did. The change just didn't happen instantly. Britain is still a constitutional monarchy but it no longer has colonial ambitions.

I don't think political change can be considered a simple catalyst for social or geopolitical change, they both happen together, as a part of a process.

The point being that if China becomes a democracy then its attitudes will also change, but neither change will occur over night. It will take decades for China to become a democracy and just as long for the Chinese to get used to the idea of not regarding foreigners as enemies.

1. No. As a user mentioned, it may be classified as a rival. But there presently is no risk of military action being taken by either side. So, I think "enemy" is too harsh a classification.

2. No. It will depend on both sides. If both sides remain stubborn, then no progress will be made.

3. Yes and no. China would be developing differently, but it may very well still be a rival of the U.S. even as a democracy.

And the U.S. may one day fall, but it is not in the foreseeable future. It will not be the result of China, islamofascists, or anyone else, at least not in their present incarnations.

BTW, I like the thread title.

1.) That depends. China has great investments in American Treasury bonds, so economically they are our best friend. Policy-wise they are friendly to American industry. Human-rights-wise they are on the border. Overall, I believe that China is a necessary enemy if you could qualify China as an enemy at all.

2.) Certainly not. It does in fact take two to tango.

3.) Oh, without a doubt. Democratic nations flock to one another, China and the United States would suddenly become even more the best of friends. China would elect its own leaders and shape its own policies-- something the United States government would surely wish to put their two cents in to the mix.

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

Yes, without any doubt.

China has threatend a military invasion of Taiwan, an ally of the United States, if Taiwan decides to "formally declare" it's independence from China. Invading a peaceful democratic nation is not the act of a friend.

Their repression of human and civil rights is not, as VDem said, "on the border". It is nothin short of deplorable and ghastly. The communist government allows the employment of children in high-risk locations such as fireworks manufacturing plants.

Their "One Child Policy" is nothing short of barbaric, which includes forced abortions, sterilizations, and economic penalties for it's violation.

They make it almost impossible for Christians, Muslims, and Buddhists to openly practice their faith. While it is allowed, there are many restrictions regarding where and how one can worship. In fact, in some of the Muslim poulated areas, it is illegal to teach Islam to children. While it is not illegal to be a practicing member of a faith and hold office, since one must be a member of the communist party, and that religion is not seen as comaptible with party interests, the ability to become a holder of a political office is virtually impossible as well.

International Religious Freedom Report 2002

Tibetans are being forced off their land to make room for an ever growing ethnic Chinese population, the effects of which present both an economic and cultural strain.

There is ever more stricter control of the internet, in which certain pages (that pose a threat to the regime) are blocked and violators are often jailed.

These actions do not represent someone who is on the same page with the United States. They despise those who wish to usurp their control through the spread of democratic ideas, they threaten our allies, and they aid our enemies and work to undermine the very laws we inact within the global community.

They are not our ally. They are our enemy.


2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

Of course not, but if there is to be peace, China's gonna have to make some broad changes, and I don't see that happening.

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

I think so, I think the difference would change the course of history as we know it.

Have you ever been to China? Your comments are insulting in the very least, xenophobia is spouting out of your mouth.



The Republic government of United States allows the employment of poor people in low-wage job such as McDonald´s & Wendy´s. Most of them have no insurance.



Do you even know what the one child policy is about? Do you know how many people live in China? Do you know how many people live in United States in comparison? Do you know the world is overpopulated?



I would say that indoctrinating your own religion on a child, destroying its ability of reasoning is bad, but that is another topic, so i will stick to this:

Last time i was in China people didnt seem to complain, i saw Jews, Muslims and Christians. But Most people are Daoist or Buddhists.



Tibet is Chinese.



Like the U.S you mean?



Eh, yes it does? I would say that Chinese and American policies are pretty similar, but China is the only one being Honest about it, Whiles the american goverment use false propaganda and spouting rhetoric about "freedom" and "democracy".



So does the United States, refusing to accept Geneve convention, or environmental protocols. So far, you said anothing that your own goverment is not guilty of. Mown your own lawn first man.



According to American policies, EVERYONE is your enemy. You dont find this odd?

Not that I agree with Titus here (because I don't), but you have not effectively countered most of his statements.


Argument ad hominem: attacking the man. This is an attempt to discredit an idea by attacking the person who suggested it and not the idea itself.


Deflection of argument. How does this respond to the statement that many Chinese children are in highly dangerous working conditions?


Deflection of argument. His statement concerned the barbarism of the policy. You countered with the purpose of the policy.


Statistics of small numbers. "I hear that one in five people is Chinese. How can this be? I know hundreds of people, and none of them is Chinese. Yours truly,..."


Argument from adverse consequences. "They might not be very good, but we are worse". You have not responded to the statement.


Argument from adverse consequences. "They might not be very good, but we are worse". You have not responded to the statement.

Neither have you. You are both fencing with words.

What he is trying to say is the before complaining and accusing others, the US should look at itself.



I direct your attention to the Indian Social Activist Arundhati Roy's speech about an American CEO's actions and US's refusal to hand him to Indian authorities. If this is not hypocracy, can you tell me what it is?



Also here is some information on the actions of American CEOs from the same source. As EricStanza said and I am repeating, US is not as "clean" as many believe or want to believe. One should look at his own faults before accusing others.

Eric Stanze, your personal attacks aside, I'll address some of your comments.




What do you consider low wage? According to the Wikipedia page found here an unskilled Chinese laborer is paid less than one American dollar per hour. The federal minimum wage in the United States is at $5.15. Certain states have it higher. In California, it is $6.75. Annualy, the average Chinese makes $1300 American per year. The average American makes over $30,000. (See Nationmaster.com) I see no case of "poor Americans" being exploited in the labor market.




Overpopulation is no justification for forced abortions, forced sterilizations, economic sanctions, and/or psychological "reeducation". There is no logical justification for this whatsoever.








So I'm to trust what you supposedly saw over Amnesty International, HRW, the UNCHR and several other international human rights organizations? I'm sorry, but "people didn't seem to complain isn't gonna pass mustard here, or anywhere else.






Whether or not Tibet legally belongs to China is another discussion, but the fact remains; people are being forced to relocate from their ancestral homes to make way for someone from Inner China, all in an effort to erode the Tibetan culture and secure Tibetan resources for virtual aliens.

QUOTE
There is ever more stricter control of the internet, in which certain pages (that pose a threat to the regime) are blocked and violators are often jailed.




If you could provide some examples, that would be helpful.



How are our policies similar? Our economies are different. Our political policies are different. Our geo-political views are, like the others, as night and day. Aside from "spouting rhetoric", what can you show that proves otherwise?




We all have our issues, but regardless, what I said can be seen in the actions of the Chinese government. If you believe otherwise, that's up to you.

FMA, while I agree that the United States isn't pristene when it comes to our actions, we are leaps and bounds ahead of the Chinese. While you are quick to point out certain instances of American corporate businessmen who live better than us, you have done nothing to prove that China is, in any form, an ally of the United States.

There is no personal attack, its a logical question regarding this topic. It´s like me saying that there all this poverty in United States, and i never been there, then my point means nothing does it?

And your "obvious" knowledge about China was quite flawed, hence, the question. And for the point, i presume you never been there then.




I can only use McDonalds as a reference, where they good quite good pay. What wikipedia says is not of concern, as money is relative to where you live.

Last time i was in United States the McDonalds employers got 4,5 to 5.5 a$ hour, i presume they where not telling the truth ofcourse, but it must be much higher, right?

The average McDonald´s employee in China gets around 1200 Yuan a month (160 h), which is about 150$. This is more compared to the United States using cost of living, exopenses and so forth. My amateur analyzis would say this is around 1500$ or so for an american. Which would almost be twice the amount an american earns at the same place.



Thats like saying "Murder is justified because of....."

Ofcourse it is. And "murder"? ABORTION, not murder. I would say that the U.S would do the same if they had the same amount of people. Its very logical, abortion= less people. Simple, is it not ?



Once again, the "Tibetian culture" is Chinese. the "Tibetian resources" is Chinese.
Pretend its Hawaii, if that makes it easier for you, o man, they Stealing the .... you get the point.



Guantanamo, Torture, school indoctrination, the list goes on.

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

No, China is a competitor, and a darned good one. If I were to check the clothing labels in my closet, I could count on the vast majority of the articles I own having been made in China.

American industries trying to make and sell goods made here might consider China the enemy. As one e-mailer quipped on last night's Lou Dobbs Tonight program, What are becoming the most valuable antiques on the market? American-made goods!

2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

Is this a serious question? Of course not. It is also determined by our politicians. As long as the likes of Wal-Mart depend upon the cheap labor of countries like China for their inventory, the politicians will have to soft-pedal the issues of human rights abuses and censorship for which China is notorious.

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

Yes, but that's a HUGE if. What evidence is there that this nation (a few dissidents aside, and even Cuba has its dissidents--Castro will rule until he dies, anyway) which has persuaded Microsoft and Yahoo! to not use words like "freedom" and "democracy" in their programs in order to have their business has discernible inclination to become a representative democracy? On the contrary, they would point at our country and maintain that, based on the conflict surrounding our democratic national elections, WE are the ones who are not a democratic people.

If China somehow miraculously became a democracy, it would still be our competitor. But we might not worry so much about the buildup of their navy and other armed forces.

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?
Titus provides a fairly compelling case that might make China an enemy of the US, but it falls short. Much of what he quotes makes China an enemy of human rights, child labor, and religious freedom, but it does not make them an enemy of the state. If it did, we would add a handful of other countries that we currently term allies into the enemy category.

China is a competitor to our standing as the world's only superpower. And they don't exactly play by the rules to achieve that. A lot more of the world's capital is flowing into their borders where it once gushed into ours. Part of that is globalization, part is witness of the perils of a government controlled economy. That makes them a tough (and potentially unfair) competitor, not an enemy.

2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?
Yes and no. China is in the driver's seat for much of our current issues, but I think it would be naive to think that we are completely at China's mercy. I will admit that the balancing act here is difficult.

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?
Of course. Their progress would be slowed by incrementalism and accountability.


This is a nice little red herring, but you have just proven Titus' point. The child labor in a fireworks factory is an apple to your McDonald's orange drink. Bottom line is that most workers in China don't work at McDonald's, their labor standards are extremely poor in comparison, and child labor practices there and in much of Southeast Asia is an abomination. If you'd like further documentation of this, I would suggest viewing a few articles from China Labor Watch.

And my simple comparison showed that the U.S labour laws are an abomination. You can be sacked right and left with no security.

And this has nothing to do with the topic, which is "China- friend or foe?", if their child labour policies are not "suitable", then the rest of the world needs to be included.


In practice, i just wanted to show that things like that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand. The U.S is one of the few "civilized" nations that have Death Penalty, and yet you are talking about Child Labour? Like it does not happen in the U.S too. Sure, not officially, but in any case.


To condem CHINA as a whole for child labour or other points does not work, as the U.S is guilty of torture, concentration camps and so forth, sure, they wont ADMIT IT OPENLY, that was my point, China does not hide the fact what they are, The U.S DOES......
We even have entire topics about the way the U.S acts, so read them for clarification.



p.s Most Chinese does not work in ´fireworks factory´ as child labour either. So i didnt understand this point. I used McD as an example, which showed they actually got more/better deal then the American counterpart, and yet, you used ignore it. interesting.

Your comparisons of US labor laws to Chinese are as ridiculous as they are off topic. Indeed we have topics about the way the U.S. acts, feel free to comment in those threads, or to start your own. The questions here are regarding China. It would also be refreshing if you referenced facts to back up your assertions. Visiting a nation of over a billion people and going to McDonalds is not evidence. For instance:
One does not need to visit a country to observe that it does or does not have poverty. I have never been to the moon, yet I am aware that the gravitation pull is less there, and I would bounce around in my space suit. I may even link to a website that provides the gravity for the moon vs. Earth. See how this works? It does not matter whether titus has been to China. I doubt while you were there you shook hands and chatted about God in Mandarin with the millions of Chinese believers either.

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?
I'd say "strategic competitor" vs. enemy. Their tactics are certainly aggressive, and in the case of counterfeiting US intellectual property, illegal. But 'enemy' is too strong.

2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?
I would have originally said that "if the Chinese move on Taiwan, that changes everything." But our "one china" policy belies this - I can't tell what we would actually do in this case. The entire world hung the Tibetans out to dry, maybe we would do the same with the Taiwanese.

The way China suppresses dissent is criminal. And they have more and more dissent as information flow increases. I don't know how their actions in this regard - oppression of religion, curtailment of free speech, political corruption - will affect the US posture on China. With the Olympics in Beijing in 2008, the whole world should see what they are up to. But we may see a Chinese potemkin village instead.

No, what you can do is show that non-unionised labour in the United States often is often at a disadvantage, and people do not have the protection that unionised labour does, nor do they have as much protection as they might in some other countries with stricter labour laws.

What you cannot do with any hope of being taken seriously is compare US and Chinese labour laws and practices.

I am not American, I personally see many problems with US labour, as personified by organisations like WalMart and the like. But to equate them to workers, farmers and in particular miners in China is laughable.

You seem to be saying that there are some large holes in the foreign and domestic policy of the US, emblematic in examples like Guantanimo Bay and the recent debate over the use of torture. Thats fine, I agree. Clearly these are glaring flaws in the prestige of the US, or more specifically of the Bush Jr. Regime.

But not even the most anti-American person could say that the US is the same or even comparable to China in terms of individual rights, labour laws, freedoms, judicial practice, and so on. There may be problems in the US to be sure, but they are not equatable to problems in China.



True or not, McDonalds also employs exactly 12,000 people, out of China's 1.3 billion, not exactly a major employer. It is also a western company with internal rules on how it pays its employees the world over. Perhaps a somewhat more realistic statistic would be an average Chinese employer in China, as opposed to a western one?

Either way, this is irrelevant. Rather than arguing by individual experience,which accomplishes nothing, we can simply look it up. Your whole 'money is different everywhere' point is something that, astonishingly, economists are aware of, which is where they came up with the concept of purchasing power parity

Thus, the GDP per capita in China is USD $1,400, you are correct, the lower cost of everything means that the PPP GDP/Capita is actually USD $6,400.

Which is still a fraction of the PPP GDP/ Capita of the US, which is $40,800. So much for your economics argument.



Thats a false argument. I personally am very pro-choice, and believe abortion is not murder, but part of being pro-choie is the whole 'choice' issue. Forced abortions are not great on the issue of choice. As to forced sterilisations, there are acusations of China doing this, but no actual proof, so I reserve judgement. In the case of this argument, I agree with both sides actually. It is barbaric, and it is necessary.



So you keep saying. You are, however, utterly wrong.

Tibet was an independent nation and kingdom for several thousand years until the 1200s when it was defeated by the Mongols, and included in the Mongol Chinese teritorial Zone. However the Mongols gave Tibet political independence in the early 1600s. This lasted almost 300 years, when Chinese influence in Tibet grew in the late 1800s. Though tibet was nominally independent, they were under Chinese political domination for about 40 years, until 1911 when Tibetan rebels expelled the Chinese and re-established authority. They were independent until they were re-invaded by China in 1950.

Tibet has its own history and its own culture, its own political and religious traditions and its own language. Tibet is Tibetan, and currently under Chinese control. I would rebut your claim that 'Tibet is Chinese' further, but its difficult since all you did was repeate this complete assertion with nothing to back it up...

You miss the key difference. In a democracy, the leaders (or rulers as you name them) rule at the will of the people as expressed through elections. If they displease the people they can be voted out of office. If they commit high crimes or misdemeanor they can be impeached and removed from office.

If you don't think there is a difference between this situation and the rule of Saddam in Iraq, Stalin in Russia, Hitler in Germany, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Mao in China, Ho Chi Min in Vietnam, Castro in Cuba, or Mugabe in Zimbabwe, please explain your logic.

Democracy is incredible check on individual power.

Sorry for the mini-necro. This one's important to me.



They certainly don't consider themselves to be. The Chinese are fully aware of our symbiotic relationship and know that, for the most part, what is good is going to be good for the other.

Of course, this doesn't mean that they feel any obligation to follow our lead on foreign policy. I might point out, however, that while they're defying us on the issue of Iran's nuclear energy program, they're not the ones defying us about the weapons programs in Yemen or Libya.



If anything, I'd say it's the other way around. There's really only one thing China is likely to do that will force us into direct conflict-- invade Taiwan-- and they've pointed out they'll only do that if Taiwan declares independence.

I do not believe for a second that the United States would risk war with China over Taiwan; especially not while it is being so doggedly determined to declare war with the entire Middle East. It would be a spectacular display of economic suicide if we attempted it.



Nope. Other than a few human rights issues-- which we don't really care that much about-- a democratic China would not behave much differently than authoritarian China has been.

And so presents the conundrum that is China...

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

China has re-invested its surplus American dollars (a result of their substantial trade surplus) in U.S. Treasury Bonds, thereby partially financing the massive budgetary shortfall. On the other hand, the U.S. is the main destination for Chinese goods, providing an essential source for Chinese growth. Therefore, this is a relationship of healthy interdependance outside of military-strategic objectives, which are at significant odds.

2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

Both. Relationships are binary creatures, whereby both parties affect the health of that relationship.

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

Democracy no affect on the relationship. The U.S. has no problem in dealing with various non-democratic countries when its interests are served that way..

Whoa, my baby is still alive and well.

Enlightening replies, fellows, the good thing about debates is that there really is no right or wrong, what matters is what YOU perceive to be right or wrong. Keep up the good work.

1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

I don't think China should be an enemy to the United States in any way shape or form. Yes, they are a competitor but that doesnt necessarily mean they are an enemy. With the reemergence of globalization in the past couple years, we have learned that the global market brings free market nations closer. Whats good for China is whats good for the United States. The more trade and more relations we have between our nations, the better off we will be.

2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

No not at all. It takes two to tango as they say and the US has an important role. We have to encourage investment by US firms in China and Chinese firms in the US. The more markets we create, the more growth we will have and the better prices we will have for consumers.

3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

I think the situation would be different but it really shouldnt affect it. China is an economic powerhouse because it has adopted the free market and hopefully civil rights will follow the economic freedoms they have given. Eventually as the quality of life improves for the people of China, technology will make it impossible for China to shut off its populace.

Can I say something as a chinese?


1. Is China an enemy of the United States?

No,of couse. At least we chinese common ppl don't want to be. Though sometimes the U.S. seems aggressive to us, it still is the most powerful country in the world and the successful example of China. In fact ppl here don't want to be enemy of any country(except Japan in some younger's views, maybe). We just want to have a peace life and earn enough money to make our family live better.


2. Is the future of the relationship between China and the U.S. determined solely by the actions of China?

No. The reationship depends on both. And most of us wish it will be better in the future.



3. If China becomes a democracy, would the situation be any different?

It's really hard to say. And many ppl are disputing for it here in China. It seems that democracy can bring us a more incorrupt government (we hate the corrupt communist bureaucracy so much!), but Mongolia or the nations in South America are democracy and all are not good examples of China. Meanwhile, most chinese are peasants who are not well educated and easy to be instigated. If they have the right to vote, a radical nationalist may be voted to be the president and China will be more aggressive to other countries. That won't be good for both China and the U.S. . The democracy won't bring advantages for the ralationship until most of chinese can become bourgeois(well, it's just a dream of chinese, won't be the reality in short days).