Quote:
Originally Posted by ivi0nk3y
Um not really, he has a point and dismissing it out of hand just shows disrespect.
Yes America has benefitted the world in some ways but most of those benefits are geared for the countries own survival.
If anyone disagrees, they either are ignorant of the facts or are hypocrites who want to further their own agenda at the cost of everything else.
The recent media frenzy about China can only be seen as propaganda. This sparks up interest in the public which in turn fuels our oh so "democratic" system.
It is no susprise to people who KNOW shit, that key American figures for decades have been shitting bricks because of China and her potential.
Africa had such potential too but its amazing "coincidental" stroke of one bad luck scenario after another, has caused it to be nothing more than an arid wasteland when compared with the rest of the world.
China can definitely become a new stable superpower, since her ideas and principles are unified within the country. Whether people like how they live in China or not is irrelevant, since it is human weakness that wants us to have what we don't have.
If the balance between power and the treatment of people remains, China will have no problem in achieving whatever she wants.
|
I went back to read Acidreptiles posts and I don't think you read them right. Even if you filter out his rhetoric, the only point he "made" was that "China is rising while the USA is falling". A point that MIGHT have some merit if he cared to explain his reasoning though at best it's arguable. Personally I would argue that the US isn't falling, rather China is catching up to it. China may be an emerging superpower or even a superpower in their own right depending on the definition and the context you use that term (though in general I refer to it as an emerging superpower), but the best guesses are that it will be at least 50 years untill China can seriously challenge the United States world's sole hyperpower status.
I find it strange that the Western media is being accused of propaganda. I mean seriously when you look at how the media works in the West you'll find that this is a stretch at best. The Western media is very rarely state owned, and when it is, (the BBC for example) it is not answerable in terms of what it reports rather is run as a state owned enterprise. The only agenda the Western media has is to sell a story. And while I think it capable of exaggeration to sell a story I don't think it capable of fabricating lies. I mean do you really think that ALL the Western media outlets in competition with each other for our attention would have the will or the ability to collaborate with each other to report the SAME lies so that it appears so very real? Are they really ready to risk their integrity which would mean risk losing viewers/readers to the competition? (I mean you see what happens to Fox News. Outside the US it is not a respected media outlet. Heck even in the US it is not relied on by a good percentage of the population.)
Not to mention that the Chinese state owned and operated media are hardly angels. The difference between the two is that China's state media HAS not only a motive, but also the ability to fabricate lies. Do you remember the Olympic torch coverage? The Chinese population were not exposed to the disruptions all over the globe (From Britain to Japan) because the Chinese media did not report it. Instead they told the Chinese people that everything went smoothly. Also why did China BAN foriegn media from Tibet during the riots? What did they have to hide? If there is a serious case of misreporting, then perhaps it is China's fault for not allowing foriegn media in which lead them to rely on second hand information from the many tourists inside Tibet at the time. (Are all the tourists selling the same lie too?)