1. IndyInjun says:

    Sad to say, but China owns so much US debt that our pols dare not insult them.

    Money trumps principles in politics.

  2. Tea Party says:

    WE are where we are…

    China owns so much US debt, we send $1.2BB per DAY to the Middle East to feed the oil machine.

    Our population curve is approaching the retirement stage, and the increase in social security taxes in the mid 80’s is already spent.

    The government prints money faster than the ink can dry, Due to this and an increase in the cost of oil, inflation is starting to rear its’ ugly head.

    Worrying about how China handles its’ business in Tibet is really down on the list, today…

  3. StevePerkins says:

    Working in software for a living, a lot of the colleagues I work with are originally from China. They’re pretty Westernized, and on the same page with 1st Amendment values, but they’re puzzled at how little Americans try to understand where that country is coming from.

    Basically, China was a feudal timewarp for millennia, and spent the past century under disastrous collectivized farming schemes. It’s only been within the past decade or two that the country has started taking half-steps toward economic reform and development. 99% of the population understands absolutely ZERO about economics (compared to only 95% of our population!), so change is not always popular with everybody.

    We watched Russia try to do too-much-too-soon with democratic reform, and they backslid. Why push another nuclear-armed economic-superpower toward the same result? I’m not advocating for communism, but people need to let go of this “the-Iraqis-will-welcome-us-with-open-arms” neocon notion that democracy is a natural state of being that springs up whenever given half a chance. It ISN’T… it’s a huge cultural shift that takes generations. Don’t forget that the Founders of OUR democracy originally believed that only white male landowners should vote, and even then they should only vote directly for their House rep.

    From what I understand, the percentage of actual Chinese people who really get up in arms protesting free speech limitations is roughly equal to the number of Americans who passionately follow the happenings in Guantanamo Bay. They’ve vocal, but small. Because they’ve been undeveloped for so long, the average guy is more interested in the government’s performance vis-a-vis opportunity creation for them and their kids. My hope and expectation for China is that as this economic development continues, future generations will accept it as the status quo rather than new luxury… and will continue to expand openness in other areas.

  4. Old Vet says:

    Not only should Sonnny not have gone to China, President Bush should eliminnate any diplomatic ties to the olympics, including his own presence. China has been in the process of destroying Tibetan culture for many years by importing Han Chinese into the country and marginalizing the native Tibetans. How can we make great fuss over the relatively minor economic privations of the Cubans and overlook the destruction of an entire civilization in Tibet?

  5. John Konop says:


    The problem with the West is we see the world only via our eyes. The trading of goods does not guarantee ending a fascist style government.

    In fact many have seen this as an opportunity to lower cost and make a profit. That is why Adam Smith was clear about the need for workers to have legal rights as well as justice for capitalism to function correctly.

    We cannot change communist China they must decide or we end up with Iraq. I find it bizarre how people from the both parties think democracy is a form of sprinkle dust that wipes out thousands of years of history.

    I wonder how many people even now about the vast differences within China via culture?

  6. IndyInjun says:


    Are you daring to imply that COMMUNISTS have gained the upper hand over our capitalists?

    Or it a matter of corruption sinking to the lower level? I favor the latter, for the Wall Streeters are not capitalists at all.

    They are cronyists.

    As far as China goes, they have been summarily executing radical Muslim separatists for years, so why the sudden dismay from the Redstate crowd over Tibet?

  7. Ms_midtown says:

    Delta needs the help, otherwise a postponement
    could have made a statement. But then there is likely one or more major elected officials in China on any given day.

    It looked like a big party onboard, maybe a more somber tone would have been appropiate at landing. Now we know Sonny Perdue is not trying or expecting to be the Republican VP nominee.

  8. Demonbeck says:

    Yes, I am sure that if Sonny hadn’t shown his blatant disregard for the plight of Tibetans by taking a flight to China, the folks in midtown Atlanta would have continued their strong support of his efforts.

  9. John Konop says:


    Please get the following for my family.

    2 orders fried rice

    1 Lemon Chicken

    1 Singapore Beef (Mildly Spicy)

    1 Moo-Shu Pork (extra plum sauce)

    1 Ginger Shrimp

    And please tip the driver!

  10. Donkey Kong says:


    Or it a matter of corruption sinking to the lower level? I favor the latter, for the Wall Streeters are not capitalists at all.

    They are cronyists.

    I had coffee with a friend today and we were commenting how incestuous the top students at UGA are — we are all friends and hang out with each other. The cream does in fact rise to the top, and it tends to clump together on the way up. I do not in any way mean this arrogantly. It’s also never conscious — there’s no clique and no exclusion of others, period. But people of similar heart with similar drive tend to gravitate towards each other, and when you have to choose between two fairly qualified people, one of whom you know well and can trust, why not choose the one you know you can trust? Cronyism can definitely have a bad form as well, when you choose your friends over much better qualified individuals. Truthfully, though, “cronyism” of some sort has been the norm among the difference-makers in the world since time began. What bothers me on Wall Street is not cronyism, but elitism. Thankfully, some firms are better than others, and all respect an insatiable drive and work ethic.

    As far as China goes, they have been summarily executing radical Muslim separatists for years, so why the sudden dismay from the Redstate crowd over Tibet?

    Well, the fact they were executing radical Muslims (could you classify them as terrorists?), not relatively peaceful monks, might have something to do with it.


  11. Bull Moose says:

    Weird issue, but the German Chancellor demonstrated tremendous leadership in announcing she will boycott the Opening Ceremonies of the Olympics there.

    Hard to make theoretical decisions not knowing all the circumstances on Perdue’s trip, but I tend to believe that if put in a similar situation, that I probably would not have gone on the inaugural flight and just gone the day after.

    At the end of the day, sometimes, symbolism is the only power that elected officials have at their disposal to sway public opinion.

  12. Donkey Kong says:

    Nah, I’m glad the Governor went. China deserves much of the criticism, but let’s step back a second and remember that China is on the path to reform and freeing up their markets. They are smart, intelligent people and they know that this process takes time. I am not suggesting they are convinced of the values of western civ by any means, but they are trending in our direction. After watching with horror the pervasive corruption and destruction in Russia by so rapidly privatizing Russian institutions, China has a long-term approach and is in no rush to push through every possible reform. Let’s keep in mind that when communist ideology so pervades a populace, the citizenry may not be able to handle, with the discipline necessary, an immediate cold turkey jump to capitalism. Democracy requires self-restraint and substantial individual responsibility, and when you dump this responsibility on individuals trained for decades, if not centuries, to rely on others, many will be unable to handle the burden. Our founders knew, unlike the current administration, that not all people are ready for democracy.

    The Chinese are nationalists. Is what the current regime doing all that much worse than Lincoln and the union troops invading the south and stripping away some of our rights? I doubt you’ll find many intelligent people, even here in the south, that today wish the Union would have dissolved via the victory of the rebel troops. I am not suggesting the ills of the Union are of the same degree of the evils of the Communist regime in China, but just drawing a parallel between the similar goals of holding a nation together. The regime is nationalist, and I don’t entirely blame them.

    That said, the Tibetans still have certain inalienable rights, and I will be happy to support their goal of ending the government’s intrusion on these rights.

  13. joseph stewart says:


    Comparing the Chinese government’s actions to Lincoln’s during the Civil War is useless. For one, there has been no legal declaration of independence, merely protests in the streets, which were peaceful until the Chinese police forcefully dispersed them, shooting people and arresting monks. Secondly, the motivations of the protesters are myriad: some do want an independent Tibet; others just want the Chinese to stop relocating ethnic Chinese into Tibet and then favoring them once they arrive. This isn’t about holding a nation together–it’s about consolidating empire through cultural genocide. It’s okay to understand the communist government’s logic here, but do you really kind of agree with it? If anything, it’s more like America’s treatment of the Native Americans than it is like the Civil War.

    Many Tibetans (including the Dalai Lama) are happy with how the Chinese have put the region onto the road to progress, but they’re vexed at being elbowed off that road by a horde of carpetbaggers.

  14. Donkey Kong says:


    You raise some valid points. I do not support the oppression of an individual’s inalienable rights. That said, a freer and more prosperous China will make the world more prosperous. If the Tibetan movement for independence grows, the Communist regime will eventually take a Tiananmen Square type response. The restraint the Communist regime has shown thus far is a mark of the progress they have made. There was an article in the NYTimes yesterday about Chinese who are disappointed that the Communists have not taken a harder line against the Tibetans. If the regime is pushed to react more violently, I think it will make Communist leaders further link freedom to anarchy and violence and eschew further reform. Stability is the key to their power, so the regime will avoid pursuing policies they feel will lead to widespread unrest. The Tibetans cannot win, and the effect of their unrest, should it turn more violent, would be to curtail freedom of all Chinese, not provide more. The idealist in me says to support those calling for freedom throughout the world, but I think we need to be realists and understand the forces at play. If what we want is a more free China, we cannot push them into a corner and force them to react violently in Tibet.

    The Communist leaders, more than anything else, want to stay in power. Because unrest principally occurs for economic reasons, the regime has realized their need to bring about economic reform — in particular, capitalist-style reform. What is unique about the situation in China compared to other despotic regimes is that they link their power to gradually providing more freedoms to their people — compare this with the dictatorships such as Chavez that strip freedom to obtain more power. As long as the Chinese economy keeps growing, their power is safe. And at the 10%+ annual growth rate they have achieved for decades, I would say they are doing something right.

    As a side note, though, it remains as important as ever that the world community continue putting pressure on China to provide more freedom, and I think the pressure of world opinion has had a substantial impact on China choosing to open their markets. We just need to be wise on how we exert pressure.

    Side note #2: Something to watch for: the Shanghai stock market, which is primarily open only to the Chinese, has plummeted over 35% in the last few months. Because the Chinese have been unable to invest outside China, many ordinary Chinese put savings in either real estate or their domestic stock market. So far, the real estate market there has held up, but it is widely speculated that there is still a massive bubble in their real estate market that has yet to pop. If this bubble does pop, combined with how much money the Chinese have lost in domestic stocks over the last 6 months, it will be interesting to see if, or how much, domestic unrest increases.

  15. John Konop says:

    This video is the reality of what goes on in China. Why would China change the behavior toward exploitation of people when it gives them a market advantage?

    That was the point Adam Smith made in his famous economic book Wealth of Nations the bible of free market economics. That is why he was insistent that a legal system with justice for all was a very important factor in a free market system.

    Torture of Gao RongRong in the Longshan forced Labor Camp.


  16. IndyInjun says:

    DK wrote ‘“cronyism” of some sort has been the norm among the difference-makers in the world since time began. What bothers me on Wall Street is not cronyism, but elitism.’

    The elite of Wall Street are elite all right – they are an elite of FOOLS. No matter their golden Ivy League educations, FOOL or THIEF can only describe debt securitization, whereby the borrower, the lender, the originator, the loan processor, the security owner, and the holder of collateral can be all different ‘people’ in the same transaction The result has been, that in a goodly % of cases , it cannot be proven who holds the mortgage.

    Let’s embark on a little lesson here. The FOOLS who founded Long Term Capital Management were TWO NOBEL LAUREATES in economics and a star Wall Street trader. They managed to parlay a $hundred million or so in equity into liabilties in the trillions. These “brilliant” men nearly took down the world financial system in 1998.

    Contrast these luminaries and educated wonders with drop-outs Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Steven Jobs, and high school drop out Dave Thomas, founder of Wendies.

    Common sense and keen minds built fortunes, while educated fools and thieves destroyed finances worldwide.

  17. Doug Deal says:


    It’s not the fact went to Ivy League schools that is the problem, it is the belief that they are endowed by god to be superior to everyone who hasn’t.

Comments are closed.