China says Australia should consider Japan's war history before submarine contract

[Aepsilons]

lol Nihon, you gonna get bashed by @Viva_Viet, or @NiceGuy reborn, he truthly believe that Vietnam belong to sub-Mekon and has nothing to do with Greater east Asia, he is a TPP believer guy...please don't mess with him

It matters not what they think; i am, and i believe i am not alone in this, a believer of a healthy , inclusive, developmentalist approach to region-wide collaboration on a comprehensive matter of economic, political, cultural, academic-research, strategic issues. I believe in regional growth not necessarily be dependent on militarized methods and militarized black and white equations. In fact i would utilize the case scenario of the integration of South Viet Nam to North Viet Nam as a case model upon which we can draw inspiration and wisdom from. After the collapse of the Government of South Viet Nam , Hanoi had implemented a rehabilitation program for former military personnel of South Viet Nam, and implemented a national-focused paradigm of grassroots level development. Emphasis was on the solidarity and national unification of the great nation of Viet Nam and that every Viet Namese citizen , irrelevant if he or she used to have loyalties to the philosophical practices of SVN or NVN, should have an overarching dedication and obeisance to the Nation itself, which is now the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. And look now at the growth and success of the proud, beautiful and hard working Viet Namese people!

Yes, brother, this IS Viet Nam !

This is Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon)

This is Danang !

This is Hanoi!

The point of the matter is that if we emphasize economic integration , and follow suit with political harmonized integration , the overall organism (the nation state, as the nation state is an organic entity) matures, and reaches homeostasis. Perfection. In Japanese we refer to this as 'Zen'.

This is the ultimate and objective goal of the East Asian approach of peaceful oriented , development and progress. Not with war, heavy securitization and unproductive , toxic rhetoric.

 

[Tshering22]

Unbelievable...

When Imperial JPN felt there was a dire need to modernize, the JPNese government sent their best and brightest to foreign lands to study and bring back as much knowledge as possible to pull JPN out of the dark ages. That is what Mr. 1051 believes he must do to save his country from the evil white Americans. My response is that JPN is going to repeat the same mistakes -- with disastrous consequences -- if there are enough JPNese like him. There are no good coming out of this romanticism.

No one said US is evil.

Nor am I against US.

Why do you find withdrawal of US troops from Japan and Korea as something negative against you?

And BTW Japanese culture is one of the most evolved in terms of self-development, self-realization, ethics and culture.

It was not in 'dark ages'.

Only thing that got Japan a benefit was artillery and guns that changed warfare.

Warfare in ancient Asian civilizations, whether it is us, Japanese, Chinese or Koreans was conducted with certain principles and code of honour.

Fair enough that it was a good change and nice innovation by the West. Totally impressive.

 

[gambit]

After the collapse of the Government of South Viet Nam , Hanoi had implemented a rehabilitation program for former military personnel of South Viet Nam,

Only party hacks and the intellectual dishonest would call what happened in 1975 as 'rehabilitation'. For those who lived thru it, as in those who managed to escape the country and those who survived the collapse of SVN, what happened was sheer brutality of the communists against anyone with even a suspicion of a taint of association with the SVN government, meaning a lot of innocent people got hurt and killed on a whim.

I have no problems with you being anti-US, at least that would be honest and I will respect that. But what you are doing is outright despicable. Glossing over bloodbaths that was so well documented that even to this day the Vietnamese government continues to persecute those who would carry the truth.

Why do you find withdrawal of US troops from Japan and Korea as something negative against you?

Hey, pal...This thread is NOT the first time I stated that the US should withdraw our military presence from Asia. If any country want US there, let them make their case and we MAY consider. But that the US should begin, starting with a PR drive, that in the coming yrs, the US military will be drawing down our PERSISTENT presence in Asia. Same for Europe.

That does not mean we will have no presence at all. We will continue to have regular military associations with allies and assorted hosts, if they so desire. The persistent presence I referred to was about long term garrisons.

And BTW Japanese culture is one of the most evolved in terms of self-development, self-realization, ethics and culture.

It was not in 'dark ages'.

Compared to the Europeans at that time, Imperial JPN was in the 'dark age', no matter how sophisticated the poetry, the calligraphy, etc...

 

[Aepsilons]

No one said US is evil.

Nor am I against US.

Why do you find withdrawal of US troops from Japan and Korea as something negative against you?

And BTW Japanese culture is one of the most evolved in terms of self-development, self-realization, ethics and culture.

It was not in 'dark ages'.

Only thing that got Japan a benefit was artillery and guns that changed warfare.

Warfare in ancient Asian civilizations, whether it is us, Japanese, Chinese or Koreans was conducted with certain principles and code of honour.

Fair enough that it was a good change and nice innovation by the West. Totally impressive.

No side is perfect and no side is in a position to claim or resonate a 'holier than thou' tone. In admission i recognize that my people and the nation upon which my ancestors and i hold fealty to was guilty of brutal acts during the sengkoku jidai and also in the military adventurism Japan had been unnecessarily obsessed about in the past (the imjin wars, the sino japanese wars, the pacific war). However, i believe that nations, as organic entities, are able to learn from prior policies that resulted in collective and collateral hurt. I have faith and belief that nations in Asia, despite national sentiments -- which are only natural due human psyche and sociology , are able to rise above and learn from each others' developmental experiences. I suppose this is why besides from minor border clashes in the 60s, 70s, the conflicts in Asia since the end of the 2nd world war were relatively limited and surgically unexplorative in nature. I suppose we are able to utilize proper diplomatic channels to work things out. Given there is a wealth of opportunities and challenges to be had, but that is what life is about, yes? We must , in a nation specific model context, traverse forward. Positively. And Heaven smiles in gladness.

 

[gambit]

...i believe that nations, as organic entities, are able to learn from prior policies that resulted in collective and collateral hurt.

Then be honest about what happened in Viet Nam after the war. Why are you so terrified of calling what happened in VN as atrocities ? Never heard of the 'boat people' ?

 

[bbccdd1470]

China needs to clamp down on these political terrorist once and once for all, breaking their back through sheer number of security police, harsh beatings when there is violent reaction, and mass arrests to ensure that those arrested would be sentenced the most heavily with very little interaction with the outside world.

I'm agree what you say and actually the mass arrests is happening. We HK netizens have a say " the police arrests, the judge releases", in fact 2014 yellow umbrella occupation was not peaceful as the media portrayed, there were a lots of violence and bloodsheds, but as you can see not a single leader of this occupation was arrested or sentenced, not to mention many people were released due to insufficient of evidences. Because of that those people become more violent and aggressive. We are hoping that this time the Judges can really do their job and not to let them go easily like the yellow umbrella occupation.

 

[bbccdd1470]

It appears that people in HK didn't learn a lot from their former ruler, the British. When the British was about to leave, they were selling not law and order, but democracy, to people in HK. Maybe that is why HK people got the wrong idea about the priority.

This is sad but true. How can democracy work if people do not respect the law? Honestly, those rioter are only a small portion of our population, but what worry me that is many people in HK support or sympathize with those rioters, what even worse is that many of them are highly educated, including politicians and educators.

 

[Tiqiu]

Hey, pal...This thread is NOT the first time I stated that the US should withdraw our military presence from Asia. If any country want US there, let them make their case and we MAY consider. But that the US should begin, starting with a PR drive, that in the coming yrs, the US military will be drawing down our PERSISTENT presence in Asia. Same for Europe.

The US will never withdraw your military presence willingly from Asia. It is not because of democracy, humanitarian,fighting communism/terrorism, or any other reason you can come up with, it is because of the survival instinct of the great sea power.

The concept of sea power and the role of sea power was first formulated in Alfred Thayer Mahan(the US Navy Admiral) 1890 book “The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783”. Based on his studies on the seventeenth century conflicts between the Dutch, England, France and Spain, and the nineteenth century naval wars between France and Britain, where British naval superiority eventually defeated France, consistently preventing invasion and blockade, Mahan developed his strategic views of naval war and military superiority which has a profound and underlining implications in shaping the policy making of Sea power like UK and the US. Here is the Wikipedia quotes: “The concept had an enormous influence in shaping the strategic thought of navies across the world, especially those of the United States, Germany, Japan and Britain, ultimately causing a European naval arms race in the 1890s which culminated in the First World War. His ideas still permeate the US Navy doctrine.”

Through Mahan's views and principle, one can easily understand how great sea power like UK or US, whose geographic location is unique and population is constrained, achieved world dominance. By controlling the ports/trade routes around globe for commerce on one hand , playing off shore balance to counter great land power in the Eurasia World Island on another, UK and the US became what we knew of. On essence, the US will never allow a great power on Eurasia Land growing stronger to challenge her.

Let's apply Mahan's views to a series of major wars in our modern times and see if we can find its shadow in it.

The Napoleonic Wars (1803–1815):UK was sided with an array of European powers and Russia(till 1807) to defeat the French Empire whose ultimate goal was to establish the Continental System, strengthening economic ties between the different countries in Europe under French domination.

Anglo-Russian War (1807–12): upon Russia's singing of the treaty with French obliged Russia to cease her maritime trade with UK, UK started war with Russia.

Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905):UK was sided with Japan(Anglo-Japanese Alliance) to fight the greater land power Russia.The demise of Russia Pacific Fleet and Russian Baltic Fleet pronounced the rise of Japan, a new sea power.

World War I (1914 -1918): UK was sided with her old enemies of France and Russia to prevent the rise of the great land power Germany.

World War II on Europe (1939-1945):this time the emerging sea power of the US joined UK and Russia to fight the resurging Germany to take the Eurasia Land.

The Second Sino-Japanese War (1931 –1945):The Japanese invaded Manchuria at September 18, 1931.Only until 1938 did the US start realizing that Japan 's ambition was not only annexing Manchuria, but to become a great land power to achieve “The Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere”. As a great sea power,with or without Pearl harbor attack, the US was fated to fight Japan in order to achieve her world dominance ambition.

Cold War(1947-1991): at 1975 the US (greatest sea power) made alliance with China(her main enemy in Korean war and Vietnam war) to contain the USSR(the greatest land power).

So do all these ring the bell for the famous cliche “Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.”?

Back to the topic of NEAU, if someone is still advocating the idea that the Chinese will not easily forget Japan's war history, then that someone is knowing now we might know history more than you guys.

What China and Japan need is, to find commonality in their nation's interest, becoming a land/sea power peacefully to benefit the whole wold.

Off -Shore Balancing is like Whac-a-mole

 

[Jlaw]

View attachment 294490

Oh yah LOL. Billy Chiu who is from Vietnam from what I heard about him.

 

[nang2]

This is sad but true. How can democracy work if people do not respect the law? Honestly, those rioter are only a small portion of our population, but what worry me that is many people in HK support or sympathize with those rioters, what even worse is that many of them are highly educated, including politicians and educators.

It is not unexpected and they are trained by the same western propaganda. However, the propaganda may not intentionally mislead. The westerners are also misleading themselves as they start to forget their own history of liberty and take it for granted. The same effect has been seen in Europe and US as well. The difference is that their long history of the respect of law provides ample counter measure to democrazy-ness. But it is just a matter of time before it wears out eventually.

 

[Aepsilons]

It is not unexpected and they are trained by the same western propaganda. However, the propaganda may not intentionally mislead. The westerners are also misleading themselves as they start to forget their own history of liberty and take it for granted. The same effect has been seen in Europe and US as well. The difference is that their long history of the respect of law provides ample counter measure to democrazy-ness. But it is just a matter of time before it wears out eventually.

Yes, you're touching into it, my friend. Allow me further addend (perhaps @TaiShang can also add, as he is an IR specialist). What we are seeing in Hong Kong, in Tokyo , is a symptom of not democracy, but populism.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, populism is not simply a matter of irresponsible policies or appeals to the downtrodden. Populism is an anti-elitist but, crucially, also an anti-pluralist form of politics. And despite the optimistic notions of many liberals, populist parties are not just protest parties that always prove incapable of governing. Populist regimes have recently been consolidated in Hungary, Turkey and to some degree Russia, among other countries. These regimes are often supported by what political observers since Aristotle have liked to think of as the social backbone of democracies: the rising middle class. Fukuyama himself recently affirmed the belief that “middle-class societies . . . are the bedrock of democracy,” but they can just as easily be the bedrock of populism.

Populist rabble-rousers today rely on middle classes who increasingly feel like—and are portrayed as—threatened minorities. Less obviously, populist regimes try to create their own middle class and equate it with the “true” people as such. These regimes typically weaken checks and balances, colonize the state, crush independent civil society and almost always prove highly corrupt. But all of the above tactics, even corruption, can be presented as benefiting a regime’s protected middle class, and hence do not obviously discredit a populist government.

So what, then, is populism? Populism is a moralistic conception of politics, a way of perceiving the political world that opposes a morally pure and fully unified people against corrupt or in some other sense immoral elites. There is no populism without anti-elitism, but not every anti-elitist is a populist. In addition to being against existing elites, populists must also be anti-pluralists. Every genuine populist claims that they, and only they, can properly represent the real people, and that all other political contenders are essentially illegitimate. By implication, to oppose populists amounts to an implicit admission that one is corrupt oneself or does not belong to the people at all.

In the U.S., such populists rail against both liberal elites and racial minorities, while in Central and Eastern Europe, the targets are left-liberal elites and ethnic groups such as the Roma—both of whom are also supposedly supported by an illegitimate outside power, the European Union. In Italy, “communists” and illegal immigrants are the enemy, according to the rhetoric of former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and the Northern League. The controversy over U.S. President Barack Obama’s birth certificate made this logic almost absurdly literal: In the eyes of the “birthers,” the president is in fact a usurping foreigner, someone who does not belong and who has appropriated the office under false pretexts.

It is a mistake to think that populists advocate for more direct political participation. They do not have a problem with representation; they simply think that they are the only legitimate representatives of the real people. Behind this claim stands the further assumption that the people themselves have one common will that genuinely aims at the common good, and that in turn can be identified and implemented by the supposed one authentic leader of the people. Thus, as long as populists are in charge, the people can stay passive.

 

[nang2]

Yes, you're touching into it, my friend. Allow me further addend (perhaps @TaiShang can also add, as he is an IR specialist). What we are seeing in Hong Kong, in Tokyo , is a symptom of not democracy, but populism.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, populism is not simply a matter of irresponsible policies or appeals to the downtrodden. Populism is an anti-elitist but, crucially, also an anti-pluralist form of politics. And despite the optimistic notions of many liberals, populist parties are not just protest parties that always prove incapable of governing. Populist regimes have recently been consolidated in Hungary, Turkey and to some degree Russia, among other countries. These regimes are often supported by what political observers since Aristotle have liked to think of as the social backbone of democracies: the rising middle class. Fukuyama himself recently affirmed the belief that “middle-class societies . . . are the bedrock of democracy,” but they can just as easily be the bedrock of populism.

Populist rabble-rousers today rely on middle classes who increasingly feel like—and are portrayed as—threatened minorities. Less obviously, populist regimes try to create their own middle class and equate it with the “true” people as such. These regimes typically weaken checks and balances, colonize the state, crush independent civil society and almost always prove highly corrupt. But all of the above tactics, even corruption, can be presented as benefiting a regime’s protected middle class, and hence do not obviously discredit a populist government.

So what, then, is populism? Populism is a moralistic conception of politics, a way of perceiving the political world that opposes a morally pure and fully unified people against corrupt or in some other sense immoral elites. There is no populism without anti-elitism, but not every anti-elitist is a populist. In addition to being against existing elites, populists must also be anti-pluralists. Every genuine populist claims that they, and only they, can properly represent the real people, and that all other political contenders are essentially illegitimate. By implication, to oppose populists amounts to an implicit admission that one is corrupt oneself or does not belong to the people at all.

In the U.S., such populists rail against both liberal elites and racial minorities, while in Central and Eastern Europe, the targets are left-liberal elites and ethnic groups such as the Roma—both of whom are also supposedly supported by an illegitimate outside power, the European Union. In Italy, “communists” and illegal immigrants are the enemy, according to the rhetoric of former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and the Northern League. The controversy over U.S. President Barack Obama’s birth certificate made this logic almost absurdly literal: In the eyes of the “birthers,” the president is in fact a usurping foreigner, someone who does not belong and who has appropriated the office under false pretexts.

It is a mistake to think that populists advocate for more direct political participation. They do not have a problem with representation; they simply think that they are the only legitimate representatives of the real people. Behind this claim stands the further assumption that the people themselves have one common will that genuinely aims at the common good, and that in turn can be identified and implemented by the supposed one authentic leader of the people. Thus, as long as populists are in charge, the people can stay passive.

Populism is the appearance, not the core. Democracy in the common format includes populism. Therefore, you cannot separate these two.

I am an engineer. From years of practice and studies, it has taught me one thing. For any method to work, there are a list of prerequisites, without which the method can either not work or even cause harm.

What democracy requires is rational population. A rational person means a person who will only do things that is truly beneficial to him, not what may be beneficial to him. That is a very high requirement and even a highly educated and informed person could from time to time lose his vigilance and stray.

The reality is that human is not perfect. In fact, far from it. We have so many traits that will make us gullible and delusional. Recent development on psychology has provided ample evidence on this fact. Whoever is interested may read the book titled "Thinking, Fast and Slow". Knowing that, soon you will find so many acts in governments, in medias that directly aim at mind manipulation, which makes it a wonder on why democracy even works sometimes.

I mentioned that populism isn't the core. The core is human imperfection, including both gullibility and avarice. Working together, you get populism.

 

[Aepsilons]

Populism is the appearance, not the core. Democracy in the common format includes populism. Therefore, you cannot separate these two.

I am an engineer. From years of practice and studies, it has taught me one thing. For any method to work, there are a list of prerequisites, without which the method can either not work or even cause harm.

What democracy requires is rational population. A rational person means a person who will only do things that is truly beneficial to him, not what may be beneficial to him. That is a very high requirement and even a highly educated and informed person could from time to time loses his vigilance and strays.

The reality is that human is not perfect. In fact, far from it. We have so many traits that will make us gullible and delusional. Recent development on psychology has provide ample evidence on this fact. Whoever is interested may read the book titled "Thinking, Fast and Slow". Knowing that, soon you will find so many acts in governments, in medias that directly aim at mind manipulation, which makes it a wonder on why democracy even works sometimes.

I mentioned that populism isn't the core. The core is human imperfection, including both gullibility and avarice. Working together, you get populism.

An accurate appraisal of the organic ailment , actually, @nang2 .

 

[bbccdd1470]

So what, then, is populism? Populism is a moralistic conception of politics, a way of perceiving the political world that opposes a morally pure and fully unified people against corrupt or in some other sense immoral elites. There is no populism without anti-elitism, but not every anti-elitist is a populist. In addition to being against existing elites, populists must also be anti-pluralists. Every genuine populist claims that they, and only they, can properly represent the real people, and that all other political contenders are essentially illegitimate. By implication, to oppose populists amounts to an implicit admission that one is corrupt oneself or does not belong to the people at all.

Thanks for the explanation. This is very accurate to describe the current HK situation, since they always claim that they are the voice of HK people, they are against the government and elites form business sector, most importantly they never accept other voices that are different from them. So are there any way to prevent populism? or how can we stop populism if the situation is already out of control like in HK?

 

[Aepsilons]

Thanks for the explanation. This is very accurate to describe the current HK situation, since they always claim that they are the voice of HK people, they are against the government and elites form business sector, most importantly they never accept other voices that are different from them. So are there any way to prevent populism? or how can we stop populism if the situation is already out of control like in HK?

It is part of the democratic experiment, my friend. This is why , ultimately, i believe democracy is unsustainable. A government that has a sense of authoritative control is , ultimately, preferable to a liberal democratic government , which as you have noticed , can be usurped by populism. And mind you populism is not just affecting Hong Kong; what is happening in Hong Kong SAR is just a spill-over effect of the current paradigm shift in Western Europe, North America, and in other parts of the 'democratic' world.

Source: Eurostat

Policy Network - Populism and migration: Challenges for the left

Thanks for the explanation. This is very accurate to describe the current HK situation, since they always claim that they are the voice of HK people, they are against the government and elites form business sector, most importantly they never accept other voices that are different from them. So are there any way to prevent populism? or how can we stop populism if the situation is already out of control like in HK?

My friend, THIS IS WHY , ultimately, China's form of government (socialism combined with capitalism, and chinese characteristics) is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it is ultimately the best form of governance for a gargantuan continental sized nation state such as China. A nation of 1.4 billion.

Besides, in light of my discussions with graduate students in political science (at my university), i do remember that in a socialist capitalist society , civil rights and the bill of rights as espoused by the universality of human rights does not necessarily have to be expunged as what some would like to believe (in error).

Oh yah LOL. Billy Chiu who is from Vietnam from what I heard about him.

Brother,

Not all Vietnamese patriots are like this Billy Chiu, or whatever his name is. In fact the Vietnamese graduate students who i knew in grad school days came to the United States straight out from Viet Nam. They actually are able to defend the tenets of socialism, and do believe in the structural equations that relates to socialist thought, and their politic is not that different (i would even deign to say) to Chinese mainlanders who are fluent in political science theories. This Billy Chiu, only represents a populist radical; his being or not being an ethnic Vietnamese is of no consequence.

Why in fact the VCP in Viet Nam take up differing positions as Vietnamese protesters, actually, whom by the way are populists. We have to be careful when we generalize all Vietnamese patriots as not all of them are populist radicals.

We have to learn to differentiate patriots from populist radicals.