By Mark Stern
It is my belief that it is critical to alter the image of China presented by the Democratic and Republican parties in order to minimize war.
First, the notion that the US is democratic and China is autocratic is harmful when the reality it that one can argue China is more, albeit differently democratic than the US. The US is an oligarchy, not a democracy. The US is an oligarchy {you sure this needed repeating?}. Monied interests determine policy, particularly on economic matters. While ultimate decisions in China are made by the party elite, it is usually after engaging local communities in discussions.
In China there are corporations, but the state exercises considerable control over them. In the US corporations exercise considerable control over the government.
Furthermore, China is largely for the people, however it arrives at that result. The result is that China has eliminated most extreme poverty in a conscious effort over the last decade or two {By becoming the world’s workshop, right?}. There is no homelessness; indeed, there is a glut of housing. There is little or no unemployment. China provides universal health care, free education, and housing. The US does little of that. Instead, it expends its resources on military spending and its “manifest destiny.”{this phrase needs some sort of explanation—at least in a footnote}
As for global warming, China is a major polluter, but far behind the US despite having a much larger population. It has effective high-speed transit and electric cars. While it is the no. 2 polluter, it is working to address that, while the US is headed in the other direction.
As for overseas military bases, the US has more than 600; they encircle both China and Russia, who together have about 40. The US has been perpetually at war for 90% of its 240 years. And it has used nuclear weapons twice. China has not been at war since Korea and Vietnam, and has never used nuclear weapons. The US military budget dwarfs China’s.
China has not invaded Taiwan. Indeed it anticipates Taiwan will become part of China over time for economic reasons. The US has invaded Iraq, {comma not needed} and Afghanistan in recent times.
China’s investment in other countries has its negative sides, but no more so than the US; and it has been generally regarded with more trust in Africa, and to some degree in Latin America. Furthermore, China does not, for better or worse, discriminate against popular governments, like those in Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia. There are bad aspects to its investments: it brings its own people and in that sense does not develop local people’s skills, and does extract natural resources.
As for treatment of indigenous peoples, China has a mixed record. It enshrines their right in its Consitution, but also tries to indoctrinate them into a socialist view of the world. Tibet, for one example, is a semi-autonomous region where the people have education, medical care and education; for all the Dahli {Dalai} Llama crap spouted by liberals, under the {Dalai} Llama’s rule most if not virtually all of the people were feudal serfs, a/k/a slaves.
