Public sentiment is polarized regarding China's influence in global governance, with admiration for its national strength and criticism of Western policies. While some view China's rise positively, expressing optimism about its global role, others criticize its governance practices and approach to international relations, indicating both recognition of its might and concern about its methods.

China

United States

Western Governments

This thread has been identified as being related to the People's Republic of China due to containing the following keyword: China.

Due to this subreddit's long-term experience with PRC-related threads, [low effort discussion will not be permited](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/) and may lead to removals or bans. Please remember that r/Socialism is a subreddit for socialists and, as such, participation must consist of conscious anti-capitalist analysis - this is not the place to promote non-socialist narratives but rather to promote critical thought from within the anti-capitalist left. Critques are expected to be high quality and address the substance of the issue; ad hominems, unconstructive sectarianism, and other types of lazy commentary are not acceptable.

Please keep in mind that this is a complex topic about which there may be many different points of view. Before making an inflamatory comment, consider asking the other user to explain their perspective, and then discuss why specifically you disagree with it.
   


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

China has free speech.  You can largely say whatever you want about the government behind closed doors.  What they don't have is freedom of publication - freedom of the press.  Publishing certain types of criticism of the government or on certain topics is disallowed, even on social media.  For the most part, people will simply be censored, not punished, unless it is persistent.

Now, what is the alternative?  Publication isn't free, and is expensive.  So a "free press" is ultimately a press controlled by the wealthiest members of the society.  Even social media and search engines are curated by the owners, either by pruning certain topics or through algorithms of various kinds.  The United States descended into fascism largely on the heels of such a "free press", which is controlled by billionaires and floods the zone with crap daily.  Putting the "free press" into a constitution hamstrings the government.

TLDR: there's no such thing as a free press.  The "press" is a means of production, specifically information production.  It is either socially controlled, and accountable to a state that represents the people, or it is privately controlled, and accountable only to a society's wealthiest members.  China has chosen the former.

ApolloDan

Why would anyone, if their goal is to divert the focus of our addled western brains *away* from lowest common denominator orientalist propaganda, *toward* the overwhelmingly humane and forwardly progressive possibilities— to which we really ought to be paying attention and learning from as they are continuously demonstrated and advancing in real time— waste the tiny attention spans we can expect to give no more than a fleeting moment’s consideration, by lending emphasis and legitimacy to fabrications whose entire purpose is actually served fully, even by only a passing mention?

Edit: we shouldn’t overlook the source of these claims. Well, if we’re talking evidentiary sources, none even exist, but promotion of these claims is de facto US state dept policy. With no credible proof of uyghur oppression you will find countless published reports, articles, position statements etc. on .gov domains, with nary a peep on extensively documented and far more egregious human rights violations domestically as… honestly take your pick, one [currently trending r/pics post](https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/s/RgzN0mgcON) is as good an example as any. We end up with fucking John Oliver segments happily baiting the trap because corporate media will always faithfully backfill state dept positions with lurid accounts and wild eyed rhetoric as it serves multiple simultaneous interests; first of all that shit sells, it very conveniently poses no risk of official blowback, and it greases palms all the way down the line from foreign embassy staff and diplomats to the corporate silhouettes whose interests actually drive the policy direction, offering them plausible deniability or legal cover as well as potentially infinite ego theatre for every variety of privately powerful connections one might like to have.

_HI_IM_DAD

Hey there! That's a really sharp and honest question you're asking about China. It's something many people, especially those on the left, grapple with: how can we praise their economic achievements and social progress, but then look away from the censorship and repression? You're right to want to get to the truth beyond the usual Western narratives, without ignoring the darker side.
Let me try to explain this from a particular perspective that helps make sense of these contradictions. Imagine the world isn't just a bunch of separate countries; it's actually split into two giant, opposing forces. On one side, you have what we might call the capitalist heartland, led by the U.S., where the system of capital truly dominates everything. On the other side, you have a powerful force that's fundamentally against that capital, and right now, that's primarily China and the countries aligned with it.
So, China isn't just another capitalist country that happens to be successful. This view sees it as a unique kind of state, one that's built to gather and concentrate power against the global capitalist system. Its main goal isn't to spread revolution everywhere right now, but to rapidly build up its own economic and technological strength, both internally and within its sphere of influence, to create a powerful alternative to the West.
Now, about those "good" and "bad" policies. What you see as "socialism with Chinese characteristics" – their mix of market elements and state control – is seen as a very practical, flexible way to achieve this goal. They're essentially using some of capitalism's own tools, like foreign investment and market growth, but they're doing it on their own terms, with the ultimate aim of strengthening their anti-capitalist position. The key industries and the overall direction of the economy are still firmly controlled by the state and the Communist Party.
And the repression, the censorship, the tight controls? From this perspective, these aren't just random acts of evil. They are seen as a necessary defense mechanism. To build up this strength and prevent the capitalist system from infiltrating and destabilizing them from within (something that happened to other anti-capitalist states in the past), they believe they have to tightly control information and suppress dissent. It's like a body's immune system aggressively fighting off anything it perceives as a threat, to ensure its survival and ability to grow stronger. Issues like the Uyghurs or Taiwan, in this light, are seen as potential vulnerabilities that the opposing capitalist forces could exploit to undermine them. And their partnerships with countries like Russia, Iran, and North Korea are part of a broader strategy to build alliances against the dominant Western bloc.
So, when people like Hasan praise China's economic and social policies, they're focusing on the real, tangible improvements in people's lives and the undeniable growth that's happening. And when they seem to downplay the authoritarian aspects, it's not necessarily because they condone them morally. It's often because, from this specific theoretical viewpoint, these controls are seen as an unavoidable, if harsh, part of China's historical role in a global struggle. It's a recognition that in this ongoing, high-stakes "economic game" between opposing systems, China's actions, both positive and negative, are deeply intertwined with its core mission to build a powerful alternative to global capitalism. It's a complex and often uncomfortable contradiction, but one that this perspective tries to explain as a necessary part of its dialectical development.

Vilen_Isteni

Hasan has addressed this before. I'll see if I can find a link but don't hold your breath- dude has a lot of content. 


But basically, Hasan says that he is simply addressing the good things that he would like to see, and doesn't let the bad taint the success of the good at the cost of diminishing the good's validity. Basically- a good policy is a good policy. So if he is talking about good policy- he doesn't think it's nessicary to go into the weeds by getting distracted by bad stuff.


Also, he seems to think China's "bad side" is overstated at times, especially when compared to America's "bad side". 


For example- China does repress desenting voices against the CPC, but that being said, desenting voices are actually pretty rare. For example, during Covid, Chinese people started getting mad at the government, and the government responded by a push to be more transparent about their desision making process behind policys, which calmed people back down. So while they are repressive- China also tends to be reactive to what the people want. Again, they aren't perfect. And I'm also sure I also could be mistaking Hasans views on this, so I'll try to find the clip.

APraxisPanda

Honestly, China's main problem is how capitalistic they are. Sure, their government is VERY involved, and has the power to reign billionaires in, but the society is state capitalist at the end of the day. Private property ownership exists, and there are major class distinctions. Whether you can make an argument that they are headed in the direction of a socialist state, that's another conversation entirely. I'd argue yes, purely on the basis that their government is able to reign in their billionaire class and industry when it wants to, and things like land are for the most part decommodified. Most capitalist oriented states do not have the power to actually punish their wealthy, or willingly cede that power. On the other hand, that "original sin" of private property ownership and subsequent increasing wealth inequality (DESPITE social mobility being way more achievable than in the US by far) still remains, and I don't see any sign of that going anywhere.

Still, when it comes to social mobility, actually investing in society, decommodifying land and other basic necessities, and actually making an attempt to respond to climate change, China is lightyears ahead of the US. As a result, the Chinese public seems largely satisfied with the CPC. Many can remember a time when everybody around them was a lot poorer. The quality of life for the average person has increased by a large degree in the last few decades. Doesn't change the existence of the surveillance state, the undemocratic top-down nature of the workplace, and other problems, although the west certainly isn't innocent in any of those regards. On the surveillance front, we even have a term for it: surveillance capitalism.

I do not think you can call it a socialist state while there is private property ownership and class distinctions, though. Just the fact that there even ARE billionaires to reign in is a problem in and of itself. So long as the influence of capital has a sway on the CPC, I do not think you can call it a "dictatorship of the proletariat"

FluidRise8971

Best suggestion I can give you is to start reading theory. You’re in a head spin like I was when I started my research, an average misinformed American Liberal, and have been actively participating in Marxist-Leninist theory for 5 out of the 30 plus years of life under my belt. 

Factionalism and a “free press” owned by the oligarchs cause severe damage to a proletariat-dictated society. Laws and policies are in place to deter capitalist saboteurs from straying society away from the working class.

Brown_Faced

I think some of it boils down to cold, pragmatic realpolitik. Following the fall of the USSR, China is now the only "socialist" state with considerable geopolitical and economic power in the global scene. 

So a lot of people will vouch for China because they feel like they need a socialist force than can stand up against the neoliberal and capitalist forces in the US and EU. A part of me does end up falling in this line of thinking subconsciously, even though I don't support them. I find their attempts at Sinofication on the Uyghurs, Tibetans and Chinese Mongolians disgusting.

minecraftbroth

I‘d say it wasn’t really about specific geopolitical events but about the continuous rise of china as the next contender for global hegemony (whether that is the intended goal or not). 

The steady advances in technology, the sheer economic power (both as a market almost no global
Company can do without and as an investor in many parts of the world) and the steady built up of the Chinese military simply became more and more threatening for the US whose power (at least relatively speaking) has been in a (not always quite as) steady decline for some decades now. 

The economic interdependency of the two countries has led to a great deal of nervousness since both sides suspect, in case of open hostility breaking out, the other side could use that interdependency for devastating strikes on the economy. Trump‘s tariff tantrums probably shifted that felt power balance toward china to some degree, it also shows however, that decoupling is viable at best as a long term strategy and attempts to quickly use economic influence might only backfire (though the Chinese leadership seems a bit to clear headed to attempt that in such a rash way.

Furthermore, i‘d say the geopolitical hotspots and crises you mentioned are less defining points for the relationship and work better (especially for IR) as indicators on how good or bad the relationship actually is. Taiwan is an excellent example for this, when one looks at the history of the 2nd half of the 20th century, it was never an issue that defined the US-Chinese relationship but became a point of contention when the relationship soured and relaxed when relations became more amicable (think of Nixon). The stakes might be higher nowadays because of Taiwans rise as the leading center for chip production, speaking long term though, china probably doesn’t really need Taiwan for anything but symbolism. While internal politics does play a role in both countries, this seems more of a hegemonial struggle and and a lot of reactionary behaviors in its context.

GibDirBerlin

Have you heard the policy of pivot to Asia under Obama administration? America intended to contain China since early 2000s, but was delayed until Trump’s time. 

Culture differences didn’t stop America to be partners with China in the 70-90s. It didn’t stop partnerships with Saudis either. 

Also, cultural differences didn’t give Americans the right to be hostile towards other nations.

Pointfun1

China us relations did a nose dive when trump announced the first round of China tariffs in 2018, along with sanctions on huawei and the scandal involving the (illegal) arrest of meng. After that the sanctions were strengthened and continued under biden because a) a large part of the u.s. establishment views china as a threat to us hegemony and b) it was popular with the us public. Over this time period US policy did a total 180 towards china but chinese policy didnt change at all or only changed in response to us changes.

freaknbigpanda

As an outsider to both, it looks more like internal US politics has drive the rift to me. The Chinese actions that people interpret as adversarial seem like reactions to the "Pivot to Asia", the trade war, etc.

ReadingPossible9965

US hoped to turn China into a capitalist state that is heavily influenced by and dependent on the western capitalism and on the US itself, just as it happened with many other developing countries, reinforcing US dominance in the world.

This did not happen. China not only chose its own path but developed itself so much that it went on a path to become a major global power itself, that is not dependent on the US, and possibly THE dominant world power in the future, to replace the US in this role.

Notice that most of the hostilities are coming from western countries towards China, not from China towards west. These hostilities are just the old dominant power realizing that their position is being threatened and trying to prevent that.

In geopolitics, If you're in the 6th place, if the runner up at the 7th place is not your ally, they are your rival. If you're in the 1st place with an enormous gap to the 2nd place for decades, a sudden rising contender that has the potential of replacing you is not a rival but an enemy. There's too much to lose falling from the 1st place.

Maysign

"Talks about war in Taiwan are ever present."

Only in the US. China isn't talking about invading Taiwan, and it hasn't fought a war in half a century. There is zero reason to think China is gearing up to invade anyone.

General_Problem5199

[deleted]

As a Chinese person, let me reply.


China and the US have always had friction, but the earliest event I can think of is Obama's “return to Asia-Pacific”, which is 100% directed at China.


It was Trump's trade war in 2018 that really put the US-China relationship at a turning point.


That was followed by the Anchorage, Alaska meeting, where Biden inherited Trump's China policy and further expanded it to include economic sanctions, political pressure, and military blockade.


Then came Pelosi to Taiwan.


And when Trump took office it was “Liberation Day”.


The China-US problem is structural. The United States believes that other countries must be subordinate to itself, while China believes that a country's fundamental right to develop itself cannot be taken away.


As far as worldviews go, I think it's pretty simple - you just have to put up with it.


By equality, I mean tolerating each other.

bjran8888

Early 2010s. China studied what pivot to Asia meant especially after seeing the invasion of Middle East in the prior decade. They understood they have to take control of their own backyard because might equals right. Its neighbours and US then sees this expansion as aggressive. Sprinkle in some racism getting trump 1 elected and you have escalating tensions for the foreseeable future.

IceShaver

I think the tension was always there, going back to when U.S. manufacturing jobs started moving to China for cheaper labor. Even if the government didn’t show concern, resentment was building, especially among Republican voters. When Trump ran for president, he tapped into that frustration and brought anti-China sentiment into the political mainstream.

Sapling-074

It’s just the natural geopolitical result of China becoming wealthy and threatening (just because of their potential not any policy) towards the US. Most views of this being because China or the US being hostile is just propaganda. 

The same thing would happen if Europe or Russia became powerful again. There was a mistaken belief in the US that if they helped China economically they would for some reason become liberal and an American ally.

Particular-Star-504

This is not limited to the US. China's reputation in the West has plummeted due to covid. China is still pretending that covid is not their fault, but no one believes it.

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/10/PG_2020.10.06_Global-Views-China_0-01.png?w=640

testman22

Shift since the discovery of the massive CIA network that was dismantled by chinese counter intelligence in 2011

Many-Ad9826

An imperialist hegemony seeks to maintain its so-called rule-based "economic colonial system" and contain the emerging power, nothing new in history.

Wuaner

The recent stance can be traced back to the pivot to Asia under Obama and then the more hostile trade war under trumps first term.

But the structural determinism perspective is that China continued and still is rising, and it way past the conditions people thought were possible at the time. It convinced the politburo to vote in positions to cement Xi  to transition China, as well as raise the sensitivity the west has to China’s practices.

ekw88

2018 trade war. Trust between two side completely shattered after the trade-war. Pro-US leaders are layed off, and Hawkish leaders are now in high position. Since then china is preparing for de-coupling with no force to slow it down. 

With trade completely decoupled, military confrontation is a natural outcome.

Slow_Echo1478

itsheadfelloff

Since China overtaken US in many aspects of the economy plus garnered many allies. US scared of losing power to any country. So late 1980's.US is warmongering country that has a massive propaganda media machine. Remember WMD or Gulf of Tonkin.

Any-Ad-446

Started with Obama when the oligarchs realized they were on a trajectory to overtake America (pivot to asia). I remember reading that tandem thinking, "Yep, we are walking right into the Thucydids trap." 

They were getting out of the low-cost manufacturing trap and moving up the value chain, threatening Western economic and military  dominance. 

Scientifically, militarily, and economically, you can not have a near peer in real politik, or it will represent an existential threat to your dominance.l and as world history has shown if your not at the top you are potentially subject to all kinds of horrors.

Tzilbalba

They are a direct competitor to the US and as a result the status quo. The China a few decades ago is completely different than China now. Before they weren’t really seen as a threat by the US so relations were for the most part pretty cordial.

That being said under Obama in 2011 they started a pivot towards Asia, focused on China. As time goes by and China developed more and more it became even more of a closer rival than the US and arguably surpassed the US in some key fields. As a result the US has a vested interest in trying to prevent China’s rise. The amount of money the US has spent on anti-China propaganda is massive.

Multicultural_Potato

ShadowSniper69

When US found out China is not a pushover.

HorrorFriend1228

There is a genuine difference in way of thinking between China and America. 

The American way of thinking is always about competition and getting to the top (hegemonic), and is willing to do so even though it meant upsetting others. There is always a clear cut winner and loser in American way of thinking. 

The Chinese however, tend to look at things at a more wholesome approach. They are more open to sharing of power if situation warrants so and they tend to believe a win-win scenario is the best for everyone instead of duke it out till the last man standing.    

This difference in way of thinking create huge suspicion from the US, when China is slowly rising and catching up. China always propose a concept that the world is large enough for two super power to co-exist. But the Americans believe that China would be a hegemonic power like them when they become no.1 because of their inherent way of thinking.

statyin

look when did china start to making their own phones that are not far behind apple's flagship... thats when the relationship pretty much start to decline

  
ps this is not just a phone example, this is when china is able to produce some shit that are competitive enough to mess with US corporate profits...

Its always been hostile. there are brief years of closer relations, but its always been hostile.

Americans just don't like the Chinese, they are afraid of them.  Reason why they enacted the Chinese Exclusion Acts, committed to propaganda to paint them as a yellow peril, and commit massacre's of Chinese settlements and towns.

Rights were not given to Chinese settlers till during or just after WW2. And this was all before the CCP were even relevant.

CynicalGodoftheEra

The US proactively attempts to create dissent and chaos behind the scenes to governments that won't ally/ bend their knees/ pose a threat in some kind. If that doesn't work they become the targets of the multi billion dollar  propaganda machine, which then provides the US gov with justification/citizen approval to constrain said governments via trade or proxy war.

Chinas bullying actions in the SCS most likely escalated this tension and then taco man turned it up another notch

Peon01

Salty yanks think that they should be on top till the end of universe. That's all. 

https://youtu.be/y28w6ob_V9k


This video sums it up. China did not liberalize as our esteemed End of History space cadets predicted. Because they never read a word of Marx in their lives, sadly. They do not understand communism or the Chinese ideology. And because it is now clear the Chinese will not liberalize, their system is a threat to the capitalist order.


If anyone had bothered to read Lenin, for example, it would have been apparent that China would use the contradictions inherent in capitalism to try to use the communist party to control global manufacturing, baiting our elite with attractive profit motives and cheap labor and resources. Our ruling class assumed the Chinese leadership would become compradors. But their leadership has read Lenin and understood his plan for this situation.

MonsterkillWow

The military-industrial complex always needs a new “big bad.” We’ve been at war for 93% of our history since 1776. 

U.S. feels threatened by China’s continuously improving economic and geopolitical position, and has been acting ever more aggressively towards China ever since the so-called Asia pivot.

America has managed to sway its western allies, and both Democrats and Republicans are rushing headlong to embrace the propaganda and eventual conflict.

randomuser6753

Wow, not a lot of good takes ITT. Generally this subreddit is pretty good.

IR Realist take:

As soon as the power relations started getting closer to 'Among Equals'. 

Prior to the 2010s, China was an inferior power to the US. No one could reasonably argue that China was among equals. Their economy was picking up, but they lacked high tech industrial and a powerful military. 

In the 2010s, China had started creating high end tech independent of the US + built a significantly stronger military. This placed China (debatably) 'Among Equals'. They threatened the US's worldwide hegemony/unipolar world. Now we are (debatably) a bipolar world.

Morgenthau calls this 'Imperialism'. And for non-readers, that simply means they were trying to change the power dynamic. They did not need to conquer territory to change the power dynamic, but rather change the status quo power dynamic by building a large military with a strong economic base. 

&gt;the unformulated conflicts of power (are) “tensions” and the conflicts which are formulated in legal terms (are called) “disputes.” 
 
The tension is there. ITT people are mentioning the legal justification.

read_too_many_books

After the financial crisis of 2008, China started to buy less and less of American debt. I know they hold significant American debt. But they started to slow down on buying new debt. Then couple of years later, after upgrading their own (China) infrastructure with that money, China started the grand BRI program. This was around the time new Chinese president Xi came into power. US started to see the writing on the wall. This was around the time Trump stepped into running for president. That cemented the sour relationships between them.

Aladdin_Man

It is a distraction. The government has and will not attempt to find a solution to the many problems in our society.  The United  States is not a country but place where corporate entities can exist. People and their lives are not prioritized. The corporate run government is just creating an enemy out of China so that we don't create a movement around changing this dynamic.

Impressive_Mouse_477

Early 2010s for multiple reasons.

* China is a direct and the biggest economical and military competitor of the United States. 
* China has not liberalised, thus it is ideological opponent. 
* China threatens the existence of Taiwan, while US with its support of Taiwan threatens the monopoly of power of the Chinese Communist Party. 

Basically, US hoped China would become a member of the liberal status quo, kinda like Japan. Economic competition must have been expected but military one and ideological maybe were not. Instead, China became a force that is threatening the status quo and the US doesnt like that. I dont think the collective West would care that much about China rising if one of the goals wasnt the takeover of liberal Taiwan. 

Think of India for example, the West doesnt have a problem with it. It is a future economic superpower and a military great power, but its still a liberal country, so its not seen as a big threat, as China is, by the West.

Tricky_Weight5865

Because those people interested in “great power competition” have no other credible rival to focus on.

diffidentblockhead

Xi’s island building in the South China Sea was the turning point.

piscator111

China play a textbook level, tit for tat gaming theory strategy, that means if US choose to cooperate, China-US relationship will be back to normal in no time.

But international politics is not a 1vs1 game. Other players see the relationship deteriorate, take the chance to act. Russia and Israel benefit from the chaos, India tried but failed, and a lot of other potential players would like to try, the world is not going back.

Future-Theory

When the U.S. essentially replaced China as the regional hegemon and their tributary system post WW2, China became very anti-US. Basically China sees the United States as an encroacher on a natural and long lived tradition that saw China as the top dog. As if the U.S. is an invasive species.

These other posts are more targeted at recent events and do fall within recent flare ups in China-U.S. tension but to answer your question fully, using actual IR publishings, you have to go back to the early post war era.

Limp-Ad-2939

It's Xi being part of a revanchist movement in the CCP, pretty much.

mikiencolor

In the 2010s, as China’s economy grew significantly, they also became much more assertive militarily

Actual_Nothing988

Since China decided to go back deep into mao style communism. So around ~2012

HarambeTenSei

China is economic competition now, and not an economic ally. That's all it is. The economy is the foundation of society. So when something disrupts that, bad things happen.

savetinymita

The US and China were bitter ideological enemies from the defeat of Chiang Kai-shek and the end of the Chinese Civil War (1949) until Nixon visited China (1972). The US still didn't recognize the PRC until 1979, instead formally acknowledging the the ROC (Taiwan).

The rapprochement was made possible by the Sino-Soviet split, but the US and China were never exactly buddy-buddy. It was more a triangulation / allies of convenience thing.

Now, China represents the greatest (arguably *only*) meaningful rival to the US as global hegemon.

Able-Distribution

When they started producing counterfeit Disney items en masse in the early 90s.

That's not a joke. It's when their manufacturing and ability to replicate started ramping up. They would use that to produce what the US was making at a fraction of the price and then sell it back to them.

Bannedwith1milKarma

Communism...Taiwan issues...North Korea issues...all the technology theft, hacking, espionage, intellectual property and trade practices complaints have been the same complaints had for decades, just always building...expansion in south China sea...supports Iran and Russia...Japan issues.  Just never have been confrontational in addressing any of it before.

Confident_Row7417

China continued to grow fast and critically it moved into sectors that placed it in direct competition with the U.S, it also did not converge to "neoliberalism" as some expected.

Now China is advanced enough and has a sufficiently different economic and political system that it is now seen especially by neoconservatives as representing a Cold War style strategic competitor.

fluffykitten55

Maybe if CCP stops bullying all its neighbors US would not have any buyers for their fearmongering. Hell CCP is even gradually invading Bhutanese land which is such a peaceful country. Then their consistent threats to Taiwanese

IndividualSociety567

North Korea is not China's agent.



The pro-China North Korean forces were purged by Kim Jong-il in the 1960s.



Later, North Korea even destroyed the cemetery of Chinese volunteer soldiers.

coludFF_h

The root cause is that the United States hopes that China will always be poor and that China's GDP will not surpass that of the United States. However, China's population is four times that of the United States. If it reaches the level of the United States, its per capita GDP will only be one-fourth of that of the United States. Therefore, China's GDP must exceed that of the United States. The United States regards this as the ultimate threat to it.

Both-Manufacturer419

by western accounts china is basically playing the world. They take advantage where they can (international mail subsidies) and steal what they want (IP theft) all while playing the peaceful friendly flute. 

  
The idea of peace each country brings is a bit different. Ukrainians and eastern Europeans talk about the Russian peace as something they do not want to return to.

Chinese peace is a peace with the general idea that people need to be controlled. Jackie Chan agrees and says "chinese people need to be controlled."

  
So the general mantra of the US and China are opposite. If they reach parity to each other they will consider each others ideology a threat to their own.

OPcrack103

The reality is that China stopped buying US bonds after being scared by the GFC in 2008. In fact, you can completely map bond holdings and detiorating relations between the two countries. What many people do not understand is that Chinese and Japanese purchases of US bonds in the 2000's partially kept interest rates low before QE. China also never fully opened up their financial markets to the US, which Wall Street always wanted in order to continue the house of cards. This in turn turned China into the great enemy of the west. In fact, much of what Trump is doing is to persuade China and Japan (with heavy-handed tactics) to continue to fuel the American debt machine (i.e. to lower interest rates).


The version you receive is that China got powerful and they steal...or some other neoliberal word salad that you can see everywhere in this thread. If China continued to buy US bonds to fuel US spending habits and opened up their financial markets to the west, the US would not care at all.

PreparationMost7116

When the US realized China wouldn't become their lapdog and submit to western capitalist hegemony, which they thought it would happen after reform and opening up

LeDurruti

Consequence of globalization. Most of US manufacturing jobs are outsourced to China, leading to a shrinking middle class in the US, growing inequality that led to a growing substantial unhappy group of voters, who allows conservatives to take power and enact protectionist policies.

I traveled through the Rust Belt; I saw empty factories and even big name like IBM abandoned  their manufacturing buildings. Yet, the sign of what used to be a prosperous place was still there.

last_stand_000

Since forever? China always saw America as a component to bypass, and America always hated China for a multitude of reasons (and so as any other country/organisation that is different and/or won't bow down to their supremacy).

Key-Clock-7706

The Death of Engagement by The Wire China is a pretty good read to learn more about it.

TLDR: US-China relations were pretty cool up until Obama since China wasnt powerful enough to challenge US primacy yet. During Obama, China had reached 2nd biggest economy and now had enough hard power to challenge the US. Relations further deteriorated when Trump took office and started calling China public enemy #1.

AdIcy1845

Its simple geopolitics, two major powers will have conflicts of interest inevitably.

Ok-Hunt7450

When China got strong enough to be able to challenge the US. 

The other important factor is that the US left realized that their industries are all going overseas, so they joined the right to fight globalization.

species5618w

All these comments only focus on the results but not the causes. You literally had 2 populist leaders come into power that undermined or reversed what made their respective nation great in the last decades

Leaper229

You say more or less, it's significantly less. China isn't just growing peacefully, it's growing aggressive and hostile. If China was growing peacefully your argument would make sense that it's only about financial dominance.

Activeenemy

China is incredibly aggressive, deny it all you want.

China is a rival super power that America can’t control. Since the Bush neocons after the 11/9 attacks, America has wanted ‘full spectrum dominance’ over the entire world, as it was put in PNAC.

Any country that stands in the way of American hegemony has therefore to be portrayed as an enemy and (in the case of small countries), potentially subjected to invasion to install pro-Western regimes that obey American and Zionist wishes.

China also is the only major power that offers a working alternative to neoliberal capitalism.

DigitalDroid2024

Ms4Sheep

You are on the internet. Find a book or a book or a video. There is over two hundreds years of complicated history. What do you really hope to learn from a reddit post? 

  
You are struggling because you have made no fucking effort. The fact you are looking for answers here is part of your problem.

Dense-Pear6316

Started somewhere in the 2010s - for decades the US and The West thought if they integrated China with the world economy enough, rising living standards would lead to democratisation. Instead it's left their manufacturing base becoming increasingly hollowed out along with rampant IP theft and an increasingly autocratic regime that has flexed its muscles literally every opportunity it's had. What's thrown everything off kilter of course if Ukraine - it showed the CCP what could happen to inexperienced militaries beset by corruption attempting to invade against modern western military technology. So now there's increased tension as China is running against the demographic clock to reunify, then who knows what will really happen.

Snoo30446

Honestly, the way you try to make me spell it out for you, even though it’s obvious to fucking everyone makes me too suspicious and annoyed to answer. I hope Chinese officials are better diplomats than you, because if not, they carry a lot more blame than I thought.

I’m not sure you realize that through most of history in the United States hasn’t even had much of a relationship with China so….. what do you think the relationship with China was like in the 80s?

It’s much better today than it’s been most of my life

Specific-Peanut-8867

因为美国已经没有能力对中国玩弄霸权，政治不是游戏，中国不是日本和韩国这些婊子国家，我觉得美国人要反思，为什么美国会妄想控制世界上的其他地区？你们甚至连内部不同派系的人群都控制不了，中国不会为了控制蒙古、中亚和东南亚，而轰炸这些地方的牧民和农民

Tasty-Purpose-1762

No, it's not that the U.S. doesn't care about China anymore. They're just bringing up old issues from their relationship and talking about going their separate ways. China wasn’t ready to split at first, but now, who knows?

AssistanceMundane724

Became hostile when China started getting stronger economically and the US didn't like it. Simple as that.

Hostile relations would have started earlier if America wasn’t distracted with the ME wars and great financial crisis, as is the nature of great power politics. Like Rome and Carthage or Sparta and Athens.

sadboyoclock

North Korea is not a Chinese proxy. They are acting independently when it comes to Russia. I don't know where you got the idea that North Korea is a Chinese proxy. But lately everyone one on reddit has been calling everything a proxy. I've seen comments saying Pakistan is a Chinese proxy etc etc.

Cattovosvidito

North Korea is not our proxy. Judging from sources inside North Korea, the relationship between North Korea and China cannot even be described as friendly. North Korea publicly accused China of supporting the Security Council's sanctions on North Korea over the North Korean nuclear issue. 

This is not that difficult to understand. Taiwan is China's internal affairs and also our core interests. This has not changed since the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States.

Electronic-Run2030

I believe the tension arises from China's refusal to align with U.S. directives.

Slight_Shift7974

Probably because china steals every bit of IP they can get their hands on

TewthDr

I think it has always been there but their masks dropped when they went after the non-China Chinese CEO of Tiktok.

liquid2140

i see this start went trump became a present and start his 1st trade war

lMRlROBOT

Cause US supports the Taiwanese governament too contain mainland China, id imagine thats the largest irritant

ppmi2

Taiwan has been a source of tension since the Chinese Civil War / Communist Revolution ended 75 years ago. For the first 50 years, the rest of the world wasn't particularly concerned due to the nature of the conflict. Much of the dispute related to claims over the territory, but also who should be considered "the real China". Of course, I'm oversimplifying the issue here, but from a Western perspective, it was little more than an inconsequential regional/domestic dispute. But that's certainly no longer the case.

Taiwan is responsible for producing the most advanced semiconductor microchips in existence, far superior to anything the rest of the world is capable of making. And their global market share is something like 90%. This tech is favoured by the US military and others presumably. These chips are also used in phones and essential IT infrastructure. Needless to say, Taiwan's economy is quite important.

On top of that, China claims the Strait of Taiwan is a crucial shipping lane that facilitates over a trillion dollars of trade per year. Geographically speaking, there doesn't appear to be any huge advantage exclusively offered by this route - it's hardly the Malacca Strait. But it does lie off the west coast of Taiwan - home to almost 90% of the islands population as well as key ports and infrastructure.

Combine these issues with China's global ambition, and it's easy to see why the US is so concerned. Many already consider China the world's second superpower - a position that leaves China unsatisfied and the US uncomfortable. If China takes control of Taiwan, they likely become the dominant global power. On top of that, the US loses a key foothold in Asia and any influence over the East* China Sea, which has ramifications for military interests based in Japan and Korea, with the latter effectively becoming isolated from their allies and surrounded by adversarial neighbours.

None of this provides any justification for hostility between the US and China IMO - they **should** be the strongest of allies. Surely, both would benefit from such a relationship. But as we know, things aren't that simple, especially when the global balance of power is potentially at stake.

*edit - mistakenly said South instead of East

sincsinckp

Hello before going in the deep discussion we need to know some basics first. Power has always been zero sum game from beginning of time. There are no equals but only number one or just let be rotten in the dust. You can profess to follow any form of ideology or any form of government, you have to deal with same material conditions that are present in front of you. China is a resurgent power that aims to change the unipolar world with a multi polar world, that aim itself pits China against Usa , since Usa wants unipolarity China has to go against it. 

Usa is a bourgeiose Democracy where the economic interests of political class, business class mattered more than the interests of so called working class or the voters of Trump, which lead to heavy investing of trade and surpluses in Chinese economy. You can read a lot of good how Apple basically built the present Smartphone industry in China by training the Chinese employees, who end up taking the same learned knowledge to start new Chinese smart phones giants that we know of now. Patrick Mcgee wrote very well in Apple in China. 

What this lead to entire companies shifting their bases from industry dependent cities to Chinese cities for low prices and artifically lowered salaries which in end inticed big western companies to run to China. 

That's why you can see the salaries of western middle class in America has stagnanted since 1980s. This killed the middle class in Usa. 

What this lead to China not only learning but spying, stealing, cheating for secrets and they very well manufactured the idea of how to implement this industries. They basically created a single country around exporting to other countries while not consuming since their economy is designed at exporting rather than consuming, it lead to high amount of deficits with their trading partners. This trading partners could not accept this since China never consumes much, how weird for world's biggest economy ppp terms yet you see no deep trades  where Chinese needs what other countries have. 

This basically created a world level running company state lead by a state of so called single party which itself is a false flag. it is itself a technocracy rule believing in being driven by data and other ideas. 

China is a new super power which is going to flex  her arms and one of the biggest issue with development is people tend to want liberation when they have money in their pockets and they tend to want to have a opinion about things. the Chinese government did great things for it's people, might be greatest things any government has ever done but what it can't do is keep the might of 1.4 billion people in check. 

Usa is a world power if it fails to control China in her knees, world will change and lead to multipolarity. If world becomes multipolar what would happen to American exceptionalism, to print as much money as it wants and rule the world. That any world power cannot risk. When the Sun set on British empire, it never became powerful again, when the Sun set on Soviets empire, they never saw light of the day. Any power would fight to it's limits to grow it's influence .

romeoomustdie

To paraphrase Deng, the CCP was merely "biding time with best fake smiles". It seems a lot of people like you are still charmed by how best the fake smiles were. It was never OK with whatever the circumstances were in the 90s or the 00s, but it couldn't do much then so it decided to just latched on to the US to strengthen itself while weakening the US with the hope of being able to do something in the near future. 

The CCP is extremely realist, with the goals of wanting to remain in power and for China to be the number one country, and realizes that the US is the only external power that can credibly threaten its goals. To get what it wants it had to lie, scam, and steal, so it did, as well as gradual and persistent harassing of neighboring states, below the threshold of a war, to reduce the credibility of the US in the region. We are at the stage of the US finally responding in some way or another. 

All that has happened is very predictable. The only thing that doesn't make sense is that the US has let the CCP latch onto it for so long.

Linny911

Please use [Good Faith](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) and the [Principle of Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) when commenting. We are currently under an indefinite moratorium on gender issues, and anti-semitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/).


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*

F

They are not enforcing the congressionally-passed TikTok ban allowing a Chinese intelligence gathering tool and communist propaganda outlet to remain on the phones of a third of Americans. They are allowing Nvidia to sell their advanced cutting-edge chips in China just bypassing export controls and threatening American tech leadership. The tariffs, supposedly targeted at China, have hit American allies like Japan and South Korea while strategic nations like Vietnam and India that are central to containing China face *higher* levies than those imposed on China. The administration has opened the door to 600,000 Chinese nationals at American universities and authored a National Defense Strategy that would cede in entire Western Pacific to Beijing.

Reshaping America's attitude towards China was one of the crowning achievements of the first Trump term. He is throwing that away in the second.

jbelany6

D. We are not doing enough to fight them.

WatchLover26

C+

China is a bit of a tough nut to crack. 

I think he’s doing a good job highlighting the imbalance and pointing out our need to de-risk our dependence on them and the supply chain.

I to think he’s missing opportunity to box them out /w better alliances.

Our foreign policy should be less worried about subsidizing Europe, and more building with high potential friendly nations in Americas, India, and the Philippines.

Many of those nations do have to balance opportunity with undercutting and immigration concerns (which Trump is right to focus on), but he has needlessly pissed off India / Brazil / Canada - who should he top of the list of people to buddy up with if we tell Europe it’s gotta start picking up the check every now and then.

Kman17

F. Even without his disastrous handling of China itself, he's pushing everyone towards China with his actions towards them. 

Modi was the most pro-US Indian president ever, until Trump wanted a Nobel prize for a ceasefire he had no part in. 

Canada and Australia are selling more coal and oil than ever to China, while he punished them. 

Other countries are buying more and selling more with them, such as Brazil with soy. 

He's stopped coordination with Five Eyes, an alliance formed on the thought-unbreakable bond of sharing cultural heritage, and the Quad, which is critical to sueveilling China. 

His pulling out of the TPP during his fist term led the organization to be sinocentric, and while he was being a buffoon and taking up media airspace China swooped into Australia to snag drinking water and coal rights, both things we need to keep them from getting, while nobody noticed. 

Reduction of US AID means China will come in with their Belt and Road initiative, which seeks to spread Chinese influence through debt and infrastructure to bind together an alliance of authoritarian states backed by Chinese technology so overthrowing them is harder for their citizens

Lamballama

I’m going to give him an incomplete.

China is almost certainly going to invade Taiwan before the next election.  They’re going to start the war by provoking an incident in the South China Sea, similar to how they tried to collide with a Philippine coast guard boat.

They’ll probably immediately escalate the war by firing hypersonic missiles at American carriers in the pacific, to keep them away from the invasion force in Taiwan.

My grade for Trump depends entirely on his response to this war.

No-Difference-839

C

He's got a deal on trade in progress with China.   We'll see how that affects trade and the economy in the long run.   

On the TikTok ban he's not enforcing, I don't think it's as big a problem as some others think.   It would be extremely unpopular with young voters if implemented.

JoeCensored

I never understood what this sub is about. The most important thing on the road to socialism is having industries and certain sectors like mining and energy transport social cares etc under state ownership and control.

 And China’s goal, like throughout its history, is survival. Right now they are doing this properly on the socialist path. Communism is not something you just declare like “we’re communist now.” Class struggle has existed for centuries in different hegemonic forms—feudalism, colonialism, slavery, etc. Capitalism is the hegemony of recent times. When most of the world is governed by this ideology and you’re surrounded by capitalism, the first goal is to survive. And your society’s belief in socialism grows stronger over time. 

The end of capitalism is an inevitable collapse, but the goal is to get through all the hardships with minimal damage as a self-sufficient country and show the world your path is the right and you dont collapse. Communism doesn’t come in 10, 20, or 50 years. It may take 100, 200, or more years. The way is to progress with socialist principles and increase the state’s influence in the economy.

 The most important thing is for your society to realize and believe in this path generation after generation, through education and self-consciousness. This path is correct—you can reach communism this way. If you want to go full communist mode as you imagine, most of the countries around you and the world must also be socialist. You can’t achieve this while external pressure is this high and the majority is capitalist. You need to keep going with socialist principles and the right steps, and wait

bozkurt37

Nothing that you have said here means that China is not socialist. China is socialist because it has a democratic dictatorship of the people under the leadership of the communist party. 

Being a large manufacturuer is not anti-socialist. Lending money at reasonable rates is not anti-socialist. Having markets is not anti-socialist. China does allow capitalism to exist for the purposes of developing the forces of production as fast as possible. But they also have a 5-year plan and the vast majority of finances are controlled by state owned banks. Capitalism is allowed solely to develop the productive forces, it is not allowed to exert political power the same way it does in the west.

China is in a transitionary phase and allows multiple modes/relations of production to exist at the same time. This same exact process happened with the development of capitalism. Marx says that the capitalist mode of production only properly got gowing after thrle bourgeoisie took power. That means there was a time in which the ruling class was capitalist but the dominant mode of production was still feudalism. China is currently in a similar situation today. Socialism takes time to build, it cannot be done in a day much less 100 years.

If you would go read modern Chinese marxist scholarship you would understand this. All of these debates were solved years ago, just no one in the west reads what the Chinese have to say. "Only the wearer of the shoes knows if they fit or not" -Xi Jinping.

StalinsBigSpork

Ok, was the Communist Party of Britain or the Communist Party of the USA the sole party in control of their country 100 years ago?  Maybe as Westerners, we shouldn’t project onto China what we have done ourselves, especially concerning a country that suffered during the century of humiliation under the boot of the West.

Dragonwick

&gt;or tied into the US led capitalist order. 

I personally think we're in the process for China taking over as world-capitalist hegemon, so it won't be the American capitalist order for much longer...

ebolaRETURNS

During the UN General Assembly, China's Premier emphasized multilateralism and criticized unilateral actions, signaling a shifting global governance landscape amidst rising tensions.

China's Role in Global Governance

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want