5 reasons why India needs to worry about China’s military base in Djibouti

[Han Patriot]

Marxist communism inevitably lead to coercion and state domination. Mikhail Bakunin believed Marxist regimes would lead to the "despotic control of the populace by a new and not at all numerous aristocracy."Even if this new aristocracy were to have originated from among the ranks of the proletariat, Bakunin argued that their new-found power would fundamentally change their view of society and thus lead them to "look down at the plain working masses."

Genius, fascism also leads to state domination, authoritarianism has nothing to do with Communism, Authoritarian governments can choose to implement communist or capitalist policies. Understand?

 

[turbofan7a]

Genius, fascism also leads to state domination, authoritarianism has nothing to do with Communism, Authoritarian governments can choose to implement communist or capitalist policies. Understand?

Socialism works only when it's combined with Capitalism and a Free Market. However, while Socialism can work, it is ultimately going to fail because it fails to allow for human nature.

Humans want to control everything for their own good. Humans group up to help make this easier and they form societies. The way humans interact is based on the fact that everyone understands the other guy probably does not have your best interests at heart.

So, humans naturally work out ways to protect themselves and what they have from others. Humans will always seek to control the means by which wealth and power is accumulated because human nature dictates that you must always protect yourself from other humans who want to take it away.

It's for this reason that any system which fails to adequately control human nature to prevent one human from taking from another human their ability to live and grow (ie, the opportunities or the theft of those opportunities), fail. And Communism failed very quickly because of this There's always someone waiting to take power and keep it with whatever means they have at hand. Stalin is clear proof of this.

 

[Han Patriot]

Socialism works only when it's combined with Capitalism and a Free Market. However, while Socialism can work, it is ultimately going to fail because it fails to allow for human nature.

.

Bro don't tell me about the invisible and visible thing crap. I understand market economics. I just want you to explain what portion of China is communist, until today you still haven't answer me.

 

[turbofan7a]

Bro don't tell me about the invisible and visible thing crap. I understand market economics. I just want you to explain what portion of China is communist, until today you still haven't answer me.

Communism benefits those who do not wish to work, of course, because all they have to do is be born, and then they are able to sit back and have everything provided for them.

Meanwhile, the people who are the actual bread winners can expect no reward for that, because everyone’s standard of living is simply set by the government or whoever is leading the decisions.

So basically, communism robs life of the freedom to determine over the prosperity or the lack of wealth, because no one is able to better their lot in life by working hard, and no one is able to suffer disadvantages from being lazy.

 

[Han Patriot]

Communism benefits those who do not wish to work, of course, because all they have to do is be born, and then they are able to sit back and have everything provided for them.

Meanwhile, the people who are the actual bread winners can expect no reward for that, because everyone’s standard of living is simply set by the government or whoever is leading the decisions.

So basically, communism robs life of the freedom to determine over the prosperity or the lack of wealth, because no one is able to better their lot in life by working hard, and no one is able to suffer disadvantages from being lazy.

You are still not answering my question, which part of China today is communist. Can you explain? You also can't seem to be able to differentiate economic ideology versus political ideology. You can be democratic and communist too.

 

[turbofan7a]

You are still not answering my question, which part of China today is communist. Can you explain? You also can't seem to be able to differentiate economic ideology versus political ideology. You can be democratic and communist too.

While the Chinese Communist Party has adopted some aspects of capitalism, China remains a textbook communist country: The Party controls all land and the “Commanding Heights of the Economy“; it maintains strict controls on speech, assembly, and belief; and the Chinese regime’s political structure is that of a classic Leninist dictatorship.

 

[Gufi]

the point again is China will not need to make the journey from China to Indian Ocean, but we already be there. So China can always dp battle far away from, well, China.

The ability to open multiple fronts in a war is a very important strategic aspect. A strong deployment would need to be made to multiple locations to be able to counter the assets that PLAN has. Extending the coast the Indian navy has to defend is going to decrease the number of offensive missions possible.
As far as long range missiles are concerned, the Chinese are ahead of most if not all countries in the conceptualisation of ranged ballistic missiles to deal with naval threats. A few batteries defended by a strong SAM network can change the A2AD of the region.
But I think this is a first step to learn from in a relatively flexible country on what are the real implications of having an overseas base. It is not an easy prospect and in time the lessons learnt can be applied to other overseas bases in areas which are further from the Chinese homeland. Just like the first aircraft carrier, this is a move towards a new policy, with the cautious approach of small steps towards bigger goals.

 

[Han Patriot]

While the Chinese Communist Party has adopted some aspects of capitalism, China remains a textbook communist country: The Party controls all land and the “Commanding Heights of the Economy“; it maintains strict controls on speech, assembly, and belief; and the Chinese regime’s political structure is that of a classic Leninist dictatorship.

That just means a portion of the economy is state owned, a.k.a mixed ownership even fascist regimes and democratic India have state owned industries monopolizing key industries. Those land were leased to farmers, don't tell me land leases don't exist in India?

I am asking you again, communism means equal distribution of wealth to ALL and ALL property is commonly owned. Do you see that in China? If that was true, there won't be billionaires and millionaires, there won't be private entrepreneurs, there won't be private companies, understand genius? Since 1980s, China has been a capitalist mixed ownership economy run by a nationalistic authoritarian government, no different from Nazis or prewar Japan.

 

[turbofan7a]

That just means a portion of the economy is state owned, a.k.a mixed ownership even fascist regimes and democratic India have state owned industries monopolizing key industries. Those land were leased to farmers, don't tell me land leases don't exist in India?

I am asking you again, communism means equal distribution of wealth to ALL and ALL property is commonly owned. Do you see that in China? If that was true, there won't be billionaires and millionaires, there won't be private entrepreneurs, there won't be private companies, understand genius? Since 1980s, China has been a capitalist mixed ownership economy run by a nationalistic authoritarian government, no different from Nazis or prewar Japan.

You are too dumb to be explained leave it.

 

[wiseone2]

You are still not answering my question, which part of China today is communist. Can you explain? You also can't seem to be able to differentiate economic ideology versus political ideology. You can be democratic and communist too.

Your are governed by Chinese Communist Party

That just means a portion of the economy is state owned, a.k.a mixed ownership even fascist regimes and democratic India have state owned industries monopolizing key industries. Those land were leased to farmers, don't tell me land leases don't exist in India?

I am asking you again, communism means equal distribution of wealth to ALL and ALL property is commonly owned. Do you see that in China? If that was true, there won't be billionaires and millionaires, there won't be private entrepreneurs, there won't be private companies, understand genius? Since 1980s, China has been a capitalist mixed ownership economy run by a nationalistic authoritarian government, no different from Nazis or prewar Japan.

land lease by government to private farmers is rare in India. Most farm land is owned by private individuals

 

[Han Patriot]

Your are governed by Chinese Communist Party



land lease by government to private farmers is rare in India. Most farm land is owned by private individuals

DPRK is a 'democratic' government.

In China, land is leased, property and wealth is private, Singapore is a good example where the majority of land is leased. This way nobody can hoard land for generations as in the case of pre 1949 China and currently India, that's why you don't see slave farmers in China where they work on rented land, forever tied to this predicament. You know why you don't see the kind of poverty in China? People in the rural areas actually own the land they farm, the house they live. The case is opposite in India, it is ripe for Maoist revolutions, but their education level is too low to understand revolution, I have a feeling the elite class is trying to keep it that way.

The house on the land belongs to you, the car you own belongs to you, the computer in your house belongs to you, the money in your bank belongs to you. So how do you call that communism?

 

[wiseone2]

DPRK is a 'democratic' government.

In China, land is leased, property and wealth is private, Singapore is a good example where the majority of land is leased. This way nobody can hoard land for generations as in the case of pre 1949 China and currently India, that's why you don't see slave farmers in China where they work on rented land, forever tied to this predicament. You know why you don't see the kind of poverty in China? People in the rural areas actually own the land they farm, the house they live. The case is opposite in India, it is ripe for Maoist revolutions, but their education level is too low to understand revolution, I have a feeling the elite class is trying to keep it that way.

The house on the land belongs to you, the car you own belongs to you, the computer in your house belongs to you, the money in your bank belongs to you. So how do you call that communism?

I know you have to parrot the party line on DPRK. I will give you a pass. Otherwise I wouldn't want you spending 5-10 years of your life in a 5x5 cell.

Most of the India in India is owned by farmers. If you have 20 acres you would be a "landlord". The landlord hires landless workers to work on his land. It is similar to factory owner-worker relationship from pre-industrial revolution days. Part of the problem is that the farms are small and inefficient. They cannot support high wages for landless workers.

 

[Han Patriot]

I know you have to parrot the party line on DPRK. I will give you a pass. Otherwise I wouldn't want you spending 5-10 years of your life in a 5x5 cell.

Most of the India in India is owned by farmers. If you have 20 acres you would be a "landlord". The landlord hires landless workers to work on his land. It is similar to factory owner-worker relationship from pre-industrial revolution days. Part of the problem is that the farms are small and inefficient. They cannot support high wages for landless workers.

Huh, how does explaining that labels are not necessary indicative of real structure makes me a parrot to DPRK?

Most of Indian farmers are landless, they work as laborers aka slaves. That's why the starvation and poverty rate is so high. Most are near starvation sustenance levels, coupled with a huge finger from Modi in demonetization, they are barely alive now. This is the demographic dividend you shall reap for the next 50 years. Jai Hind!

Latest news on 173 Changsha, remember East Pendulum claimed there were rumors it was floating in IOR due to engine falilure. He now claims new info that the ship was recalled back for disciplinary action, seems like the commander had some discipline issues. Btw, I found out his so called source, TW media.

According to the Up Media newspaper quoting a source from the Taiwanese army (?) , Destroyer 173 Changsha was on June 18 from China for the Baltic Sea. But for some unknown reason the ship would never have left the South China Sea and would have turned back towards the Fiery Cross reef to return to the Zhejiang naval base, Vessel is affected, by sailing at a speed of "22 knots".

This speed of the ship thus seems to rule out any serious damage to the propulsion system as claimed by another Chinese source, quoted in our article of 8 July.

The same Taiwanese source assumes that this early return would be linked to the disciplinary investigations that are currently underway in the Chinese army, and that one or more Chinese destroyer or flotilla officials would be involved, forcing the Chinese navy To repatriate the whole ship and have it replaced by another of the same class.

http://www.eastpendulum.com/histoire-destroyer-173-changsha

Use google translate. Most Indians were jumping in joy and a few international outlets quoted the same East Pendulum 'news'.

 

[wiseone2]

Huh, how does explaining that labels are not necessary indicative of real structure makes me a parrot to DPRK?

Most of Indian farmers are landless, they work as laborers aka slaves. That's why the starvation and poverty rate is so high. Most are near starvation sustenance levels, coupled with a huge finger from Modi in demonetization, they are barely alive now. This is the demographic dividend you shall reap for the next 50 years. Jai Hind!

There is nothing evenly remotely democratic about DPRK. Can we agree on that ?

It is not like the landowner who owns 20 acres lives like a king. demonetization would have little impact on the landless worker. It is not like they have money stashed up anywhere. it could impact your 20 acre landowner. there are government handouts in many parts of the country. nobody is starving but there is malnutrition. there is plenty of money for liquor, cellphones and TV sets. school education is free. at least 80% of kids go to school until 8th or 10th grade. there are few hundred million living at sustenance levels. This is no different from China of 30 years old. the government can send few hundred million to the cities within 2-3 years. But then what ?? % of the rural population is decreasing. It was 85% at independence. It is 65% now.

 

[Han Patriot]

There is nothing evenly remotely democratic about DPRK. Can we agree on that ?

Of course we can agree. This is the same case for CCP, which is the point I was trying to make.

It is not like the landowner who owns 20 acres lives like a king. demonetization would have little impact on the landless worker. It is not like they have money stashed up anywhere. it could impact your 20 acre landowner. there are government handouts in many parts of the country. nobody is starving but there is malnutrition. there is plenty of money for liquor, cellphones and TV sets. school education is free. at least 80% of kids go to school until 8th or 10th grade. there are few hundred million living at sustenance levels. This is no different from China of 30 years old. the government can send few hundred million to the cities within 2-3 years. But then what ?? % of the rural population is decreasing. It was 85% at independence. It is 65% now.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/cash-crunch-hits-kharif-sowing-telangana-monsoon/1/990926.html

Cash crunch in rural banks and ATMs has affected farmers as they are unable to purchase seed and fertilizer or to pay wages to farm labourers.


Speaking about the cash crunch Wayra, Bhadrachalam branch manager of Andhra Gramin Bank Sitharamulu, said, "RBI has not sent enough money to banks. We are facing cash crunch. We are not able to distribute money as pensions, DWCRA and to farmers. We are trying to collect the money from other business to keep bank functioning."

Farmers too are feeling helpless in this situation as they are unable to get money from banks or ATM

This was just last month. You are underestimating the impact of demonetization which btw has nothing to do with a cashless society, it was just a money changing exercise executed with Indian style efficiency aka a big screw up. Has the black money dissipated? No, it's still there in new shiny currency denominated in even higher Rs2K notes.

http://www.indiatimes.com/news/indi...tarving-population-lives-in-india-261267.html

Four-year-old Usha weighs only five kilos. Her eyes are dry and her skin flaky, her limbs are barely able to support her as she tries to stand up - she falls down exhausted. She tries to shove a handful of grovel in her mouth, and cries out of hunger when she is unable to consume it.

No starvation? Only malnutrition? There is a thin line between malnutrition and starvation, Indinas like to choose to call their hungry malnourished. First, learn to feed your people before thinking about SUPA POWA dreams.