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

China: Vote as I say

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 33 posts

Re: China: Vote as I say

#21

Post by bane »

code_duck wrote: post #5
cubeboy wrote: post #3

China is interesting. It's not like USA with just a population of 310,000,000, it has 1,330,000,000 people. If one group successfully causes enough political unrest, and 5% of the population supports and follows this group, that's a total of 66,500 000 people, the current population of the UK. Its astounding when you start looking at numbers like this. USA, UK, Europe and the Western world will just be a distant memo…

> USA, UK, Europe and the Western world will just be a distant memory when China and India start becoming major players. As individual entities, perhaps. As a bloc? NATO member countries total population is about 800 million, if I'm not mistaken. The Western world is hardly going to disappear.

Don't forget the rest of the Americas! (And Australia/New Zealand!)

Re: China: Vote as I say

#22

Post by rospaya »

cubeboy wrote: post #3

China is interesting. It's not like USA with just a population of 310,000,000, it has 1,330,000,000 people. If one group successfully causes enough political unrest, and 5% of the population supports and follows this group, that's a total of 66,500 000 people, the current population of the UK. Its astounding when you start looking at numbers like this. USA, UK, Europe and the Western world will just be a distant memo…

How do you explain India then?

Re: China: Vote as I say

#23

Post by cabalamat »

dimmuborgir wrote: post #14
vorg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just a bloc of NATO countries, but also with Russia, which seems to be eagerly invited into organizations such as G8 (= G7 + Russia). With Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, the total population of such a bloc is 1 billion. I can forsee the US, France, Germany, and Russia soon forming a proto-military alliance, to give them the option to counter-balance China if they need to one day. And of course the US, unlike Ch…

Russia has always been against NATO and lately it is pushing hard for a strong SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) [1] which is branded as Russia's/China's answer to NATO. The current major issue with SCO though is it needs either India or Pakistan or both as its members to make it a formidable military alliance. But since India and Pakistan are archrivals there are differences between Russia, which has always ba…

> Russia has always been against NATO and lately it is pushing hard for a strong SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) [1] which is branded as Russia's/China's answer to NATO.

This is true. In the long term, Russia needs to decide whether it wants to be a satellite of China, or part of NATO / the West.

Bear in mind that SCO isn't actually a military alliance (with mutual defence obligations) yet, although it may become so in the future.

Re: China: Vote as I say

#25

Post by known »

rospaya wrote: post #22
cubeboy wrote: post #3

China is interesting. It's not like USA with just a population of 310,000,000, it has 1,330,000,000 people. If one group successfully causes enough political unrest, and 5% of the population supports and follows this group, that's a total of 66,500 000 people, the current population of the UK. Its astounding when you start looking at numbers like this. USA, UK, Europe and the Western world will just be a distant memo…

How do you explain India then?

Unlike China, India is a heterogeneous society. And Indian regime successfully injects hope into the society e.g https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/NREGA

Re: China: Vote as I say

#26

Post by firemanx »

_delirium wrote: post #20
patio11 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is country/peasant worker vs city worker an ethnic divide? The distinction you're looking for is "Han Chinese" versus "everyone else." China's outlying rural provinces have significant populations -- often pluralities or majorities -- from ethnic groups which are not Han Chinese, which is the dominant economic group in China and which is the portion of China largely winning from economic growth. For example, there ar…

On a macro-scale the non-Han are relatively small, though, especially compared to some of the other cases of multi-ethnic countries. Non-Han-Chinese make up only 8% of the PRC population, whereas non-Russians make up about 20% of Russia's current population, and made up about 40% of the USSR's. It is true that they're much more prominent in the outlying areas; e.g. 60% of Xinjiang is non-Han. Those areas have relativ…

It's easy to throw out numbers like 8% until you realize that it represents over 100 million people. Per capita that may be a small number, but in the general scheme of things it means a lot of disgruntled people. I never really thought about it until I went over there and had the chance to interact with various groups, and it changed a lot of my perspective on how China functions on the inside.

Re: China: Vote as I say

#27

Post by cglee »

firemanx wrote: post #26
_delirium wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a macro-scale the non-Han are relatively small, though, especially compared to some of the other cases of multi-ethnic countries. Non-Han-Chinese make up only 8% of the PRC population, whereas non-Russians make up about 20% of Russia's current population, and made up about 40% of the USSR's. It is true that they're much more prominent in the outlying areas; e.g. 60% of Xinjiang is non-Han. Those areas have relativ…

It's easy to throw out numbers like 8% until you realize that it represents over 100 million people. Per capita that may be a small number, but in the general scheme of things it means a lot of disgruntled people. I never really thought about it until I went over there and had the chance to interact with various groups, and it changed a lot of my perspective on how China functions on the inside.

I grew up in Xinjiang, arguably the most ethnically divided region in China, so I know where you're coming from. China's approach to taming ethnic minorities is straight forward: various forms of oppression. Besides racism, the other major reason is that minorities in China, unlike those in the US for example, do not want to be Chinese. There's no civil activism because neither side want true equality (both want to be separate).

Back to the original point: the Han peasant class is far greater than any other demographic. That demographic has been responsible for the dynastic cycles for thousands of years. It's still the case today, and the Chinese government is well aware of that. At the same time, the government has to keep stoking the economic fire, promote innovation, etc.

Re: China: Vote as I say

#28

Post by netcan »

patio11 wrote: post #13
Volpe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is country/peasant worker vs city worker an ethnic divide? Sounds more like a class divide. (ironic in a post-maoist country) The urbanisation figures in china are highly suspect. Given one child policy is primarily policed in the city and intentionally lax in the countryside. This coupled with the fact their census seems (unconfirmed) do NOT count unofficial residence (i.e second/third/etc children). It makes it ver…

Is country/peasant worker vs city worker an ethnic divide? The distinction you're looking for is "Han Chinese" versus "everyone else." China's outlying rural provinces have significant populations -- often pluralities or majorities -- from ethnic groups which are not Han Chinese, which is the dominant economic group in China and which is the portion of China largely winning from economic growth. For example, there ar…

China's ethnic groups are small, weak and concentrated in remote areas. They really are probably not a political factor. I really can't see this ever being the dividing line of a civil war. They might demand autonomy or independence but that's not really a civil war.

Any serious civil strife that could effect the political direction of the country is most likely to be of the revolutionary kind. The most likely (though still not that likely) scenario I can think of is post economic downturn combined with political scandal. It would probably be a nebulous combination/coalition of demands/factions. Pick a basket of anti regime, pro peasant, anti corruption, pro democracy, human rights. Maybe Christianity or religion in general plays a role.

I think you need to draw a line though between civil strife and revolutionary agitation. I think the urban/rural divide will most likely manifest in the latter.

Re: China: Vote as I say

#29

Post by rospaya »

known wrote: post #25
rospaya wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you explain India then?

Unlike China, India is a heterogeneous society. And Indian regime successfully injects hope into the society e.g https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/NREGA

On what parameters? Both have hundreds of languages, ethnic groups and religions. Both are huge and somewhat federated.

OP was saying that democracy doesn't stand a chance in highly populated countries. According to the Democracy Index [1], it's working better in India than in 15 European countries.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index

Re: China: Vote as I say

#30

Post by code_duck »

bane wrote: post #21
code_duck wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> USA, UK, Europe and the Western world will just be a distant memory when China and India start becoming major players. As individual entities, perhaps. As a bloc? NATO member countries total population is about 800 million, if I'm not mistaken. The Western world is hardly going to disappear.

Don't forget the rest of the Americas! (And Australia/New Zealand!)

I thought it might be presumptuous to assume that South America wanted anything to do with us... if I, personally, was South America I wouldn't, at this point.
Post reply on HN