The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Godfree Roberts Archive
The China Hoax
Is China Being Framed?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state. Noam Chomsky.

I was researching Chinese censorship when–irony of ironies–I fell afoul of American censorship, providing an opportunity to update you on the state of the art under both regimes, starting at home, with the recent attempt to frame the President for crimes he did not commit.

Like many attempts to frame people, events and nations–Vietnam, Iraq, 9/11, JFK, Bin Laden–it was a State hoax, a falsehood deliberately fabricated to masquerade as truth . An atrocity story sustained by artful censorship and loud, proud, bold and brassy propaganda. An expensive, in-your-face, preposterous conspiracy, sustained for two years at great financial and reputational cost to the nation. Wildly ambitious, batshit crazy and so self-destructive as to boggle the mind, it was one of many propaganda-driven frame-ups, another of which in progress as you read these lines.

It checks all the boxes: big, bold, loud and proud, expensive, in-your-face, a preposterous hoax, daringly ambitious and utterly self-destructive.

The China Hoax frames China’s Confucian politics and economics as if they were–or should be–Roman. It explains why thousands of predictions of China’s collapse have been one hundred percent wrong for seventy years and why we keep repeating them, and why we think of China’s government as oppressively authoritarian when ninety-five percent of Chinese think it’s super. It also helps us see how the narrative is sustained by an almost totalitarian censorship regime.

It is well known that our censors–for that’s what they are–have silenced hundreds of thousands of Americans with National Security Letters[1]National Security Letters are administrative subpoenas with gag orders enjoining recipients from divulging to anyone that they’ve been served. and, whenever those prove inadequate, have permanent authority to take control[2]Executive Order 10995: Assigning Telecommunications Management Functions and EO 12472: Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions Act. of all American communications and information. If undesirable communications persist they can kidnap, imprison or execute the communicators[3]In 2011 President Obama ordered the execution of Anwar al Awlaki, an American citizen, for preaching Wahabbism and separately executed his sixteen-year-old son and eight-year-old daughter, all without trial. without fear of court trial or media criticism. Since China emerged as a threat to our hegemony six months ago they have tightened their control noticeably.

* * *

I bumped into them following a clue in Ann Lee’s[4]What the U.S. Can Learn from China, Ann Lee. 2012 story about “A reporter and friend of Michael Massing,[5]Former Executive Editor of The Columbia Journalism Review. who worked at the Beijing office of The Wall Street Journal, who told Massing that the editors in Washington regularly changed material information and opinions in his articles. Given the twelve-hour time difference, by the time his stories went to press in the West, the editors had replaced all the Chinese interviews with statements from American talking heads who work at think tanks promoting anti-China perspectives.”

Congressional testimony from the CIA’s Victor Marchetti[6]The CIA and the cult of Intelligence, by V. Marchetti. 1976. The first book an American government censored prior to publication revealed the source of the talking heads’ funding: he told Congress that the Agency provided two hundred fifty million dollars[7]In 2019 US$ annually, “To The Asia Foundation for anti-communist academicians to disseminate a negative vision of mainland China,” and paid journalists and publishers worldwide[8]English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte’s “Bought Journalists” Suppressed? to do likewise.

I had always assumed that the government manipulates the news somehow and had I thought a little deeper I would have realized that, after spending billions on framing China, censors would eventually tire of pipsqueak consumers like me questioning their narrative.

Until two weeks ago my comments on China in mainstream media attracted thousands of responses (one-third angry) from millions of readers and provided priceless exposure for my upcoming book, I hoped. My readership stats climbed steadily until I received an email from Patrice Greanville of the socialist Greanville Post on April 4 with a warning from Google:

Patrice told me that, since Google downrated his site as part of its fake news campaign the Post had become almost invisible in their searches.

The next day I received a message from the Financial Times (to which I subscribed) informing me that my comments would be blocked thenceforth and, lo! they were:

I told another China-friendly FT commenter and he replied, “I was blocked last week.” When I checked the comment sections of China stories I found that positive comments had disappeared. One comment from a virulent China-basher, caught my eye, “Where are the wumao[9]An epithet flung at commenters who explain or justify Chinese policies. FP itself explains, “Wumao means ‘fifty cents’ in Chinese and is slang for web users who reliably take the government’s side. How to Spot a State-Funded Chinese Internet Troll. Foreign Policy, June 17, 2015.? Have the fifty-centers given up?”

Three days later the leading comment plugin Disqus, which supports 750,000 websites and 35 million users, blocked me from a broad range of publications:

I was also blocked from several university-run China sites and two established China news services, Sinocism and SupChina (to which I also subscribe), whose mission is to publish negative stories about China. Yet uncensored fora like Unz Review, Greanville Post and Quora demonstrate that there is high and growing interest in fact-based China news–and growing suspicion of a frame-up. There is also–as we see daily in these pages–a growing awareness of our own censorship regime though a lack of knowledge about its makeup and authority.

We know that less than half of us trust our media and we know that, despite a Constitutional prohibition, we are censored. But we don’t know who our censors are, their goals or where to seek redress. Neither Congress, the Administration nor the courts are willing to admit the problem, which suggests that they are party to it.

Every year Reporters Without Borders[10]2018 WORLD PRESS FREEDOM INDEX asks Western media experts to rank the world’s media freedom based on pluralism, independence, environment, self-censorship, legislation and transparency. In 2018, they ranked America’s media freedom a respectable forty-first, Singapore’s government-regulated media 154th and China’s ten times less free than leader Norway, at 176th.

Every year Edelman[11]2018 Edelman Trust Barometer, January, 2018. surveys the world’s media consumers, asking how much they trust their media. Forty-two percent of Americans, fifty-two percent of Singaporeans and seventy-one percent of Chinese trust their national media.

Singapore’s Lee Kwan Yew,[12]A Third World Perspective on the Press. RH Lee Kwan Yew, Prime Minister of Singapore. C-SPAN, APRIL 14, 1988 whose relationship to media is both notorious and enlightening, told the American Society of Newspaper Editors why this is so.

”The Philippines press enjoys all the freedoms of the US system but fails the people: a wildly partisan press helped Philippines politicians flood the marketplace of ideas with junk and confuse and befuddle the people so that they could not see what their vital interests were in a developing country. And, because vital issues like economic growth and equitable distribution were seldom discussed, they were never tackled and the democratic system malfunctioned. Look at Taiwan and South Korea: their free press runs rampant and corruption runs riot. The critic itself is corrupt yet the theory is, if you have a free press, corruption disappears. Now I’m telling you, that’s not true. Freedom of the press, freedom of news critics, must be subordinated to the overriding needs of the integrity of Singapore and to the primacy of purpose of an elected government.”

* * *

Politicians must use only such language as is proper for public speech and only speak of what is practical and proper to effect. Confucius, Analects 13.3.

The censorship scene in China could hardly be more different.

For two thousand years the Chief Censor has been a public intellectual and the incumbent, Wang Huning, is typical. He’s the most famous intellectual in a nation of intellectual-worshippers. His Master’s thesis, From Bodin to Maritain: On Sovereignty Theories Developed by the Western Bourgeoisie, won wide acclaim and millions watched him twice lead Fudan University to victory in the international Intercollegiate Debating Championships. After his PhD thesis, Comparative Political Analysis, became a famous book (one of twelve he’s authored) he became the youngest professor in Fudan’s history and headed its Law School until former President Jiang Zemin, quoting verbatim passages from his book, persuaded Wang to turn speechwriter. Jiang’s successor promoted him to the 25-man Politburo and his successor, President Xi, invited Wang to join his six man cabinet and his band of travelling companions. That makes three successive presidents who have esteemed him more than their predecessors.

Everyone knows Wang’s bio, his job description and the constitutional source of his authority: “Once a policy has been widely discussed, voted on and legislated, discussion is suspended while everyone unites to implement it.”

His online rules are commonsensical: no infringing, fake accounts, libel, disclosing trade secrets or invading privacy; no sending porn to attract users; no torture, violence, killing people or animals; no selling lethal weapons; no gambling, phishing, scamming or spreading viruses; no organizing crime, counterfeiting, false advertising, empty promises or bullying; no lotteries, rumor-mongering, promoting superstitions. No opposing the basic principles of the Constitution or national unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity and, of course, no divulging State secrets or endangering national security.

Wang’s part of a feedback loop helping to keep the leadership honest and his responsibilities are bidirectional: he must market leadership’s ideas to the citizenry and market their complaints to his colleagues.

As an intellectual he encourages free expression, says Harvard’s Gary King, “Contrary to much research and commentary, the purpose of the censorship program is not to suppress criticism of the State or the Communist Party. Indeed, despite widespread censorship of social critics, we find that when Chinese people write scathing criticisms of their government and its leaders the probability that their post will be censored does not increase. Instead, censored tweets were equally likely to be against the state, for the state, irrelevant, or factual reports about events. Negative, even vitriolic criticism of the state, its leaders and its policies are not more likely to be censored.” Even investigative journalists,[13]Media Politics in China: Improvising Power under Authoritarianism by Maria Repnikova, C.U.P., July 15, 2017. though as embattled in China as elsewhere, publish front-page exposes in mainstream media with strong public support.

The Chinese are not naive about censorship. It’s is an honored public service, constitutionally and legislatively delimited, that operates in the glare of public scrutiny. Wang is often asked to explain his decisions[14]To complaints that he censored a viral essay, Beijing Has 20 Million People Pretending to Live Here, about the city being overrun by outsiders, he explained, “It polarizes relations between prosperous Beijingers and inflames ill feeling towards the vulnerable immigrants who sweep their streets.” and I have yet to find accurate, useful or professional information blocked.

Deborah Fallows[15]Most Chinese Say They Approve of Government Internet Control, by Deborah Fallows, Senior Research Fellow, Pew Internet & American Life Project March 27, 2008 found that over eighty percent of Chinese want their media regulated and eighty-five percent of those who do want the government doing it, as do most people in the world. Everyone everywhere trusts state outlets like the BBC twice as much as private media and seventy percent of Chinese trust their media–right in line with Singaporeans and their famously regulated media. If we want to find out what is really going on in our own country and abroad we must find ways to create trustworthy media, otherwise we’re fumbling in the dark.

For example, we’re told China steals our IP when there is zero evidence of theft and abundant evidence that they outspend us 4:1 on R&D.

That’s mad. If we don’t know that underinvestment in research cost us the 5G race, or that Chinese scientists do half of our domestic research, how can we respond effectively–or at all?

The China Hoax is a cruel joke and the joke’s on us.

Notes

[1] National Security Letters are administrative subpoenas with gag orders enjoining recipients from divulging to anyone that they’ve been served.

[2] Executive Order 10995: Assigning Telecommunications Management Functions and EO 12472: Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions Act.

[3] In 2011 President Obama ordered the execution of Anwar al Awlaki, an American citizen, for preaching Wahabbism and separately executed his sixteen-year-old son and eight-year-old daughter, all without trial.

[4] What the U.S. Can Learn from China, Ann Lee. 2012

[5] Former Executive Editor of The Columbia Journalism Review.

[6] The CIA and the cult of Intelligence, by V. Marchetti. 1976. The first book an American government censored prior to publication

[7] In 2019 US$

[8] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte’s “Bought Journalists” Suppressed?

[9] An epithet flung at commenters who explain or justify Chinese policies. FP itself explains, “Wumao means ‘fifty cents’ in Chinese and is slang for web users who reliably take the government’s side. How to Spot a State-Funded Chinese Internet Troll. Foreign Policy, June 17, 2015.

[10] 2018 WORLD PRESS FREEDOM INDEX

[11] 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer, January, 2018.

[12] A Third World Perspective on the Press. RH Lee Kwan Yew, Prime Minister of Singapore. C-SPAN, APRIL 14, 1988

[13] Media Politics in China: Improvising Power under Authoritarianism by Maria Repnikova, C.U.P., July 15, 2017.

[14] To complaints that he censored a viral essay, Beijing Has 20 Million People Pretending to Live Here, about the city being overrun by outsiders, he explained, “It polarizes relations between prosperous Beijingers and inflames ill feeling towards the vulnerable immigrants who sweep their streets.”

[15] Most Chinese Say They Approve of Government Internet Control, by Deborah Fallows, Senior Research Fellow, Pew Internet & American Life Project March 27, 2008

 
• Category: Foreign Policy, Ideology • Tags: American Media, Censorship, China 
Hide 259 CommentsLeave a Comment
259 Comments to "The China Hoax"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Chewie111 says:

    Say what you will about China…. but I’ve got a Chinese laptop (Lenovo), smartphone (Huawei), and action camera (Akaso) which pack much better specs and power than American or South Korean brands at the same price point.

    Whatever China is “hoaxing”, it’s certainly making my wallet a lot happier.

  2. anon[286] • Disclaimer says:

    The China Hoax
    Is China Being Framed?
    GODFREE ROBERTS

    this clown again?

  3. anon[211] • Disclaimer says:

    “CIA’s Victor Marchetti revealed the source of the talking heads’ funding: he told Congress that the Agency provided two hundred fifty million dollars annually, “To The Asia Foundation for anti-communist academicians to disseminate a negative vision of mainland China,” and paid journalists and publishers worldwide to do likewise.”

    I’ve suspected as much for a long time now. If you search YouTube and other social media, you’ll find a large number of well-produced channels (China Uncensored, etc. …) with an almost comically anti-Chinese bent: pictures of Chinese dams breaking in the thumbnail, videos alleging the Chinese are creating genetically engineered babies, videos on Chinese pollution, videos on Chinese theft and corruption, Chinese censorship … . These videos are all quite strange and unusually well produced (and very numerous) with the hosts acting as though they are doing a job for client or something; they seem to have no legitimate reason to make such a large amount of anti-Chinese content (why do a couple of white guys care so much about China?). In fact, I did a bit of cursory research on one of these channels once, and it turned out that their supposed funding source was a religious cult; the CIA is famous for using third parties to funnel money into political efforts.

    PS. Steve Sailer has hinted a couple of times that he thinks it’s strange that China had such a successful run in American movie theaters in the early 2000s but now suddenly hit Chinese movies are hard to come by … hmm, strange.

  4. MEFOBILLS says:

    For example, we’re told China steals our IP when there is zero evidence of theft and abundant evidence that they outspend us 4:1 on R&D.

    Godfree, you cannot make claims like there is zero evidence of theft and expect to be taken seriously.

    It damages your other salient and accurate points. The average reader will then throw out the good with the bad.

    I was part of the first company to go to China in the mid 90’s, and we gave away our technology. It is also a general characteristic that Asian partners (not Japanese) take advantage of free-wheeling American’s. In technology exchanges, it is always talk to my boss, and I cannot reveal that, etc. Meanwhile, we (American’s) give away the store. It is always a one way street, where we give and they take.

    I got 8.5 million hits on Google when I typed in a search for Chinese theft of intellectual property. That many millions of hits implies when there is smoke, there is fire. One of the companies I worked for, the Chinese copied some of our stuff so accurately, parts were interchangeable.

    I also worked in R and D, and I do respect many of the Chinese researchers. In major breakthroughs, it still tends to be us, and Chinese are fast followers. Their being embedded in our universities, allows them to piggyback onto our government dollars and first research.

    Maybe the roles will be reversed when China pulls ahead, but somehow I think that one way street sign will not point from China to the U.S.

  5. utu says:

    “a wildly partisan press helped […] politicians flood the marketplace of ideas with junk and confuse and befuddle the people so that they could not see what their vital interests were “

    This seems to be the point of media and internet even more so. Fragmentation of ideas and purposeful confusion. Dilbert came up with the term confusopoly “an economic and marketing term referring to a purposeful act by a seller or group of sellers to confuse the buyer in order to ease the sale.” This works making rational educated choice impossible.

  6. Voltaire said “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

    Advice to the author, dig deeper and find out who is behind all these hoaxes in the west, and why.

    https://www.mintpressnews.com/the-western-left-needs-to-stop-commusplaining-to-china-and-russia/257376/

    • Replies: @MAOWASAYALI
  7. Alfred says:

    I am rather proud of having been banned from commenting on FT.com – despite having subscribed to the newspaper (printed and online) for 20+ years – around 5 years ago. They did not like me pointing out their obvious lies about what was really happening in the Middle East.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  8. Anonymous[317] • Disclaimer says:

    His online rules are commonsensical: no infringing, fake accounts, libel, disclosing trade secrets or invading privacy; no sending porn to attract users; no torture, violence, killing people or animals; no selling lethal weapons; no gambling, phishing, scamming or spreading viruses; no organizing crime, counterfeiting, false advertising, empty promises or bullying; no lotteries, rumor-mongering, promoting superstitions. No opposing the basic principles of the Constitution or national unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity and, of course, no divulging State secrets or endangering national security.

    Half of those rules look pretty bad, like bullying, rumours, superstitions or national disunity.

  9. Half-Jap says:

    I always appreciate your work and has enlightened me on our national neighbor.
    The Chinese economy and data on it is sketchy, though the rest of the major economies have been on life support for a while and predictions of collapse have come and gone. China seems to be in a better position to weather it, with plenty of room for the real economy to grow, while the rest has been overwhelmingly just that of the balance sheet.

    It frequently bothers me that Tienanmen propaganda is accepted as historical fact, just as much as the whole Nanjing massacre is accepted so over there. Drives my Chinese wife mad or uncomfortable each time I brought it up with other Chinese; at least in those I’ve socialized with, they’re all the more interested in how we view it and what evidence we base our opposition (most of which were seized by the US and brought to U of Maryland’s naval library). Nationalists and Japan did do quite a lot of damage and much to answer for, but that we didn’t do. As the referenced Japanese article evinces, we have respect and interest in China, and it seems the past is a major obstable in what otherwise would be a great partnership.

    By the way, 5G will be the end of us, literally (plenty of other research and reports on less strong RF emissions, but check out the middle for the meaty part: http://prn.fm/race-towards-extinction-climate-change-versus-5g-roll). Doesn’t matter whether it’s Huawei or whichever corp. deploying it. Speaking of Huawei, ironic that the US is shutting Huawei out over surveillance/’national security’ reasons, when the US is the biggest one doing it globally long before Huawei entered the picture.

  10. Cyrano says:

    I always thought that there is something fishy about the Chinese. Back in the 1970’s they all looked like the Hugh Hefners of Asia – wore pyjamas all day long, they were all fit as fiddles, despite never engaging in more strenuous exercise than that ridiculous slow motion koala style tai-chi, and they all rode bicycles – supposedly because they were poor, but I suspect it was because they were in no hurry to get anywhere.

    I also think that they engineered the downfall of the west. I think that they invented the Cultural revolution on purpose. They knew that the west is stupid and they’re going to try to compete with China – and sure enough – just to outdo the Chinese, the west went one step further. Instead of Cultural revolution, the west invented the Multicultural revolution, because stupid as they are, they thought – how can you go wrong – multi means many, and of course everybody knows that many Is better than one.

    So the west ended up with the Multicultural revolution as opposed to the Chinese singular cultural revolution. And if you thought that surviving the Cultural revolution was difficult, try to imagine how much more difficult it will be to survive the Multicultural revolution. That’s why I think it was all a setup, the downfall of the west was orchestrated by China. I wouldn’t be surprised if few more years down the road, the middle kingdom gives the west the middle finger completely.

    • LOL: Byrresheim
    • Replies: @Byrresheim
  11. This is very interesting appreciated the article I will have to think on it.

    I am not knee-jerk anti-chinese but I am aware that they are a serious competitor on the world stage

    It’s an awesome thought to think of competing with a high-context culture of nearly a billion people.

  12. media owned by power and speaks for the power owner, there are five power owner in human history:
    1. blood (king, emperor);
    2.religion(church, monks);
    3. money (businessman, bank, monopoly, nowadays add the high-tech owner/knowledge owner);
    4.knowledge (ancient priest in the west , Confucius disciples and national exams in ancient China ; nowadays also the high-tech owner, scholars);
    5.class/mass (80% of the human population that owns no power at 80% of the time, but sometime it owns very unstable power: slave/rebellion/revolution mass in very short period, working labor organized & encouraged by communist, 99% etc.)
    Nowadays its mainly money and knowledge in power in most west countries (blood have married money, religion keeps survive), class is out unless its a chaos.
    While in China its mainly knowledge and class/mass in power at least in theory, by name (blood is doomed; religion never ever wins here, just survives; money is fighting fiercely to kick off the class/mass).
    So with this power structure, if its a west media owned by money and knowledge, the west class/mass should be even more cautious with what it feeding them with.
    The interesting question would be:
    Will high-tech grow so fast in the future that it separate from traditional knowledge branch and marry with the class/mass? Or will high-tech grow so huge that none of the others can manage it?
    Anyhow, knowledge and class/mass make the best marriage, that’s also what makes the different of China and the west, at least until money takes over someday, hope not.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  13. In China it isn’t uncommon for the government to listen and act accordingly, when it comes to public grievances. No system is perfect, but having been in quite a few demonstrations that effectively lead nowhere, I’m tempted to say our system [the western variant] really sucks when it comes to ‘our true freedom.’ Go out onto the street, do your democratic thing, and do a countdown until the moment cops show up. In most cases, one hand will suffice. The same hand that’s used in the famous Chinese question: what’s the sound of one hand clapping [as the other must be too busy doing something else…]?

  14. Erebus says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    Yes, unfortunately Godfree needlessly oversells his case with far too much breathless enthusiasm.

  15. Corvinus says:

    “with the recent attempt to frame the President for crimes he did not commit.”

    That would be Fake News. There was no framing involved. A special prosecutor investigated. His boss summarized the findings. Let us actually see the report and the evidence. Certainly our dear author would not be opposed in the interest of censorship.

    “Like many attempts to frame people, events and nations–Vietnam”

    OK

    “Iraq”

    Maybe.

    “9/11”

    Perhaps.

    “JFK”

    Sure.

    “Bin Laden”

    Perhaps.

    “it was a State hoax, a falsehood deliberately fabricated to masquerade as truth.”

    That would be your opinion.

    “and why we think of China’s government as oppressively authoritarian when ninety-five percent of Chinese think it’s super.”

    It’s a poll. There is truth there, but one needs to delve deeper into their thought processes. Of course, China has been oppressively authoritarian. Tianamen Square ring a bell?

    And then there is this…

  16. The zio/US propaganda is to sustain the MIC and the warmongering effect all good for the zionist bankers who own the FED and control the US.

    The day that US business pulls out of China, that will be the day that will never come, as every major corporation in the US has built the threat that the zio/cons are attempting to terrorize us with, and their ie US factories are all in China, thanks to David Rockefeller and his henchman Kissinger and the rest of the NWO satanists!

    The US gov is ran by and for world class criminals and traitors!

  17. akka says:

    Don’t know about the whole article but when I came upon this line:
    “Three days later the leading comment plugin Disqus, which supports 750,000 websites and 35 million users, blocked me from a broad range of publications:”
    I couldn’t agree more.
    Disqus?
    Back in the old days I had a site which had a comment section far superior to Disqus. No, I didn’t write it; there were tons of comment programs available for free back then. (and actually the one on Unz is pretty good, don’t know if it is free). Point is that the program I had didn’t store comments on any third party site – just on the server I was paying for. You would have to crack the server’s DB to get into anything about the people who commented. And it was organized in tree form – start a discussion on one topic and it can go into numerous sub-topics, easy to read and easy to navigate. Things don’t always go uphill in this new future. Sometimes it is difficult not to criticize YouTube and hundreds if not thousands of news sites which have next to nothing in terms of of organization and ease of use.

    About China I don’t know if politically/socially they are good , bad or somewhere in between but they are definitely moving faster than anyone else technologically. And as the article remarked, the vast majority of people who live there are solidly behind their government. Watch out! We all know in the West just how duplicitous governments can be (get us into wars with media propaganda, which none of us want to get into); are the Chinese really so much better philosophically than the empires which came before them? I don’t know. Different race, very intelligent people. It is a mystery to me. We do know that they are taking everything they can get in the South China Sea, have stolen everything they can get from American technology, are using the same means the World bank and IMF have used for decades to take over the physical, infrastructural and social riches of other countries. They are the new kid on the block internationally and we just don’t know.
    I wouldn’t go crying to Jesus just yet and saying we have found a new savior.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  18. While there are things about the P. R. C. that do indeed deserve closer scrutiny and even censure, I agree with the author’s argument that it is the target of unfair treatment by the U. S. and its colonies—ahem!—I mean “allies”. It alone among today’s major powers has exercised a generally level-headed, responsible foreign policy (although its territorial spats with Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, etc. would greatly benefit from the finesse they have demonstrated elsewhere, rather than their current ham-fisted approach).

    Nevertheless, however sympathetic I am to their concerns, the Chinese government can be a rather difficult bunch to like. Their surveillance-mania comes to mind, their naked subservience to mammon, as well as does their expert manipulation of the historical victim narrative (which a certain beloved swarthy race of people dubiously gifted unto the world). Then there is what they stand for which is, well, essentially being a “new and improved” America. In other words it does not offer any genuinely alternative framework for individuals and nations to see and understand the world, but rather usurps and embroiders upon the failing one of another country’s, which by virtue of its emptiness—no unifying national ethos or beliefs aside from “get money or die trying”—will set forth its own undoing.

    The last time in world history that authentically divergent and reasonable national worldviews were postulated were by the Empire of Japan and Italy in the 1930s. Japanese intellectuals advising the imperial government, such as the Kyoto School of philosophers, postulated some interesting ideas. I am not sure if the documents from their “Overcoming Modernity” symposium from 1942 have been translated in full into English. Their skepticism of Anglo-American utopianism, especially the obsession with individualism, which these Japanese scholars felt that taken to extremes would be ultimately self-destructive (how right they were!), demand to be better known.

    Returning to the article at hand, it is clear that once the Russia madness dies down, that China will become the next target. Or it will simply be added on. Because why not? Let us hope that the People’s Republic of China does not become the 21st century version of the Empire of Japan (i. e. the focus of an entire nation’s irrational envy and hatred). Because if a Pearl Harbor-type conspiracy were to be instigated against them, there will be no winners in the resulting war.

    • Replies: @denk
    , @denk
    , @DB Cooper
    , @denk
  19. joe webb says:

    Chomsky is to Zionism as this author is to Chinkdom

    • Replies: @akka
  20. Although academics have tradionally been motivated by things other than money, the super-inflated cost of college in recent years suggests that the money-minded attitudes of many college administrators have permeated most campuses, seeping even into the rag-tag faculty rebels who must chase tenure much harder these days, cavorting with the economic Establishment since so many PhDs are now running around competing with them, not to mention all of those itinerant, part-time, un-tenured professors who never really had academic freedom.

    The economic Establishment in America loves China, a place where so many top 20%ers invest their excess money, whether that is the dual-high-earner parents, hogging all of the household-supporting jobs with benefits by keeping two under one roof, or the top 1% business class that is even more heavily invested in the cheap-labor markets of China.

    If it is true that the still largely rural China does not need the US export market or the millions of jobs that US-owned companies located in China, we have all the more reason to implement this SS-saving plan: Tax all US-owned corporations for every foreign employee for SS, whether that foreign employee is working for a US-owned company in an offshored or outsourced capacity in China, Mexico or any other foreign nation. Tax offshoring / outsourcing corporations at 15.3% for every foreign employee, covering the employer and the employee portion of SS taxation, inserting the money that would have been contributed to the SS fund if those jobs had been kept in the USA into the fund, thereby restoring the SS fund’s surplus.

    Bet this comment, too, would be censored by Disqus, even though it is not pro-China or anti-China, but anti cheapskate US corporations.

    But when the Chinese donate a lot of money to increasingly money-motivated American universites, you have to wonder if a customer / shopkeeper relationship has replaced disinterested academic analysis.

    Granted, the US government needs to stop lecturing the rest of the world on values that it long ago abandoned, like First Amendment safeguards on political speech. The US government and all of its branches are very protective of the free-speech rights of corporations, which are people with rights superseding all of the constitutional rights of flesh-and-blood citizens, but not so protective when it comes to the political speech of ordinary individuals.

    When it comes to political speech, the US government also thinks that it should censor foreign publishers, particularly when they release information that makes the US government look bad.

    It seems that the Confusion culture of self sacrifice for the group has taken over American politicians and business elites who are heavily invested in China, but not so much when it comes to their own massively underemployed nation, with its 95 million citizens out of the laborforce, where the average employee works only part time. American elites apply the Confusian ideal of bowing to the common good only to the 80% serfs, not to themselves.

    Elites want the bottom 80% to sacrifice for the common good, giving up the few household-supporting blue-collar jobs, like coal mining, for the environment, while elites do what’s best for ol’ #1, like wasting environmentally detrimental jet fuel in their constant global travel and investing in foreign countries with low-cost labor to maintain their extreme wealth concentration, even though wages for the bottom 80% of Americans have not risen in 40 years.

    Elites aren’t sacrificing for the common good when they concentrate non-job-creating wealth from salaried jobs via assortative mating in a country with a vanishing middle class. Elites could double the size of the US middle class just by raising their own children, like the stay-at-home moms of past eras. They sacrificed for their fellow Americans and for their children, rather than leaving that work to low-wage daycare workers / NannyCam-surveilled babysitters. Elites did not take two household-supporting jobs out of the economy, but just sized down their middle-class lifestyles, rather than trying to emulate the lifestyles of the top 1% business class.

    But with two high-paying jobs per household, elites can afford $800k mortgages, constant fine dining out, all kids in private schools and a lengthy vacation to Europe every couple of months, plus having plenty left over to invest in global stocks, while 52% of Americans have zero saved for retirement since rent has gone up by 72% in 25 years while wages have fallen for 4 decades.

    Given China’s emphasis on the group, and given its massive population, it is hard to believe that they put the plight of individual students in Tinamen Square ahead of what government elites regarded as the common good for government elites. Countries with massive populations are often willing to sacrifice a few individuals, and we saw the defenseless tank man mowed down on TV.

    American elites haven’t gone so far since mowing down veterans protesting for promised bonus pay during the Great Depression. But even though US elites violate the principles that this country was founded on all of the time, it does not mean that a surveillance state with a social credit system will be tolerated here in the USA, a place where acceptance of an Orwellian control mechanism has no Constitutional home, even if it has a home in the US-owned corporate persons who own the US Congress, the SCOTUS and the executive branch.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
    , @Biff
  21. kauchai says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    1) I was part of the first company to go to China in the mid 90’s, and we gave away our technology.

    Just what did your company give away? Can you name the product/component, specifications, functions and when was it “given” away? Was it the latest and the greatest gizmo or was it dated something like 30 years ago?

    But you conveniently chose not to mention what you had gotten in return. ( I suspect it must have been in the millions of USD or more). I also like to put it to you that had your company not gained financially from this exchange it would have walked away with its tech intact – end of story. Lastly, did the chinese put a gun to your head and demand that you hand over the tech? Lets be fair…

    2) It is also a general characteristic that Asian partners (not Japanese) take advantage of free-wheeling American’s.

    Nope, not in my experience of dealing with US companies. In all instances they demanded to be paid fully upfront for all products and services. And then, delivery was late and spotty at best. To top it off, they will employ sub-contractors who had barely been trained to install their products, and these greenhorns added delays to the project.

  22. Ex CIA agents, authors and some journalists have reported on the Agencies success infiltrating every major news organ in America, and wider. Most of the time it was as easy as sitting down with an editor or the owner and playing on their patriotic sympathy. Well known names such a Donnelly, Brinkley, and Daniel Ellsberg have been exposed as CIA assets. It’s been going on since the 50s, really since the early 1900s with Wells Fargo, the RCA, and AT&T. Any semblance of a free press really went out the window in the 90s when Bill Clinton allowed legislation to allow a few mega corporations to consolidate ownership of all major media. It quickly went from a dozens of different corporations down to 9, and soon to the 6 we have today. Worse news! These same 6 players are now the major players in Europe and Australia. So basically what we have is a shit show here in the west.
    CIA director William Colby is said to have said something like: ‘we’ll know our job is done when everything the people think they know is a lie’.

    • Replies: @akka
    , @The Alarmist
  23. akka says:
    @joe webb

    Chomsky is an asshole. Big words, small ideas.

    • Replies: @akka
  24. akka says:
    @akka

    Talk to me in my language sweetheart; where we don’t exclude ordinary people from the conversation.
    We don’t have the education ‘you all’ have, but it doesn’t for even a moment mean that we are not just as smart as ‘you all’ are. There is a point here. And the point is that fancy words do not make you smarter than anyone. It only gives you a layer of insulation to not speak in the language of reason.

    • Replies: @akka
    , @Twodees Partain
  25. @MEFOBILLS

    I expect to be taken seriously by people who understand that allegations are not evidence, let alone proof. Check the court records in San Jose, New York, Shanghai and Beijing, and the WTO’s TRIPS. They’re all online. Can you find any evidence? There’s abundant evidence that American companies steal each others’ IP, but China is barely visible.

    I expect to be taken seriously by people who know that China outspends us 3:1 on R&D.

    I expect to be taken seriously by people who know that Chinese kids graduate school three years ahead of ours.

    I expect to be taken seriously by people who know that China is ahead of us in basic research and most technologies.

    I expect to be taken seriously by people who know that China spends $31 billion annually in
    IP license fees.

    And I expect to be taken seriously by people who know that President Clinton loosened export controls on several high-technology sectors, including U.S. high-speed computer manufacturers, software makers, and communications satellite makers who wanted to sell to China.

    “Two such companies were Loral Space & Communications, Ltd., and Hughes Electronics, both the subject of a federal investigation to determine how they passed embargoed militarily-useful rocket technology to Beijing without licenses. At the time of the weapons technology transfers, Loral was headed by Bernard Schwartz, who has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Clinton and the Democratic Party. Hughes was headed by C. Michael Armstrong, who was named head of the influential President’s Export Council after lobbying vigorously—and successfully—for the easing of U.S. national security export controls. Shortly after the “decontrols” took place, American supercomputers began showing up in both Chinese and Russian nuclear weapons development centers—helping to build nuclear arms that might one day be turned against the United States. The president, at the urging of Armstrong and other export-hungry businessmen, has consistently opposed the imposition of sanctions on nations that engage in the sale of dangerous weapons of mass destruction technology and equipment. In a rare moment of candor, during a White House meeting in April 1998, Clinton explained, “What happens if you have automatic sanctions legislation is it puts enormous pressure on whoever is in the executive branch to fudge an evaluation of the facts of what is going on.” This frank admission of deceit captured the essence of the administration’s foreign and defense policies. Bill Clinton and his administration have relied heavily on this “fudge factor”—deliberately ignoring, playing down, or covering up dangerous developments abroad that affect vital U.S. interests.” –Gertz, Bill (2013-02-04T22:58:59). Betrayal: How the Clinton Administration Undermined American Security (Kindle Locations 92-102). Regnery Publishing. Kindle Edition.

    We have met the IP enemy and he is us.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  26. akka says:
    @akka

    Well, I guess it could be argued one way or the other. But if one uses fancy words to make the opposing side (pretty much all of us when it comes to war) believe that war is okay, then maybe that is a political crime. You may have better words than I do, but I still don’t want to go to war.

  27. @Alfred

    I wonder how many thousands of subscribers they’ve sacrificed to protect The Narrative?

    It’s obvious that The Narrative is more important than money, since our mass media are going out of business rather than tell the truth.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Mike P
  28. @Cyrano

    Then again, that’s not funny at all.

  29. @Endgame Napoleon

    “it is hard to believe that they put the plight of individual students in Tinamen Square ahead of what government elites regarded as the common good for government elites. Countries with massive populations are often willing to sacrifice a few individuals, and we saw the defenseless tank man mowed down on TV.”

    Actually, they did put the plight of individual students in Tinamen Square ahead of what government elites regarded as the common good for government elites. The kids all went home safely, as did the defenseless tank man.

    You can read about it here. http://www.unz.com/article/tiananmen-square-1989-revisited/

  30. akka says:
    @the grand wazoo

    ” Most of the time it was as easy as sitting down with an editor or the owner and playing on their patriotic sympathy. ”
    Not so sure it was that simple. There could easily have been more pressure applied.

  31. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    it is clear that once the Russia madness dies down, that China will become the next target

    You havent been paying attention,
    China has been the designated enemy since 1949 and demonisation of China has been going on for the past seventy years.

    Fact is,

    While the Russiagate was going viral, nobody noticed a parallel Chinagate going on.
    Russiagate is limited to US, all about ‘Russian meddling in election’. Chinagate is a US orchestrated psyop all across the 5liars landscape, the brazeness of its lies make the Russiagate B.S. looks like kindergarten stuffs.

    VIZ…

    China is gonna take over Oz, NZ, only alliance with US can check the Chicoms ambition.

    There’s an army of 5th columns lying low in Oz, NZ, ready to go into action the moment Chinese embassy gave the command.

    Coming from the certified global arsonists, aka the 5liars, this is pure, unadulterated, gawd damned…
    Bandits crying robbery.

    The Pentagon sponsored hack in NZ, Anne Marie Brady, even accused China of sabotaging her car, burglarising her home and sending her anon warning letter,. !

    Jesus christ OMFG !

    iS THERE no gutter too low that the 5hoaxers wouldnt stoop to ???

    Officially, Kiwi PM Jacinda Arden played down the accusations as unverified, but we all know how this kind of game works.
    The shits stick !

    Never mind that its never been substantiated or even debunked.

    Examples abound…
    Chinese invasion of India 1962
    TAM,
    Tibet,
    Xinjiang,
    HK,
    Mao ‘murdered millions of his own people’,
    CR,
    GLF….

    Like I say, the 5liars has monopolised the top 100 hoaxes of the century chart for decades, while its China hoaxes consistently hog the top twenty spots.

    Is China framed ?

    Is that a trick question ? 😉

  32. @the grand wazoo

    And if the MSM falling into lockstep wasn’t good enough, Congress obliged with The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 with the stated purpose being “to authorize the domestic dissemination of information and material about the United States intended primarily for foreign audiences” Make of that what you will, but it repeals a decades-long ban on domestically disseminated propaganda.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  33. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    although its territorial spats with Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, etc. would greatly benefit from the finesse they have demonstrated elsewhere, rather than their current ham-fisted approach).

    How about In your fact ?

    ‘Seeing the right-wing Japanese allies of the US “pivot” into the Asia-Pacific unearth and celebrate Unit 731 is an ugly and dangerous signal to China that “we are coming after you again”.

    http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2013/06/loose-ends-from-berkeley-conference.html

  34. Patrick says:

    Thanks for this insightful article which challenges the anti-chinese narratives of the west.

    • Agree: MAOWASAYALI
  35. @Godfree Roberts

    The FT is owned by a Japanese company is it not? It occurred to me that, if you had only cited the FT’s censorship it could be explained by that.

  36. DB Cooper says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    “although its territorial spats with Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, etc. would greatly benefit from the finesse they have demonstrated elsewhere, rather than their current ham-fisted approach).”

    What ever disputes between China and Taiwan is an unconcluded civil war in nature. It is not between two countries. In fact China’s position regarding its territorial disputes with Japan, India and Vietnam is the same as Taiwan. Both Japan and India has territorial disputes with every single of its neighbors. And their territorial disputes with China/Taiwan has no standing other than taking advantage of China’s weak national strength in the last century. It is actually pretty disgusting on both Japan and India’s territorial land grab of China. Vietnam’s disputes with China regarding the SCS islands is also weak. It is actually the most aggressive in terms of land grabbing in the South China Sea.

    China/Taiwan would eventually get back their land from these countries, I am sure.

  37. DB Cooper says:

    “as well as does their expert manipulation of the historical victim narrative”

    This is just another Bullshit. Tell me, what expert manipulation of the historical victim narrative you are talking about?

  38. Erebus says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Check the court records in San Jose, New York, Shanghai and Beijing, and the WTO’s TRIPS…

    Godfree, Godfree, Godfree…
    In our previous discussions, you acknowledged that your approach misses the details. Yes, China pays for the High Technology they need to meet govt policy targets. We know that, and everyone but you seems to know that every non-govt body else just steals.

    Copying designs is endemic to the culture. The notion that an idea or design can be “owned” simply doesn’t enter the worldview in which they operate, and they copy each other as enthusiastically as they copy foreigners.

    I’ve done business in China almost 30 years and lived there for at least 10 over that period. I’ve watched copying happen countless times, often by companies who had only the vaguest notions of what they were copying. Those millions of cases didn’t show up in your court records, but they happened just the same.

    My understanding is that you’ve never developed a product in China, or anywhere else. You hold no patents, or have ever been involved in a patent dispute in China. Looking at “court records in San Jose” tells you the sqrt of fuckall about IP life on the ground. That’s like making pronouncements on the taste of a dish by looking at the recipe. An expert chef can do it because of his experience, but you’re no expert, with no experience, and so you can’t.

    You should take the advice you yourself agreed with on one of the other threads and turn it down a notch or two. One can obliterate a great many sound points by overamping one or two.

  39. Biff says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    it does not mean that a surveillance state with a social credit system will be tolerated here in the USA,

    Pfft. Where have you been? It’s been tolerated for a long LONG time.

    Social Credit System = Rap Sheet

  40. @denk

    I live in Australia and take comfort in the idea that Chinese, and probably Indians, are offsetting the long run dysgenic breeding of most modern people and giving some hope for Australian prosperity when China has got mineral production in Russia and Africa so well under control that it won’t need to go on paying high prices to Australia’s high taxpaying miners. I know nothing about the supposed paranoia you describe. The 5 Eyes, as I understand it, is just about sharing signal intelligence, for which, I trust Australia gets some reward in access to, if not the cost of, the latest defence technology. As for the army of fifth columnists I’ve rarely heard such nonsense. Where do get that from?

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  41. @denk

    You havent been paying attention,
    China has been the designated enemy since 1949 and demonisation of China has been going on for the past seventy years.

    The People’s Republic of China has been perceived as one of the many in an ever-growing, ever-changing cast of “foes” (and occasional “ally”) since the Kuomintang were chased out of the mainland in 1949. Sometimes, as during the Korean and Vietnam Wars, it was a major foe. But mostly it was viewed as a backwards Soviet satellite which was a sometime sort of ally, especially after Nixon, when the prewar China sentimentalists were once again in the ascendent, believing that all this “junior partner” needed was to free up its markets in order to covertly set it on the path to democracy. It did not become the enemy until after Japan’s “bubble economy” burst and the U. S. S. R. collapsed.

    While the Russiagate was going viral, nobody noticed a parallel Chinagate going on. Russiagate is limited to US, all about ‘Russian meddling in election’.

    The “Russiagate” nonsense is not at all localized to the U. S., unfortunately. The repercussions of this madness are seen in Europe and Latin America, where media organs from across those regions regularly report on local governments and organizations being targeted by supposed Russian meddling or hacking.

    Paranoia about the P. R. C., again, has been ongoing since the 1990s.

  42. @denk

    How about In your fact ?

    ‘Seeing the right-wing Japanese allies of the US “pivot” into the Asia-Pacific unearth and celebrate Unit 731 is an ugly and dangerous signal to China that “we are coming after you again”.

    If that grammatically unsound blurb is at all a harbinger of what a potential reader could expect to encounter at the link you provided, I will pass.

    But to answer your point, just as U. S. paranoia about China is irrational and dangerous, so is Chinese paranoia about Japan. Not even in the most Nippon ha sekai ichiban extreme of the uyoku dantai do they entertain the daydream of “going after” China. Their concern is with keeping China (and Korea) out of Japan, not invading anyone. But even if they somehow were to entertain these delusions, the sheer numbers and resources of the P. L. A. alone would serve to burst their bubbles. The J. S. D. F., even if they did not have to contend with their idiotic constitutional constraints, would never stand a chance.

    Personally, I am certain that Unit 731 existed and was the site of terrible happenings. That said, I also believe that the postwar narrative has deliberately been distorted and exaggerated by Japan’s detractors for the sake of political gain. (The Chinese have learned well how the “Holocaust Industry” has enormously benefitted Israel.)

    • Replies: @denk
  43. @DB Cooper

    What ever disputes between China and Taiwan is an unconcluded civil war in nature.

    Many Taiwanese, perhaps most would disagree that it is “unfinished”. For all intents and purposes they seem to largely regard themselves as a separate country and even people from the mainland. The only side who seems to think otherwise are the leaders of the P. R. C.

    [Japan’s] territorial disputes with China/Taiwan has no standing other than taking advantage of China’s weak national strength in the last century. It is actually pretty disgusting on both Japan and India’s territorial land grab of China.

    India was not a colonizer nation, so you will have to explain to me what “land grab” at the cost of a weak China they pursued. (I presume you mean borders that were worked out during the Raj, in which case your gripe is with Great Britain, not India.)

    Regarding China’s disputing of Japanese sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands one could, of course, flip your argument around. It could reasonably be argued that China is now being the aggressor by taking advantage of a militarily and diplomatically weak Japan and that, therefore, their land (and water) grab is “actually pretty disgusting”.

    It is too bad because if China dialed back the bellicose rhetoric and turned on the charm, Japan would probably be very amenable to some manner of resource-sharing agreement or other such compromise. Additionally, both countries would benefit greatly from closer military and diplomatic ties. Japan would be better off in the Chinese sphere of influence, while such a prospect would naturally be a boon for China. But the P. R. C.’s Japan revanchism, while satisfyingly stoking the nationalist flames in the short term, does nothing to foster a mutually constructive and lasting solution to this problem. This is detrimental to both countries.

    Vietnam’s disputes with China regarding the SCS islands is also weak. It is actually the most aggressive in terms of land grabbing in the South China Sea.

    Tell that to Vietnam. Also, the fact that China seriously believes the Vietnamese are “most aggressive” is laughable when the accuser is a nation several times its size and rapidly militarizing a wide swathe of sea to boot. To he clear, I do not begrudge them that or their other territorial claims. But the P. R. C. is no innocent here either.

    China/Taiwan would eventually get back their land from these countries, I am sure.

    From Japan and South Korea? Possibly. From the Southeast Asian nations? Because of their economic and demographic growth (and the concurrent decline of both in the P. R. C.), that looks to me the more tricky long term.

    • Replies: @denk
    , @denk
    , @DB Cooper
    , @kauchai
    , @denk
  44. @DB Cooper

    The “Nanking Massacre” for one. The Kuomintang’s own contemporary reckoning of the death toll was between 11,000 – 20,000 and they did not clearly distinguish whether the bulk of these deaths were soldiers or civilians. The Republic of China’s census alone make the much vaunted “300,000” deaths, put forward decades after the fact, highly improbable.

    But the deaths or “crimes” are not the point. Even had they never happened (and there are those who compellingly argue that they never did), the P. R. C. would have invented them in order to diminish a centuries-long regional rival. Just as Holocaust exaggerations benefit modern Israel, so too does “Nanking” and “comfort women” benefit the P. R. C.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  45. @Wizard of Oz

    The Financial Times is owned by the Nikkei, Inc. Their flagship publication is the Nihon Keizai Shimbun, or Nikkei—basically the Japanese Wall Street Journal. Like their American counterpart, they cater to your run-of-the-mill “free market” adherents and espouse a very milquetoast (even for Japan) civic nationalism. I doubt they would kick pro-China commenters as they historically have been friendly to Chinese business interests and only mildly criticize its politics. They would probably sooner ban anti-U. S. comments than anti-Japan ones. But you never know.

    Now if the Financial Times were owned by the Sankei Shimbun, then that would be a different story.

  46. @Erebus

    You keep assuring me about your bona fides without adducing a whit of evidence for your allegations.

    We all know that people copy people and companies copy other companies’ IP. I have gone through the patenting process on behalf of two employers and have defended against a patent lawsuit. I do understand IP law in a fundamental way.

    I ask for proof of your allegations because, without it, no illicit copying occurred.

    In the absence of proof to the contrary, China’s actions were licit–as were their demands for IP-sharing within the WTO.

    Because you don’t like something doesn’t mean its illicit or wrong.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Half-Jap
  47. @denk

    Anne Marie is my idol. I love her.

    She is such a whore, a self-important fantasist who belongs in anyone’s collection of the World’s Top Ten Useful Idiots.

    How long did the CIA/NED nurture her before letting her loose on New Zealand?

    More important: can you find out who paid Clive Hamilton for his stupid book–and how much they paid him?

    Enquiring minds want to know…PM me if you wish.

    • Replies: @denk
  48. Erebus says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    I have gone through the patenting process on behalf of two employers and have defended against a patent lawsuit.

    In China?

    I am speaking only of my Chinese IP experience, and not international. Ever had any of your own patents violated by a Chinese co? Ever been in a Chinese court in an IP case? Ever had one of your own unpatented designs/products copied? How many?

    If you answer “No” to any of the above, you know not of what you speak. Not enough, at least, to speak authoritatively.

    PS: You can take or leave my anecdotes as you will, just as I yours.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  49. @Wizard of Oz

    I suspect that ‘the army of fifth columnists’ he refers to are people like Clive Hamilton, NED/CIA assets who can be activated when a rupture between Australia and China is desired.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  50. Anonymous[243] • Disclaimer says:
    @chinese with poor english

    Money is already taking over. China has way more wealth inequality than most of the west.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  51. Anonymous[243] • Disclaimer says:
    @akka

    are the Chinese really so much better philosophically than the empires which came before them? I don’t know. Different race, very intelligent people.

    Very intelligent, yet very stupid. Orientals seem very prone to tunnel vision, which can be both a blessing and a curse.

    My experience of China is that they’re moving forwards more rapidly than any other sizable nation in history, but also that they’ve got a hell of a lot of unresolved issues. I’d say they’re intrinsically smart people who can hold their own against Europeans but I’d also note that 90% of worldwide Chinese live under a centrally planned regime and I’m skeptical that it will be able to exert enough control to solve the pressing issues while also allowing enough freedom for people to breathe and businesses to prosper.

    • Replies: @Biff
  52. Anonymous[243] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    they copy each other as enthusiastically as they copy foreigners

    This is my experienced also. I often buy a handful of equipment samples from different companies in different parts of China and find they’re almost exactly the same design. It’s often not even a particularly good design with glaring weaknesses that a good engineer would see instantly. It seems one company somewhere in China hacks something together and, in return, enjoys about two months of market monopoly before everyone else starts producing their own identical products.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  53. @MEFOBILLS

    “I was part of the first company to go to China in the mid 90’s, and we gave away our technology. It is also a general characteristic that Asian partners (not Japanese) take advantage of free-wheeling American’s. In technology exchanges, it is always talk to my boss, and I cannot reveal that, etc. Meanwhile, we (American’s) give away the store. It is always a one way street, where we give and they take.”

    You’re stating very clearly here that technology was given away, not stolen. Can you expand a little on how accepting something freely given, or sold, amounts to theft?

    • Replies: @akka
  54. I critiqued Disqus a while back when they started shadow banning people and making easy to do so across multiple websites. They sell shadow banning to websites as a management option for a specific website, but since it is centrally administered, they (Disqus) actually have the power to broadly disappear people and opinions they dislike across thousands of sites.

    At the time I looked into it–just after Alex Jones was de-platformed–Disqus had been purchased by shadowy investment group, probably related to nexus of Mossad and MI6 ops. They are using the platform to manipulate public opinion. I tried to warn publications like the MintPress News, but no joy there. If you check out their comment section it is very sparse, whereas it should be robust given the topics they deal with.

    They also mine user comments for data including political opinions.

    https://www.mintpressnews.com/assange-poop-smear-concocted-cover-ecuadors-4-2-b-imf-loan/257554/

  55. Mike P says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    I wonder how many thousands of subscribers they’ve sacrificed to protect The Narrative?

    It’s obvious that The Narrative is more important than money, since our mass media are going out of business rather than tell the truth.

    Another great example is Canada’s National Post. They have been haemorrhaging money for ages, their negative equity must must by now rival Uncle Sam’s unfunded liabilities, but somehow, magically, they are still kept alive (sort of like Elon Musk, who should have been sacked many times over). How come? It is obvious that they don’t exist to provide independent journalism that pays for itself, but simply serve as a propaganda outlet.

  56. @akka

    That’s funny, I didn’t realize that “asshole” is a fancy word.

    • Replies: @akka
  57. I doubt that denk has heard of Clive Hamilton. And I scratch my head at both aspects of your suggestion. Associating the worthy waffling Clive Hamilton with NED/CIA strikes me as a bit fanciful but the idea that he might be used to promote a rupture with China, or be any good at it strikes me as strange. Maybe you have some specific events in mind as evidence????

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  58. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    It’s often not even a particularly good design with glaring weaknesses that a good engineer would see instantly.

    The story of my life…

    I once found a copy of a prototype of mine proudly shown to me by the “engineer” who reverse engineered it at a different factory than the one I’d been working with. He copied everything, including my kluges and error corrections perfectly so that it worked, but it quickly became obvious he had little idea how to take the design the rest of the way. I have little doubt no improvement was made until the production version came out of the original factory. I also have little doubt it went into production at the 2nd factory kluges and all before the original factory produced the finished product.

    I’ve chalked that up to the vast number of semi-competent techs and engineers pouring by the millions out of the schools with no real need for them. They’ve memorized the textbooks, but beyond that they’re out of their comfort zone and completely lost. Meanwhile, their bosses need to sell stuff to keep their factory running so they are ever on the lookout for something/anything that’s selling and latch onto it like a drowning man.

    The latter part of that is also due to the fact that an important, perhaps the most important, part of being a design engineer is vision. Knowing what to design, or what is worth designing, takes a different level of talent than even the competent can manage. China has no shortage of those, but the numbers of those who don’t have what that takes are simply overwhelming. There’s literally tens of millions of them.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Sergey Krieger
  59. @MEFOBILLS

    Throwing the Jew speech code “political correctness” to the wind and toning down any concern for ethnic sensitivity because whites have been required to endure same for so many decades now, this lil’ saying seen recently on the net not only supports your position but maybe all the more so is offered as a challenge to black readers to check the criminality in your ethnic group rather than doing the old Jew trained knee-jerk of blaming whitey consistent with this comment just made here:

    http://www.unz.com/article/black-crime-and-its-jewish-apologists/#comment-3161040

    Give a white man a hammer and he’ll use it to build a civilization.

    Give an Asian man a hammer and he’ll use it to build a billion more hammers.

    Give a black man a hammer and he’ll use it to kill a white man.

    Give a Jew a hammer and he’ll give it to a black man.

    Doesn’t it always seem that sayings so often are based in observable predominant truths.

    Whitey is the golden goose. Like it or not, he has creative traits of intellectual curiosity, adventuresomeness, precision in detail and responsiveness to the needs of others which are not in combination universal and have resulted in the overwhelming worldly excellence of the West.

  60. @Godfree Roberts

    After I wrote #60 I Googled for Clive Hamilton and found reference to the book you must be referring to. I expect you would agree with most of the review here:

    https://theconversation.com/book-review-clive-hamiltons-silent-invasion-chinas-influence-in-australia-93650

    But what would you say to the approval by the reviewer of

    https://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/15/world/asia/tiananmen-square-fast-facts/index.html?no-st=9999999999 ?

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  61. denk says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    She is such a whore

    vERY well paid I suppose.

    Anne Marie is a card carrying member of the neocon Wilson Centre, intimately tied to the war hawks in the Washington cesspool.,..

    ‘Clinton claimed that Beijing was now much more active in the Pacific and intent on “dominating its part of the globe through soft power and the projection of its military capabilities.” Clinton cited the work of NATO-funded academic Anne-Marie Brady, who has called for New Zealand’s intelligence agencies to take action against Chinese “influence” in NZ politics and business.

    In 2010, as secretary of state, Clinton was instrumental in intensifying the relations between New Zealand and the US as part of the Obama administration’s “pivot” to Asia to confront China. She signed the Wellington Declaration, paving the way for the resumption of military exercises and training between New Zealand and the US after a decades-long freeze in response to New Zealand’s anti-nuclear legislation.’

    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/05/12/nzai-m12.html

    her claim of China’s burglary and threat is so wacky it boggles the mind .
    It her house was actually burglarized my bet would be FF , with the 5liars finger print all over it.

    Hamilton is the Nato hack in Oz, like Anne marie he claim the Chinese students. , businessmen, even Chinese Australians are Beijing cultivated 5th columnists , ready to create havoc at the behest of CCP/.

    Jeeze, what’d these psycho think of next ?

  62. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    If that grammatically unsound blurb is at all a harbinger of what a potential reader could expect to encounter at the link you provided, I will pass

    Then you’d miss my point,
    viz…
    Jp is doing all the taunting.


    A pic is worth a thousand words ?

    P.S.
    Gagnon is a feisty antiwar activist, an endangered specie, if murkka has more men like him it wouldnt have driven itself into satan‘s dark abyss..
    The man deserves our respect.

  63. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    It is too bad because if China dialed back the bellicose rhetoric and turned on the charm, Japan would probably be very amenable to some manner of resource-sharing agreement or other such compromise.

    Thats exactly what Chou Enlai did in the 70’s, he proposed both sides shelving the Diaoyu issue so normalisation of relation could proceed regardless.
    jp China reached kinda gentleman agreement and there was a honeymoon period bet the two Asian powers.

    It didnt last long tho, once Washington got wind of the love fest , the arsonist set out to wreck the party.

    All ‘Panda huggers’ in Tokyo were soon dispatched via bloodless coup, to be replaced by Washington favored war hawks like Abe san and his ilks,.
    Sino/jp relation has been nose diving ever since.
    The rest is history/

  64. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    It could reasonably be argued that China is now being the aggressor by taking advantage of a militarily and diplomatically weak Japan

    Jp and China are both ranked amongst the top ten military powers, with at most 2 placing in between them.

    Jp is a key member of a military/economic alliance, including the 5liars, India , Nato, which advertise its intention to ‘contain/encircle’ China.

    So much for China exploiting a ‘militarily and diplomatically weak jp’ !

    and that, therefore, their land (and water) grab is “actually pretty disgusting”.

    Please,
    China is merely claiming Diaoyu, which’s under jp control since ww2/

  65. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    ham-fisted approach to India

    Ironically,
    Post independence ‘democratic’ India was even more aggressive than its Brit masters, earning it the dubious honor as ‘USA of South Asia’.

    The record speaks for itself, Delhi has since 1947 gobbled up Goa, Kashmir and all the adjacent Mongoloid kindoms, aka the seven sisters.

    BUt Delhi’s land grabbing appetite was barely whetted.
    In 1975, India blatantly invaded and annexed another Mongoloid Buddhist kingdom, Sikkim.
    This daylight robbery evoked nary a squeak from the ‘international communities’, aka the 5liars.
    you can put it down to professional courtesy amongst pirates.
    Delhi’s western buddies casually referred it as India’s ‘incorporation‘ of Sikkim. [sic]

    Bhutan would’ve suffered the same fate had it not joined the UN just in time, nevertheless it was summarily placed under protectorate-ship by Bharat.

    This is why,
    In South Asia, the specter of being
    Bhutanised‘, worse still, ‘Sikkimised‘ often make
    Sri Lankans , Nepalese sit up in cold sweat in middle of the night.

    Anyway, India’s lust to Sikkimise BHutan has never subsided.

    In 2017, Delhi made its move.
    Indian troops crossed over the international border into Chinese held territory to threaten a Chinese road building crew, ostensibly at the request of its Bhutan ‘protectorate’.

    India’s gambit was as reckless as its 1962 ‘forward policy’ at the border, resulting in an self inflicted defeat.

    Fortunately,
    After repeated warning from Beijing, the Indians blinked and slouched back into their own side.

  66. @denk

    It is not doing any “taunting”—it is unable to. Again, the concerns of the nationalist right are defensive rather than offensive.

    • Replies: @denk
  67. Mike P says:
    @denk

    All ‘Panda huggers’ in Tokyo were soon dispatched via bloodless coup, to be replaced by Washington favored war hawks like Abe san and his ilks,.

    Interesting parallel to German-Russian relations, which also keep getting torpedoed by Washington.

    • Replies: @denk
  68. @denk

    It didnt last long tho, once Washington got wind of the love fest , the arsonist set out to wreck the party.

    The Senkaku agreement lasted long enough. It would have still been active today had Ishihara Shintarō not moved to annex the islands as part of Tokyo City. Though I personally believe he moved to do that less to aggravate China (although he certainly knew it would also do just that), and more to add fire to an already collapsing Noda Yoshihiko/DPJ government. (The Obama administration played a crucial role in all this.)

    All ‘Panda huggers’ in Tokyo were soon dispatched via bloodless coup, to be replaced by Washington favored war hawks like Abe san and his ilks,.

    The pathetic thing about Abe and the current LDP is how wavering and phony their “nationalism” is. All their utsukushii Nihon window dressing only serves to mask their shameful subservience to U. S. interests. And it was not only the China-friendly DPJ which the Americans have deposed. Back in the 1980s when Nakasone Yasuhiro sought to rewrite the Constitution, reform the armed forces, and began hinting at the eventual removal of U. S. forces from the “unsinkable aircraft carrier”, he too was quickly shown the door by Washington.

    • Replies: @denk
    , @denk
  69. @denk

    Jp and China are both ranked amongst the top ten military powers, with at most 2 placing in between them.

    Yeah, but the gulf in terms of personnel and resources is enormous. Moreover, the P. R. C. is known to not fully disclose the extent of its budget or size. Japan looks strong on paper, but is certainly weak in practice. Article 9 does not help matters. In a contest between the P. L. A. and the J. S. D. F., the former would steamroll over the latter. It would not even be close.

    Please,
    China is merely claiming Diaoyu, which’s under jp control since ww2/

    Who appear to be the rightful owners of the Senkaku Islands, at any rate. Again, China would be wise to dial back the bellicosity there as it alienates Japanese who are otherwise indifferent or even friendly to them, further straining the matter. Instead of sabre-rattling, they should need to persuade the Japanese, beguile them. This matter can be solved in a fashion that would be mutually satisfying, but not if China continues to run all manner of stunts in order to threaten Japan. At the moment, at least, it appears that relations are thawing out once more. Let us hope for progress. Again, the best thing for both countries would be to face reality and embrace each other.

  70. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    Ever had any of your own patents violated by a Chinese co?

    What patents owned by you did the Chinese violate?

    Were those patents issued in China? I need to ask this because the U.S. patent system is beyond ridiculous. For example, check out US patent 6004596 (link), awarded to Smuckers for the crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwich; I doubt that China would allow a patent on something so trivial. So if the Chinese violated your U.S. patent for chewing gum, color me unimpressed.

    • LOL: Mike P
  71. Vidi says:
    @The Alarmist

    And if the MSM falling into lockstep wasn’t good enough, Congress obliged with The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 with the stated purpose being “to authorize the domestic dissemination of information and material about the United States intended primarily for foreign audiences” Make of that what you will, but it repeals a decades-long ban on domestically disseminated propaganda.

    The repeal of the domestic propaganda ban is necessary in this age of the Internet. U.S. propaganda loses most of its impact if the targeted foreigners can see that the story is completely different in the U.S. So the story in the U.S. must be made to conform, however false that story may be.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  72. DB Cooper says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    “India was not a colonizer nation, so you will have to explain to me what “land grab” at the cost of a weak China they pursued. (I presume you mean borders that were worked out during the Raj, in which case your gripe is with Great Britain, not India.)”

    India of course is a colonizer nation. And Indians are actually very proud of that fact and this is the main reason India is resented by all its smaller neighbors because of its bullying altitude towards its neighbors. There is no such thing as India until the British created one. And when the British left the subcontinent and gifted the country it created to the Indians the ruler of the new country were full of hubris. Nehru and his man sees India as the new imperial power in the block in the mold of the Raj and act as such. India is basically a poor man’s copy of the Raj and continue the land grabbing expansionist policy of the Raj without missing a beat. This is the reason India has grabbed land from every single of its neighbors, including China.

    Don’t be silly. India has some land grab of its own from China after the British has already left town. I am talking about South Tibet, including historic Tawang. In 1951, four years after the British has already left, India finally creeped up to Tawang and invaded and annexed it and occupy it to this day. Tawang is the birthplace of the Sixth Dalai Lama and home to a four hundred years old Tibetan monastery. The natives there, Monpa, Adi…etc. are of Tibetan stock. The Sixth Dalai Lama was a Monpa.

    In 1987 India renamed South Tibet to the so called Arunachal Pradesh and made it a state. Note that both Taiwan and China denounces India’s travesty and both parties vehemently resolutely not recognized the so called Arunachal Pradesh part of India. Today occupied South Tibet is restless and the people there are seething with anger and India knows it. This is the reason AFSPA is imposed on South Tibet. AFSPA gives the state the power to detain or kill anyone with impunity and is meant to suppress dissent and intimidate the locals. AFSPA is imposed on area India deemed ‘disturbed’, such as South Tibet and Kashmir.

    The MSM never talks about this for various reasons I am not going into. But just because the MSM never talks about it doesn’t mean it does not exist. And this is why this website unz.com is so valuable in providing real facts rather than propaganda to the many gullible readers.

    By the way except a small portion of the border area (such as the ones between China and Sikkim (Sikkim is another country India invaded and annexed after the Raj has left, in 1975)), the vast majority of the border area between China and the British Raj has never been demarcated. The so called McMahon line is a diplomatic fogery created by the British to browbeat China to accept it when China was weak but no Chinese government, whether the Nationalist goverment (aka Taiwan) or the Communist government or even the provincial Tibetan government ever recognizes the so called McMahon line.

    Free South Tibet from the Indian rapists!

  73. Vidi says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    The “Nanking Massacre” for one. The Kuomintang’s own contemporary reckoning of the death toll was between 11,000 – 20,000 and they did not clearly distinguish whether the bulk of these deaths were soldiers or civilians. The Republic of China’s census alone make the much vaunted “300,000” deaths, put forward decades after the fact, highly improbable.

    Chang Kai-Shek (Jiang Jieshi), the head of the Kuomintang, served in the Japanese Imperial Army at one time. So please don’t cite the KMT as a credible source on anything related to Japan.

  74. Xi and Communism are insane. That’s all I can say about the situation. As an anti-commie Chinese national I really don’t want to witness WWIII. I really hope that commies or at least Xi will be ousted before he foolishly starts the war.

    • Replies: @Lin
  75. Erebus says:

    What patents owned by you did the Chinese violate?

    I don’t see where I said I owned any, though I do.

    Were those patents issued in China?

    Yes, and internationally in some cases. Patenting internationally has become almost superfluous now as its becoming increasingly difficult to make something commercially viably outside of China, at least in certain fields.

    … the U.S. patent system is beyond ridiculous.

    Fully agree. The USPTO now grants patents for almost anything if the application follows the required format. Their SOP seems to be to grant and let the courts sort it out later. Perhaps that’s because the quality of the examiners has fallen abysmally in recent decades.

    • Replies: @Vidi
    , @Vidi
    , @Anonymous
  76. jb says:

    So wait, are you saying that, contrary to everything we have been told, the Chinese people are actually free to discuss, as a most obvious example, the events in Tiananmen Square, without being censored or facing negative repercussions in their personal lives? I was under the impression that any mention of Tiananmen Square was insistently scrubbed from the Chinese internet. Was I wrong to think so?

    The thing is, this isn’t just a matter of opinion; anyone living in China can easily verify whether such discussion is allowed by looking to see if such discussion actually exists. It’s not a question of who is right, it’s whether any discussion is allowed at all. From all reports, it isn’t, and that kind of matters. This is a litmus test — if a governments silences all discussion of a purported crime committed by the government against the people, then one can safely assume it silences any other dissent that it feels poses any kind of real threat. If you are OK with that, then you are OK with a government that can get away with lying to its people about anything. So have I understood you correctly?

  77. @Anonymous

    Much of China’s GINI (inequality) gap is structural: their inland, rural populations have always been poorer than their urban, coastal cousins and, because the country couldn’t afford to build homes or cities fast enough, inlanders were held in place by residential hukous. Recently, however, economists[1] found that this aspect of inequality has been exaggerated because the cost of living in wealthy areas like Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen is much greater since urban land prices–not housing quality–are vastly higher. If we include the full range of goods and services whose price differ across areas (in rural areas basic foods cost half of Beijinbg’s prices), incomes from most rural areas should be increased by fifty percent to make them comparable.

    If we adjust for where people actually live the difference shrinks even further. Until recently, demographers counted people’s hukous–where they were registered to live rather than where they actually lived–but migrant workers’ numbers rose to three hundred million in 2018, distorting the comparisons. In real life, the coastal provinces have millions more residents than their registered populations and the reverse holds for migrant-sending inland provinces so, as each person moved from China’s interior to the coast, measures of inequality rose because the migrant contributed to income in the coastal destination but was still counted as living in the origin, interior, area. Once this counting error was corrected, regional inequality in China was found to have declined at an average trend rate of 1.1 percent per year from 1978 to 2016.

    In 2002, fourteen Guizhou workers earned as much as an average[2] Shanghainese but, by 2019, it took five. Nor was the structural gap as painful as it sounds: as far as everyone could see, everyone got richer every year. Villagers buying their first pickup truck found Shanghai lifestyles uninteresting because even at the bottom, things improved steadily.

    [img]https://i.imgur.com/J5Bj1zI.jpg[/img]

    [1] Chao Li & John Gibson, 2014. ”Spatial Price Differences and Inequality in the People’s Republic of China: Housing Market Evidence,” Asian Development Review, MIT Press, vol. 31(1), pages 92-120, March.
    [2] China’s Got a $46,000 Wealth Gap Problem
    Bloomberg News
    May 21, 2018
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-20/china-s-wealth-gap-teslas-for-the-rich-footpaths-for-the-poor

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  78. @Wizard of Oz

    If Clive’s book seems like ‘worthy waffling to you then I can’t answer your question because it rests on an assumption I don’t share.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  79. @Wizard of Oz

    Denk seems to know Clive.

    The Conversation itself is very heavily censored and its review is largely ‘bad China lite’.

    The Tiananmen article is fantasy, as I explained here: http://www.unz.com/article/tiananmen-square-1989-revisited/

  80. @jb

    So wait, are you saying that, contrary to everything we have been told, the Chinese people are actually free to discuss, as a most obvious example, the events in Tiananmen Square, without being censored or facing negative repercussions in their personal lives?

    Nope. When Hu Jintao was in power we could indeed talk about it as long as the gov was not listening. I managed to know about the Tiananmen Massacre through pictures of a Wikipedian article that haven’t been blocked by internet censorship. Yes we could do that and as long as we weren’t too loud the gov wouldn’t know or care. We bashed commies in the dorms and my classmates could freely call commie fuckers ‘fascists’. I bashed commies too lol. Nobody liked communism, nobody in my extended family or class was a fucking commie lover other than one particular weird classmate who was actually a fan of Mao. The rest of us just laughed when we heard that.

    Unfortunately right now Xi is in power. This is no longer true because he is a control freak.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  81. akka says:
    @Twodees Partain

    Good one!
    Asshole is a fancy word depending on whose asshole it is.

  82. akka says:
    @Twodees Partain

    Sure. Google something like ‘American technology stolen by the Chinese’ and you will find hundreds of examples of it. People like Uriah Heep never want to give away their sources but it is all there in black and white these days.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  83. @Vidi

    I get more real news about the US from BBC, The Mail, and even RT than the average US resident gets from US MSM, and it is less likely that a US resident will look elsewhere in the world for US news and analysis.

  84. kauchai says:
    @Erebus

    ” I’ve done business in China almost 30 years and lived there for at least 10 over that period. I’ve watched copying happen countless times, often by companies who had only the vaguest notions of what they were copying. Those millions of cases didn’t show up in your court records, but they happened just the same. ”

    I have a simple question for you – If you had already experienced the “copying culture” in china, why did you or your company still want to continue doing business in china? Why not just pack up and leave? After all, china didn’t put a gun to your head and demanded that you stay.

    But the lure of profit was too strong, wasn’t it? And after you’ve had your fill from the trough, you start to fart to the high heavens about the “endemic culture”. Sounds like a pig to me…LOL!

    • Replies: @Erebus
  85. Lin says:
    @EastKekistani

    Xi and Communism are insane. That’s all I can say about the situation. As an anti-commie Martian national enfant terrible, I really don’t want to witness Mars-SinoTerra war. I really hope that commies or at least Xi will be ousted before he foolishly spend more on nuclear fusion, energy beam weapons, quantum computer, 5G tech……

  86. Ron Unz says:
    @EastKekistani

    Nope. When Hu Jintao was in power we could indeed talk about it as long as the gov was not listening. I managed to know about the Tiananmen Massacre through pictures of a Wikipedian article that haven’t been blocked by internet censorship.

    Actually, a few years ago I was extremely surprised to discover that the “Tiananmen Massacre,” as almost universally reported by Western journalists of that era, was very likely a media hoax.

    In fact, I think a couple of years ago, an article in the highly-reputable Columbia Journalism Review, pretty much admitted it as such.

    So if one of your foremost accusations against the PRC government is that they covered up the horrific 1989 massacre while Western governments reported it, your overall picture of reality may actually be rather inverted.

    And, in particular, I would urge you to never believe a single thing you read in Wikipedia about any even somewhat controversial topic…

    • Replies: @DB Cooper
  87. Three days later the leading comment plugin Disqus, which supports 750,000 websites and 35 million users, blocked me from a broad range of publications

    You can still publish by using a VPN, right?

    • Replies: @Vidi
    , @Godfree Roberts
  88. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    I don’t see where I said I owned any [patents], though I do.

    You did ask, “Ever had any of your own patents violated by a Chinese co?” This usually implies that you have experienced some of your patents being violated by the Chinese.

    Yes [these patents were issued in China], and internationally in some cases. Patenting internationally has become almost superfluous now as its becoming increasingly difficult to make something commercially viably outside of China, at least in certain fields.

    Fine. Please name the patents owned by you (and valid in China) that were violated by the Chinese.

  89. Erebus says:
    @kauchai

    Why not just pack up and leave?

    Why would I? You just take the culture into account and plan your jobs accordingly. I’ve seen enough of different cultures on a working basis to be quite sanguine about the differences between them.

    What one learns after a while is that there’s room for the talentless copiers, and for the innovators. In the past decade or so, the innovators have been taking the field away from the copiers as the domestic market matured and began to demand both innovation and quality. Also, China’s internal IP & contract law has matured as dramatically as everything else, so innovation is penalized much less now than previously.

    The 2nd thing one learns is to seek out those companies that want to innovate and work with them. I have both overseas and Chinese clients, and so the scope and challenge of the work I get is simply not available anywhere else in the world. That work is beginning to go both ways now, as China’s factories move to be closer to their markets.

    The 3rd thing one eventually realizes, rather than learns, is that what’s happening in China is a historically extraordinary development. Being on the scene as history is being made is a rare opportunity.

  90. kauchai says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    1) Many Taiwanese, perhaps most would disagree that it is “unfinished”. For all intents and purposes they seem to largely regard themselves as a separate country and even people from the mainland. The only side who seems to think otherwise are the leaders of the PRC.

    Many taiwanese have also lately came to realize that the Republic of China also includes the mainland and its entire polity. This is written into its constitution. Reunification of the mainland is also a separate article within the constitution. Therefore, the ROC is not only 23 million strong, it is actually 23 million plus 1.4 billion right across the strait. SORRY, THE MAINLAND AND TAIWAN DO HAVE “UNFINISHED” BUSINESS BETWEEN THEM.

    2) India was not a colonizer nation, so you will have to explain to me what “land grab” at the cost of a weak China they pursued. (I presume you mean borders that were worked out during the Raj, in which case your gripe is with Great Britain, not India.)

    There was no such political entity known as INDIA before the arrival of european conquests. The south asian continent was a fragmented collection of independent states, each with its own ruler, laws, customs, traditions, language and culture. In the early 1900’s, the british attempted to arm twist the new republican government of china to handover the southern part of tibet by using a map and JUST DRAWING A LINE right across tibet all the way down to Burma. Henry McMahon then announced to the whole world that the area south of the line now belonged to britain. IT WAS JUST THAT! A LINE DRAWN ON A MAP! No british troops were deployed, no war was made, not a single shot was fired!

    And then, to enforced this “farce”, he baited the tibetans with the idea of independence to try to corner the new chinese republican government into signing a treaty to handover south tibet. In 1914, the government of Yuan Shikai sent his foreign minister, Ivan Chen to Simla India to attend this conference. Upon realizing what the brits were up to, Chen got up and walked out of the conference. McMahon then forced the tibetans to signed the accord and promptly declared that southern tibet is under british “suzerainty”. This was how the infamous “Simla Accord” came into being. It was a complete hoax that the indian authorities were in full cognizance of but chose to ignore.

    When the brits left india, they left a big mess behind. India was a largely fragmented piece of land with undefined borders; political, economic, religious and social accords among its myriad of races was non-existent. This explains why (together with indian’s sense of hegemony in south asia) the partition with pakistan, the annexation of sikkim in 1975, the present kashmir problem, the annexation of Goa, and the 1962 border war between china and india that india lost.

    So, there has never been any border agreement between india and china ever. And in 1951, india invaded and occupied south tibet, a chinese territory.

    3) Regarding China’s disputing of Japanese sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands…

    The Diaoyu islands were never a part of japan. Meiji era japan was already setting its eye to the conquest of east asia and these islands eventually came under jap occupation after china lost the naval war in the yellow sea to japan in 1894. In a forced signed treaty of shimonoseki with japan in 1895, china was forced to cede taiwan and its surrounding islands and the liaotung peninsula to japan in addition to a war reparation payment of 220 million taels of silver. This was how imperial japan came to “own” these islands.

    After japan’s defeat in WWII, the Cairo Declaration and later reinforced by the Potsdam Proclamation forced japan return all its occupied territories to countries that it had conquered and illegally occupied. The Japanese surrender article also referenced these two documents.

    Unfortunately for china, in a peace treaty signed in san francisco in 1951 (of which china was not a party), the empire assumed administrative control over these islands because china was taken over by the communist party 2 years earlier. Later in 1971, under the terms of the Okinawa Reversion Treaty, the empire ceded the administrative duty of these islands to japan, its military ally. SO, JAPAN WAS ONLY BESTOWED WITH ADMINISTRATION RIGHTS, NOT SOVEREIGNTY.

    Therefore japan has no sovereign rights over the Diaoyu islands. Even the empire dared not assumed sovereign control over them between 1945 – 1971. These islands belong to the PRC and ROC. And yes, the PRC could have seize them back by force but that would create WWIII which I am sure Mr Navarro would also suffer from.

  91. Vidi says:
    @last straw

    Three days later the leading comment plugin Disqus, which supports 750,000 websites and 35 million users, blocked me from a broad range of publications

    You can still publish by using a VPN, right

    Most people have only one e-mail address.

  92. DB Cooper says:
    @Vidi

    For credible source on anything related to Japan please consult the CCP. Yeah right. Chang Kai-Shek was a true patriot. He never concedes any Chinese territory even though China was attacked on all sides by imperial powers. Even after the Nationalist government retreated to Taiwan he still denounced slum dog invasion of South Tibet. On the other hand Mao Tse-Tung the mother fucking piece of shit gave away Chinese land left and right once the fucker came into power. Ever wonder why today’s China is one size smaller than it was before? The mother fucking piece of shit concedes Mongolia and was prepare to give away South Tibet to India but the slum dogs was too greedy to just stop at South Tibet and refuse to come to a meeting to sign the paper and take it away. Note that the US has always been friendly to China up till the late 1940s after the Communist took over but Russia is the biggest land grabber of China yet Mao the mother fucking piece of shit likes to kiss the Russian’s ass. During Mao’s time huge portraits of Marx, Lenin and Stalin were paraded across the Tiananmen square forcing the Chinese people to worship them like gods. This is just disgusting. Mao the mother fucking piece of shit denounces Confucius and seek to destroy Chinese culture including the banning of Chinese characters. If the fucker is alive today no Chinese people in mainland will be writing Chinese. And South China Sea will most likely be given away if the fucker’s past record is any indication. The best thing the American did to China was to kill the fucker’s son during the Korean war otherwise today China will be rule by the fucker’s grand son like fat Kim is running North Korea. One of these days the mother fucking piece of shit will be dragged out of his tomb and his stinking body will be whipped for three days and three nights and then grinded into minced meat. Fuck that piece of shit. Here is a tip of the iceberg of what’s going on during the fucker’s reign. Enjoy and let it drill into your dumb head:
    https://fredgan.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/毁于文革中的部分全国珍贵文物古迹名录/

    • Replies: @Vidi
  93. DB Cooper says:
    @Ron Unz

    Hi Ron, as a long time China watcher I can say that the Western media is definitely not honest in its reporting. There was no massacre but civilians were shot (outside the square) when the government move armed troops into the capital to disperse the crowd’s killing of unarmed soldiers by Molotov cocktails. It is hard to understand the event today because today’s China was very different than those days and understanding the context is very important in understanding the event. The narrative pushed by the MSM actually exist, but not to China but to South Korea. I am talking about the Gwangju massacre. How many people here have heard of Gwangju massacre and then ask your question why?

    • Agree: Ron Unz
  94. @Godfree Roberts

    I didn’t say that his book was “”worthy waffling”. When I made that comment I hadn’t yet looked up the book and read the review referred to in my later comment. It was a reference to my impression of Clive Hamilton over years in which I first knew of him as Director of the lefty Australia Institute. So…. perhaps you can answer my question – please do – as that one book is not, I presume, all the evidence for his acting for NED/CIA.

  95. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    … the U.S. patent system is beyond ridiculous.

    Fully agree. The USPTO now grants patents for almost anything if the application follows the required format. Their SOP seems to be to grant and let the courts sort it out later. Perhaps that’s because the quality of the examiners has fallen abysmally in recent decades.

    Actually, I think the issuing of patents on nearly everything is deliberate U.S. policy. The evidence for this is the design patent, granted for “ornamental design for an article of manufacture” (link). That it is now possible to obtain a legally-enforced monopoly on something as trivial as mere ornamentation, and that this perversion of the U.S. Framers’ clear intent has not been revoked long since, is strong indication that the patent system is now working as the U.S. elites wish.

    The intention, of course, is to prevent other countries from catching up, by blocking nearly every route to progress, trivial or not. What was probably not anticipated is that the wall of patents is also blocking much American progress.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  96. Biff says:
    @Anonymous

    while also allowing enough freedom for people to breathe and businesses to prosper.

    Oxygen is ubiquitous, but on the business end things are different. While I’ll agree that authoritarian regimes can stifle business activity, but don’t discount what passes as the “free market” for doing the same, and what I am talking about are corporate monopolies – the American economy is riddled with them. Board meetings often involve corporate lawyers drafting laws to restrict any, and all competition, and then they get their ‘bought and paid for politicians’ to pass them.

    It begs the question: “What’s the difference between government controlling business, or business controlling government?”

  97. @Vidi

    Even if one were to discount their reckoning of the alleged Nanking incident, that still begs the question of why the Kuomintang would fake its own prebellum census. Or is one to believe that they deliberately suppressed population figures because they were hoping that someday the Japanese would “massacre” its civilians, and therefore be ready to cover up for them?

  98. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Everything you say is true, but it’s also a historical perspective and doesn’t speak about the future. It seems to me that the deng xiao ping industrial boom has largely run its course and that the new class system is now entrenched. This means lots of luxury cars and expensive restaurants while most people (city and country) live very simply with not much hope to level up. Money seems to be king in the new China, which means the successful entrepreneurs are a higher caste than the regular workers.

    This kind of class divide is not visible in most of Europe. The USA may be a different story.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  99. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    I’ve chalked that up to the vast number of semi-competent techs and engineers pouring by the millions out of the schools with no real need for them. They’ve memorized the textbooks, but beyond that they’re out of their comfort zone and completely lost.

    This sounds like you’ve identified a substantial education-based problem. The solution would be to encourage more creativity, hands-on learning, and place more emphasis on individual development rather than conformity. Unfortunately, this would create a class of people who would need a much more sophisticated control matrix to keep them in line, and I’m not seeing any evidence of this emerging.

    This is one of the reasons why I’m not sure China will be able to solve it’s self-created problems while still maintaining enough forward momentum to maintain positivity and avoid collapsing back to a less popular and therefore less efficient form of governance.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  100. @jb

    There’s no problem with discussing Tiananmen publicly.

    In 1998, President Clinton discussed the incident with President Jiang Zemin on national TV and John Border [1] reported, “The drama of the meeting came in a remarkable 70-minute news conference, carried live on nationwide Chinese television, in which the two Presidents differed sharply on the nature of personal freedom, the role of the state and the meaning of the Tiananmen Square demonstrations that were violently suppressed by the Chinese Government in July 1989…Mr. Clinton flatly told the Chinese leader that his Government had been ‘wrong’ to use force to end the peaceful demonstrations of the spring of 1989 and that broad personal freedom and political expression were the price of admission to the world community of the twenty-first century. ‘For all of our agreements, we still disagree about the meaning of what happened then,’ Mr. Clinton said in his opening statement, referring to the violent crackdown on Tiananmen Square the night of July 3-4, 1989, that left hundreds of protesters dead.”

    The problem lies with the US narrative about a ‘violent crackdown on Tiananmen Square the night of July 3-4, 1989, that left hundreds of protesters dead.’ It didn’t. That is a flat out lie and there’s no point in the Chinese government giving it air. I summarized it here: http://www.unz.com/article/tiananmen-square-1989-revisited/

    Every Chinese knows about it. What surprises and confuses them is when you talk to them about ‘a violent crackdown on Tiananmen Square the night of July 3-4, 1989, that left hundreds of protesters dead.’ It makes them wonder if the government is playing with a straight bat.

    99% of political censorship in China is in response to lies like that and we keep lying so they’ll keep censoring and we can say, “Look! Bad! Censorship! Because freedom!”

    When Cambridge University Press tried to distribute 300 academic articles making the same ‘violent crackdown’ claim the Censor asked them not to but they said, “Look! Bad! Because academic freedom!” so the censor threw up his hands and let the lies in.

    The Uyghur thing is a similar campaign: we give financial support and terrorist training to the Uyghur separatist ETIM who then kill Chinese so the government says, ‘We’d better teach these people to read and write and hold a job1″ and our media says, “Look! Bad! Concentration camps! Because freedom!”

    We invest $1 billion annually in stunts like that because they work on so many levels.


    [1] The New York Times
    http://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/28/world/clinton-china-overview-clinton-jiang-debate-views-live-tv-clashing-rights.html

    • Replies: @homahr
  101. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    Yes, and internationally in some cases. Patenting internationally has become almost superfluous now as its becoming increasingly difficult to make something commercially viably outside of China, at least in certain fields.

    Another excellent observation.

    China has always made imports very difficult, which means they had to build their whole economy from the bottom up. This means that China’s new mobile phones are made from domestically produced electronics, using domestically produced robots and domestically produced chemicals, and transported on domestically-built lorries with domestically-built engines made from domestically produced steel.

    The only things they lack are the natural raw resources at the bottom of the pyramid, and a rapidly dwindling handful of high tech capabilities at the top of the pyramid.

    They’ve played a very deep game for a long time now, and expertly positioned themselves as the center of gravity of the world economy.

    • Agree: Godfree Roberts
    • Replies: @Erebus
  102. @akka

    I googled ‘American technology stolen by the Chinese’ and did find hundreds of examples of it.

    When I searched the American IP court records, however, I found only three examples in 19 years–and none seemed serious.

    Would you try that and see what you can turn up?

  103. @Lin

    ‘Xi and Communism are insane. That’s all I can say about the situation.’?

    Are you aware that next year every Chinese will have a home, a job, plenty of food, education, safe streets, health- and old age care? All of them.

    And  500,000,000 urban Chinese will have more net worth and disposable income than the average American, their mothers and infants will be less likely to die in childbirth, their children will graduate from high school three years ahead of American kids.

    There will be more drug addicts, suicides and executions, more homeless, poor, hungry and imprisoned people in America than in China.

    Who’s insane here?

  104. @last straw

    Not under my own name on Disqus

  105. George says:

    In Europe recently I tried to access mainstream US news sites, and found many of them blocked. Many YouTube vidoes were out of region. The reason for blocking was likely they could not conform to the myriad of privacy ect rules, but were still blocked.

  106. @Erebus

    It is interesting to read your posts. Basically I sense someone who knows what he is talking about, unlike Godfree.

  107. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    *India was not a colonizer nation,*

    Well you’ve been informed now.

    * so you will have to explain to me what “land grab” at the cost of a weak China they pursued. (I presume you mean borders that were worked out during the Raj, in which case your gripe is with Great Britain, not India.)*

    China was loathe to recognise that illegal ‘Mcmahon line’ , but in accordance with its established policy of setting intractable border issues asides while normalising bilateral relation [think Diaoyu], China was willing to swallow the bitter pill, adhere to that infamous demarcation by the Brits and move on.

    Trouble is, the Indians are not satisfied with ‘inheriting’ a large piece of premium real estate from the Raj, their appetite had been whetted, they wanted more.

    In 1962, at the instigation from the gawd damned arsonist in Washington, the Indians tried their luck, to push the Mcmahon line further North. Unfortunately ,after three centuries of humiliation, The Chinese were in no mood to be pushed around any more, the rest is history.

    • Replies: @homahr
  108. Mike P says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    And 500,000,000 urban Chinese will have more net worth and disposable income than the average American, their mothers and infants will be less likely to die in childbirth, their children will graduate from high school three years ahead of American kids.

    Furthermore, even the less fortunate Chinese – those living in rural towns left behind by the economic miracle – will have a much safer, better life than poor Americans, who are simply being abandoned to lawlessness. I’ve only been to China once, but from what I saw, I would much rather be poor in China than in the U.S.

  109. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    It is not doing any “taunting”

    hmmm,
    Can you imagine the hue and cry if Angela Merkel pose in a Messerschmitt fighter with Nazi Swastika !

    http://web.archive.org/web/20190419043457/http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=2971580&cloc=joongangdaily

  110. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    when Nakasone Yasuhiro sought to rewrite the Constitution, reform the armed forces, and began hinting at the eventual removal of U. S. forces from the “unsinkable aircraft carrier”, he too was quickly shown the door by Washington

    .
    ————

    It figures, a Sino-Korea-Jp power block would means the end of murkkan hegemony in Asia, a spectre that
    makes uncle scam sit up in cold sweat in the middle of night !

  111. denk says:
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    The Senkaku agreement lasted long enough. It would have still been active today had Ishihara Shintaro not moved to annex the islands as part of Tokyo City.

    Though I personally believe he moved to do that less to aggravate China (although he certainly knew it would also do just that), and more to add fire to an already collapsing Noda Yoshihiko/DPJ government. (The Obama administration played a crucial role in all this.)

    ————

    There aint no war in the Eastern front for decades.
    SCS, ECS, TW straits were at peace until the global cop arsonist came along and set it all ablaze,.

  112. denk says:
    @Mike P

    Its all business folks, nuthin personal..

    Dracula couldnt help sucking blood,

    A pathological arsonist couldnt help setting fire….

    ‘A former Japanese diplomat has accused the United States of manipulating Japan
    A former Japanese diplomat has accused the United States of manipulating Japan since the second world war in order to “eliminate” prime ministers who sought to develop betterrelations with Beijing.’

    https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a5f_1351781752

    • Replies: @MAOWASAYALI
  113. @Lin

    Xi and Communism are insane. That’s all I can say about the situation. As an anti-commie Martian national enfant terrible, I really don’t want to witness Mars-SinoTerra war. I really hope that commies or at least Xi will be ousted before he foolishly spend more on nuclear fusion, energy beam weapons, quantum computer, 5G tech……

    Of course I want nuclear fusion, quantum computers and 5G. However I really hope that someone more similar to Jiang replace him. From what I have heard things are not going on well because of him.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  114. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    China has always made imports very difficult…

    That has changed dramatically in the last couple of years.

    Imports are suddenly all the rage and no longer limited to high end luxury goods. In larger cities, even small grocery stores have an international section, and TaoBao is full of imported goods.

    It’s mostly foreign food, alcohol and cars of course, but much of everything else is represented.

  115. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    The evidence for this is the design patent, granted for “ornamental design for an article of manufacture”

    Actually, Design patents can be quite legitimate.

    They are how a Gucci or a Bosch protect their Industrial Design against copiers who would make something that looks identical but is of much lower quality.

    That both defrauds the public and damages both the reputation and the business of the original brand.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  116. @EastKekistani

    You’ll have to wait a long time then, hasn’t he been elected leader for life? And this came a year after his visit to Trump where Trump launched a missile salvo on Syria during their meeting. Obviously those who made the decision decided that Xi was the best man for whatever reason. Now how would you react if you were a leader of a superpower visiting another and he demonstrated the capability of his missiles in such a way to you? I mean when Trump visits China should Xi launch a few missiles on Taipei to show off? Of course he won’t but he won’t forget Trump’s actions either and understands the message well.

    I understand that you are not happy with the communist regime there but China is really capitalist for all intents and purposes. Now if you want regime change there you have to be very careful. By introducing western style democracy you may also introduce other evils from the west that you are not happy about, like the liberalism, more immigration, more Africans, greater penetration of western companies to plunder Chinese resources, etc.

  117. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    Actually, Design patents can be quite legitimate.

    They are how a Gucci or a Bosch protect their Industrial Design against copiers who would make something that looks identical but is of much lower quality.

    That both defrauds the public and damages both the reputation and the business of the original brand.

    I notice that you avoided answering my question: “Please name the patents owned by you (and valid in China) that were violated by the Chinese.”

    As for denigrating the stuff made in China, remember Sturgeon’s Law: “ninety percent of EVERYTHING is garbage”. That includes American stuff.

    For example, China recently landed a rover on the moon — on the far side of the moon, to be exact, an order of magnitude more difficult than a near-side landing. The U.S./Israeli attempt to land something on the moon (called Beresheet or something like that) crashed a few days ago, in spite of being probably a mere near-side attempt.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  118. Vidi says:
    @DB Cooper

    Chang Kai-Shek was a true patriot.

    Yeah, right. Chang Kai-Shek, the leader of the Kuomintang (KMT) was so patriotic that he served on the enemy army, the Japanese Imperial Army, for two years in his youth. I should believe anything he says about the Japanese, including the Nanking Massacre?

    Chang was also so corrupt that even his American patrons called him “General Cash My Check”. This is supposed to improve my opinion of his reliability?

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @DB Cooper
  119. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    Where did I say Chinese patents I owned were violated in China?
    You have a reading comprehension problem.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  120. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    Where did I say Chinese patents I owned were violated in China?
    You have a reading comprehension problem.

    You implied it by asking “Ever had any of your own patents violated by a Chinese co?”

    I notice that you are still avoiding my question: “Please name the patents owned by you (and valid in China) that were violated by the Chinese.”

    • Replies: @Erebus
  121. anonymous[318] • Disclaimer says:
    @Vidi

    Chang was also so corrupt that even his American patrons called him “General Cash My Check”.

    The Americans were certainly grateful to have Chiang Kai Shek’s permission to firebomb a major city (Wuhan) for practice in 1944, in anticipation of the eventual firebombing of Tokyo that would follow.

  122. @Godfree Roberts

    https://blogs.cisco.com/news/huawei-and-ciscos-source-code-correcting-the-record

    It does no good to claim that the West stole the secret of gunpowder from China, either.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  123. @Anonymous

    You are correct about Deng’s reform running its course. Its mandate ends on June 1, 2021, with all of his goals accomplished.

    That’s why there’s a fuss about Xi Jinping Thought: it’s China’s battle plan through 2049.

    And you’ll be pleased to hear that the first phase, from 2021-2035, is devoted to getting inequality down to Finland’s level. That will be fun to watch!

  124. @Anonymous

    “The solution would be to encourage more creativity, hands-on learning, and place more emphasis on individual development rather than conformity.” Creativity, hands-on learning or individual development are in short supply everywhere compared to China, judging from the metrics. Moral conformity is strongly inculcated from birth to death in China but otherwise, the average Chinese is far more of an individualist in his thinking than his opposite number in the US.

    “Unfortunately, this would create a class of people who would need a much more sophisticated control matrix to keep them in line, and I’m not seeing any evidence of this emerging.” China spends one-fourth of our internal security budget per capita, has unarmed cops, relatively empty prisons, no recidivism, safe streets, as much surveillance as the US (less than the UK) and strong support for the government’s ambitious development programs.

    The PRC is a classic Confucian government–the most Confucian since the Song, in fact. Its authority comes from its benevolence, not fearfulness.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  125. @Peripatetic Commenter

    “Huawei provided our source code of our products to Cisco for review and the results were that there was not any infringement found and in the end Cisco withdrew the case . . . the source code of the issues was actually from a 3rd party partner that was already available and open on the internet.”

  126. DB Cooper says:
    @Vidi

    “Chang Kai-Shek, the leader of the Kuomintang (KMT) was so patriotic that he served on the enemy army, the Japanese Imperial Army, for two years in his youth.”

    Curious. Where did you get that?

    • Replies: @Vidi
  127. Vidi says:
    @DB Cooper

    “Chang Kai-Shek, the leader of the Kuomintang (KMT) was so patriotic that he served on the enemy army, the Japanese Imperial Army, for two years in his youth.”

    Curious. Where did you get that?

    From the Encyclopedia Brittanica (link): “From 1909 to 1911 he served in the Japanese army”.

    Before you start protesting that Chiang didn’t realize that the Japanese were enemies, remember the Japan/China war in 1894-95, which China lost. So for sure he knew. The man was an opportunist who betrayed his country for his own benefit.

    In addition, as the unbelievably corrupt General Cash My Check, his reputation with me could not be worse.

    So why should I believe anything he or his party says about the Japanese, including the Nanjing Massacre?

    • Replies: @DB Cooper
  128. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    You implied it by asking “Ever had any of your own patents violated by a Chinese co?”

    Only in your imagination. No such implication can be found in the words themselves.

    I notice that you are still avoiding my question: “Please name the patents owned by you (and valid in China) that were violated by the Chinese.”

    The reason I’m ignoring (rather than “avoiding”) your demand (rather than “question”) is that it is not only a product of your problems with reading comprehension, it is also impertinent.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  129. DB Cooper says:
    @Vidi

    Suppose today the British is still ruling Hong Kong and some Hong Kong people is rising up against the British rule. And one of the leaders of the rebel group was a policeman in Hong Kong when he was 22 years old. Do you think that this is something that you will hold against him because he “once served in the colonial police force”?

    Many KMT officials were probably corrupt. Chiang himself was not that corrupt. You also have to understand that China at that time not only have to fight the Japs, the British, the Russians..etc. but internally the Communist was also destabilizing the economy by printing fake money and exploiting the sad situation of China by using the Japs invasion as a recruiting tools to expand its force. This is the reason the fucker personally thanks the Japanese prime minister when he visited China. The Nationalist government always maintain that the Japanese kill around 300,000 thousand people in the Rape of Nanking. What is your problem?

    • Replies: @Vidi
  130. anon[114] • Disclaimer says:

    White ‘s confusion ? Or loss of confidence ?

    From Jewish worshipping to Chinese ( East Asian ) worshipping is near completion .

    East Asian will screw and will try to get Koshered by IQ ‘s 2 digits .

  131. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    You implied it by asking “Ever had any of your own patents violated by a Chinese co?”

    Only in your imagination. No such implication can be found in the words themselves.

    So now you want precise conversation, where no implications are allowed. Fine.

    The reason I’m ignoring (rather than “avoiding”) your demand (rather than “question”) is that it is not only a product of your problems with reading comprehension, it is also impertinent.

    I just want you to be precise. If the Chinese have violated one or more of your patents (that were valid in China), I want you to name these patents. If they haven’t done that, say so.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  132. Vidi says:
    @DB Cooper

    Many KMT officials were probably corrupt. Chiang himself was not that corrupt. [blah, blah]

    I notice that you are carefully ignoring the fact that Chiang served on the army of a known enemy, the Japanese Imperial Army. Why should I believe anything he or his party says about the Japanese, including the Nanjing Massacre?

    In fact, Chiang Kai-Shek was an opportunist who betrayed his country (China) for his personal benefit. So why should I believe anything he says?

  133. DB Cooper says:

    Charging Chiang once serve under the Japanese is a little bit disingenuous and I have use the scenario of Hong Kong as an example.

    “Why should I believe anything he or his party says about the Japanese, including the Nanjing Massacre?”

    You really lose me. What did the KMT says about the Rape of Nanking? By the way its known as the Rape of Nanking, not Nanjing Massacre.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  134. homahr says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    I am not sure if you saw, but the insufferable rod dreher from the American Cuckservative, posted recently posted about the so-called Uyghur plight, quoting an artical from the Guardian, titled ‘China destroyed Uighur Notre Dame’. LOL

    Propaganda against China full speed ahead.

  135. Vidi says:
    @DB Cooper

    Charging Chiang once serve under the Japanese is a little bit disingenuous and I have use the scenario of Hong Kong as an example.

    Chiang Kai-Shek’s service with the enemy army, the Japanese Imperial Army no less, is extremely relevant. It suggests that he was sympathetic to the Japanese, and was therefore unlikely to tell the truth about them. Chiang’s defection to the enemy also indicates very clearly that his moral level was extremely low, and that we should be very cautious about believing anything he said.

    By the way its known as the Rape of Nanking, not Nanjing Massacre.

    The incident is known by both names. If you want to call it the Rape of Nanking, fine.

  136. DB Cooper says:

    Let me repeat my question, what exactly Chiang (or the KMT) said about the Rape of Nanking that bothers you? And why are you learning and using English, the language of a people that once did so much harm to China? What does this tell about your own moral level?

    • Replies: @Vidi
  137. Vidi says:
    @DB Cooper

    Let me repeat my question, what exactly Chiang (or the KMT) said about the Rape of Nanking that bothers you?

    So you started attacking me without even reading what I wrote?

    And why are you learning and using English, the language of a people that once did so much harm to China? What does this tell about your own moral level?

    My moral level is fine. Chiang Kai-Shek learned Japanese, and I learned English (and so did you). However, Chiang decided to serve on what he had to know was an enemy army; I have never served in the U.S. military. Chiang’s stint on the Japanese Imperial Army was enough to tell me that his moral level was extremely low, even if he hadn’t later become so corrupt as to be called General Cash My Check — and it was his American friends who called him that!

    So why should I believe anything he said, about the Nanjing Massacre or anything else?

    • Replies: @Peter Grafström
  138. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    I want you to name these patents.

    Want to your heart’s content, but if you think I’m going to do more than tell you the field to which the patents apply you’re dreaming. This is an anonymous forum, and will stay that way for me.

    Furthermore, we’re not talking about “my” patents as they have been assigned to entities that paid for them. In one case I was one of the Inventors in a dispute between otherwise unrelated parties. In another, I testified as an expert witness in a dispute between parties that were not related to me at all. In both of the above cases, the winner’s awarded damages barely covered their legal costs, so IP litigation was definitely systemically discouraged.

    It should be stated that these occurred before the new, specialized IP tribunals were stood up in 2014. Since then, I understand that the situation has greatly improved over the previous courts that were often not qualified to make technological judgements.

    I also understand that awards are now rising to international levels, which will make an even greater difference as punishments are large enough now to bankrupt transgressors. I am familiar with a more recent case in Shenzhen where a foreign company’s design patent was violated by a Chinese OEM. The OEM was bankrupted when it lost.

    • Replies: @Biff
    , @Someone
    , @Anonymous
  139. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    And you’ll be pleased to hear that the first phase, from 2021-2035, is devoted to getting inequality down to Finland’s level. That will be fun to watch!

    Yes, it will. The driving force of capitalism has largely been the ability to ‘level up’ and enter a higher caste, so it’ll be interesting to see how the new rich react.

    Potentially it’s possible, since the Han are intellectually homogeneous. So in other words, if we ignore the Muslims, it’s not like trying to bring blacks up to white peoples’ level (which has proven to be impossible).

    Chinese is far more of an individualist in his thinking than his opposite number in the US.

    This is not my experience at all. Chinese people seem to love short, simple answers and aren’t inclined towards open ended philosophical musings. Contrast with India!

    China spends one-fourth of our internal security budget per capita, has unarmed cops, relatively empty prisons, no recidivism, safe streets, as much surveillance as the US (less than the UK) and strong support for the government’s ambitious development programs.

    Yes … but again, this is looking backwards. The question is how they’re going to keep it this way while allowing the population enough cognitive liberty to become truly creative.

    • Replies: @denk
    , @Godfree Roberts
  140. Biff says:
    @Erebus

    This is an anonymous forum, and will stay that way for me.

    It’s not anonymous for Ron Unz or Mr Roberts, so it’s obvious who exhibits bravery, and who are the keyboard cowards.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Anonymous
  141. Erebus says:
    @Biff

    … it’s obvious who exhibits bravery, and who are the keyboard cowards.

    Including, of course, yourself and Vidi and almost every commentator here.

    The more important point is that the parties to the disputes may wish their privacy respected. I certainly won’t, on principle violate it, but also for the simple reason that doing so would probably harm me more than them.

    Vidi would know all that, of course, which is why his repeated demands are nothing more than simple impertinence.

  142. denk says:
    @Anonymous

    This is not my experience at all. Chinese people seem to love short, simple answers and aren’t inclined towards open ended philosophical musings. Contrast with India!

    You can say the same about the West,

    Turns out that the ‘spiritual, philosophical’ Whiteys and their Indian cousins become the most predatory colonizers in human history., whereas China today represents a ray of hope
    for humanity.

    Makes one wonder, are philosophical people inherently evil ?

    • Replies: @Vidi
    , @MAOWASAYALI
  143. Vidi says:
    @denk

    Vidi would know all that, of course, which is why his repeated demands are nothing more than simple impertinence.

    You made some serious accusations, slamming 1.4 billion people. I think it’s reasonable to ask for verifiable evidence, not hearsay — and so far all you have supplied is the later.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Vidi
  144. Someone says:
    @Erebus

    LOL.

    Why don’t you admit that you are full of crap, and that all your subsequent posts have been a facile attempt to dress up your already debunked initial assertion?

  145. Anonymous[410] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    Want to your heart’s content, but if you think I’m going to do more than tell you the field to which the patents apply you’re dreaming. This is an anonymous forum, and will stay that way for me.

    This is fair.

    So which field did the patents apply to?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  146. Anonymous[410] • Disclaimer says:
    @Biff

    It’s not anonymous for Ron Unz or Mr Roberts, so it’s obvious who exhibits bravery, and who are the keyboard cowards.

    Everyone has a different life situation. Some, like Linh Dinh, have gone full metal jacket and benefit form the publicity arising from not giving any fucks. Others, like myself and presumably Erebus, would stand to suffer economically if we were outed.

    Does this make us less brave? Of course not, because it’s a logical decision not an emotional one.

    Does this make our contribution less valuable? If you’re willing to go through the necessary shit filtering process that comes with reading anonymous posts, you stand a chance of getting information that a public figure would not have access to or would not be able to divulge.

    So please don’t imply that anonymous posters are necessarily inferior, just because you’re too lazy or too feeble minded to perform the shit filtering process properly.

  147. @Land of the free

    Voltaire said “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

    Mr. Roberts is a smart man. He knows there is no profit in it. He was alive and remembers what happened in the 1950s to that upstart senator from Wisconsin.

    Indeed, Joe McCarthy is a cautionary tale. Joe was trying to warn us that all the damn commies in the U.S. government in the 1950s were Jews and Shabbat goys. Look what that got him? An early death, and today his name ain’t worth shit. When you go against the Jews, they will crucify you. They will smear your name for a thousand years.

    “McCarthyism” q.v. (quod vide)

    Perhaps an even more pertinent quotation is this:

    “Some call it Communism, I call it Judaism.”  — Rabbi Stephen Samuel Wise

    Pray tell, Mr. Roberts, why are the commies in the U.S. government trying to smear the commies in the P.R.C. today?  Why are our Jewish masters trying to hoax us into another World War?

  148. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    You made some serious accusations, slamming 1.4 billion people.

    I did? Where? Your reading comprehension problems keep rising to the surface. Do you have the same problems in verbal conversation?

    • Replies: @Vidi
  149. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    This is fair.

    Of course it is.

    So which field did the patents apply to?

    The patent in question protected a novel industrial furnace. It was designed under contract to a Chinese firm and involved several Inventors. The Chinese firm owns the patent, and were the litigants.

    With a trivial amount of adjustment, such a furnace can be usefully adapted to a variety of industrial purposes besides the one that the patent owners had commissioned the design for, which indeed was what triggered the litigation.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  150. Vidi says:
    @Vidi

    You made some serious accusations, slamming 1.4 billion people. I think it’s reasonable to ask for verifiable evidence, not hearsay — and so far all you have supplied is the later.

    I want to clarify that I was responding to #144 by Erebus (link). I don’t know why the back link of #146 (link) points to Denk.

    • Replies: @denk
  151. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    I’ll just leave these right here, after a quick search in the DOJ db. . .

    https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-national-pleads-guilty-economic-espionage-and-theft-trade-secrets

    https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/prc-state-owned-company-taiwan-company-and-three-individuals-charged-economic-espionage

    The latter being merely alleged, the former pleading guilty, with all the attendant claims one can make about how fair the plea is, as cost of defense often is too high. Nevertheless, the Economic Espionage Act has only been enacted in 1996, and specifically requires establishing that defendent intended to benefit a foreign power, so it’s a little harder to find cases before that.

    In any event, regardless of whether the PRC was involved, there are plenty of private theft by Chinese nationals, or by corrupt and/or disgruntled employees selling valueable IP. The Micron case seems like a tough win for DOJ as the details lay out a private criminal act but links the PRC only through its declaration for the need to have native DRAM tech as well as involvement by a state-corp. Seems Micron had terrible IP security measures.

    • Replies: @Half-Jap
    , @Godfree Roberts
  152. Half-Jap says:
    @Half-Jap

    If I had access to Lexis, I’m sure I’d find plenty more civil cases of IP theft, as the DOJ’s policy is to leave smaller cases to civil remedies.
    Soon enough, though, PRC wouldn’t need licit or illicit tech transfers, considering the effort put into R&D. Almost all journal articles I read relating to batteries have Chinese co-/authors.

  153. Anonymous[265] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    Combustion furnaces are old school so I’m guessing this must have been something a bit sexier, like a plasma arc furnace?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  154. denk says:
    @Vidi

    Happen to me too,

    hehehhe

  155. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    You made some serious accusations, slamming 1.4 billion people.

    I did? Where? Your reading comprehension problems keep rising to the surface. Do you have the same problems in verbal conversation?

    My reading comprehension is fine. You wrote:

    Copying designs is endemic to the culture. The notion that an idea or design can be “owned” simply doesn’t enter the worldview in which they operate, and they copy each other as enthusiastically as they copy foreigners.

    As the thread topic is China, there is no doubt that when you wrote “Copying designs is endemic to the culture” you meant that copying is endemic to the Chinese culture. According to the dictionary (link), “endemic” means “natural to or characteristic of a specific people or place”.

    So you were saying that copying is “natural or characteristic” of the Chinese culture. That is a serious accusation. So it is reasonable to ask for verifiable evidence. Thus far, you’ve offered only hearsay and semantic hair splitting.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Erebus
  156. @denk

    Both England and India have a deep-seated caste system that is the closest to the Jews’; China never did.

    There have even been a couple of Chinese Emperors who came from the ‘common stock.’ Moreover, glibness was always viewed with suspicion in traditional Chinese society, if it was not despised, as was the merchant who ranked well below the scholar.

    A lot of the HBDers love to drive home the point that the Chinese always have lower ‘verbal IQ’ scores than the Jews and Whites. Well, that’s because the Chinese have been bred for thousands of years to despise fast-talking slick salesmen who speak with forked tongues.

    Only in a Jew-ruled mercantile economy and consumerist society would ‘high verbal IQ’ (i.e., glibness and sophistry) be of any commercial value or import.

  157. @denk

    Japan is a U.S. occupied slave state, with about 40,000 of Uncle Samuel’s troops stationed there. Ditto for Germany. No official peace treaty, that I know of, has ever been signed with either Germany or Japan.

  158. @Anonymous

    ‘The question is how they’re going to keep it this way while allowing the population enough cognitive liberty to become truly creative.’

    How much more creative can they get?? It took them seventy years to solve every social problem the West has struggled with for millennia: next year every Chinese will have a home, a job, plenty of food, education, safe streets, health- and old age care.  500,000,000 urban Chinese will have more net worth and disposable income than the average American, their mothers and infants will be less likely to die in childbirth, their children will graduate from high school three years ahead of American kids. Then there will be more drug addicts, suicides and executions, more homeless, poor, hungry and imprisoned people in America than in China.

    And that’s just the soft sciences.

    On the hard side, according to the Japan Science and Technology Agency, China now ranks as the most influential country in four of eight core scientific fields, tying with the U.S. The agency took the top 10% of the most referenced studies in each field, and determined the number of authors who were affiliated with the U.S., the U.K., Germany, France, China or Japan. China ranked first in computer science, mathematics, materials science and engineering. The U.S., on the other hand, led the way in physics, environmental and earth sciences, basic life science and clinical medicine. https://tinyurl.com/ydeqeqnb.

    The World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO, ranked 167 universities and public research universities for the top 500 patent applications. 110 of the patents were from China, 20 from the United States and 19 from South Korea. China dominates a global ranking of the most-cited research papers published in the 30 hottest technology fields, a development likely to alarm American leadership already leery of its rising Asian rival.

    Though the U.S. accounted for 3.9 million research papers overall compared with 2.9 million from China, China produced the largest share in 23 of the 30 fields that drew the most interest, while America led seven. Nikkei and Elsevier compiled the ranking based on 2013-18 data provided by the Dutch publisher, covering a total of 17.2 million papers.

    China led the world in the majority of the top 10 fields, and each of the five areas in the top 10 tied to battery research. It accounted for more than 70% of all papers on photocatalysts and nucleic-acid-targeted cancer treatment, which ranked 12th and 14th. The U.S. led in three biotechnology fields, including No. 7 genome editing and No. 10, immunotherapy. https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/China-tech/China-s-research-papers-lead-the-world-in-cutting-edge-tech

    China has overtaken the US to become the world’s largest producer of scientific research papers, making up almost a fifth of the total global output. https://www.stm-assoc.org/document-library/

  159. @Half-Jap

    Chinese researchers (I identify them by their Chinese names and don’t know their national affiliation) are authors on 55% of American peer-reviewed STEM papers.

    I suspect that their representation among defendants in IP theft cases is far below 55%.

    The cases I have found, like the Dow case you linked to, are all clearly the work of individuals and the harm they did was minimal, judging by the sentences.

    The FBI, a supremely racist organization, has been targeting Chinese scientists for decades and has lost as many cases as it has won against them–including all the big ones–in American courts.

    That’s a long-winded way of saying that they have no need to steal from us and, on rare occasions when they do, it has never amounted to much more than standard industrial stuff.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
  160. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Vidi

    So you were saying that copying is “natural or characteristic” of the Chinese culture. That is a serious accusation. So it is reasonable to ask for verifiable evidence. Thus far, you’ve offered only hearsay and semantic hair splitting.

    Why is it so serious? He’s not saying it’s right or wrong, just that it’s a fact and needs to be factored into any business decisions.

    If you want evidence, go to alibaba.com and search for some niche technical equipment. You’ll usually find dozens of suppliers all over China producing the exact same design which they obviously all copied off each other.

  161. @Godfree Roberts

    What I have realized is that there needs to be a separate sphere for NE Asians complete with both our home countries and our own colonies, that is, our versions of America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

    We can certainly be law-abiding tax-paying people. That’s not enough to guarantee our continued and secure existence. So we’d better start our own colonies in SE Asia, Micronesia, etc.

  162. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    … this must have been something a bit sexier, like a plasma arc furnace?

    No, the method of heating was quite mundane (electric).

    The shaping of the heating chamber and feedback control (along with a few other details) allowed the target transformation in the subject material to occur at a significant savings to the operating energy and materials cost of the prior art, with little or no extra capital cost (ignoring the costs of inventing it).
    A previously expensive and inconsistent process became materially more efficient and 3-4x more reliable. It has been further developed in recent years.

  163. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    As the thread topic is China, there is no doubt that when you wrote “Copying designs is endemic to the culture” you meant that copying is endemic to the Chinese culture.

    Of course.
    I have no idea how much time you’ve spent in China, but I’ve been all over it. I’ve personally driven >150,000 km, in addition to a probably similar amount of rail and air travel.

    One of the things I noticed in my travels is that architectural styles, art and the design of everyday household items didn’t change much over centuries. You could visit a rich merchant’s 1000 year old house, or a 500 yr old official’s house, or an army general’s house from the 1800s and they are identical in layout, ornamentation, and even in household effects.

    Look at a famous painting from 1,000 yrs ago, and following that you will see 1,000 yrs of paintings in the same style. The talent of the following painters being judged on how well they captured the original master’s technique and style.

    Be it a ground breaking architect, painter, sculptor, mechanical inventor, or calligraphist, those who follow are judged on how close they came to the original masterwork’s intent.

    That’s the undeniable pre-revolutionary cultural history of China. The Chinese call it “respect for heritage”. In the modern, post-revolutionary context, it’s called “copying”.

    Calling it “slander” misunderstands the meaning of the word.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  164. Someone says:

    Erebus is full of it.

    No one drives 150k miles in China.

    In the past, the roads wouldn’t be up to standard, or flat out would not exist.

    Now, no one would drive that distance when an HSR system is inevitably faster and more comfortable.

    As for architectural diversity, it exists too. But Erebus is too ignorant to notice. Because of climate, Guangzhou looks nothing like Beijing. Each Era has had different styles. The introduction or rebar and prefab has radically altered building heights and densities.

    And way to reinforce his dimwitted *copying* point by pointing out an exaggerated design consistency. Hell, the growth of Gothic architecture with its pointed arches and its geometry occurred right around the time of the crusades–which strangely enough had the invaders in lands which had historically featured pointed arches and geometric details.

    • Replies: @MAOWASAYALI
    , @Erebus
    , @FB
  165. @Someone

    I’m gonna go out on an “antisemitic limb” and say that the concept of “patent law” is akin to usury: it not only benefits the few at the expense of the many, it’s also an insidious form of geopolitical control.

    I just had a quick look at the history of Patent Law at Wikipedia and if you know how to read between the lines, as they say, you will easily find the Jew under the woodpile, or rather, under all the patent laws and paperwork.

    To wit: Modern Patent Laws were first developed in Venice in 1450. Guess who ruled Venice at that time? Shakespeare tells us it was the (((Merchants of Venice))).

    Speaking of Jews and patent laws, isn’t it curious that the greatest scientist of the 20th Century, Albert Einstein, started out as a lowly office clerk at a Swiss patent office?

    Christopher Jon Bjerknes thinks it’s more than curious; it’s unbelievable! He claims Einstein was a plagiarist. He even wrote a book entitled, Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist. Here’s the thrust of his accusation:

    The name “Einstein” evokes images of genius, but was Albert Einstein, in fact, a plagiarist, who copied the theories of Lorentz, Poincare, Gerber, and Hilbert? A scholarly documentation of Albert Einstein’s plagiarism of the theory of relativity, Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist discloses Einstein’s method for manipulating credit for the work of his contemporaries, reprints the prior works he parroted, and demonstrates through formal logical argument that Albert Einstein could not have drawn the conclusions he drew without prior knowledge of the works he copied, but failed to reference. Numerous republished quotations from Einstein’s contemporaries prove that they were aware of his plagiarism. 

  166. Erebus says:
    @Someone

    No one drives 150k miles in China.

    I did. Maybe more, but I have no idea what I drove in other people’s cars and I only vaguely recall the mileage on my 1st car when I sold it. At any rate, I sold my 2nd car recently and it had 122kkm on the clock. I drove every one of them.

    In the past, the roads wouldn’t be up to standard, or flat out would not exist.

    When, in 1850? A Brit I knew (now dead) hitchhiked China some 10kkm in the 1950s (NOT a typo), and I know a Australian woman who bicycled a similar distance 1989-1991. They said they did it on roads, and I have no reason to disbelieve them.

    … no one would drive that distance when an HSR system is inevitably faster and more comfortable.

    HSR started becoming useful 5 yrs ago. Before then you drove, or took 5 buses to get where you were going. Trains were medieval in the ’90s and early 2000s.

    Even now, unless you’re travelling between major cities, you’ll need to get on a bus to get to your destination. I like to drive because I like to get off the beaten path and see places that would just flash by on HSR or a bus. As for comfort, that depends on the car. The HSRs are full, often noisy, and they don’t stop wherever I tell them to.

    Because of climate, Guangzhou looks nothing like Beijing.

    You’d be surprised how similar they looked 30 yrs ago, but that’s not the point. I was talking not about geographical differences but temporal. (Do you also suffer from a reading comprehension problem?) Anyways, go to Suzhou and visit a 1000 yr old house, then Hangzhou for a 600 yr old house, then Ningbo for a 150 yr old house. Only a cabbage wouldn’t notice the similarity.

    As for the crusades and Gothic architecture, to be sure trends come and go, but the Gothic style was much more than towers and geometrics. Only a cabbage would mistake Chartres for a mosque. Institutional buildings tend to change slowly, simply because they are intended to last a long time and also need to convey stability and gravity. Private houses do not, and now don’t.

    You don’t mention art, but have a look at these shrimp paintings and tell us how innovative and different they are. I happen to like shrimp paintings, and even have a couple, but I fail to see anything beyond subtle stylistic differences and a very subtle progression between the old and the new.

  167. Someone says:

    So Erebus unravels a bit more, doubling down on his original, implausible claims.

    Car travel is plausible now–It wasn’t in the near past. In the bad old days of 2003, a young Beijing woman had her 15 minutes of fame by driving 1500 miles in her new car along a new national highway in order to escape a possible quarantine. A long road trip wouldn’t be noteworthy today–BUT it was not plausible until the very recent past.

    But then Erebus is just another loud mouthed know-it-all with really… delusional claims. Might as well base your travel claims around Francis Younghusband, or Lewis and Clark, or the guy from the Dos Equus “Most Interesting Man In The World” ads, or Indiana Jones.

    Beijing and Guangzhou NEVER looked similar. 30 years ago Beijing still had a grid plan with wide streets. Guangzhou had twisting narrow lanes from the pre-auto Era. Traditional northern architecture had to deal with snow loads, Guangzhou obviously does not, and its buildings could indulge in a lot more non structural ornamentation. Even in terms of modern building, they are far apart. Beijing is a heating climate, and buildings emphasize solar gain and minimize perimeter area and have thick walls. Modern Guangzhou is more akin to the cooling climates of Hong Kong and SE Asia, with each highrise unit requiring cross ventilation.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  168. Someone says:

    Erebus, tell us a bit more about your expert knowledge. You seem to know patent law and Chinese architecture, and you have traveled Chinese highways, apparently before they were built.

    Ditto with the Guangzhou vs. Beijing accusation. It’s just so flamingly and obviously
    dumb. Just how many 2 story shop houses exist in Beijing? How many Hutongs are in Guangzhou? Hint hint, just about zero. How many grass roof huts exist in Minnesota? How many igloos exist in Honolulu?

    But using Erebus’ “logic”, the Chinese are so hackneyed, they are incapable of actually creating anything which differs from the original, yet implausibly crib from his genius.

    As for 1000 year old vs 150 year old houses in Suzhou, Hangzhou and Ningbo, just how many are left? Up until the very recent past (in China along with the rest of the world), almost all architecture HAD to be utilitarian, as the resources for anything fancier were not available. Exceptions existed for the ruling class, but they were only a sliver of society.

    Is Erebus aware all 3 cities have the same climate and are within close proximity?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  169. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    One of the things I noticed in my travels is that architectural styles, art and the design of everyday household items didn’t change much over centuries. You could visit a rich merchant’s 1000 year old house, or a 500 yr old official’s house, or an army general’s house from the 1800s and they are identical in layout, ornamentation, and even in household effects.

    Some styles are pervasive and persistent. If you do a Google image search for “gothic cathedrals” you will get 183 million hits. These churches look very similar, through much space (all over Europe) and much time (some centuries).

    Similarly, searching for paintings named “Annunciation” gets 4.3 million hits. These works look alike; the colors, the postures of the human and supernatural figures, and the backgrounds may vary somewhat, but the similarity is striking. Even the paintings’ titles are the same!

    You describe China’s “endemic” copying as something blameworthy, when it is not at all unusual. So as I said, you were quite unfairly slamming 1.4 billion people. Therefore, I think it’s reasonable to ask for verifiable evidence of unusually blameworthy copying by the Chinese. You have given none.

    • Replies: @Someone
    , @Erebus
  170. Someone says:
    @Vidi

    In other words, Erebus is a loudmouthed BS artist with easily debunked claims.

    Hell, with his logic, Parisisians are devoid of individuality because Hausmann mandated mansard roofs, standardized setbacks, and seven floors. Medieval Paris sure as hell was more varied (cause there were no regulations.) St. Petersburg would be worse, as it is an Italianate copy in a Russian city.

    Places like Barcelona and Budapest would be ersatz copies of exotic places…

    Then to Erebus’ 150k of driving–LOLOLOLOL.

    Erebus finds the HSR to be busy and lacking flexibility, which makes sense. But chooses to DRIVE? If he’s going to BS, he should at least pretend to have limitless money and patience and pretend to have a professional driver. If Erebus solely went to tiny, isolated villages (which only became accessible a few years ago, fine.) But Erebus claims to drive and has mentioned Beijing, Guangzhou, and the Yangtze delta cities? And drives? Holy hell that is just dumb. You KNOW he’s BSing as the cities (especially the inner cities with historical architecture) are in constant gridlock and require drivers to have limitless patience and balls of steel. It’s as plausible as Winnebago camping in downtown Paris.

    30 years ago–those highways were essentially narrow pothole lanes. The big cities had few cars, but were full of bicycles.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  171. Erebus says:
    @Someone

    A long road trip wouldn’t be noteworthy today–BUT it was not plausible until the very recent past.

    You simply have no idea what you’re talking about. My first China road trip was in ’91/’92 from Shenzhen to Guangzhou. It took ~4 hrs IIRC and was nowhere near as bad as the road trips I was taking in India a few yrs later. In 2003, few Chinese had cars, and a 1500km drive would be noteworthy for an ordinary person – if for no other reason than that she did it without running into something. For truck-drivers, it was quite normal. People were shocked that I would drive Shenzhen to Xiamen on a fairly regular basis. They’re only a little less shocked now, but that’s because there’s good HSR service now. If I needed/wanted to stop along the way, I’d still drive.

    Traditional northern architecture had to deal with snow loads, Guangzhou obviously does not… (etc)

    What difference between “geographical” vs “temporal” do you fail to understand?

    Beijing still had a grid plan..

    No, it, like Guangzhou is built on a ring road plan. GZ is more chaotic, I’ll grant that, largely because the Pearl River Delta broke it up into pocket neighbourhoods.

    Might as well base your travel claims around Francis Younghusband, or Lewis and Clark…

    In addition to reading comprehension, you have a math problem. Even if I was driving only since 2003, my 150kkm would amount to less than 10kkm/yr. Hardly noteworthy, unless you think everybody’s like you and leaves their basement only when they run out of beer and potato chips.

    My travels may shock you (and Someone), but are nothing compared to people I’ve met.

  172. Erebus says:
    @Someone

    Is Erebus aware all 3 cities have the same climate and are within close proximity?

    Yes. I’ve driven between them on quite a few occasions so I know exactly how far apart they are. That they are close together geographically makes my point regarding temporal change. Try to grasp that and the rest will become clear(er).

  173. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    These churches look very similar…

    See my point above about public vs private buildings. Furthermore, as it typically took 70-100 yrs to build one, it’s unlikely the style would change radically over short periods of time.
    Regardless, Gothic cathedrals are an obviously natural development of the churches of the 4-500AD era and that’s my point – one sees obvious development. Towers and pointed arches were already in architectural practice as far away from the ME as England and Germany and centuries before any Crusades.

    … searching for paintings named “Annunciation” gets 4.3 million hits. These works look alike;

    As alike as the shrimps (linked above)? Early Annunciations (say 1200s) look like those of say, 1600s? Really? If they look the same to you, you can add vision to your reading comprehension and math problems.
    Everything about them is different aside from the subject matter. Again, one sees obvious development from geometrical layout and brush technique to the paints themselves.

    You describe China’s “endemic” copying as something blameworthy…

    I do? Where? You and Someone ought to learn how to read before trying to write.

    Look, importing innovation is absolutely normal and catalyses development. Building on that import within the context of the importing culture can lead to a wholly new things.

    Did late-medieval Europe import whatever it could get its hands on, from Chinese fashion to Islamic physics? Absolutely. Did it then go on to develop the combinations of imported and indigenous into something wholly new? I’d argue “Yes, it’s called the Renaissance”, when even more was imported to catalyse even more European development.

    The pre-1900 Chinese nation did very little of that, and that can be seen across everything from painting, to feet-binding, to architecture, to industrialization. Do I blame the post-Deng Chinese for doing the same as their “Renaissance” got going? Nope, except when they do it in direct contravention of a written agreement or law, and that’s what the fuss is about.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    , @Vidi
  174. @Erebus

    The pre-1900 Chinese nation did very little of that, and that can be seen across everything from painting, to feet-binding, to architecture, to industrialization. Do I blame the post-Deng Chinese for doing the same as their “Renaissance” got going? Nope, except when they do it in direct contravention of a written agreement or law, and that’s what the fuss is about.

    Yep. Thankfully we are getting rid of this ossifying nonsense. I’m very wary of cultural ossification, preserving harmful traditions simply for being traditions and isolation due to Chinese history.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  175. Someone says:

    Reading intently as Erebus digs his hole a bit deeper.

    As late as 2003, Shenzhen to Guangzhou was one of the few places with good highway access. Explains why so much manufacturing and exports occurred in that relatively small area of land. Why the hell were you in Shenzhen before Shenzhen was much of anything? You a lychee farmer, alongside an inventor, patent lawyer and expert driver?

    In 91/92, just about ALL non truck traffic between HK and Guangzhou was done by train–about a million times easier than the existing roads. Check my IP address. I know this stuff because I am an architect who just happens to work here.

    And LOL at driving in Guangzhou. You can, but no sane person (nor anyone with a choice) would choose it. In China you drive if you are visiting rural areas. You regularly drive in the city if you have a driver if you have a company and can afford it. Choosing to drive between Guangzhou and Xiamen is flat stupid.

    Erebus also knows nothing about architecture and urban planning. The Beijing ring road system is relatively recent, as there previously was no need to accommodate large scale vehicular traffic. Beijing’s grids however, have been around forever. No grid in Guangzhou to this day. And extra LOL at an aged, crotchety a-hole driving between all these Yangtze delta cities. You could hop on a train and save your time in order to spew more BS here.

    And talking about foreign influence in architecture, you sure as f*ck were too blind to notice the obvious foreign influence in the treaty ports of Guangzhou and Xiamen. Cause their architecture isn’t anything like the architecture in Beijing. Could have gone to Kai ping in now suburban Guangzhou to see obvious and fascinating fortress-like towers.

    But Erebus has never been to these places. His stories are merely the work of his fecund, basement dwelling imagination.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  176. Erebus says:
    @Someone

    30 years ago–those highways were essentially narrow pothole lanes. The big cities had few cars, but were full of bicycles.

    Your point is? Did I say anything about driving 30 yrs ago?
    Anyway, you’re talking rubbish.
    The 33m wide, 120kmh Guangshen Expressway, connecting Shenzhen, Dongguan, Guangzhou and Zhuhai was completed 1993-ish, and fully opened to traffic a yr or 2 later. Nary a pot hole or bicycle to be seen on it. It was a regular run for me in the late ’90s/early ’00s.

    It wasn’t the only highway in China. By 2004, China’s highway system was almost 2mkm, so your girl that drove 1500km in 2003 could have kept going for quite a while.

  177. Erebus says:
    @Someone

    As late as 2003, Shenzhen to Guangzhou was one of the few places with good highway access.

    Must have been more than a few because China had almost 2,000,000 km of highway open to traffic in 2004. They didn’t build that in a few months. A real “architect” would know how long it takes to build things.

    I know this stuff because I am an architect who just happens to work here.

    If you are, then stop talking rubbish, or at least stop giving voice to your fear of driving. You can’t drive, so nobody can? If you’re in China, look out the window. See any cars? Do you see people driving them?

    Check my IP address. I know this stuff because I am an architect who just happens to work here.

    That’s interesting, UR is usually unavailable to me in China without a VPN. Anyway, an architect who knows nothing about Gothic cathedrals, can’t differentiate between public and private buildings, has no idea how long it takes to build things and confuses geographical divergence with temporal development is not one I’d hire.

    …in the treaty ports of Guangzhou and Xiamen.

    Never been in either “treaty port”, though I may have been in Xiamen’s. I haven’t been everywhere. Nor am I an architect.

    Cause their architecture isn’t anything like the architecture in Beijing.

    Still having problems distinguishing “geographical” and “temporal”? Not to mention that these were largely built under different foreign suzerainties.

    Do you actually have a coherent argument you can state (preferably coherently)?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  178. Erebus says:
    @EastKekistani

    Thankfully we are getting rid of this ossifying nonsense.

    I’m of mixed feelings about that, frankly.

    I know you have “break eggs to make omelettes”, but too much of what was lost was lost to wanton destruction by both foreigners and Chinese. Luckily, China had accumulated so many eggs during its history that there’s still a sizeable amount around, and the increasing efforts at preserving it are heartening.

  179. Erebus says:
    @Erebus

    I intended to add after…

    I know this stuff because I am an architect who just happens to work here.

    … that our Someone really is an exceptional fellow. Why, a little over 1.5 yrs ago he was a plant genomicist, (who) underst(oo)d the methodolgy… and now he’s architect who misunderstands architectural development. That’s a long way to drop in a year and a half. I wonder what he’ll be next…

    Maybe he’ll become a rally driver, and regale us with tales of the Macao to Zhuhai rally. Or, more likely what’s bred in the bone will finally out in the flesh…

    • LOL: MAOWASAYALI
    • Replies: @FB
  180. “Everyone everywhere trusts state outlets like the BBC twice as much as private media”

    That is as loony a statement as I have seen for a while.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  181. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    [Gothic cathedrals and paintings of the Annunciation]

    Whatever your excuses, you would have to concede the many similarities, and that “copying” is “endemic” to Europe too.

    You describe China’s “endemic” copying as something blameworthy…

    I do? Where? You and Someone ought to learn how to read before trying to write.

    Of course you did. In slamming China’s copying but not Europe’s, you were blaming 1.4 billion people. So I ask politely for verifiable evidence. In response, you offer insults but no evidence.

  182. Erebus says:

    [Gothic cathedrals and paintings of the Annunciation]

    Whatever your excuses, you would have to concede the many similarities, and that “copying” is “endemic” to Europe too.

    Man, I thought I’d heard everything…

    Of course they’re “similar”, in the same way all Scotch Whiskeys are similar. If they weren’t, they’d be a Gin, or Vodka, or Brandy, or whatever defines those individual types.

    “Gothic” defines a style, and a building claiming to be “Gothic” has to include certain stylistic elements to be of said style, otherwise it ain’t “Gothic”.
    “Annunciation” defines a subject matter, and any painting that doesn’t focus on that subject matter ain’t an “Annunciation” painting.
    Innovation is what happens within the boundary conditions that define the product. IOW, it’s a lot more complex than you seem to be able to imagine.

    In slamming China’s copying but not Europe’s, you were blaming 1.4 billion people. So I ask politely for verifiable evidence.

    Your numerous misunderstandings are unanswerable.

  183. Vidi says:

    Of course they’re “similar”, in the same way all Scotch Whiskeys are similar. If they weren’t, they’d be a Gin, or Vodka, or Brandy, or whatever defines those individual types.

    Of course. Every style mandates certain elements that must be copied, European styles no less than Chinese styles. The “endemic” copying, whether it’s done in Europe or in China, is essentially this.

    Therefore, when you slam China and not Europe for copying, you are being unfair. Once again, I ask you politely to supply some verifiable evidence, not insults.

    Your numerous misunderstandings are unanswerable.

    The loser of an argument is usually the one who starts hurling insults.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Someone
  184. Visiting here again after a hiatus.

    You guys would find the two following blog posts relevant and interesting.
    https://gmachine1729.com/2019/04/12/thoughts-on-google-in-china/
    https://gmachine1729.com/2019/04/09/different-types-of-people/

    There is also that I created and deployed a web service for searching Disqus comments while in China where Disqus is blocked. The service endpoint is https://pacific-waters-11622.herokuapp.com/ and more about in https://gmachine1729.com/2019/04/25/disqus-comment-search-service-released/. I used it to download almost 2000 comments of Steve Hsu and 4000+ of Bob Sykes, now replicated at
    https://gmachine1729.com/disqus-commenters/infoproc-steve-hsu/
    and
    https://gmachine1729.com/disqus-commenters/bobsykes/

    • Replies: @Anon
  185. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    Once again, I ask you politely to supply some verifiable evidence…

    Included below is verifiable evidence of Chinese copying on a grand scale…

    So lifelike is the copy, that the Chinese buy the Land Wind and change the logos to Range Rover to impress their friends. Apparently this is worth having to change them back for the required regular safety inspection.
    This kind of evidence is available all over the internet. You don’t need my help to find it, but you do need to be completely dishonest to deny what’s a click or two away.

    BTW, you can tell someone that I’ve driven both.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  186. Erebus says:
    @Erebus

    Here’s another one, if you think that’s a one-off.

    If you know anything about design, both of these are pretty unique originals, and their copies are a lot more similar than any two Scotch whiskeys, or any two Annunciations.

    There’s approx 30 more examples I can give from the automotive industry before I have to move on to another industry. Need me to continue?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Vidi
  187. Anonymous[213] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    That explains why each time I go to China, I’m struck by the amount of funny car brands I’ve never heard of and yet that all look so familiar!

    Perhaps Haval is an exception? They seem to be exporting in numbers, so they must be different enough to pass the lawyer test 🙂

  188. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    [photos purporting to show similar Chinese and Western cars]

    How do we know the Chinese cars weren’t products of joint ventures? If they were, the cars were supposed to be similar!

    • Replies: @Erebus
  189. Anon[381] • Disclaimer says:
    @gmachine1729

    Compare Chinese to Indians. What are the similarities and differences between Chinese and Indians?

    • Replies: @gmachine1729
  190. homahr says:
    @denk

    Indians still want Pakistan, all of it, not just the Pakistan parts of Kashmir, Gilgit-Baltistan. They claim this will be accomplished by 2025.

  191. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    [photos purporting to show similar Chinese and Western cars]

    Obviously, you’ve never been to China or you would have seen them with your own eyes. Do have any idea what it takes to copy a car? You’re just another fake.

    How do we know the Chinese cars weren’t products of joint ventures?

    You demanded verifiable evidence.
    You got it.
    Google is your friend. Every automotive JV in China is easily found.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  192. Someone says:
    @Vidi

    Eh. Erebus at this point is more of an overt idiot than anything else. LOL at him traveling hundreds of thousands of miles in China when he is obviously stuck in his basement and posting here 24/7.

    Anyone who claims Beijing and Guangzhou are lookalikes has… never been there.

    Wide, wide roads on a grid, endless royal/government buildings, single story neighborhoods with thick walls and overtly south oriented windows for solar gain/minimal heat loss vs.

    Narrow winding roads, multistory shophouses with overhangs to shade pedestrians from the intense rain, huge windows designed for ventilation, foreign influenced ornamentation (think of the Chinatown in San Francisco and Melbourne where many Cantonese lived and worked.)

    And that is just for the old city. The redeveloped areas are different too.

    Then he talks about driving–Kinda hard to do that when he obviously does not read the language to navigate the traffic. Erebus even claimed to drive in Shenzhen–back before it was much of anything.

    And to cite a bunch of lookalike car designs–2nd tier manufacturers re-use stamping molds to save a few bucks. Nothing great, but everyone starts from zero. Same *copying* occurred in Korea, Japan, and infamously in 19th C America. And plagiarism isn’t anything new. Why Pepsi if we already have Coke? Or Tom Jones when a bunch of black soul singers predated him?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  193. Erebus says:
    @Someone

    So, are you writing as an architect working in Guangzhou, or a plant genomicist working God knows where, or have you taken on an all-together new career?

    Anyone who claims Beijing and Guangzhou are lookalikes has… never been there.

    Agreed, which is why I’d never claim that. What I said is that 30 yrs ago they were more similar than they are today, and 30 yrs ago the number of multi-story buildings was quite small.

    … 2nd tier manufacturers re-use stamping molds to save a few bucks.

    Oh, what stamping molds were they “re-using”? Both the Land Wind and the China built Jaguar-Land Rover cars were introduced simultaneously at the 2015 auto show in Guangzhou. That, and the fact that the Land Wind is 5cm longer means they can’t be “re-using” tools. Even if they did, the fact that JLR sued suggests they didn’t do it with permission.

    How about this copy? Pretty hard to “re-use” stamping tools that are located in Germany.

    Not to mention the hundreds of interior injection molds…

    Then he talks about driving–Kinda hard to do that when he obviously does not read the language to navigate the traffic.

    In fact, English is widely used on street signs, and the few basic characters required for reading most traffic signs aren’t a challenge to master. You had to know them to pass the driver’s test.

    Erebus even claimed to drive in Shenzhen–back before it was much of anything.

    When was Shenzhen not “much of anything”, and where did I claim to have driven there then?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  194. Anonymous[406] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    I like your commentaries, Erebus. So why not post some fresh ones instead of wasting time arguing with these two trolls? It’s now obvious that they’re being deliberately disingenuous which means good manners no longer oblige you to reply.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  195. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    … good manners no longer oblige you to reply.

    I wasn’t really replying out of good manners, but because they provide excellent foils for rational argument and allow one to expose the limits of Godfree Roberts’ narrow, legalistic/statistical arguments. The internationally available statistics don’t always capture all of reality, much less it’s more colourful aspects.

    As the dynamic duo has devolved into spurious, strawman nonsense, but more importantly as Godfree seems to have gone silent, so I will throw the keys over the fence and desist.

    Actually, I’m in awe of the ahistorical rise of modern China. The mind boggles at the nation that’s been built there in the last 3 decades, but especially in the last 2.

    That doesn’t mean they’re without traits one might wish were different, and one needs to keep in mind. Godfree says he visits China often so he must know that ignoring, or dismissing said traits because they don’t appear in WTO statistics undermines his argument regrettably, and unnecessarily.

  196. @Anon

    See https://gmachine1729.com/2018/06/16/the-brahmins/ for a partial answer.

    By the way, somebody searched username=”Godfree Roberts” on my Disqus comment search and no results were returned. Because Godfree Roberts is the displayed name as opposed to user name, which is Gantal.

    So https://pacific-waters-11622.herokuapp.com/search?username=Gantal&query=&comment_download_limit=4000 (after a few retries due to Heroku forcing timeout in 30 s) got me 3257 of Godfree’s comments, which I’ve copied over to https://gmachine1729.com/disqus-commenters/gantal-godfree-roberts/.

  197. Someone says:

    Lol.

    Erebus is just lame. He can offer dim bulbs every excuse to justify their prejudices, but knows nothing about architecture nor history.

    You said they looked alike 30 years ago. LOL no.

    Beijing: wide wide boulevards on near perfect grid. Single story hutongs, grand royal and government buildings.

    Guangzhou: narrow winding roads, 2+ story overhanging shop houses. Much more foreign architectural influence and more exposed details thanks to a snow-free climate. The vast majority of the larger buildings were commercial in nature.

    30 years on, the architecture has become a bit more homogenous, thanks to the universal adoption of prefab. Still, Guangzhou has close to 3x the population density.

    And for all his BS about “temporal” architecture, why would he negate everything else? Every courthouse apes the Parthenon facade, damn the American judges are hackneyed drones!

    He can’t even LIE PROPERLY. Maybe Erebus can talk about downtown 1991 Shenzhen’s rice paddies vs. Shenzhen of today and convince the gullible hicks that foreigners are incapable of actual independent thought and action.

    At least Erebus puts in the effort to Wikipedia details surrounding his fantasy travels.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  198. @richellieu

    It is also true. Life’s funny that way.

  199. Guys please just stop. The past can not be changed and does not really matter except as lessons (not moral lessons but Machiavellian ones) about what should be done and what should be avoided. On the other hand the future does.

  200. @Vidi

    ‘Chiangs american friends’ were actually his and Chinas enemies.
    The angloamerican establishment wanted to prevent China from becoming capitalist and therefore obstructed his side. And supported the reds. Just like they did in Russia earlier and Cuba and Nicaragua later. In all cases they pretended in the eyes of the public at home to be against communism. But in action they fought the republican reformers there who admired the Us system and wanted to emulate the better parts of it. Chiangs inspirer Sun Yat Sen was educated in the Us and Chiang was a christian Konfutsian.
    (In the russian case the Us/Uk landed soldiers in Murmansk and staged a highly visible demonstration of power to help Lenin recruit. ‘Look the capitalists are trying to steal our revolution’. And the trick worked. But the white army was constantly undermined and had its conditions sabotaged by the british army and navy. Those who really knew and interpreted the facts with the point of departure that the Us/Uk would fight the reds had to believe that the british were extremely incompetent.
    However when Lenin turned out to want to create a strong empire he had to be eliminated.
    His foreign-payed intended purpose had been to help dissolve the Russian empire, not to substitute another rival.)

    And Chiang managed to unite the unreliable warlords before he lay the emphasis on fighting the japanese. That was necessary for longterm gains. The reds were more impatient and they saw them all as enemies.
    Chinas enemies didnt want such longterm gains. Didnt want a stable and united China.
    So for the Us/Uk it would have been better to retain those warlords unchecked and China disunited.
    When interpreting the negative quotes regarding Chiang , keep in mind how the west characterises Putin today.

  201. Erebus says:
    @Someone

    At least Erebus puts in the effort to Wikipedia details surrounding his fantasy travels.

    You have zero credibility.

    In Aug 2016, you claimed to be a “plant genomicist“. In this thread, you claimed to be “an architect” in Guangzhou.

    You’ve fallen into the Liar’s Paradox. All you can credibly claim is that you’re a liar.

    • Agree: MAOWASAYALI
    • LOL: FB
  202. FB says: • Website
    @Someone

    On another thread I remarked on an intelligent sounding comment of yours…but here you prove yourself to be a mouthfoaming buffoon…

    Erebus has given an interesting and credible account, over numerous posts, from an engineer’s perspective, on the issue of IP in China…he has noted that the recent legal reforms have improved the recourse that wronged IP owners now have…that makes perfect sense in the context of China’s very large leap in indigenous innovation…

    Others have taken issue with his observation that mimickry is endemic to the culture…let’s remember that truth is the strongest defense to the accusation of slander…there is no question that the explosion of private manufacturing enterprise, especially in the small and medium sector, has resulted in knock offs of just about everything…from lawnmower engines to just about any kind of machinery in every imaginable application…all you need to do is spend an hour on Ali Baba…

    Personally I am glad for this…and so is everybody I know…once you discover the knockoffs on Ali Baba, many of which are as good as the originals, you are happy as a bug in the rug for the wild and wooly Chinese copycats…because you just kept a considerable stack of bills in your own wallet…instead of filling the pockets of Madison Ave shysters and scumbag CEOs that insist on living like the 21’st century version of the Egyptian Pharaoh…

    Unfortunately many western companies are taking advantage of the boon…and having those very same knockoff artists producing products on which they merely put their label and charge three or five times as much…and yes I have personal knowledge of this in the aerospace parts sector…

    The issue of industrial espionage is something else altogether…and the US, France and other western countries have been stealing more than anybody…

    I think Godfree Roberts doesn’t understand the full picture as well as someone like Erebus…I loved Mr Roberts’ series on Mao which was tremendous…as was his piece on Xi…he should concentrate more on busting these myths to which we have all been indoctrinated…have a look at a tremendous series currently running on The Saker blog, on the Cultural Revolution…by writer Ramin Maziheri…

  203. Someone says:

    Wasn’t me. Never interested in plants nor genetics. Not a fan of the various racist/nationalist nitwits here.

    Check the IP.

    That, and check architectural drawings and maps, historical maps of various Chinese cities.

    And yeah, you are still BSing about any knowledge of Beijing, Guangzhou, and DRIVING through pre-Shenzhen Shenzhen.

    • Replies: @FB
  204. Erebus says:

    Wasn’t me… Check the IP.

    IP means nothing in a world of VPNs. 10 minutes from now my VPN could indicate I am 10kkm from where it says I am now.

    It’s in your UR list of comments, which means whoever it was used the same email address. That would be uncanny, but you’re never alone if you’re schizophrenic.

    Do you ever come home and wonder who put all those plant cuttings in your bedroom?

    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @MAOWASAYALI
  205. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    SWEET LORDY MAMA…

    That is one impressive bust E… well done…LOL

    And this fucking clown has the cheek to still squirt his diarrhea here…amazing…what a fucking moron…

    I’ve noticed the pathological liars here on UNZ are also the mouthiest…

    • Replies: @Erebus
  206. FB says: • Website
    @Someone

    It wasn’t you…?…that’s pretty fucking rich…it’s right there in your comments archive…it’s impossible to post a comment on this site under a username without also entering the corresponding email…

    You are pretty pathetic man…[you should have just said you’re both…a plant genomicist AND an architect…LOLOLOL]

  207. Erebus says:
    @FB

    That is one impressive bust E… well done…LOL

    I got a hunch that this guy was an obsessive whackjob, and dug into his comment history. After outing him, I hoped he’d have just enough sense left in him to slink off to pollute some other site, but noooo…. back he comes like a deranged MCAS.

    Sigh, some people’s kids…

  208. @Erebus

    Do you ever come home and wonder who put all those plant cuttings in your bedroom?

    That’s lol funny.

    I’ve been following your posts on this article for a couple of days now and I agree with much of what you have to say. It’s blatantly obvious the Chinese copy, and I would even go so far as to say ‘copycatting’ is endemic to their culture. You cite Chinese “shrimp paintings” as a good example.

    However, if you live in China, you ought to know that the Chinese love their ancestors and traditions above all else. Culturally as well as politically, the Chinese strive for balance and stability in their personal lives and in their greater society.

    “Avant-garde art” or even the bulk of “modern art” are ostensibly weaponized concepts promoted by the banking oligarchs: Jackson Pollack and abstract expressionism were promoted in America in the 1950s by the CIA as a counterweight to the neorealism and socialist art of the Soviet Union.

    The worship of “innovation” over “tradition” in the past 100 years in the West is why we have the cultural cesspool we now have, especially in America.

    Regarding Chinese ‘copycatting’ in industry or in the sciences, I’m not as morally indignant about it as you are. When Einstein did it, the Jews gave him a Nobel Prize.

    In an earlier post on this thread, I compared patent laws with usury, and just like usury, patent laws are used by the oligarchs to keep the masses forever poor and subjugated. In the context of international trade, it’s also an insidious form of geopolitical control, if you really want to analyze it deeper.

    Of course, if you feel you have been cheated by Chinese copycats, you should, by all means, sue the bastards. This option is available to you in China, and, as they say, all the more power to you.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    , @Erebus
  209. @MAOWASAYALI

    Dude, you are exactly the type of people I fight against at any cost in NE Asia.

    It is muh traditionalism and muh ancestorism that led to NE Asia being poorer than India and the Middle East until 20th century. We don’t need more muh traditionalism. Why do you want more of that? So that we can fucking stagnate again?

    The Sinic muh ancestorism is in fact very primitive and absurd. Most other societies have already gotten rid of that partly due to large religions a long time ago. We haven’t and it is a problem. Did muh ancestorism help in any of the foreign wars since who knows when? No. Muh ancestorism is primitivism. Seriously. This helps nothing. Hell unlike religion and nationalism it doesn’t even boost social unity because all it does is making China hundreds of millions of nano-Israels all considering each other to be goyim.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  210. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    You demanded verifiable evidence.
    You got it.

    Not just any random evidence. The context is clear: you were slamming 1.4 billion people for doing blameable copying, and not also challenging Europe’s equally pervasive immitating. That is quite unfair. So I ask for verifiable evidence (which in context clearly means verifiable evidence of blameable copying).

    If the Chinese cars in your pictures were the products of joint ventures with some Western companies, then of course there would be similaries: the Western partners would insist on reproducing their styles. The likenesses would therefore be quite innocent; the Chinese companies would not be culpable. Your “evidence” is invalid.

    When you hurl insults at me in response to polite requests, it is clear that you know you have lost.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Erebus
  211. Not just any random evidence. The context is clear: you were slamming 1.4 billion people for doing blameable copying, and not also challenging Europe’s equally pervasive immitating. That is quite unfair. So I ask for verifiable evidence (which in context clearly means verifiable evidence of blameable copying).

    I don’t really care. To me mass copying just like heavy pollution is merely what happens when a civilization is becoming developed but isn’t fully developed yet. There will be one day when copying will be unprofitable. Then it will gradually stop.

  212. Anonymous[214] • Disclaimer says:
    @Vidi

    If the Chinese cars in your pictures were the products of joint ventures with some Western companies, then of course there would be similaries: the Western partners would insist on reproducing their styles. The likenesses would therefore be quite innocent; the Chinese companies would not be culpable. Your “evidence” is invalid.

    Are you stupid? He already gave evidence for them not being joint ventures, and also pointed out that all JVs would be high profile and easily searchable.

    The onus is now on you to prove otherwise or keep quiet.

  213. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    If the Chinese cars in your pictures were the products of joint ventures with some Western companies, then of course there would be similaries: the Western partners would insist on reproducing their styles.

    Your reading comprehension problems simply make discourse all but impossible. You asked for “verifiable“, and I gave it to you. So did you bother to verify anything? Didn’t think so.

    Let me help simplify things so you’ll understand…

    Q: What “Western partner” insisted that Zotye Motors copy a Porsche Macan?
    A: None. Zotye is a stand-alone, wholly Chinese company not JV’d with any Western or Chinese partner.

    Q: What “Western partner” insisted that Landwind copy a Range Rover Evoque?
    A: None. Landwind is a brand owned by Jiangling Motor Holding, which is a JV between Jiangling Motors and Changan Automobile. Both are Chinese govt SOEs.

    Q: Will the Chinese companies get away with it?
    A: Well, sorta as the cars have been selling.

    The first Chinese IP court found against Jaguar-Range Rover because they showed the car in Europe before the design patent was applied for in China, though they later also revoked the X7’s for being a copy of the Evoque!
    However, Jaguar-Range Rover wouldn’t let go and escalated all the way to the Beijing District Court. In a landmark decision, they won last month. Carscoops reports…

    The Beijing Chaoyang District Court found that the original Range Rover Evoque featured five unique design elements that were copied directly by Jiangling, owners of Landwind and creators of the X7, ordering the Chinese company to cease production and sales immediately, as well as pay the British car maker a compensation.

    That’s all as “verifiable” as you could possibly want, and all with a few clicks of the mouse. Why did you fail to verify it? Lazy? Obtuse? Both?

    Are you now going to argue that the Beijing Court is “slamming 1.4B people”?

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Vidi
  214. Erebus says:
    @EastKekistani

    There’s a lot of truth in what you say. Ancestorism is primitivism, and what the revolution did is break some of that worship of the past. Deng’s “opening up” will eventually break most of the rest. There’s no doubt that the younger people today look forward much more than the older generation, yet there’s still respect for the elderly and China’s past.

    This helps nothing. Hell unlike religion and nationalism it doesn’t even boost social unity because all it does is making China hundreds of millions of nano-Israels all considering each other to be goyim.

    You nailed it, on quite a few levels. China is leaving that behind (again) and that’s what’s gonna make the 21C Chinese.

    The Party will go down in history as one of the greatest innovators of all time. It imported an alien, quintessentially Western bourgeois political philosophy and grafted it onto Chinese traditionalism, gaining an extraordinary new form of government thereby – government by a new form of Scientific Dialecticism that just seems to work like nothing else can. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the Chinese system works on the ground.

    As the Chinese (re)create their social unity and cohesion, I believe their political system will come to be copied as assiduously as the Chinese copied sunglasses and watches 10 yrs ago.

  215. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    Isn’t Jaguar and Range Rover now owned by Tata, the Indian conglomerate…?

    Kind of ironic considering the British were lording over them not that long ago…?…imagine the reaction if the possibility of such a thing were to have come up over tea at some stuffy gentlemen’s club in India during the British Raj…

  216. Anonymous[381] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the Chinese system works on the ground.

    This is what I’m not so sure about. It’s certainly allowed them to catch up with the west at incredible speed, but whether they can keep up the momentum once they have to start charting their own course is unknown.

    You see, it seems to me that the things that China is doing better at the moment are based on social compromises, which are only viable as long as the rate of forward progress is enough to keep the population happy. Eg. Their G train network is awesome, but the tradeoff was disposessing villagers all over China. 5G is great, but health effects unknown. Free market and loose regulations are great for business, but what about warehouse explosions and chemical noodles? And most telling of all, China is doing its best with renewable energy and yet it’s still building nuclear power stations at record rate. Where’s the waste going to be stored? What are the chances of a catastrophe? How much land would be lost and how long for? So what is the real cost and can China afford it?

    It seems that in the absence of further technological advances, it’s a zero sum game and China’s approach is not intrinsically better tham Europe’s more cautious and regulated yet, per capita, more innovative approach.

    This is also what I said above – can the Chinese break the herd mentality enough to innovate their problems away while still maintaining social cohesion and national unity? If they can, it will be their second miracle!

  217. @Erebus

    There’s a lot of truth in what you say. Ancestorism is primitivism, and what the revolution did is break some of that worship of the past. Deng’s “opening up” will eventually break most of the rest. There’s no doubt that the younger people today look forward much more than the older generation, yet there’s still respect for the elderly and China’s past.

    “Respect” in the social sense is a fuzzy word. Trads not just limited to China can often make it basically cultural ossification. “Respect the elderly” often means you have to defer to people on the grounds of nothing but age and in South Korea and Japan this often ossifies into “promotion is based on age instead of merits”. This is a mess. The elderly should be properly taken care of….and in exchange they should not be allowed any power so that they won’t make disastrous mistakes due to their lack of understanding of the current situation.

    Traditionalism is not about getting anything done. Instead it is precisely about not allowing any new developments towards any direction to be happen. This is why I’m against considering both trads and say religious fundamentalists “social conservatives”. Real fundamentalists are rarely actually traditionalist. Instead historically they often clashed with trads in order to implement their religiously pure vision. Trads want to preserve the status quo while fundamentalists want to take power from the traditional powerholders on the grounds that they have failed to do their religious duty. Puritans and Wahhabis are good examples of fundamentalism. They both clashed with trads.

    Is traditionalism useful? Yes. In long-term social contracts. Even in a very modern society such as America the Constitution is very traditionalist. The Constitution stands not because it is modern but precisely because it is old. It hasn’t been repealed despite ups and downs which is why it is reliable. Validity of social contracts depends on people not defecting against each other. Hence traditionalism is useful because it precisely does not allow anyone to do anything about the contracts.

    However traditionalism definitely needs to be kept out of STEM, philosophy or anything else that isn’t about human relations though. If we view knowledge socially instead of factually, that is, if “Einstein developed a new model that fits observations more than Newtons’” is interpreted as “Einstein was disrespecting the great scientist Sir Issac Newton by contradicting him so he must be a really immoral person who attacked our heritage” we will never advance. Of course STEM is thankfully relatively free from that precisely because more trad-minded people are less likely to either do it or be interested in its claims other than those that contradicts beliefs trads believe in. In the West this manifests itself in anti-evolution sentiment. In China this manifests itself in incoherent defense of TCM.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Godfree Roberts
  218. I think I need to explain one issue more.

    This helps nothing. Hell unlike religion and nationalism it doesn’t even boost social unity because all it does is making China hundreds of millions of nano-Israels all considering each other to be goyim.

    These nano-Israels are families and extended families in China. What I was saying is that muh ancestorism is harmful in China because the Chinese version of it emphasized almost zero social duty to strangers in the same town, city or nation. There is the centralized state & emperor and there is the extended family. Nothing in between existed. People tended to treat non-kin poorly, hence there are “hundreds of millions of nano-Israels all considering each other to be goyim.”.

    This needs to change.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  219. @Anonymous

    This is also what I said above – can the Chinese break the herd mentality enough to innovate their problems away while still maintaining social cohesion and national unity? If they can, it will be their second miracle!

    Well, China isn’t Japan. We already have almost no social cohesion simply because that thing hasn’t really existed for more than 1,000 years. If anything social cohesion actually improved and amoral familism declined after the fall of Qing Dynasty. National unity which was previously unheard of (that’s not an exclusively Chinese phenomenon for national unity is generally unheard of in empires outside the ruling class, if you want national unity you need a tribe or a nation state, not empires united by nothing but shared rulers) also appeared during the period. This is proven by the Second Sino-Japanese War in which Nationalist China actually managed to make the war a stalemate despite really poor weaponry.

    What we need to do (and it seems that Xi is at least not going to ruin that) is to further go in the way of people in the Hajnal line. Encourage more and more outbreeding (commies at least did one thing good, namely banning inbreeding including cousin marriages) including between provinces, encourage adult men not to live in the same apartment/condo as their parents… The civil society is building itself online and IRL anyway as long as Xi does not completely destroy it. Other than the civil society building itself commies are actually likely to welcome the new developments because the Leviathan isn’t a fan of any kind of social unity including in families.

    Innovation is slowly coming but I already have a feeling that China is more innovative than Japan and South Korea precisely because young men are free from the power of the seniors in colleges.

  220. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    Your reading comprehension problems simply make discourse all but impossible. …. So did you bother to verify anything? Didn’t think so.

    As I said, insults come from losers.

    You asked for “verifiable“, and I gave it to you.

    No, I said “verifiable evidence of blameable copying”.

    Q: What “Western partner” insisted that Zotye Motors copy a Porsche Macan?
    Q: What “Western partner” insisted that Landwind copy a Range Rover Evoque?

    Is that more blameable than the following lookalikes?

    A Ford Fusion looks almost identical to an Aston Martin Rapide.

    How about Lincoln MKZ and Jaguar XF?

    Lest the Europeans feel neglected, the Peugeot RCZ is nearly clones the Audi TT.

    This isn’t anywhere near a full list of Western duplication. As the saying goes, car design is a copycat world.

    As you were assaulting Chinese imitators as being somehow more endemic than Western copycats, I ask for verifiable evidence of this extra-blameable copying by the Chinese. You answer with insults.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Erebus
  221. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    I said “verifiable evidence of blameable copying”.

    OK, I’ll bite. Is there such a thing as “un-blameable copying”? How does it differ from “blameable” copying?

    • Replies: @Vidi
  222. Erebus says:
    @EastKekistani

    Thanks your thoughts. I agree your main points but differ when it comes to nuance.

    Respect for tradition is not the same as worship of tradition, and awareness of the past isn’t worship either. You can’t know where you are, or how you got here if you don’t know where you’ve been. The expression “the past is prologue” captures what I mean by that.

    However traditionalism definitely needs to be kept out of STEM, philosophy or anything else that isn’t about human relations though…

    I’m not sure I understand your point. STEM and Philosophy are very human endeavours and so have everything to do with human relations.

    In fact, they have probably done more to change human relations than any other fields of endeavour. Too often, the change is for the worse because they forged ahead in ignorance of, and untempered by the bigger human picture. The pretence that STEM is ethically valueless is precisely what allows it to be hijacked by those with socio-political or financial agendas towards undesirable ends.

    EG: Who would argue, for instance, that allocating the world’s highest-end STEM talent and efforts to weapons development is in any way “good”? That’s what the modern world, in aggregate, has done. Arguably, it’s marching us to extinction and if we get there, the change in human relations will be all-encompassing.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
  223. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    … whether they can keep up the momentum once they have to start charting their own course is unknown.

    Of course it’s unknowable, but IMHO they’ve got a far better shot at it than most others, incl the West that they “caught up” to. It seems it’s the West that doesn’t have a clue about what to do next as the old model that supported it began devouring itself. China, otoh, built a detailed plan and it’s working the plan. My own guess is that as the international system continues to break down, China will fall less far than everyone else. If they manage that it’ll be because they kept just enough of the “ancestor worshipping old China” to keep everything glued together under economic stress domestically while they build a new, perhaps more modest system internationally. Their partnership with Russia is foundational to the latter goal, and luckily it appears that Russia is showing every sign of being up to the job.

    … the things that China is doing better at the moment are based on social compromises, which are only viable as long as the rate of forward progress is enough to keep the population happy.

    I’m not sure how that’s different from everywhere else in the developed world, where (for the most part) the social compromises that got them where they are are breaking down. Perhaps that’s what you meant, but I think China’s social compromises are a lot more robust than they’re given credit for, and certainly an order of magnitude more robust than the social compromises we watch unravelling in the US.

    Eg. Their G train network is awesome, but the tradeoff was disposessing villagers all over China.

    I hear this mentioned a lot. The villagers that are unhappiest about that in China are those the train routes missed. The Party is too smart to do this kind of thing stupidly. Displaced villagers get very generously compensated, and while there’s no doubt some feel the loss of locale, from what I’ve been told the general feeling seems to be that “the ancestors approve” of the trade. In a peculiarly Chinese twist on things, displaced villagers are often thankful to their ancestors for having put them in a lucky spot that made them rich.

    5G is another matter, and not just 5G. I too am rather wary of the risks, and not just to human and environmental health. Too much of the world that 5G enables is unknown, and seems to open the way to gross distortions in socio-political structures. Too much Internet-of-Things-Brave-New-Worldiness for my tastes.

    Free market and loose regulations are great for business, but what about warehouse explosions and chemical noodles?

    Slippage. What’s well nigh impossible for someone without on-the-ground experience is to imagine the scale on which China does things. EG: That China produces and uses more concrete in 3 years than the US did in the entire 20th century, and all the associated activity that such usage necessarily entails, is not easily absorbed. With that level of economic activity, “warehouse explosions and chemical noodles” are rounding errors that slipped through the cracks. For every warehouse that exploded there’s a million that didn’t. For every chemical noodle company there’s probably 2 million making good ones.
    There’s noargument that China’s development of physical plant outran its pre-industrial legal & regulatory systems. They’ve been playing catch-up with an accelerating train. Even so, China’s legal and regulatory systems have made great strides and really are getting there, but we’re talking 1/6 of humanity here and not everything can be micro-managed.

    … it’s still building nuclear power stations at record rate. Where’s the waste going to be stored?

    One of the great advantages that China enjoys over the West is its immunity to Russophobia, and the Russians are world leaders at re-using the waste. That’s not to say I’m in favour of more NPPs, but China needs the power, and there’s really no place else to get it at the pace it needs to be gotten.

    …can the Chinese break the herd mentality enough to innovate their problems away…

    If the “problem” is how to manage a society through the reset/transition that’s coming, I give the Chinese the best chance of any large developed nation. Of course, with 1.4B people they’ve got the biggest hill to climb, but in managing China’s rise over the last 3 decades they’ve proven themselves the world’s, perhaps history’s, greatest innovators.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  224. Erebus says:
    @MAOWASAYALI

    Of course, if you feel you have been cheated by Chinese copycats, you should, by all means, sue the bastards.

    To clarify, it was not I per se, but the patent Assignee who sued.

    This option is available to you in China, and, as they say, all the more power to you.

    That option was a mug’s game for a long time. In the case I mention above, the cheater lost, but the Chinese court awarded only statutory damages so there was no meaningful compensation.

    That’s why the JRR vs Landwind decision is a landmark. The Beijing court awarded JRR substantial damages and shut down Jiangling’s production lines and sales channels. That the court found for a foreign plaintiff and against a Chinese SOE denotes a sea change in China’s treatment of IP.

  225. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    For a larf, I dragged up this image of the Peugeot and the Audi. If you think the Peugeot is a “near clone” of the Audi you’ve no idea of design, or even of the meaning of “clone”, “copy”, “fake”.

    The two cars are almost as different as they can be in the modern definition of the 2+2 sports category.

    The roof, hood and door lines, wheel arch treatments, overhangs, lights, grills and 100 other details are as different as they can be.

    More to the point, one is obviously a Peugeot, and the other is just as obviously an Audi, and nobody would mistake one for the other. That the copies are intended to be mistaken for the originals is precisely the issue in the Evoque/Landwind & Macan/Zotye cases.

    At any rate, Audi would get laughed out of court if they brought a suit. Perhaps that’s why they haven’t said anything.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  226. @Erebus

    Agreed. We’re being out-governed and even the common people are beginning to notice. That’s what happens when all your smartest, most honest people go into government. Ten years ago an EU Minister whose responsibilities took her everywhere said that government elites always asked her, “How does China do it?”

    The answer, as you suggest, is “The same way they’ve always done it, only radicalized.” They’ve adopted the most extreme reading of Confucianism by thinker and reformer Kang Youwei. His book Dàtóng shu (Book on the Great Community) advances an original and radical interpretation of dàtóng, drawing mainly on both Liyun and the Gongyang Commentary to the Spring and Autumn Annals, which propounds a theory of progress in human history from the Age of Disorder to the Age of Ascending Peace (which China will reach in 2021) and finally to the Age of Universal Peace (no date yet).

    Here’s a sample of what the Age of Universal Peace will look like:

    Now to have states, families, and selves is to allow each individual to maintain a sphere of selfishness. This infracts utterly the Universal Principle (gongli) and impedes progress. …

    Therefore, not only states should be abolished, so that there would be no more struggle between the strong and the weak; families should also be done away with, so that there would no longer be inequality of love and affection [among men]; and, finally, selfishness itself should be banished, so that goods and services would not be used for private ends. …

    The only [true way] is sharing the world in common by all (tienxia weigong) …

    To share in common is to treat each and every one alike. There should be no distinction between high and low, no discrepancy between rich and poor, no segregation of human races, no inequal- ity between sexes. … All should be educated and supported with the common property; none should depend on private possession. … This is the way of the Great Community [datong] which prevailed in the Age of Universal Peace (Hsiao 1975, pp. 499).

    Mao memorized the entire book and, after mutual congratulations in 2021 (when every Chinese will have a home, a job, plenty of food, education, safe streets, health- and old age care and there will be more drug addicts, suicides and executions, more homeless, poor, hungry and imprisoned people in America than in China), Xi will re-set the country’s course for dàtóng land. The first leg, from 2021-2035 is entirely devoted to getting GINI down to Finland’s level.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  227. @Anonymous

    One function of the Great Western Firewall is to delay information from China (the original Great Wall was built to delay horses), so we’re not kept up to date about their progress. Here’s what’s happening in a few areas:

    According to the Japan Science and Technology Agency, China now ranks as the most influential country in four of eight core scientific fields, tying with the U.S. The agency took the top 10% of the most referenced studies in each field, and determined the number of authors who were affiliated with the U.S., the U.K., Germany, France, China or Japan. China ranked first in computer science, mathematics, materials science and engineering. The U.S., on the other hand, led the way in physics, environmental and earth sciences, basic life science and clinical medicine. https://tinyurl.com/ydeqeqnb.

    The World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO, ranked 167 universities and public research universities for the top 500 patent applications. 110 of the patents were from China, 20 from the United States and 19 from South Korea. China dominates a global ranking of the most-cited research papers published in the 30 hottest technology fields, a development likely to alarm American leadership already leery of its rising Asian rival. Though the U.S. accounted for 3.9 million research papers overall compared with 2.9 million from China, the Asian country produced the largest share in 23 of the 30 fields that drew the most interest, while America took the crown for the remaining seven.

    Nikkei and Elsevier compiled the ranking based on 2013-18 data provided by the Dutch publisher, covering a total of 17.2 million papers. China led the world in the majority of the top 10 fields, and each of the five areas in the top 10 tied to battery research. It accounted for more than 70% of all papers on photocatalysts and nucleic-acid-targeted cancer treatment, which ranked 12th and 14th. The U.S. led in three biotechnology fields, including No. 7 genome editing and No. 10 immunotherapy.https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/China-tech/China-s-research-papers-lead-the-world-in-cutting-edge-tech

    China has overtaken the US to become the world’s largest producer of scientific research papers, making up almost a fifth of the total global output, according to a major new report. https://www.stm-assoc.org/document-library/

    China leads the world all fields of civil engineering, all fields of sustainable and renewable energy, manufacturing, blockchain, supercomputing, speech recognition, graphenics, thorium power, pebble bed reactors, genomics, thermal power generation, quantum communication networks, ASW missiles, drones, in-orbit satellite refueling, Genomic Precision Medicine, passive array radar, metamaterials, hyperspectral imaging, terahertz radar, nanotechnology, UHV electricity transmission, HSR, speech recognition, radiotelescopy, hypersonic weapons, satellite quantum communications, Railguns, quantum secure direct communications, quantum controls,.. “Approximately 72% of the academic patent families published in QIT since 2012 have been from Chinese universities. US universities are a distant second with 12%.” (Patintformatics. https://patinformatics.com/quantum-computing-report/).

    Socially, everything’s copacetic. Social Credit–the first digital tool for social self-regulation–looks like a winner.

  228. @EastKekistani

    The defense of TCM is only incoherent if it argues on allopathic grounds.

    TCM is not an heroic intervention modality.

    It is an energetic technique, like qi gong, designed to induce a psychophysical state of equilibrium that Chinese value and to which many Westerners are insensitive.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @EastKekistani
  229. @EastKekistani

    Not so. Both have always been operative in China as they are everywhere, in one or another form. Parochialism and tribalism are everywhere manifest in human society.

    How many Americans care, for example, that there are more homeless people in America than in China? How do you think that happened?

  230. Erebus says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Here’s a sample of what the Age of Universal Peace will look like…. This is the way of the Great Community [datong] which prevailed in the Age of Universal Peace (Hsiao 1975, pp. 499)

    “They make a desert and call it peace.”

    I’ve wondered why I’ve heard Chinese say that Xi is a dangerous nut. I’ve heard it maybe a half-dozen times, and the explanation was always vaguely about “direction”. Well, if that’s where he’s taking China, they’re right. He is a nut.

    On balance, I’d prefer Mad Max.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  231. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    Of course it’s unknowable, but IMHO they’ve got a far better shot at it than most others, incl the West that they “caught up” to. It seems it’s the West that doesn’t have a clue about what to do next as the old model that supported it began devouring itself.

    I agree the West’s gone autophagous. Its immune system seems to be collapsing to the point where it’s almost begging for an exogenous system to take control. Let’s hope the Chinese do it before the Muslims do.

    I hear this mentioned a lot. The villagers that are unhappiest about that in China are those the train routes missed. The Party is too smart to do this kind of thing stupidly.

    It’s not just the trains. I remember seeing brand new highways all over China that bypassed the villages through which the old roads used to run. As a double whammy, the trucks that were used to build the new bridge-tunnel-bridge-tunnel marvels had totally destroyed the old road and left it in a shocking state of disrepair. The villages felt rather ‘forgotten’ and I had serious doubts for their economic future.

    I don’t have enough experience on the ground to go from qualitative to quantitative so I couldn’t say how representative this is of China’s progress in general.

    There’s noargument that China’s development of physical plant outran its pre-industrial legal & regulatory systems. They’ve been playing catch-up with an accelerating train

    My guess, after doing business with China, is that their warehouse explosions and chemical noodles are a direct result of their cowboy culture, rather than a lack of regulations. China sometimes catches me off guard by having regulations that most other countries don’t, but their adherence to the rules is still very fast and loose.

    Again, can China continue to move forward at high speed once it’s regulatory burden starts to approach Europe’s?

    One of the great advantages that China enjoys over the West is its immunity to Russophobia, and the Russians are world leaders at re-using the waste. That’s not to say I’m in favour of more NPPs, but China needs the power, and there’s really no place else to get it at the pace it needs to be gotten.

    China’s partnership with Russia is great, but nuclear power still isn’t. Imagine if any chemical company applied to build a chemical plant that holds hundreds of tons of exceedingly toxic material at high temperature and high pressure and that needs active cooling in order to prevent it exploding out of its containment vessel, and that also produces ridiculously toxic waste that itself needs active cooling for years to prevent autoignition and ultimately requires deep underground disposal with fingers crossed for no geological/terrorist activity. What would their chances be of obtaining permission? Pretty damned low. Atoms for Peace was a great cover for building lots of bombs, but it was never a sensible way to contribute to a nation’s energy needs.

    As for China’s need for nuclear power, this is precisely the problem. Unlike the West, which has approached this with a bit of reserve and now has more time to figure things out, China has charged ahead like a bull in a China shop and now finds itself having to chose between future economic disaster and immediate social disaster. Can they innovate their way out of this zero-sum game?

    If the “problem” is how to manage a society through the reset/transition that’s coming, I give the Chinese the best chance of any large developed nation. Of course, with 1.4B people they’ve got the biggest hill to climb, but in managing China’s rise over the last 3 decades they’ve proven themselves the world’s, perhaps history’s, greatest innovators.

    I’m still uncertain.

    I think the thing we can both agree on is that it’s good that China is trying a different approach. Because, ultimately, it doesn’t matter which country succeeds and which fails: the human race as a whole gets to carry on.

  232. Erebus says:

    China’s partnership with Russia is great, but nuclear power still isn’t… it was never a sensible way to contribute to a nation’s energy needs.

    It may be now. The reason I said that was that Rosatom’s new (5-6yrs old) sodium cooled, fast breeder reactor is turning the NPP industry on its head. It itself produces zero waste, and can use re-processed waste from older reactor designs. It addresses almost all the issues, which is why Rosatom now gets ~60% of the world’s NPPs orders. They’re simple and relatively cheap.

    … the trucks that were used to build the new bridge-tunnel-bridge-tunnel marvels had totally destroyed the old road and left it in a shocking state of disrepair. The villages felt rather ‘forgotten’ and I had serious doubts for their economic future.

    A close colleague comes from one of those villages, about 200km ENE of Shenzhen. The highway lopped off part of the village, incl his family’s plots and house. His parents got compensated with a new tract of land on the other side of the village, a 3 story concrete house (2/3 of which they don’t use) and a lump of cash. When I last visited (~7 yrs ago) the main village road was, as you say, such a shambles that I parked half a km away and walked (I hear it’s been sorta fixed), but with their cash they put their 3 boys through University. You can bet his parents are very happy with their good fortune. Yes, there’s millions of “forgotten” villages across China. Many have been abandoned. There’s millions of them all around the world as it moved to Big-Ag.

    I think the thing we can both agree on is that it’s good that China is trying a different approach.

    I’ve suddenly become less hopeful of that with Godfree’s reply to my comment.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Anonymous
  233. Erebus says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    TCM is not an heroic intervention modality.

    Not quite so. It’s worked heroically for me a couple of times, and in ways that Western doctors who have some familiarity with TCM were later unable to make sense of. Ergo, I’m a big fan of TCM’s “heroics”.

  234. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    The Russian fast breeder technology has caught my eye too…they seem on the path to perfecting a nuclear energy cycle that is ‘self cleaning’ if you will…by consuming spent fuel…it’s not nearly 100 percent, nor can it ever be…but it’s a big step forward nonetheless…

    This is another example of state directed big science…I spoke about that in respect to the aerospace domain elsewhere…point being that so called free enterprise has a huge gaping hole in terms of accomplishing big scientific advances…at least in the modern era…

    The US is nowhere in nuclear energy…and probably more Fukushimas on the way…but done properly nuclear has some very real advantages over just about anything else…the anti nuclear sentiment in the US is not misguided though…for the reason that capitalism and the profit motive has turned nuclear into a disaster waiting to happen…

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Anonymous
  235. @Godfree Roberts

    The defense of TCM is only incoherent if it argues on allopathic grounds.

    TCM is not an heroic intervention modality.

    It is an energetic technique, like qi gong, designed to induce a psychophysical state of equilibrium that Chinese value and to which many Westerners are insensitive.

    What I’m saying is that the theory in TCM is very ridiculous because it is pre-modern medicine. There are obviously TCM treatments that do work. It is just mixed together with a ton of bullshit.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
    , @Erebus
  236. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    OK, I’ll bite. Is there such a thing as “un-blameable copying”? How does it differ from “blameable” copying?

    Yes, there is such a thing as unblameable copying, or at least copying that is not blamed. You accused Chinese firms of “endemic” copying but did not also blame Western firms for doing much the same. So where is your verifiable evidence of China’s duplicators being worse than Western copycats?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  237. Vidi says:
    @Erebus

    For a larf, I dragged up this image of the Peugeot and the Audi. If you think the Peugeot is a “near clone” of the Audi you’ve no idea of design, or even of the meaning of “clone”, “copy”, “fake”

    The resemblance between a Peugeot RCZ and an Audi TT is at least as close as that between a Zotye and a Porsche Macan — one of the Chinese (non-join-venture) copiers you were blaming. There are plenty of differences between the latter two as well.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  238. @Erebus

    Respect for tradition is not the same as worship of tradition, and awareness of the past isn’t worship either. You can’t know where you are, or how you got here if you don’t know where you’ve been. The expression “the past is prologue” captures what I mean by that.

    Yes but due to human psychology people cook up propaganda as history all the time. China is just one offender among an entire planet of offenders. Everybody outside the Hajnal line write completely absurd “history” such as Second Bulgarian Empire being actually a bit Romanian.

    I’m not sure I understand your point. STEM and Philosophy are very human endeavours and so have everything to do with human relations.

    Well yes. However that doesn’t mean we should obfuscate or refuse to pursue knowledge. In practice people do that all the time. The closer some discipline in science is to humanity the more likely that it has been distorted by human interests and values.

    For example what if we actually objectively try to understand how many species humans are..we may actually find that Pygmies are a separate species if the word “species” is used consistently in biology. However human societies are just not equipped to handle that. “There is one human species, namely Homo sapiens” isn’t necessarily a biological fact. Instead it may have some serious social distortion.

    The pretence that STEM is ethically valueless is precisely what allows it to be hijacked by those with socio-political or financial agendas towards undesirable ends.

    I think STEM is inherently ethically neutral. It is the public that attacks STEM on all sides precisely because it is objective and hence can potentially offend almost everyone for different reasons.

    EG: Who would argue, for instance, that allocating the world’s highest-end STEM talent and efforts to weapons development is in any way “good”? That’s what the modern world, in aggregate, has done. Arguably, it’s marching us to extinction and if we get there, the change in human relations will be all-encompassing.

    This is necessary for the sake of defense against aliens. Being 100% peaceful like the Moriori is just not a viable option in this dangerous universe.

  239. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    Yes, there is such a thing as unblameable copying, or at least copying that is not blamed.

    Umm, does that mean anything? Any examples?

  240. Erebus says:
    @Vidi

    The resemblance between a Peugeot RCZ and an Audi TT is at least as close as that between a Zotye and a Porsche Macan…

    I can’t believe I read that.

    • Agree: FB
  241. @Erebus

    It’s a vision for Chinese civilization, not for us.

    They’ve been contemplating and discussing it for 2500 years and that makes perfect sense for them.

    We have our own vision.

    Oh, wait…

    • Replies: @Erebus
  242. @EastKekistani

    There are obviously allopathic treatments that do work, too. They’re just mixed together with a ton of bullshit.

    • LOL: MAOWASAYALI
    • Replies: @MAOWASAYALI
  243. Erebus says:
    @FB

    The Russian fast breeder technology has caught my eye too…they seem on the path to perfecting a nuclear energy cycle that is ‘self cleaning’

    Here’s an older article that talks about where the Russians went. The US knew what they had to do, but went off to design F35s instead. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/smarter-use-of-nuclear-waste/

    …point being that so called free enterprise has a huge gaping hole in terms of accomplishing big scientific advances…at least in the modern era…

    Agreed. I’ve been thinking for some time that we’ve hit the point of diminishing returns in large scale STEM. Diminishing returns is not what free enterprise chases (unless you’re Elon Musk).

    That’s why juggernauts like GE and Westinghouse turned themselves into financial services cos, and then lost their shirts.

    Meanwhile Rosatom is currently building 42 NPPs around the world, not to mention providing services covering the entire lifecycle from Uranium mining to waste processing to plant de-commissioning. The Chinese may eventually challenge them, but for now they’re head & shoulders above everybody else.

    PS: Speaking of failing juggernauts, I replied to your last B737 comment. Yet more trouble for Boeing.

  244. Erebus says:
    @EastKekistani

    What I’m saying is that the theory in TCM is very ridiculous because it is pre-modern medicine.

    TCM, like the Pyramids and Baalbeck came before the scientific method.

    Our pretence to modernity, belief in progress, and our obsession with the scientific method is precisely why we can’t understand how the ancients did things that worked. That makes it unclear where your term “ridiculous” is most accurately applied.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
  245. Erebus says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    It’s a vision for Chinese civilization, not for us.

    Yes, and that’s perhaps why Chinese history oscillates so rapidly between chaos and stagnation (aka: “heavenly peace”).

    The corollary, of course is that the “heavenlier” the peace, the deeper the chaos that follows to break it. A managed mix of the two is what is inevitably both healthier and more stable. One hopes, for the Chinese’ sake that someone with a more balanced view dilutes this vision in the coming decades.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  246. @Erebus

    TCM, like the Pyramids and Baalbeck came before the scientific method.

    Right. I’m not suggesting that there was literally nothing before the scientific method.

    Our pretence to modernity, belief in progress, and our obsession with the scientific method

    What?

    Aren’t skyscrapers real? Aren’t railroads real? Aren’t cars real? Aren’t antibiotics real? What do you mean that modernity and progress aren’t actually real?

    Moreover what is “obsession” with the scientific method? Isn’t the scientific method great?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Erebus
  247. @Godfree Roberts

    I am amused by your wit, but the subject matter is actually not lol funny.

    A commenter at Anatoly Karlin’s latest article, if I remember correctly, claims approximately 140,000 people die at the hands of their doctors (medical malpractice) each year in America. If you include the 60,000 who die from prescription opiates, then it’s about 200,000 deaths per annum.

    Guess who owns Big Pharma? Sorry, but the answer is too easy and in-your-face “antisemitic.”

    One of the biggest manufacturers of opiates in the world is the Sackler Family, the successor and modern-day Sassoons, who during the 19th century were known as the “Rothschilds of the East.”

    Opiates: Death on the Prescription Plan

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: America is the old China and China is the new America. If you don’t understand what the Jews did to China with their bloody opium wars in the 19th century, you won’t understand a damn thing about the modern world.

  248. @Erebus

    Some dynasties lasted 600 years.

    Chinese history oscillates rapidly between chaos and stagnation only when you compress it into 400 pages and focus on the Imperial Court.

  249. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    It may be now. The reason I said that was that Rosatom’s new (5-6yrs old) sodium cooled, fast breeder reactor is turning the NPP industry on its head. It itself produces zero waste, and can use re-processed waste from older reactor designs. It addresses almost all the issues, which is why Rosatom now gets ~60% of the world’s NPPs orders. They’re simple and relatively cheap.

    Thanks for the heads up. I had no idea this had become reality.

    It definitely won’t be zero waste. The fanfare covers fuel reprocessing only and omits to mention about intermediate/low level waste arising from irradiation/contact – fuel cladding, neutron-embrittled pressure vessels, tools, gloves, etc. Nonetheless I take my hat off and grant that this is indeed a great leap forward in nuclear technology. This is where nuclear technology should have been before commercial plants were given the go-ahead.

    His parents got compensated with a new tract of land on the other side of the village, a 3 story concrete house (2/3 of which they don’t use) and a lump of cash.

    This sounds pretty good. Personally, I don’t have enough boots on the ground time to have a feeling for this. I suspect the truth about China lies somewhere between Godfree Roberts and China Uncensored.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  250. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @FB

    done properly nuclear has some very real advantages over just about anything else…the anti nuclear sentiment in the US is not misguided though…for the reason that capitalism and the profit motive has turned nuclear into a disaster waiting to happen…

    It wasn’t capitalism. It was the government. The war hawks in both the USA and the USSR wanted more and more nukes, the environment be damned. Atoms for Peace was a cover story to whitewash nuclear weapons and give the USA more plutonium generation capability.

    In Russia, their biggest nuclear disaster wasn’t even about power generation. It was the weapons grade plutonium production Mayak facility in Chelyabinsk province. They rendered Lake Karachay so radioactive that ‘one hour by the concrete lake’ would be enough to kill someone, and later had a waste storage explosion that spread enough radiation to destroy vast tracts of pine forest. Lucky for Russia, it’s a big country.

  251. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    It definitely won’t be zero waste.

    Don’t know what happened, but I thought I’d typed “near zero” waste, though I’ve read elsewhere that fast breeders could theoretically make zero waste.

    Anyway, from The Sci Am article I cited above…

    A 1,000-megawatt-electric thermal-reactor plant, for example, generates more than 100 tons of spent fuel a year. The annual waste output from a fast reactor with the same electrical capacity, in contrast, is a little more than a single ton of fission products, plus trace amounts of transuranics.

    At >98%, the reduction in waste is enormous. That the waste can be re-processed and re-used is the big bonus.

    This is where nuclear technology should have been before commercial plants were given the go-ahead.

    Yeah, but the boys needed lots of bombs, so the hell with the long view. With an average reactor age of 38 yrs, the US has lots of decommissioning in its near future.

  252. Anonymous[409] • Disclaimer says:
    @EastKekistani

    Moreover what is “obsession” with the scientific method? Isn’t the scientific method great?

    The scientific method relies upon isolation and reduction. It’s very good at accomplishing conscious objectives and very bad at living in harmony with nature’s unconscious expression.

    The physical corolarry is a growing prevalence of orthogonal geometry and a disappearance of natural landscapes.

    We are playing God and using our conscious minds to reshape the world in our image. Unfortunately, our self awareness is such that we have a very myopic view of ourselves. “I think therefore I am”? Fuck off, Descartes.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
  253. @Anonymous

    The scientific method relies upon isolation and reduction.

    Yep.

    It’s very good at accomplishing conscious objectives and very bad at living in harmony with nature’s unconscious expression.

    What is nature’s “unconscious expression”? Why do organisms have to live in “harmony” with nature’s “unconscious expression”? Moreover if anything nature’s “unconscious expression” includes “might is right” and “the universe is amoral”. That is, the world belongs to conquerors, not pacifists. Wolves always win and sheep always lose. Aryans live in Europe because they conquered Europe and wiped out male members of ancient migrants into Europe who themselves wiped out Neanderthals there. North Africa is culturally a part of the Middle East because Middle Easterners wiped out the older inhabitants. Maoris live on Chatham Islands because they almost wiped out the Moriori while Anglos failed to wipe them out. They could not dominate the islands though because Anglos were more competent at warfare and were & are more populous. That’s just how the universe works.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  254. Erebus says:
    @EastKekistani

    Aren’t skyscrapers real? Aren’t railroads real? Aren’t cars real? Aren’t antibiotics real? What do you mean that modernity and progress aren’t actually real?

    Where did I say skyscrapers etc weren’t real? Of course they’re as real as stones and toasters.

    OTOH, “modernity” & “progress” have no existence independent of the human values/constructs that created them and so have no more reality than “beauty”, “ancient” or “horrible”. In fact, they’re both very new notions, and humans managed to get through quite a few millennia without them.

    … what is “obsession” with the scientific method? Isn’t the scientific method great?

    Over the years, I’ve come to know that its success lies in restricting the questions it’s “allowed” to ask. IOW, it asks questions it can answer, and ignores those it can’t. That yields a certain sort of result. Coupled to the notion of “progress’, the sort of result it can give us at the moment do not include answers to questions such as how TCM works, or how Baalbeck’s 1200T stones were cut and lifted into place. Or, (to mix threads) how Apollo got to the moon :-).

    Leaving the epistemological & metaphysical questions aside, science is just human exploration disciplined by a set of rules. It is a tool, nothing more, and there’s nothing magical about it. With all the modernity and progress it brought us, it has no way to build us a Notre Dame/Cusco/Pyramids/Baalbeck/Great Wall at anything like an affordable cost (if at all).

    The civilizations that built them could afford it. We can’t. Let that sink in.

    Somebody clever said that “99% of Engineers spend their whole career finding ways of doing for 50¢ today what they did yesterday for $1.”

    If we can’t build a Notre Dame etc today for 50¢, or even at all, what does “progress” mean? If “modernity” means building stuff without half the grace and awe-some presence of a Notre Dame or the Pyramids, what does “modernity” mean?

  255. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @EastKekistani

    What is nature’s “unconscious expression”?

    The natural world. The biosphere.

    Why do organisms have to live in “harmony” with nature’s “unconscious expression”?

    Because if they don’t, they need to find some way to consciously recreate everything that nature was unconsciously producing for us.

    Moreover if anything nature’s “unconscious expression” includes “might is right” and “the universe is amoral”. That is, the world belongs to conquerors, not pacifists. Wolves always win and sheep always lose.

    This says more about the seer than it does about the seen.

    Aryans live in Europe because they conquered Europe and wiped out male members of ancient migrants into Europe who themselves wiped out Neanderthals there.

    Now you’re talking about a few episodes in the history of one species of primate right at the top of the food chain. In your eyes, this is a macrocosm for the universe as a whole. In nature’s eyes, it’s like two sparrows fighting in spring. The sparrows consider themselves to be the center of the universe. To us, they’re just a quaint and recurrent expression of the mating season.

    We are like the fighting sparrows. We are so immersed in our lives that we have no time to consider the immensity of the natural world that supports us. We’re like teenage rebels that insult their parents and disavow all of their benefits, while still coming home every night for a warm meal and a soft bed. Just like the teenagers, all of our talk about moving out is pure hyperbole. We send a few men into space at an insanely unsustainable per-capita cost to the natural world, and claim victory. All of our plans for ‘space farming’ and colonisation of Mars are based on technology and supplies coming from Earth and even our wildest Sci-Fi movies have failed to imagine technology that could be truly self-supporting.

    We need to be humble and see the life support system that nature has given us in its full technological glory. Nature has given us:

    A magnetic field, to keep the cosmic radiation out
    An ozone layer, to keep the UV out
    An oxidizing atmosphere, to allow location-independent metabolism
    Oceans, to moderate the temperature, to provide near-ubiquitous water, and to provide food
    Birds, to drop the seeds of nature and spread the forests everywhere
    Trees to guard the soil and recycle our gaseous waste back into food
    Vegetables, fruits, animals. All can be eaten and all provide exactly the nutrients we need.

    Do you really think science can recreate all of this without introducing side effects that themselves require technological solutions?

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
  256. @Anonymous

    Now you’re talking about a few episodes in the history of one species of primate right at the top of the food chain. In your eyes, this is a macrocosm for the universe as a whole. In nature’s eyes, it’s like two sparrows fighting in spring. The sparrows consider themselves to be the center of the universe. To us, they’re just a quaint and recurrent expression of the mating season.

    We are like the fighting sparrows. We are so immersed in our lives that we have no time to consider the immensity of the natural world that supports us. We’re like teenage rebels that insult their parents and disavow all of their benefits, while still coming home every night for a warm meal and a soft bed. Just like the teenagers, all of our talk about moving out is pure hyperbole. We send a few men into space at an insanely unsustainable per-capita cost to the natural world, and claim victory. All of our plans for ‘space farming’ and colonisation of Mars are based on technology and supplies coming from Earth and even our wildest Sci-Fi movies have failed to imagine technology that could be truly self-supporting.

    We need to be humble and see the life support system that nature has given us in its full technological glory. Nature has given us:

    A magnetic field, to keep the cosmic radiation out
    An ozone layer, to keep the UV out
    An oxidizing atmosphere, to allow location-independent metabolism
    Oceans, to moderate the temperature, to provide near-ubiquitous water, and to provide food
    Birds, to drop the seeds of nature and spread the forests everywhere
    Trees to guard the soil and recycle our gaseous waste back into food
    Vegetables, fruits, animals. All can be eaten and all provide exactly the nutrients we need.

    Do you really think science can recreate all of this without introducing side effects that themselves require technological solutions?

    Well you can try to be a Moriori then. See how well things went for them. Nope I will imitate ancient Aryans and later Medieval Arabs for their way is the way of life.

    The universe belongs to the most competent conquerors, humans, transhumans, aliens, AI, whatever.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Godfree Roberts Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?