Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China's Silk Road Illusions

nybooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 82 posts

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#41

Post by yorison »

thablackbull wrote: post #13
chiefalchemist wrote: post #7

Of course such projects have risk. Of course there is historical baggage. But while China is building an infrastructure legacy, the USA et al are using its resources to wages multiple wars. It's likely the USA's ROI (if you will) will be increased debt and enemies for years to come. China on the other hand seems hardly interested in such things. The outlook for their ROI is much brighter.

What we're witnessing today is a chicken-and-egg problem. USA: America is the chicken. To be a modern country, it is hypothesized that the developing country needs immediately adopt American systems, laws, behavior & structures (the Washington consensus, etc.). In essence, and to keep it short, the 'free-markets' will take over, and standards of living will boom. China: China is the egg, because they view modernizati…

> I think we're at one of the most important points in time. USA & China, under two diametrically different systems have been able to grow extremely large economically - that means more data points to understand how to modernize other parts of the world.

It seems to me that China is following the framework that the US has set to become a superpower.

Politics: When the US was developing, only rich, educated white men could vote. In China right now, only those who are eligible to join the CCP can be involved in politics.

Slavery: While China doesn't have de facto slavery, their province/city registration system places migrants in extremely disadvantaged positions. As for the US, well, I'm sure we all know.

Protectionism & IP Theft: During the Industrial Revolution, the US was extremely active in stealing tech from Europe. And only when the US started to develop their own tech, did they start caring about intellectual property. This is also the case in Japan and South Korea, so I can see China following this path as well.

Other issues, like eminent domain, limitations on free speech, and violating the rights of individuals as long as it's in the national interest are things that a developing superpower does.

It was only after the US became a superpower, that we start to see a really big difference in the behavior of both nations.

Though I do agree that the rhetoric of both nations was vastly different from the start. The US always espoused American values, even if those privileges only applied to a subset of people. While China keeps on emphasizing a harmonious society, they really mean that "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#42

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

aclsid wrote: post #10

Other than the historical facts, this article is kind of a weird read. The author seems to be guilty of the same thing he's accusing the Chinese president, namely using history to support their version of how this might play out.

Also its all a matter of interpretation: you can look at aid to central Asia and Africa as a long term investment. If these regions take off then that would be beneficial to China - it would create markets and natural allies. Creating a win win situation with foreign aid is also a bit novel (so far it was more an attempt get them into neocolonialist dependency, let's see if the Chinese do any better than that)

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#43

Post by latch »

sho wrote: post #36
gozur88 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is using very little of its resources to wage wars. Military spending as a percentage of GDP is down to pre-WW II levels. And you're underestimating the extent to which China is making enemies in the South China Sea region. These are countries with potentially significant military capability, too, like the Philippines and Japan, not bands of goat herders.

> Military spending as a percentage of GDP is down to pre-WW II levels No it's not[1]. As a % of the total budget it's around 16%, which is huge. And furthermore the appropriations for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are mostly not included - they have been funded by "supplemental" spending bills, which total well into the 10 figures. The Philippines doesn't really have a navy worth talking about. Japan can defend i…

Agree with everything, but I'd have mentioned Taiwan too. Assuming no black swan with NK or India/Pakistan, the Taiwan situation seems the most likely to escalate.

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#44

Post by seanmcdirmid »

fspeech wrote: post #39
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of space to cover if we are talking about the populated parts of Sichuan and shaanxi, which are mainly east. The most western city outside of Xinjiang would be like Lanzhou, kunming, xining, etc... The railroads to Europe are still heavily subsidized, and are coming back to china mostly empty. They'll make more sense when trade becomes more balanced, but that isn't today.

You are right that they need to find more goods to ship on the return trip. The current route actually runs on existing tracks so didn't require a lot of investment. For cities like Lanzhou, Xining, Urumqi etc it makes sense to develop a land route. The economics are even better than Chongqing since Chongqing actually has access to the Yangtze river.

The tracks aren't as important as the trains in this case; e.g. Crews and fuel as well as not using those on more productive routes. Chongqing as a gateway to the western china is a bit weird since it actually isn't that west :) Chinese geography is a bit wonky like that.

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#46

Post by dbcooper »

fspeech wrote: post #19
dmix wrote: post #12

I read the entire article and it's a great read. It's fascinating how much we romanticize about past cultures and how much if it is wrong. I love reading history and this almost always turns out to be the case. Digging into any topic reveals they are always far more complex and multilayered than the the common caricatures you find in media and in generalized accounts. China's popular understanding of the Silk Road se…

Unfortunately the author's analogy with the ancient silk road rings as false as the Chinese government's. For example in discussing the rail link, the author failed to note that beyond Xinjiang there lie Shaanxi and Sichuan, two of China's most populous inland provinces. And Xi'an was the ancient Chinese capital for over a millennium. The Chongqing-Europe railroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chongqing-Xinjiang-Euro…

Xinjiang is west of Shaanxi and Sichuan. Please get your facts right before playing the know-it-all.

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#47

Post by sho »

latch wrote: post #43
sho wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Military spending as a percentage of GDP is down to pre-WW II levels No it's not[1]. As a % of the total budget it's around 16%, which is huge. And furthermore the appropriations for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are mostly not included - they have been funded by "supplemental" spending bills, which total well into the 10 figures. The Philippines doesn't really have a navy worth talking about. Japan can defend i…

Agree with everything, but I'd have mentioned Taiwan too. Assuming no black swan with NK or India/Pakistan, the Taiwan situation seems the most likely to escalate.

Taiwan could certainly be a flashpoint but it's something China would be choosing to do. And... well, I'm no expert, but I just don't see it happening, not in the foreseeable future. Not only because the PLAN simply doesn't have the sealift capability - and they don't - but there's just too much to lose and not that much to gain from an attempted military takeover of the island, even before taking into account what other powers may or may not do to help (my money's on "not"). IMO, the danger of a war for Taiwan has come and gone. If it was going to happen, it would have happened in the 80s. China has a middle class now and, it's not interested.

This is a topic I've discussed quite extensively with my Chinese friends and my impression is that while Taiwan remains a sore point, that ship has sailed for the time being. The fact that it's independent and not a colony helps - Hong Kong was a different story. And there's no pressing national security need for the territory like Tibet.

The feeling towards Taiwan (amongst my circle anyway) is a bit like a wayward child - to be held in check, and encouraged to return, but certainly not warranting military action with its accompanying loss of life. And the politburo's main goals are stability and its own continued reign. So long as Taiwan doesn't do anything to threaten those, China may rattle its sabre every once in a while, but it's probably safe for now.

My personal prediction for Taiwan (as a white layperson, mind) is that as the mainland prospers and stabilises, and gets over its remnant paranoia from the bad old days - and as the island gets over its own adolescence - the emnity and restrictions will gradually dissipate and the countries will move closer together naturally. It might not be a Chinese territory again like HK, but it's hard to imagine too many restrictions being in place in 50 or even 30 years' time. In the end, Taiwan needs China a lot more than the other way round, and will inevitably gravitate towards it.

That's assuming China doesn't collapse spectacularly, of course. Then all bets are off!

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#48

Post by dmichulke »

thablackbull wrote: post #40
ant6n wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure who's hypothesizing that a modern country has to emulate the US. That's a kind of cold war point of view. Many modern countries these days don't adopt the American system, but are striving towards being modern, pluralist democracies with functioning social systems, good governance, and sane judicial systems.

> I'm not sure who's hypothesizing that a modern country has to emulate the US. I'm just going to focus on one element due to space; one of the core pillars of American economic thinking is the idea of free markets. Through bilateral relationships or organizations like the IMF, etc., developing nations are given a road-map of how to modernize. It may not have to be a carbon copy of America (and that was not my point)…

> However, have you ever noticed that no country has ever modernized through free markets, it always required a lot of protectionism.

I think attributing this to protectionism is not really helpful. There are many protectionist states (or states with a "strong industrial policy") that don't develop at all economically.

The examples of Europe before the early 20th Century and Far Asia in the late 20th century are certainly prominent but what about the other protectionist countries during that time or today?

You can find the "most protectionist" (by some measure) countries here:

http://www.heritage.org/index/explore (Click on "Trade Freedom" and then check the top vs bottom of the list)

So we have examples and counter examples, not a strong case in favor of protectionism IMO.

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#49

Post by dis-sys »

gozur88 wrote: post #32
chiefalchemist wrote: post #7

Of course such projects have risk. Of course there is historical baggage. But while China is building an infrastructure legacy, the USA et al are using its resources to wages multiple wars. It's likely the USA's ROI (if you will) will be increased debt and enemies for years to come. China on the other hand seems hardly interested in such things. The outlook for their ROI is much brighter.

The US is using very little of its resources to wage wars. Military spending as a percentage of GDP is down to pre-WW II levels. And you're underestimating the extent to which China is making enemies in the South China Sea region. These are countries with potentially significant military capability, too, like the Philippines and Japan, not bands of goat herders.

those so called "enemies" are now basically Vietnam alone.

Japan has "significant military capability"? with an aging and shrinking population and a GDP growth lower than 1%? nice joke.

Re: China's Silk Road Illusions

#50

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

DrScump wrote: post #37
the-dude wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The T-34 was better than what the Germans had at the time. The better German tanks came too late and too little, true.

The T-34 was better than what the Germans had at the time. The T-34 platform was more effective because it vastly outnumbered all German tank models combined, ran on diesel, was easier to repair/replace, and the Soviets were willing to absorb more personnel losses. If you're saying you'd rather go into battle with 5 fully operational T-34s than 5 fully operational Tigers, then we seriously disagree.

The German army used captured T-34 tanks, so they probably did not think of it as a bad piece of equipment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34#German_use_of_T-34s

Also comparing very different tanks in a general manner has its problems: each has its strong and weak points, it is very difficult to say which one of the differences would be of benefit in a given battle.

Post reply on HN