← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Submitted by People’s Democratic Congress (PDC)
A migrant worker picks up a bottle of water during a break from his work near a construction site at Beijing’s Central Business District Monday, Aug. 16, 2010. (AP Photo/Alexander F. Yuan)

While many people on here on BU blog on much trivia and whilst many citizens in Barbados itself talk and engage in much foolishness and crap, and are systematically being sidetracked by many Eurocentric Westernized into doing so, we in the PDC, and we suppose some others too in Barbados, are presently  learning that the Chinese have just overtaken the Japanese as the world’s second biggest economy in terms of GDP, and are on course, according to a few talking heads in this western hemisphere,  to overtake the  Americans – who are presently the world’s biggest economy – in the next 3 0r so decades ( See Link)

However, the fact that the Chinese were at some points in the past bound to overtake the Japanese eventually, would have been seen from the time of their (the Chinese’s) implementation of particular state capitalist industrialist  ideologies, principles and programs during the time in which such statist trends and events were categorized under the rubric as The Great Leap Forward – in the post World War II era under the Late Great Mao Zedong (1893 – 1976);  from the time they would have implemented market capitalist imperialist industrialist ideologies, principles and programs that fell within the embrace of the introduction of greater Western market style reforms to a Chinese economy that hitherto was centrally planned,  in 1978 under the paramount leadership of Deng Xiaoping (1904 – 1997) – and which were thus seen to be centered around the building on the positives that had been ushered in in the period of the Great Leap Forward – which though too had its own fundamental problems; and from the time they would have executed more of the same capitalist freemarket ideologies, principles and programs that would have inevitably led to profound increases in the strong holds that both Chinese and Western Capitalism have had on the Chinese economy, since the emergence of Jiang Zemin ( 1926 – ) as the paramount leader of China in the aftermath of the Tiananmen Square protests crackdown in 1989, and right up to this juncture with the present paramount Chinese leader Hu Jintao (1942 –).

These different and higher stages in the development of the Chinese economy and society, and American and Western political capitalists preference for investing in China rather than Japan, etc., have undoubtedly helped to produce the terrific rates of material growth and production that have been seen in the Chinese economy, and that have ensured that China has had an increasing share in global material output and investment flows.

So, while the Chinese economy has been growing at these phenomenal rates, and hundreds of millions of Chinese have been lifted out of poverty since the 80s, the Japanese economy has been on such a steady downward and  stagnant spiral, that there has been the coming into existence of a political economic  period of depression and deflation in Japan, that which when contrasted with the long term upward growth patterns of the American economy and the Chinese economy, has been termed by some international political economy experts, as:  The Lost Decade – 1991 to 2000.

Such is significant partly because the Japanese are the only non-Caucasian dominated country that has ever been able to achieve the status of a G7 (G8) nation, which primarily would have happened through the President of France at the time (1975) asking five other heads of the governments of  major industrialized powers (Japan included) to a meeting at Chateau de Rambouillet to discuss matters of mutual importance (Wikipedia.org). Part of the basis for the involvement of the Japanese was as a primary result of their having been able to reach the now former  post-World War II ascendency/status of having become the second biggest industrialized economy, and its having become a mighty trading power from the 1960s up to  early 2000s.

But, a lot of the financial value that emerged from returns on the industrialized growth and development capacity that the Japanese achieved in the 60s, 70s and 80s, eventually has become useless and worthless through the further development of American/Western style financial gambling and speculation in nominal money schemes in the area of land transactions, share stock transactions, government stimulus packages, etc.

And, so, with the Japanese’s increasing emphases on  the latter,  something would have had to give – its no 2 position as the world’s pecking order of economies, as real production in Japan has been withering away over the last two decades, and as it exports have had to face increasingly stiff competition from Taiwan and South Korea esp.

Well, given that there is available on the internet, and available from some actual reading literature desks across the world,  information that speaks to a “Chinese Master Plan to destroy America” – it can be Googled!! – there must therefore be responses by Americans to any such real plans by a few Chinese to actually destroy America.

But, we in Barbados do NOT have to look very far for any of those responses from the Americans because, for right now , we – in Barbados and else where in this global maze –  are involved in this covert silent “war” that continues to take place between America and its surrogates and China.

This “war” clearly started in the early times of Communist rule in China and with American flare ups over Chinese human rights violations, and their human rights record (even as the US itself would have had then a very bad human rights record in certain areas), with Americans demanding greater investment export access to Chinese markets in 1980s to 2000s,  with present American demands for a devaluation in the renmimbi (the Chinese currency’s appellation), and with the just concluded mini-battle with the US based internet search engine giant – Google.  These and other relevant situations are examples of the skirmishes that exist in this Sino-American “war”.

So, instead of, on one hand, many of us Barbadians “talking foolishness” and “blogging crap”, and, on the other hand, our paying greater attention and detail to much of what is happening in global politics and international relations, many of us are now left in state of ignorance – not knowing – that Barbados is now seriously caught up in the  crossfire of this “war” between the Americans and the Chinese  whereby there have been many moves by the Americans to prevent the Chinese from taking over them as the world’s biggest economy, which, if it were to be allowed to happen by the said Americans and their surrogates, would have serious and profound implications for the continued hegemonic dominance of the world by the American political enterprise, culture;  would have severe and far-reaching implications for higher global “prices” for oil – which is a resource that the Chinese (and the Japanese) substantially lacks; and very adverse implications for the American Dollar being still
used as a globally traded currency( the rise of the Chinese Yuan as a global currency) etc.

So, the truth right now is that the Americans (and also their counterparts in Europe – which equals European Caucasians ) are STAGING these international financial and economic crises to slow, or stop, which ever, the Chinese’s  ( the yellow people’s ) carry forward/momentum from being the only Asian superpower, with military and aero-spatial superiority, to ever achieve  the  goal of becoming the biggest economy in the world , onto its eventual planned course of  becoming a global superpower. And Barbadians are caught up in this war and are  NOT even prepared for the ongoing battles that are part of this “war”.  What a tragedy of epic proportions!!!

For, it is very possible that there may be a double dip recession in the US and parts of Europe to achieve what the 2008-9 financial crisis did not do – that is-  to cripple or maim the Chinese economic juggernaut and trading giant. But, of course, in that crisis, the Chinese did not roll up and play dead, and did respond with their own Western Neo-Keynesian style stimulus packages, and have been depending more on their so-called internal economy, to resist those real politicking Machiavellian efforts of the USA and Europe.

But, finally for now, surely the Americans and the Europeans do NOT have to worry about China ever becoming a global superpower since, they are many fundamental social political material problems that this Asian behemoth faces, that will prevent it from actually becoming a global superpower. One such fundamental political problem, is that, it does NOT have a federal system of government to unite or federate the different political ethnic and religious regions into a really  stronger Chinese nation against other nations of this world. The Communist Party is no substitute for such a federation,  primarily because in a matter of time  – it will either be greater  long term political freedom ( or such  being asked for by many ordinary Chinese consonant with this greater wealth and income that they are now getting) – meaning that Communist Party of China too will have to give up more of its power and authority over the Chinese society to other political groups/regions – or it will be
greater material technological financial acquisitions for most Chinese along the present trajectory, with those greater social political freedoms for its citizens and others that are necessary to drive its becoming a great global power being otherwise stymied by a ruling elite that continues to tightly manage other competing political forces.

Surely, that is one of the Great Chinese dilemmas.

But are NOT many of us in Barbados going to stop talking blogging much foolishness and engaging in much crap, and instead think and act greater ideologically, politically, materially, financially in this country in the face of this ongoing  Sino-American “war”???


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

29 responses to “China Takes The #2 Spot From Japan, USA Next – What Are The Implications For Barbados In The Ongoing Sino-Western ‘War’?”


  1. @PDC

    A good read, all 1600+ words.

    One thing you should elaborate is the extent to which the Chinese investments have been made in US financial products e.g. US treasuries, bonds etc. To what extent can this curtail China’s march to #1 in 3-40 years which has been projected.


  2. On the subject of the geo-political, Prime Minister David Thompson appointed to a high-powered panel at the United Nations. Is the UN relevant any longer though?

     

    Swedish aid minister appointed to UN panel

    Published: 10 Aug 10 11:48 CET | Double click on a word to get a translation

    Online: http://www.thelocal.se/28284/20100810/

    Share

    UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has appointed Sweden’s Minister for International Development Cooperation Gunilla Carlsson as a member of the new UN High-level Panel on Global Sustainability.

    Moderates pledge billions for unemployed (18 Aug 10)

    Police operation called off as gunmen escape (18 Aug 10)

    3 Swedish universities make top 100 list (18 Aug 10)

    "I am tremendously pleased and grateful for the opportunity to be a member of this panel on an issue of such importance to all humankind. This is also recognition of Sweden’s very determined efforts on behalf of a sustainable environment for people in both rich and poor countries," Gunilla Carlsson said in a foreign ministry statement on Tuesday.

    The High-level Panel will be jointly headed by the President of Finland, Tarja Halonen, and the President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, and will be tasked with formulating a new vision for sustainable growth and development and to identify mechanisms for achieving this vision.

    The panel has been established by the Secretary-General in response to the conclusions from the UN Summit on Climate Change in September 2009 and the final report of the Commission on Climate Change and Development, led by Gunilla Carlsson, "Closing the Gaps", which was published in 2008.

    The Panel’s other members include US Ambassador to the UN Susan E. Rice, former Prime Minister of Australia Kevin Rudd, Barbados Prime Minister David Thompson, EU Commissioner Connie Hedegaard and former Prime Minister of Norway Gro Harlem Brundtland.

    The first meeting will be held in conjunction with the gathering of the United Nations General Assembly in New York in September, will be assigned a secretariat to support it and will deliver a final report to the Secretary-General by the end of 2011.

    Peter Vinthagen Simpson (news@thelocal.se/+46 8 656 6518)


  3. Maybe PDC offering China Democracy to have confusion like Barbados confusion … no?

    China never become global superpower because China NO FREE TO PRINT MONEY TO PAY BILLS like other Super Power … no?

    Sino-Western ‘War’ Not exist … this Porcine urinatement … no? We make friendly with everybody (except pig brain medic … no?)


  4. Oh by an way, population largest in world history for any nation …no? Far bigger that Japan, far bigger …! Japan have Democracy ..ha ha … very good for Japan … no? And what foolish talk about Tiananmen Square, you either with us or no …no? Why not mention great upheaval when Bush win second election …


  5. Peak Everything: Preface to the paperback edition
    by Richard Heinberg

    Note: Peak Everything: Waking Up to the Century of Declines will be released in paperback this month (September) by New Society Publishers.

    SNIP

    Of course it is simplistic to argue that everything has peaked (though Peak Everything makes for a better book title than “Some Things Peaking Now, Most Others Soon”). Perhaps the most glaring exception is human population, which continues to grow and is virtually certain to pass the seven billion mark within the next couple of years.

    Here’s another non-peak: China’s economy is still growing rapidly, at the astonishing rate of 8 to 10 percent per year. That means it is more than doubling in size every ten years. Indeed, China consumes more than twice as much coal as it did a decade ago—the same with iron ore and oil. That nation now has four times as many highways as it did, and almost five times as many cars. How long this can go on is anyone’s guess. But surely not many more doublings in consumption rates can occur before China has used up its key resources.

    For what it’s worth, my forecast is for China’s continuing boom to be very short-lived. As I argued in my recent book Blackout, there are hard limits to China’s coal supplies (the world as a whole will experience peak coal consumption within the next two decades, but China will get there sooner than most other countries because of its extraordinary consumption rate—currently three times that of the U.S.). Since China has no viable short-term alternatives to coal to fuel its industrial machine, by 2020 or so (and possibly much sooner) that country will have joined the rest of the world in a process of economic contraction that will continue until levels of consumption can be maintained by renewable resources harvested at sustainable rates.

    World population growth may likewise continue for a shorter period than is commonly believed, if global food production and economic activity peak soon in response to declining energy availability.

    In short, the world has changed in a fundamental way in the past three years, and the reverberations will continue for decades to come. Indeed, we have just seen the beginning of an overwhelming transformation of life as we’ve known it.

    http://www.energybulletin.net/node/53860


  6. The golbal economic recession is not friendly to anyone.Not even China. I predict China export of goods to rapidly decline to other countries in the near future. Soaring unemployment will be a contrbuting factor as companies inventories would remain dormant as the supply outweighs the demand .


  7. Interesting article. When people discuss the huge growth in the Chinese economy, it reminds me of the similar expansion of Japan’s economy. I can remember the words of “experts” of the time, reassuring the British that there was nothing to fear, that Japans growth was based on low wages and the production of cheap mass produced goods; the Japanese cuture did not foster improvisation or inventiveness, and so they’d never challenge the West’s technological lead. What a load of racist rubbish! The “experts” could not have been more wrong, and their assumptions were based on their Eurocentric world view and inherent racism.
    The balance of power has been changing for a long time. The USA may see this as a threat to their preeminence, but other countries can see it as an opportunity. Germany’s and Sweden’s economies have benefitted from focusing their export efforts on Asian markets.


  8. @M.Williams

    Good point and to add. Those who question whether China can sustain near double digit growth have to examine the extent to which China can generate capacity in its domestic economy. No only does China have huge reserves but a huge part of the country remains undeveloped.


  9. David,

    Thanks for the comment on the article.

    Furthermore, you asked that we “elaborate on the extent to which the Chinese investments have been made in US financial products e.g. US treasuries, bonds etc., and on the extent to which this can curtail China’s march to #1 in 3-40 years which has been projected.

    Well, whenever a country ( CHINA) has a very favourable balance of trade with another ( THE USA ) there is very much the possibility/inevitability that the government/private sector of the country ( CHINA ) that has this favourable balance of trade, will also so-called greater invest in many financial instruments of the increasingly debt laden country’s government ( THE USA), primarily because the government of the country that has this unfavourable trade balance ( THE USA) will ask the government/private sector of country that has the favourable trade balance to put back in some amount of the money value acquired from the favourable trading done into whatever areas of activity in the other country for purposes of later entering into and fostering free trade and investment associations/arrangements on the basis of agreed to treaties; or for purposes of stabilizing the value of the currency of the increasingly debt-bearing country; or for purposes of reducing the domestic costs of producing and distributing many goods and services in the latter country, and therefore providing business expansion, etc., – or it will simply be seen that the government/private sector/power elites of the country, with this unfavourable trade balance, will simply do this amount of investing in financial instruments to significantly allow for more of its country’s goods and services to be traded with that other country that has the better trade balance.

    Therefore, the government/private sector of the country with the favourable balance will view themselves as having a vested interest in the other country – NOT just a trading interest, and in return this will be expected to be so from the point of view of the country with the unfavourable trade balance.

    So, David, note too that when there becomes a great public outcry in the country with the less favourable balance of trade, over there being this worsening trade imbalance ( as you have seen so often with many Americans concerning Japanese goods, vehicles in the 80s) , there are these types of so-called investments that will be taking place as well as foreign direct investments, to perhaps ease the weight of the very trenchant criticisms being made in the particular country that suffers from the trade imbalance.

    So, there is also something politically strategic about these kinds of investments too that are made by the better trading country, including making sure that, in the case of China’s favourable balance of trade and payments with the USA, and in the case of the great monetary and other benefits that that brings, there still is this particular level of balance and fairness that will be fostered among certain countries in the global political order through, say, the bid by China to redistribute many the benefits away from the USA to poorer countries through aid and concessionary lending to those poorer countries, etc.; through making sure that they will be able to leverage their way further into, say, the USA’s public policy making processes by asking or indicating – in the case of this said government/private sector/the think thanks, lobby groups in the USA, that there will be great logic and common sense in having certain educational technological military transfers and other benefits, hitherto not available to many other countries where there is far less amount of trade being done with them and the same USA – other than if you are like Israel – directed to or provided at lower or discounted financial or social costs to them ( the Chinese).

    So, just as this type of political material conduct has happened in the past and continues to happen with
    Japan and Saudi Arabia ( through the USA buying of much Saudi oil), it has recently started to happen with China – but in a very extraordinary unique unprecedented powerful way – Check the great amount of skirmishes between the USA and China yet their trading and investment partnership is almost the biggest out of all other nations that they each trade with.

    As well, it will also be seen that the country with the unfavourable balance of trade ( THE USA) will benefit financially in the short term – through initial streams of income lent to them by the better trading country ( CHINA) – and which will therefore be spent among its population for their greater survival anddevelopment, or will be used for payment towards the reduction of existing burdensome debts, whereas the country with the favourable balance of trade (CHINA) will benefit financially in the long term – through usurious interest rates plus the principal values that were invested originally that will still have to be paid back ( unless traded to other parties) – or through some of these returns being seen as future capital re-investments flows right back into the said country’s productive sectors with the unfavourable balance of trade.

    So, to put a few figures or estimates on those types of financial investments that China has recently been making in the USA, we proceeded to this bit of information taken from the US Congressional Research Service’s document titled China’s Holdings of US Securities: Implications for the US economy, by Wayne M. Morrison and Marc Labonte, and dated July 30, 2009.

    This document, which was prepared for members of Congress and Committees of Congress, states, in its summary, that “China has invested a large share of its foreign reserves in US Securities, which, as of June 2008, totaled $ 1.2 trillion, making China the second largest foreign holder of US securities ( after Japan). These securities include LT Treasury debt, LT US agency debt, LT US Corporate debt, LT US equities and short term. It is likely that China became the largest foreign holder of US securities by the end of 2008”.

    And to get a broader picture of the level of Chinese financial investments in the West also, we went to the the electronic internet document: Tracking Chinese Investment: Western Hemisphere Now Top Target, by the Heritage Foundation of the USA, which starts by saying that “China has at least $2.5 trillion in foreign exchange and must, due to its own balance of payments rules, invest it all overseas. Most unavoidably goes into American bonds, the only market big enough to absorb it.[1] However, since the beginning of 2005, the PRC has invested almost $200 billion in foreign assets outside bonds. Official Chinese data are unhelpful, but The Heritage Foundation’s China Global Investment Tracker sorts non-bond spending by country and sector. The tracker is current through June 30, 2010.”

    “Thus far this year, Chinese investment has been predominantly characterized by a rush to the Western Hemisphere, excluding the U.S. The first half of 2010 saw record activity, with large Chinese investments and engineering contracts surpassing $45 billion worldwide. Just over half went to non-U.S. Western Hemisphere countries. (Chinese non-bond investment in the U.S. was $1.6 billion.)”

    Furthermore, an online Los Angeles Times story ( 4 March, 2010 by Don Lee, (citing the Chinese state media then) provides more evidence of greater Chinese investments in the west, by showing that the “country’s (China’s) direct investments overseas rose 6.5% in 2009, to $43.3 billion — despite A GLOBAL SLUMP ( our capitals for emphasis) in such investments — and could jump to $60 billion this year.”

    It also stated that “formal estimates of Chinese investments in the U.S. last year, excluding bond purchases, range from $3.9 billion — a figure put out by New York research firm Dealogic — to $6.4 billion, a number that comes from Derek Scissors, a Heritage Foundation research fellow who tracks China’s global transactions.”

    So, it is patently clear that the extent of NOT just Chinese investment in US Government and non-government paper (FDI), BUT ALSO total Chinese investment in the West is awesome and huge.

    But, take note, David, that recently China has been looking to diversify its overseas bond/investment portfolios further as a means of spreading around the different inherent risks associated with these kinds of investments/portfolios, and at the same as a means of illustrating that it does NOT want to become too burdened with too many costs/unnecessary costs that are associated with over-reaching oneself – physically and otherwise – which though at times may look attractive but is fraught with grave danger to a state like China, by China’s even looking closer to home, to South Korea ( which though – from an international relations perspective – may also have to be seen as a sign of telling that is sugestive that China is, to some extent, backing the South Korean Government in its troubles with its North Korean ally). See the internet story: China Doubles Korea Bond Holding as Asia Switches from Dollar, on Bloomberg.com

    But, what is even more interesting ( or disturbing ), depending on how one looks at it, is this particular subject – this time- of foreign investment inflows into China. A check with certain internet information does show too that, even though Chinese FDI is robustly growing in the US, NOT including so-called investing by Chinese in US Government paper now, there is in contrast with the great amount of Chinese FDI that is happening in the USA, totally insufficient American Foreign Direct Investment into China.

    Let us see how.

    First of all, though, according to the electronic document – Foreign Investment in China – February 2007 – whereas, overall Foreign Direct Investment ( from all countries) stood during 2006, at US $ 69.5 billion, Non-financial FDI flows into China (from all countries), during 2006, stood at US $ 63 billion.

    But, let us quickly look now, David, at the USA’s FDI trend taking place in China. This document rather shockingly shows that the United States of America placed fourth with a total of US $ 2.87 billion in FDI, during 2006, out of all the countries from which such investment would have come from into China, during that time.

    And, what an ugly trend from the country that is supposed to be so rich, money wise and resources wise, and that have so many powerful wealthy multinational corporations emerging out of it – like Walmart, Mac Donald’s, IMB, ExxonMobil, and that invest in so many countries??

    Well, given that the USA is China’s biggest export market in 2009; that the USA is China’s fourth largest supplier of goods and services in 2009 (according to US-China Trade Statistics and China’s World Trade Statistics); that China is the USA’s second biggest trading partner (according to wikipedia.org) ; and given that China is now the EU’s 2nd trading partner behind the USA and the biggest source of imports, and that the EU is China’s biggest trading partner ( according to European Commission:Trade: China (Bilateral Relations) – last updated 25 June 2010 – and furthermore given that China is replacing America as many other countries’ biggest trading partner, and given too that China has very vast and perhaps unrivalled non-oil production resources capacities, potentialities, it must mean therefore that the only damn ways the USA’s and its surrogates will stop China from becoming the no 1 economy of this world,

    1) if they win this ongoing “war” between themselves and China.

    2) if many of those conditions that would seriously break out or that would become seriously aggravated sufficient to properly displace or destroy the internal organization of the Chinese state/government, or weaken or undermine the wider main Chinese social political structures, or create independence for the different political ethnic, and religious regions of China from the centralized Chinese state and thereby the Chinese polity, and that would in the final analysis were such that they would help prevent it – in whatever combinations – from becoming a greater global power or ever remotely becoming a global superpower, must then be such that they too would help prevent China from becoming the no 1 economy of this world.

    3) And if other countries in which China is now investing so heavily in, recognize the subtle brand of imperialism expansionism that China is engaging in, and therefore do decide to point the guns in their faces instead, thus causing them to go some what in retreat for a very long time .

    Otherwise, this idea or greater reality that Chinese investments in US or in Western financial products, could ever remotely “curtail China’s march to #1 in 3-40 years which has been projected.”, would terribly be based on entire gamut of horrendous miscalculations, and vortex of headless misconceptions.

    So, let us say in bringing this PDC piece to a conclusion, that what the Chinese fear very much, that the value of its US securities were to plummet, were to come true, it stands to reckon that the USA would lose out far more tremendously than China would, given the advantages that these things help bring to the USA economy and society, as is clear from some of the relevant points made earlier up in this commentary.

    It is clear too that in this “war” that the USA is locked in such a battle with China, so intense and far reaching, that if it were to keep firing away what little ammunition it has left, it will find itself soon running out of ammunition that it should have for the rest of the battles that lie ahead, and will have to turn frantically for assistance from Europe against the Chinese – who will inevitably be beaten by them.

    PDC


  10. Your 2008 figure of Chinese US paper of $1.2 trillion, did indeed rise to $1.5 trillion but I think the big sell off has begun.
    I believe the current reported Chinese holding is now half its peak, somewhere around $745 billion.
    If these figures are correct they have caused the US to issue paper to the equivalent of over US$2,500 dollars per citizen to repay the debt.


  11. @PDC

    Appreciate your well researched response. Yes you mentioned the move by China to respond to inherent risk caused by its significant exposure in the US market. However the number remains significant and the runaway US deficit which prompts the USA to print money will only have the effect of contracting the future value of the Chinese investment. The point that such an occurrence will weaken other economies which feed on the US economy is not good news for global markets.


  12. David,

    You are right, of course.

    The last argument you raised above actually does essentially show that with this concept and practice of interdependence basically defining the level of connection among most so-called economies of this world, there is also much more than that and the usual asymmetric behaviour by an imperialist power/country that is called for, and that is required, for any imperialist power to become a global superpower – if it harbours any intentions of becoming that way.

    Hence, what is fundamentally called for, or what is required more than a propective emergent actual global superpower having, say, the normal asymmetrical political power holds over many other countries, is the capacity to prepare for and present the actual outlines of its own spheres of influence, and therefore to provide dictation to those countries falling within its spheres of influence about what they should do or should not do or what they are expected to do or expected to not do – in a realist sense – in an international relations/international political economy sense based on the promulgation of “standards”, expressed or deduced, consistent with what ever foreign policy doctrines or philosophies or programs by this prospective, emergent or actual global superpower.

    Well, notwithstanding the fact that the Chinese are NOT a colonial or colonizing power, they must nevertheless though – as the country that holds the balance of power in Asia – see to it that – if they want to be taken seriously by many people across the world including geo-political/ international relations strategists (NOT US INCLUDED ), as being on this path towards becoming a global superpower, they must set about to, or must delineate and possess their own spheres of influence and must dictate to countries within them – more often than not – what the rules of business conduct in these spheres are and the behaviour that is expected.

    These are a few of the fundamental necessaries of behaving as any serious imperialist nation would, and China must realize that it is no exception to this standard.( the China – Taiwan issue cannot however be placed in this context primarily because it is seen AS A PROVINCE OF CHINA by the Chinese government).

    Moreover, such spheres are needed because they will not just give rise to national security issues ( for the prospective/emergent/recognized global super power), and will not just demonstrate to all other countries – including those countries within them – who is the real power/influence in these spheres, to the exclusion of any other superpower or great powers (US Monroe Doctrine, US Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, etc) – BUT will ALSO answer, among other questions, trading and investment questions definitively – almost in the manner as like NOT saying the following but meaning it in whatever ways, many times over: we ( the Chinese) provide you ( the imagined countries within its spheres of influence) with security against any external threats to your survival, so you must purchase many of our goods and services, and we expect you to do so, or you will be disapproved of or sanctioned in whatever ways (standards).

    Therefore, what those considerations in the immediately aforegoing paragraph ( Chinese/creating spheres of influence) do really highlight is how a superpower can go about setting in place a definite goods and services markets for itself and its people, and how as a result of that situation other situations will arise whereby there are serious imbalances in trade between the prospective/actual global superpower and the countries that fall within its sphere of influence.

    A check with an online website that is owned by the United States International Trade Commission, would imply how, as a partial consequence of the rise of the United States of America as a global superpower, countries like Barbados, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, St. Lucia, etc. – all former British colonies up to their time of independence – have been placed in positions whereby they presently have very adverse balance of trade (merchandize) relationships with the USA.

    For instance, according to this website, which cites figures about USA Trade Balance, by partner country in 2009, Barbados exported US $32.6 million worth of merchandise goods in 2009, while in the same year it imported US $367.4 worth of merchandize goods from the USA, thus leaving a so-called visible trade deficit of US $334.8 million. Jamaica, according to this information too, exported US $ $454.0 worth of merchandize goods to the USA in 2009, while in that same year, importing US $1,366.6 million worth of the same category of goods, thus leaving a so-called visible trade deficit of US $ 912.6 million.

    These countries respond to these adverse situations by putting excessive emphases on Tourism, which itself is seen as an invisible trade within their GDPs, and by encouraging many FDI inflows, which will be reflected in their balance of payment accounts.

    Such spheres of influence ( ideationally or actually) must also straddle the concept of a relative peace that is enforced by the prospective or actual global superpower that possesses the balance of power within a given hemisphere or regional sphere, and must also involve the generation of social political cultural conditions and themes that are conducive to greater trade and investment between the prospective or actual global superpower and esp. those within its spheres of influence, and other countries. Thus, these spheres of influence/ relatively peaceful conditions are some of the conditions that had helped to define Pax Britannica – and that are now still helping to define Pax Americana, which is itself clearly now too on the decrease. –

    Such behaviour by 20th 21 century global superpowers, and from compliant states, does even have echoes from in those past times, when Britain – as a colonial power – during the plantation enslavement period – dictated that its colonies only traded with it, and no other countries.

    So, without a Pax Chinana (call it that)( which however will NEVER be), there will be NO Chinese global superpower. The idea of a Pax Chinana somehow contradicts such notions that this is the Chinese century.

    Indeed, the fact that the Chinese have as yet to engage in the provoking of many wars ( the type of people that most of them are – are very conservative, peaceful, internalized disciplined people – precludes aggressive truculent military expansionism) suggest that without military expansionism there will be no Pax Chinana – which again fundamentally conflicts with the notion that this century is the Chinese century, and suggest conclusively that the world have in its hands a China that wishes to be global superpower, but without the characteristics of waging bellicose belligerent expansionist militarism on many other countries.

    It is like wanting to reign but not wanting to exercise that power in order to reign.

    But, the fact that many Chinese have so wrongly felt that, in this continuous process of the building of this possible global Chinese empire, greater material financial expansionism across the world must, for them, instead be seen as the central defining feature of this global empire building process of theirs, rather than this political colonial or military expansionism that has long been one of the centrally defining feature of Western imperial building – is clearly utmostly, for the PDC, a case of their misplacement of feelings over certain fundamental facts.

    And, so, while the Chinese are insistent that it would be worse to build a global empire of theirs with political colonial military occupations involved, but are equally insistent that it would be better to do so on political economic financial grounds, what is still clearly obvious to the PDC though is that – whatever approaches are taken to achieve global empire – it cannot be denied that the costs to the imperial power of whatever forms of imperialism will be huge and staggering – and that over time they will be bound to vastly out weigh the benefits to the imperial power, and esp. if there is the actual overreaching of the limits of the imperial boundaries to provide for itself and its people.

    So, what will be made clearer and faster to the Chinese than it has ever been made to the British of the British empire, the Americans of the American empire, the Russians of the former Soviet Empire, is the fact that these greater global Chinese imperialist tendencies and ambitions, which are invariably based on the goals and objectives of an exploitative, accumulatist, expansionist capitalist industrial financial elite class in China, and which are bound to be likened muchly to those of capitalist industrial financial elites in those caucasian dominated British, American, Soviet empires, will eventually be frustrated far earlier far more faster than in those other mentioned empires, principally because the Chinese are building A MATERIAL FINANCIAL EMPIRE that is fundamentally constrained already by their own substantial political, historical, linguistic, cultural, spiritual differences with the majority of peoples of this world, and by the geographical vastness and social structural complexities of the country, and the distance to reach it.

    For, at this very early stage in the building of this possible bigger global Chinese empire across the world, we in Barbados and elsewhere are discovering a lesser material financial empire building process that is already subjected very much to the vagaries of a financial pragmatism as evidenced by what you, David, typewrote in the above August 20, 2010, 2:51 pm blog, and by the facts of the process being interfered with by these normal skirmishes with the USA in this oingoing “war””.

    And what is worse, is that, RATHER THAN USING NEW AND OLD SAME AND DIFFERENT EFFECTIVE COMBINATIONS OF IDEAS, PRACTICES AND PROGRAMS OF A SOCIAL POLITICAL COLONIAL MILITARY MATERIAL FINANCIAL NATURE TO HELP BUILD/ACHIEVE A GLOBAL CHINESE EMPIRE, AND USING NEW AND OLD SAME AND DIFFERENT COMBINATIONS OF METHODS OF THE SAME NATURE TO SUSTAIN SUCH AN EMPIRE, THESE CHINESE ARE USING NEW AND OLD SAME AND DIFFERENT COMBINATIONS OF IDEAS, PRACTICES, PROGRAMS, METHODS OF A POLITICAL ECONOMIC FINANCIAL NATURE TO ATTEMPT TO BUILD THIS WIDER GLOBAL CHINESE EMPIRE.

    So, in putting the cart before the horse, the Chinese are bound to be in a situation wherefore they have to be in financial retreat in some ways as you, David, Straight talk, the PDC and many others on this BU blog and elsewhere have recognized through their seeking the get the rid of much of the debt that it is holding for the US.

    Addendum – some of the centrally defining features of British imperialism were – many territories settled and colonized for purposes of the extraction of resources asset riches for the elites in the colonial power shemes – the use of the English language, education, history and religion to ensure that subjects under British rule were cognizant of things British – some of the centralling defining features of American imperialism are – fewer territories conquered and colonized than under British imperialism – but almost all countries subject to American hegemony, culture, and to the psychologies financial practices of American multinational corporations, American FDI which enter countries for the same or similar exploitatist accumulatist expansionist purposes – many international organizations or multi-lateral institutional bodies subject to outright or covert American control and domination – for the achievement of such same imperialist purposes – the Soviet kind – which was bound to have been as short lived as it was – based on instilling fear in conquered peoples, through state terroristic surveillance tactics, military might, and worst too on ensuring maximum conformity compliance from those people to/with marxist/leninist/stalinist, so-called communist ideals, and on the contrary, not inviting substantial cooperation with those peoples, or even giving them any greater autonomy.

    Does Chinese imperialism compare in any serious way with any of the above imperialisms??

    PDC


  13. @PDC

    Missed this comment.

    Agree that China is poised to be the* economic power only if those with the military might allow it i.e. USA/NATO etc. The changing of the guards as far as super powers go, let history reflect it usually is associated with wheeling military power.

    We shall see!


  14. American is not Dumb. Just for the moment passing the gravy train along for others to sample. With all the political power america have they can’t removed it ay any time. Nobody outsmart america a country not to be underestimated. As for China they goods and service sucks and if they continue on that path that would be another step to their downfall. Lets see how long they can remain #2 before america starts pulling the rug from under them.


  15. @ac

    Do you understand that China owns a significant chunk of US treasuries?

    The ownership extends to private sector.

    The USA has to be very careful about how it manages the Sino relationship, in fact China must do the same. Both their economies which has been discussed above is very much interconnected. It is one reason the USA had to back off at the recent G7 Summit in Canada regarding pressure for China to adjust the pricing of its currency. USA switched to a model of outsourcing to create capacity or food for its capitalist system and it has come back to bite them in the pooch. For the short and medium term they must treat China like a brother it dearly loves.


  16. @David
    Do you know who the owns and controls the wealth of America! You think they going to sit back and let China take it.


  17. You are correct and it is why it will make for interesting theatre.


  18. @ PDC,

    I am surprised that you did not receive more comments on your blog.

    Did you know that “Chinese nationals (living in Surinam) are now estimated to control around 90% of the country’s supermarkets, small grocery stores and food shops. All the main parties in the recent election fielded a prominently placed candidate of Chinese heritage” ?

    The yellow peril has arrived in our region and looks set to dominate our region economically, politically, culturally and demographically.

    In the words of a young Chinese girl who was been interviewed: ” “We had to learn Dutch and Sranan Tongo [Suriname creole], cope with the violence, the climate too. But we’d never leave now.” Chilling!


  19. Exclaimer

    Thanks for resurrecting this blog.

    Very timely

    Cahill is shopping its 30 year WTE contract to Chinese companies.

    Government (DEMS) wants Chinese to resurrect Sam Lords.

    China taking a delegation to study agriculture in China

    Senator Maxine has regular meeting (photo ops) with Ambassador

    China puts on Fish and Dragon Festival

    Confucius Institute at UWI Cave Hill

    Welcome to Chinados

  20. De Ingrunt Word Avatar
    De Ingrunt Word

    Considering the fact that China is the most populace country and will eventually be the greatest economic power we either look at these matters with fear and become assimilated as a ‘Borg drone’ or we learn Mandarin, adapt and interface with the powerful Borg as our friends.

    Have we not been doing the same with the US super power for generations!

    ‘Resistance [for resistance] sake is futile”.


  21. @ De Ingrunt Word June 23, 2015 at 4:48 PM,

    Let us hope that our new soon-to-be Chinese masters are of the benevolent type.

    We will see how events unfold. Sadly, I remain deeply pessimistic.

    Your last sentence had me stumped:

    ‘Resistance [for resistance] sake is futile’

    Time for me to retire. I’m off to bed.

    @ Due Dilligence,

    You should take up De Word’s advice and learn some mandarin. Who can resist the Great Bear?


  22. @Exclaimer June 23, 2015 at 5:45 PM

    “Who can resist the Great Bear?”

    Or the Dragon?

    The Flying Fish?.

  23. De Ingrunt Word Avatar
    De Ingrunt Word

    Exclaimer, actually it was incorrectly written. It should have been ” ‘Resistance [for resistance sake] is futile’..

    As you know the Borg are a Star Trek race who assimilate all those they conquer; so not dissimilar to the descriptions above re the Chinese actions.

    I simply added a few words to Borg motto “Resistance if futile”. The Chinese will be the top economic power so to resist that is a futile endeavor.


  24. “Forty-year-old meat seized as China breaks up smuggling gangs – reports

    More than 100,000 tonnes of frozen chicken wings, beef and pork – some decades old – seized in the nationwide crackdown”

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/24/forty-year-old-meat-seized-as-china-breaks-up-smuggling-gangs-reports


  25. Not to worry

    China just trying help Barbados

    See its propaganda machine at.

    http://bb.china-embassy.org/eng/dszl/dszc/

    “Welcome to the website of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Barbados.

    China, as one of the Four Great Ancient Civilizations, has a long history and brilliant cultures. Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, particularly since the reform and opening up, China has made remarkable achievements, invigorating its ancient history with youthful vigor.

    Barbados, well-known as the paradise island and tourist resort in the area where the Caribbean meets the Atlantic, is playing an important role in the region.

    Since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1977, China and Barbados have enjoyed friendly relations with strengthened political trust, deepened practical cooperation and expanded cultural exchanges. The Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Barbados is committed to promoting the sustainable and sound growth of the relations between China and Barbados, as well as the exchanges and cooperation between the two peoples.

    We will make effort to provide needed information and services to make this website a window for understanding China and China-Barbados relations and a bridge for friendship between the Chinese and Barbadian people.”

    Great website

    Suggest that the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Barbados could help GIS and other Government entities with their websites.


  26. $18m gym upgrade
    Trevor Yearwood,
    Added 24 June 2015

    THE GYMNASIUM of the Garfield Sobers Sports Complex – Barbados’ premier indoor sports facility – is getting an $18.4 million upgrade.

    The complex, which over the years has catered to swimmers, hockey players, netballers, footballers, boxers, basketballers, table tennis players, gymnasts and bodybuilders, is also diversifying its offerings, with a sports café and networking centre, a skate park and road tennis facility among the considerations.

    Minister of Sport Stephen Lashley said in the House of Assembly yesterday that the “full renovation” of the Gymnasium, which had its share of problems including a leaky roof, was being undertaken by the government of China from next April as “a gift to the people of Barbados”.

    When I read the aboveNation story about the $18m gym upgrade, my thoughts were not entirely positive.

    Indeed, my thoughts were expressed by tonywebsterbarbados far more eloquently than I could.

    tonywebsterbarbados • 4 hours ago

    I venture to re-cast this news-item….subject to correction, of course, from the “relevant authorities:-

    Knowing the depth of the Chinese well-spring of human kindess ( I nearly said “deeply-devout Christian hearts”)…we have begged the Chinese Communist Party folks for $18M …and they have graciously consented. They have (in the absence of any fact, indication, or intimation even , to the contrary)…not asked for a even bowl of noodles, in return.

    This re-build/ renovation/ shall be marked by a Great Chinese Celebration, in the Year of The Rat, to much “ratmattazzz”; clanging cymbals; Chinese fireworks; and Great Balls of Fire in the East …all signalling a Great Event in the year of Our Lord, 2018. A Short man shall rise to Great Heights…providing that the new sequel movie “Sam Lord Rises Again” makes it into the movie-theatrers in time.
    No, rest easy…they are NOT building a large, hollow, horse fasioned from Trojan Wood, at the Garfield Sobers Sports Complex…but then again…our friends from the Far East are very, very, clever people. And their “horizon”…in the Year Of Our lord 2015, would extend waaaaaaay beyond the year of Our Lord, 2018.

    Did I say that they are very clever people?

    Q.E.D. (That which is not said, but has to be figured-out for yuh-self)


  27. Interesting developments in Zimbabwe.

    “Zimbabwe to make Chinese yuan legal currency after Beijing cancels debts Yuan becomes the latest currency to be approved for public transactions in Zimbabwe, as the southern African nation seeks to increase trade with Beijing ”

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/22/zimbabwe-to-make-chinese-yuan-legal-currency-after-beijing-cancels-debts

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

    Trending

    Discover more from Barbados Underground

    Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

    Continue reading