Originally posted by Luap
Sorry, but your “source” is the national newspaper of China – in other words, the PRC’s propaganda. That article paints a lovely picture of
the Chinese “president,” but it seems to ignore a lack of civil liberties and the horrid, unequal conditions of Chinese society.
I think most of this criticism of China originates in the MSM. Regardless of the source of this article it aligns with the overt international
presence of China.
You are equating civil liberties and social conditions to international relations (which is what the article discussed). China has some internal
issues - but has been very consistent with its international policies of diplomacy and lack of military aggression.
Your assessment of China is very skewed - lets raise the topic of aggressive wars of conquest - how does it compare to the US or UK?
It is worthwhile understanding how China has managed a huge area of culturally diverse people for thousands of years within a set of borders that is
all but static.
How is this achieved? The Chinese model has always been for a relatively weak central government, and local domains to have high levels of executive
control. Despite what most people think - this is still the prevailing model in China.
Due to the influence of western agents and ideas, the degree's of freedom have been reduced to ensure a national identity is maintained. While the
main factor in maintaining the national identity in China has generally been ethnicity - it has existed for so long, that a slow movement towards
cultural homogenization has occurred.
The inequality in the US far exceeds that of China.
I've been researching this issue but can't find anything on it. I honestly believe that the Chinese elite would not cooperate with the American NWO
elite. Just look at things today on the U.N. Security Council. Russia and China versus the others. I'll keep looking and make a post when I find
something.
Of course the national elite have troubles with each other, but then again, the national elite aren’t necessarily the ones pushing for a change of
the political and economic landscape. The UN Security Council doesn’t necessarily represent the wishes of a country’s elite, either, nor can we
look to the statements of politicians and ambassadors for such representation.
The UN security council represents the future executive branch of the NWO, and certainly it would represent those ruling powers (the elites as you
call them).
Through observations of its voting patterns, it can be established with a fair degree of certainty that China and Russia do not share the same command
structure as the western countries - in other words, the controllers of China and Russia have different goals to the western NWO.
There are national “elite,” per se, but they are not the ones holding true wealth and power in the modern world. Our world now is comprised of
international systems and supranational organizations, and the individuals and families in control of these organs are those that are perpetrating
what I see to be a new world order. Their loyalty does not adhere to a particular nation or flag – it lies with the international flow of currency
and the workings of the world market.
While your observations generally align with mine - I am also of the opinion that the Chinese controllers are extremely loyal to their country and
ethnicity.
Perhaps the Russian oligarchs are happy to use Russia as a tool and destroy it - the Chinese I feel have a different set of values.
If I would like one set of powers to come out on top - in light of past performance and future plans and possibilities - I think I would prefer the
Chinese (as opposed to the Europeans or Russians).
The Chinese version of depopulation seems to be one child per family, compared to the western NWO plan of pandemics, starvation and war.
The Chinese method to extend control is diplomacy and buying resources - rather than the western NWO approach of military aggression and forced
economic disruption.
The Chinese response to international lawlessness is reprimand, and demand for trial - the western version is either violent regime change (if an
adversary), or cover ups (if an ally).
The Chinese advocate their population buy silver and gold in face of economic difficulty - the western NWO increase taxes and debts.
Despite their rather authoritarian government - it seems to be done more openly and honestly than the brutal methods the western NWO have used, and
seem to be planning.
[edit on 25-10-2009 by Amagnon]