+- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Theories Of History (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-7.html)
+--- Thread: Generational Dynamics World View (/thread-51.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 05-17-2020
(05-17-2020, 07:14 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: "There could be a trivial
incident today, tomorrow or the next day, with a small clash between
China and Japan that spirals into a war because of the massive
nationalism and xenophobia on both sides."
Also, the arguments about nuclear weapons don't apply here, since Japan does not have nuclear weapons. China might make the assumption that the US wouldn't use nuclear weapons to defend Japan.
I still think it's more likely that China will see an internal war, though, which would presumably not be nuclear.
I have a separate question: at one point in response to a question from me, I think you said Russia had been moved from the WWI time line to the WWII time line by WWII. Is that still your view - that Russia is now on the WWII time line?
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-18-2020
** 18-May-2020 World View: Stock futures surge on Moderna vaccine news
Stock futures are soaring this morning on the news that a vaccine
developed by drug maker Moderna has seen positive results in a phase I
trial. Only eight participants were involved in the phase I trial,
but the results were far better than results from phase 1 trials
conducted by other companies so far.
Moderna started working on its Covid-19 vaccine as soon as Chinese
scientists put out the gene sequence for the virus in January. By late
February, Moderna’s scientists had already delivered the first batch
of candidate vaccines to researchers at the U.S. National Institutes
of Health. In mid-March, the first healthy patient received a dose in
the government-sponsored safety trial. (Bloomberg)
A phase 2 trial will begin right away, and a phase 3 trial is
scheduled for July.
The Trump administration "Warp Speed" policy is for the federal
government to fund manufacturing millions of doses of a test vaccine,
even while testing is underway, so that the vaccine can be deployed as
quickly as possible, by the end of this year.
There's also an international political furor developing over how any
successful vaccine will be distributed -- and whether it will be
available to developing countries as well as to Western countries.
There's also a suspicion that if China is the first to develop a
vaccine, then they will be unwilling to share it.
The preliminary results with 8 people have been very encouraging,
based on new technology developed by Moderna. Stock futures are
surging this morning, but as we all know, they'll fall just as quickly
if anything goes wrong with the tests.
---- Sources:
-- Early data show Moderna Covid-19 vaccine generates immune response
https://www.statnews.com/2020/05/18/early-data-show-moderna-covid-19-vaccine-generates-immune-response/
(Stat News, 18-May-2020)
-- Coronavirus Vaccine From Moderna Shows Early Signs of Viral Immune
Response
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-18/vaccine-from-moderna-shows-early-signs-of-viral-immune-response
(Bloomberg, 18-May-2020)
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Bob Butler 54 - 05-18-2020
(05-17-2020, 09:11 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Also, the arguments about nuclear weapons don't apply here, since Japan does not have nuclear weapons. China might make the assumption that the US wouldn't use nuclear weapons to defend Japan.
It still involves a sea war with the US, which would not be in China's interests. It would become a question of whether they are looking against their interests that strongly, or if the incident that provoked the question was that serious. Frankly, I don't see it.
(05-17-2020, 09:11 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I still think it's more likely that China will see an internal war, though, which would presumably not be nuclear.
Protests, definitely. Would the Chinese let it develop into an all out war without acknowledging the people? Again, China was in a world of hurt between the Opium Wars and Great Leap Forward. They are very reluctant to enter such a period of prolonged chaos again. Give all due weight to the desire of the Reds to remain in power, but how do you avoid escalation is a good question.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - pbrower2a - 05-18-2020
(05-17-2020, 09:11 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:(05-17-2020, 07:14 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: "There could be a trivial
incident today, tomorrow or the next day, with a small clash between
China and Japan that spirals into a war because of the massive
nationalism and xenophobia on both sides."
Also, the arguments about nuclear weapons don't apply here, since Japan does not have nuclear weapons. China might make the assumption that the US wouldn't use nuclear weapons to defend Japan.
I still think it's more likely that China will see an internal war, though, which would presumably not be nuclear.
I have a separate question: at one point in response to a question from me, I think you said Russia had been moved from the WWI time line to the WWII time line by WWII. Is that still your view - that Russia is now on the WWII time line?
Wow! If he made that shift he would be agreeing with me! I see Russia as having been in a protracted Crisis that struck early and hard, and having been multiple waves of disasters beginning with military calamities involving the Tsar's armies, going through a Civil War in which the opposing Red and White sides were similarly bloodthirsty and ruthless, the failed restructuring of a plutocratic economy into a 'socialist' economy, a short respite with Lenin's New Economic Policy (NEP), followed by Stalin's forced collectivization of Soviet agriculture and purges, an abortive abatement as the executioners ran out of victims, and then the Great Patriotic War with the Holocaust in Nazi-occupied sections of the Soviet Union.
Thirty years of crisis apply also to China, as I see it, with the Communist takeover in 1949 putting an end to political chaos. Because Communist takeovers of countries with significant development of capitalism I consider Commie takeovers as Crisis events, typically beginning or closing a Crisis. This is far bigger than, for example, formally ending colonial rule over decades of gradual relaxation but without war, a nation achieving independence (the break-up of Czechoslovakia and most of the Soviet Union are not Crisis events), or abolition or institution of a royal house. (Romanian Commies forcing the abolition of Michael is a Crisis event for what else was going on, but the deposition of Constantine II in Greece is not a Crisis event.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-18-2020
** 18-May-2020 World View: Russia
(05-17-2020, 09:11 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > I have a separate question: at one point in response to a question
> from me, I think you said Russia had been moved from the WWI time
> line to the WWII time line by WWII. Is that still your view - that
> Russia is now on the WWII time line?
Russia's last crisis war was definitely the Bolshevik Revolution, so
it's definitely on the WW I timeline. WW II was definitely an
Awakening era war for Russia.
I think what you're referring to is a suggestion by David Kaiser that
the Nazi invasion of Russia was so brutal that it destroyed an entire
generation, so was like a crisis war for Russia. I have some sympathy
for that suggestion, since it's similar to what I would call a "First
Turning reset," when an unexpected invasion occurs prior to the Crisis
era. In that case, the country behaves according to its generational
era, but if the generational relationships have been destroyed, then
the country returns to a First Turning when the war ends.
If Russia were much smaller, then I would fully agree to that
suggestion. But I have my doubts that the First Turning reset option
can occur to a county as large as Russia. Still, there's no doubt
that the Nazi invasion had a major effect on Russia's population.
As far as the "WW I vs II timeline," those are just phrases of
convenience, and it doesn't really matter which group you assign
Russia to, since they're all going to merge in WW III anyway.
For convenience, I tend to think of the "WW I timeline" as being
Russia and the Mideast, and "WW II timeline" as being the West, even
though some countries don't fall neatly into those categories.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 05-18-2020
(05-18-2020, 07:52 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: As far as the "WW I vs II timeline," those are just phrases of
convenience, and it doesn't really matter which group you assign
Russia to, since they're all going to merge in WW III anyway.
It matters if you think the WW I timeline for Russia means the fall of the Soviet Union and the installation of Putin were a Crisis. If Russia is in a second turning, the reaction will be different than if they're in a fourth turning.
Quote:For convenience, I tend to think of the "WW I timeline" as being
Russia and the Mideast, and "WW II timeline" as being the West, even
though some countries don't fall neatly into those categories.
China and Japan are part of the West? They're definitely on the WWII timeline.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-18-2020
** 18-May-2020 World View: The West
(05-18-2020, 08:14 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > It matters if you think the WW I timeline for Russia means the
> fall of the Soviet Union and the installation of Putin were a
> Crisis. If Russia is in a second turning, the reaction will be
> different than if they're in a fourth turning.
I have no idea what this means.
(05-18-2020, 08:14 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > China and Japan are part of the West? They're definitely on the
> WWII timeline.
Now that we've decided that we can't agree on the WW I timeline, we
have to worry about whether we agree on the meaning of "West." Ever
since the Anglo-Japanese alliance and Anglo-Japanese treaties of the
early 1900s, I actually think of Japan as being part of the "West."
Once again, we're talking about terms of convenience, that are
imprecise and can change meanings from time to time.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Bob Butler 54 - 05-19-2020
(05-18-2020, 09:27 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(05-18-2020, 08:14 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: China and Japan are part of the West? They're definitely on the WWII timeline.
Now that we've decided that we can't agree on the WW I timeline, we have to worry about whether we agree on the meaning of "West." Ever since the Anglo-Japanese alliance and Anglo-Japanese treaties of the early 1900s, I actually think of Japan as being part of the "West."
Once again, we're talking about terms of convenience, that are imprecise and can change meanings from time to time.
I could agree with the term, but not the date of the switchover. Japan remained autocratic, warlike and blatantly xenophobic until the cultural reboot at the end of World War II. Well, we were blatantly xenophobic too before that point. Japan was actually ahead of us for a while in switching to the racial part of the Information Age values.
Still, there is a reason that Japan was with the Axis.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-20-2020
** 20-May-2020 World View: Japan and the West
(05-18-2020, 09:27 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: > Ever since the Anglo-Japanese alliance and Anglo-Japanese treaties
> of the early 1900s, I actually think of Japan as being part of the
> "West."
(05-19-2020, 10:43 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: > I could agree with the term, but not the date of the switchover.
> Japan remained autocratic, warlike and blatantly xenophobic until
> the cultural reboot at the end of World War II. Well, we were
> blatantly xenophobic too before that point. Japan was actually
> ahead of us for a while in switching to the racial part of the
> Information Age values.
Yeah, there was lots of xenophobia prior to WW II. There was American
xenophobia directed at the Japanese, as you suggest.
Japanese xenophobia was largely directed at China, and that had been
going on for centuries. But it's not much different from the
three-way xenophobia in Europe among England, Germany and France that
had also gone on for centuries.
You may say, "Oh, but those Japanese colonized Korea for 50 years."
But then you'd have to think about the "Scramble for Africa," when
European countries competed with each other to colonize the different
parts of Africa. Japan was just doing what everyone else was doing.
Large scale colonization didn't really end until the 1960s, when it
finally fell out of fashion.
So if Japan wasn't a "Western" country prior to WW II, then neither
were Nazi Germany and other European countries.
When I was writing my book, I was determined to understand what was
going on with China's "Century of Humiliation" and "unfair treaties."
What I wanted to figure out why Japan also didn't suffer a "Century of
Humiliation," since they were treated in much the same way by the
West, including "unfair treaties."
The answer, I concluded, was that there was a fork in the road around
the year 1900, and China took one path and Japan took the other path.
The path that China took was the Boxer Rebellion, where they declared
economic war on the entire world, particularly on the West, and
declared all Western religions to be enemies of China. The path that
Japan took was to join the Anglo-Japanese alliance and sign the
Anglo-Japanese treaties, which made Japan part of the West,
diplomatically and economically.
From my book:
Quote:> "Diplomatically, China declared war on the world in
> 1900 through the Boxer Rebellion, blaming their poor economic
> situation on Christianity and other foreign influences.
> But Japan went in the opposite direction signing, in January 1902,
> a treaty with Britain called the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. The
> Japanese public were unrestrainedly overjoyed by this treaty,
> because it proved that Japan had emerged from its feudalism to
> become a major international member, worthy of an alliance with a
> European power. They saw it an offensive-defensive alliance
> (koshu domei) in the same mold as the Franco-Russian alliance and
> the triple alliance of Germany, Austria and Italy, except that its
> bounds were unlimited.
> You can argue about the motivations of Britain and Japan in making
> this alliance -- Japan wanted agreement with its commercial
> concessions in Korea and China, while Britain wanted to use the
> alliance as a lever to prevent Japanese militarism and
> expansionism. And you can argue about the motivations of China in
> declaring war on the world in the Boxer Rebellion. But whatever
> the motivations, this moment confirms a major contention of this
> book, that Japan consistently and repeatedly defeated China in
> international diplomacy."
(05-19-2020, 10:43 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: > Still, there is a reason that Japan was with the Axis.
Not because the Japanese gave a shit about Naziism, but because
Japan's enemies were also Germany's enemies, including Britain, Russia
and America.
In my book, I quoted an article written by Bertrand Russell in 1922:
Quote:> "The Japanese are firmly persuaded that they have no
> friends, and that the Americana are their implacable foes. One
> gathers that the Government regards war with America as
> unavoidable in the long run. The argument would be that the
> economic imperialism of the United States will not tolerate the
> industrial development of a formidable rival in the Pacific, and
> that sooner or later the Japanese will be presented with the
> alternative of dying by starvation or on the battlefield. Then
> Bushido will come into play, and will lead to choice of the
> battlefield in preference to starvation. Admiral Sato (the
> Japanese Bernhardi, as he is called) maintains that absence of
> Bushido [Bushido is the code of honor and morals developed by the
> Japanese samurai] in the Americans will lead to their defeat, and
> that their money-grubbing souls will be incapable of enduring the
> hardships and privations of a long war. This, of course, is
> romantic nonsense. Bushido is no use in modern war, and the
> Americans are quite as courageous and obstinate as the Japanese. A
> war might last ten years, but it would certainly end in the defeat
> of Japan."
This is similar to some of the things that Chinese nationalists say
today -- and indeed what many leftists say today about America.
Japan entered a Fourth Turning generational Crisis era in 1926, and
became highly nationalistic and xenophobic after that. It was
particularly triggered by the Smoot-Hawley act. After that, Japan
invaded Manchuria (which, let's recall, was an invasion of China), and
began preparing for full-scale war with China.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Bob Butler 54 - 05-20-2020
I would argue that it was China losing the Opium Wars while Japan won against Russia. That put the two countries in opposite roles in colonialism. China was cemented as oppressed, while Japan became a colonizer. With these things happening around ‘the early 1900s’ I have no argument with your time frame.
I would say colonialism faded a little earlier than the 1960s. After World War II the United States offered to forgive Lend Lease if the colonial mother countries opened up their ports. Everybody took the offer, though it doesn’t seem to take a large part in the history books in why colonialism ended. That doomed the old colonialism. It took a while for the old mother countries to release their colonial relationships, for the former colonies to become fully independent, but that was when the big change came. Colonies were no longer a source of cheap raw materials and a guaranteed market while the mother country held the manufacturing. The shipping profits were no longer guaranteed to the mother country. That is the old Industrial Age pattern with respect to colonialism. The key was the closed ports. Eventually, the manufacturing jobs went to the former colonies to take advantage of the cheap labor. The echoes of the old colonial system linger yet.
'Western' and ‘The West’ are really undefined terms. I’ve no real problem with everyone creating their own definition. I see several waves, mostly dependent on adapting the Enlightenment values of democracy, human rights and equality. The British started the original wave, and it spread to their various colonies. The French Revolution and Napoleon started another wave, but France and much of the area Napoleon held for a time was not a reliable democracy right away. By the Enlightenment virtues standard, they took a rockier road. Germany was still autocratic going into World War II, and it took West Germany to really adapt truly Enlightenment values at wars end, and East Germany with the reunification. Catholic south Europe and South America have a separate and generally slower path than the British or French ones, which I have not really followed that much. Japan had their reboot after World War II. Hong Kong has a messy situation.
But you seem to have your own interests, so I wouldn’t expect you to concentrate on the same things.
This conversation has made a little clearer how stepping out of the Industrial Age pattern has several semi independent aspects. There is xenophobia, the Enlightenment values, the colonial aspect, and each could turn at independent times. The Reformation had something to do with it, splitting the Catholic south off of the Protestant north and helping to create the Protestant work ethic which became part of the Industrial Revolution which in turn fed off colonial exploitation. There are many areas to focus on, and you can easily get off either focusing too much or too little. People focusing on different things would naturally come up with different definitions.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-21-2020
*** 22-May-20 World View -- China to pass law threaening full control of Hong Kong
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
- China to pass law threaening full control of Hong Kong
- Mike Pompeo harshly criticizes the CCP as a 'brutal, authoritarian regime'
- China puts 100 million people under lockdown, as possible virus mutation emerges
****
**** China to pass law threaening full control of Hong Kong
****
![[Image: g200521b.jpg]](http://Media.GenerationalDynamics.com/ww2010/g200521b.jpg)
Annual Hong Kong vigil on June 4, 2019, to commemorate the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. (Hong Kong Free Press)
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has run "out of patience" with the
repeated pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong in the last year, and
will pass laws on "Establishing and Improving the Legal System and
Enforcement Mechanisms for Hong Kong to Safeguard National Security."
The law will be discussed on Friday by the National People's Congress
(NPC), and the rubber-stamp NPC is expected to pass it.
Depending on the details, the new laws could mean the complete
repudiation of the "one country, two systems" formula that the CCP
committed to honor in its 1984 agreement with the United Kingdom. The
net of all the new laws is that the CCP is ending any pretense of
meeting its commitments under the agreement.
The laws for Hong Kong will cover secession, foreign interference,
terrorism and subversion against the central government.
Even talking about "secession" is already illegal, and presumably the
new laws will specify even harsher punishment for speaking out.
"Foreign interference" refers to American support of pro-democracy
activists' free speech in Hong Kong, but also refers to Britain's
insistence that the CCP abide by the commitments it made in the 1984
joint declaration treaty to allow freedom of speech and assembly in
Hong Kong and a free press. The treaty is now part of international
law, but the CCP considers itself superior to international law and
not bound by it, although it demands that everyone else be bound by
it. "Terrorism" is the catch-all phrase that dictators and war
criminals use to justify mass arrests or mass slaughter. "Subversion"
refers to any speech or act that the CCP feels threatens it. For
example, even showing a Winnie the Pooh cartoon is considered
subversive, since Xi Jinping looks like Winnie the Pooh.
A top CCP official, Wang Yang, in a speech on Thursday that free
speech in Hong Kong was only permitted to "stop violence and curb
disorder." In describing the new laws, Wang pointedly omitted phrases
frequently used in the past, like "Hong Kong people administering Hong
Kong," nor the city’s "high degree of autonomy."
The CCP has already been cracking down on Hong Kong's pro-democracy
movement since January, by arresting a number of people under vaguely
specified charges. It's believed that the CCP is taking advantage of
the worldwide distraction from the Wuhan Coronavirus (Covid-19)
pandemic crisis to get away with passing this law without any
international reaction.
In addition, the CCP is hoping that the strict enforcement of
social distancing regulations will prevent the large public
demonstrations and riots that occurred last year.
However, the CCP may be underestimating the anger of the Hong Kong
activists, or the support that the international community may be
willing to provide them.
****
**** Mike Pompeo harshly criticizes the CCP as a 'brutal, authoritarian regime'
****
Even before Thursday's announcement, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
threatened to end America's special economic treatment of Hong Kong,
if the CCP did not meet the requirements of the "Hong Kong Human
Rights and Democracy Act of 2019," passed by the US Congress in
November of last year.
That threat was part of an extremely harsh set of criticisms of the
CCP related to the pandemic handling, and CCP threats against
Australia, Taiwan and Hong Kong:
<QUOTE>"I want to begin today with a few observations on
China, because the media’s focus on the current pandemic risks
missing the bigger picture of the challenge that’s presented by
the Chinese Communist Party. First, basic facts. China’s been
ruled by a brutal, authoritarian regime, a communist regime since
1949.
For several decades, we thought the regime would become more like
us through trade, scientific exchanges, diplomatic outreach,
letting them in the WTO as a developing nation. That didn’t
happen.
We greatly underestimated the degree to which Beijing is
ideologically and politically hostile to free nations. The whole
world is waking up to that fact. ...
Second point on the bigger picture: The Chinese Communist Party’s
response to the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan have accelerated our
more realistic understanding of communist China.
The Party chose to destroy live virus samples instead of sharing
them or asking us to help secure them.
The People’s Liberation Army has claimed more features in the
South China Sea’s international waters, sank a Vietnamese fishing
boat, threatened a Malaysian energy prospector, and declared a
unilateral fishing ban. The United States condemns these unlawful
acts.
The Chinese Communist Party chose to threaten Australia with
economic retribution for the simple act of asking for an
independent inquiry into the origins of the virus. It’s not right.
We stand with Australia and the more than 120 nations now who have
taken up the American call for an inquiry into the origins of the
virus, so we can understand what went wrong and save lives now,
and in the future.
The Chinese Communist Party also chose to pressure the World
Health Organization’s director-general into excluding Taiwan from
this week’s World Health Assembly in Geneva. ...
Turning for a moment to Taiwan: I want to say congratulations to
President Tsai on her inauguration. The democratic process in
Taiwan has matured into a model for the world. Despite great
pressure from the outside, Taiwan has demonstrated the wisdom of
giving people a voice and a choice.
In Hong Kong, our decision on whether or not to certify Hong Kong
as having “a high degree of autonomy” from China is still pending.
We’re closely watching what’s going on there.
This week pro-democracy legislators were man-handled while trying
to stop a procedural irregularity by pro-Beijing legislators.
Leading Hong Kong activists like Martin Lee and Jimmy Lai were
hauled into court. Actions like these make it more difficult to
assess that Hong Kong remains highly autonomous from mainland
China."<END QUOTE>
With regarding to Hong Kong, Pompeo was threatening to end America's
special economic treatment of Hong Kong, if the CCP did not meet the
requirements of the "Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of
2019," passed by Congress in November of last year.
The law requires that "Hong Kong must remain sufficiently autonomous
from the People's Republic of China to justify treatment under a
particular law of the United States, or any provision thereof,
different from that accorded the People's Republic of China."
The law requires that the CCP support free elections and "the robust
exercise by residents of Hong Kong of the rights to free speech, the
press, and other fundamental freedoms," and "freedom from arbitrary or
unlawful arrest, detention, or imprisonment for all Hong Kong
residents."
The special economic treatment of Hong Kong grants such things as
tariff-free special access to US markets and easier visa approval,
things are not granted to mainland China. If that treatment is
withdrawn, then Hong Kong will be treated the same as mainland China.
Needless to say, the CCP was infuriated by Pompeo's statements, and
went into their usual acting out expressions of outrage, this
time accusing Pompeo of "blackmailing" the Hong Kong government,
and of blatantly interfering in China's internal affairs.
So it's worth pointing out that Pompeo is only demanding that the CCP
honor commitments that it already made which, or course, is a
laughable concept to the CCP, leaders of the Master Race.
Still, it's hard to overstate how harsh Pompeo's criticisms of the CCP
were. The point is that we're continuing on a long-term trend of
growing hostility between China and the US, with no end in sight.
Chinese and Americans are becoming increasingly xenophobic toward each
other, and this has increased substantially since the pandemic crisis
began.
Long-time Generational Dynamics readers will be aware that this is the
path to war. Due to the mutual belligerence and hostility, a small
military confrontation in the South China Sea or elsewhere could
spiral into a larger and larger war, and engulf other nations. That's
the path that China and the US are on. This will not end well.
****
**** China puts 100 million people under lockdown, as possible virus mutation emerges
****
China has put over 100 million people into renewed lockdown, as major
new virus outbreak clusters have appeared, in a feared "second wave."
The outbreaks are occurring in China's Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces
(the former Manchuria in China's northeast), on the borders with
Russia and North Korea. There are also new outbreaks in Wuhan.
According to one Chinese expert, those infections in Jilin and
Heilongjiang provinces are presenting slightly different symptoms,
suggesting that there may have been a mutation. In the 1917-1919
Spanish Flu pandemic, a mutation occurred in the summer of 1918 that
made the second wave in fall 1918 much worse than the first wave.
That doesn't mean that the same thing will happen with Covid-19,
but there are fears that it might.
Sources:
- Hong Kong’s security laws: what are they and why are they so controversial? (Guardian, London, 21-May-2020)
- China says U.S.'s Pompeo 'blackmailing' Hong Kong government (Reuters, 21-May-2020)
- China Moves to Impose Hong Kong Security Law, Stirring Outrage (Bloomberg, 21-May-2020)
- China plans national security laws for Hong Kong after last year's unrest (CNBC, 21-May-2020)
- China proposes controversial Hong Kong security law (BBC, 21-May-2020)
- Annual Hong Kong Tiananmen massacre vigil to become city-wide tribute amid Covid-19, as museum reopens (Hong Kong Free Press, 21-May-2020)
- ‘Highly necessary’: Beijing to discuss enacting national security law in Hong Kong following months of protest (Hong Kong Free Press, 21-May-2020)
- Beijing supports ‘improvement’ of Hong Kong’s Basic Law; usual mention of ‘high degree of autonomy’ absent (Hong Kong Free Press, 21-May-2020)
- Two Sessions 2020: Beijing runs ‘out of patience’ after long wait for Hong Kong national security law, resolves to proscribe secession, foreign interference and terrorism in city (South China Morning Post, Hong Kong, 21-May-2020)
- Hong Kong’s dollar tumbles on market jitters about Beijing’s plan to impose national security legislation (South China Morning Post, Hong Kong, 21-May-2020)
- Two Sessions 2020: head of China’s political advisory body stresses Hong Kong delegates’ political responsibility, but no mention of local governance principles (South China Morning Post, Hong Kong, 21-May-2020)
- 'We stand with Australia': Mike Pompeo hits out at China threats (Sydney Morning Herald, 21-May-2020)
- Jilin / Wuhan / More than 100 million people in China face new lockdown as second wave of COVID-19 cases emerge (Fox News, 19-May-2020)
- NE China COVID-19 cases have longer incubation and show different symptoms to Wuhan cases: expert (GlobalTimes, 20-May-2020)
- Zhong Nanshan / Exclusive: Lack of immunity means China is vulnerable to another wave of coronavirus, top adviser warns (CNN, 17-May-2020)
- Pompeo Considers Hong Kong's Autonomy After Crackdown on Pro-Democracy Activists (Time, 21-May-2020)
- S.1838 - Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019 (US Congress, 19-Nov-2019)
- Secretary Michael R. Pompeo at a Press Availability (US State Dept., 20-May-2020)
Related Articles:
- Trump administration will block chip shipments to China's Huawei (17-May-2020)
- Milk-Tea twitter war links Thailand, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Philippines against China (08-May-2020)
- CNBC's Jim Cramer: Hostility to China grows in America (27-Apr-2020)
- Hong Kong holds massive peaceful pro-democracy demonstration (09-Dec-2019)
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, Hong Kong,
Chinese Communist Party, CCP, Tiananmen Square,
Wang Yang, Australia, Taiwan,
Jilin, Heilongjiang, Russia, North Korea, Wuhan
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Bob Butler 54 - 05-22-2020
Interesting
On COVID, both the CCP and Trump made mistakes. I believe they would be yapping at each other regardless of whatever else is going on in vain hopes of distracting folks. You try to hide your mistakes by forcing attention on the other guy’s mistakes. I don’t take that too seriously.
It is not in anyone’s interest to start a war one is going to loose. A land war in Asia would be bad for the US. A sea war with the US would be bad for China. There is a dance involved in starting the conflict in the right place. It’s not an impossible dance, but a real one. My best guess is going after an island in the South China Sea.
Hong Kong is close enough to China that the US can’t do much about it at the scene. They might well provoke trying to start the sea war, but I don’t see them sending land troops ashore.
The Hong Kong protestors and the CCP have been dancing for quite some time. I am not ready to advise either faction on how to best dance. The CCP doesn’t like their authority questioned, but they are reluctant to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. The Tiananmen Square protest set a precedent for how this could go. So does the Ukraine. Russia got hit with loosing their G8 status and other economic sanctions. The aggression stopped. Russia limps on with increased economic problems. The CCP has sent a quite strong no more signal to the protesters, but the CCP is living on borrowed time. How long can the Reds and Experts stay united in oppressing the people? How to best put off that day? There is a difference between suppressing protesters and starting a civil war. Everybody is approaching that difference with all the usual pre crisis war caution. This might be the time things give.
There is one thing I might worry about, which involves the US Election in November. I believe the popularity of the governors backing a strong scientific response as opposed to Trump’s unpopular happy talk approach of putting the economy ahead of effective isolation foreshadows how the election is going to go. This will put Trump in a desperate situation which he could see well in advance. He may try to get a war president’s popularity bounce as an October surprise, wag the dog so to speak. That worries me more than the xenophobia, whether the incident is real or staged. The US starts wars with administrations lying rather than loose troops with xenophobia these days. The CCP might do better to put off stomping on Hong Hong until after the elections. I wouldn’t give Trump an excuse. Then again, I am not the CCP.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 05-22-2020
(05-21-2020, 08:42 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: Even talking about "secession" is already illegal, and presumably the
new laws will specify even harsher punishment for speaking out.
I'm pretty sure the big difference here is that the law is a Chinese law, rather than a Hong Kong law. That would give the Chinese an excuse to march in with their own forces if necessary. Up until now, everything has been enforced by Hong Kong police.
Of course even better for the CCP would be the Hong Kong police enforcing Chinese law, breaking down the "two systems" barrier. I'm not sure the CCP is smart enough or capable enough to do that, though.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Bob Butler 54 - 05-22-2020
I'd also note that while we still are involved in incidents, we are sitting harder on people who might get trigger happy. Iranian small boats will buzz our warships. Our warships will cruise near islands in the South China Sea. You are apt get some horn blowing and videos released to the media. Airplanes fly where somebody might not like them to fly, often intercepted and buzzed closely by other planes. Such is the language of states these days in sending other states a message about their abilities and readiness to use them.
However, the USS Vincennes shot down a commercial airliner a while ago, and some Russian proxy troops took down another over the Ukraine. Since then a lot of folks seem more careful about letting their troops actually pull triggers.
It's much safer just to lie. Trump has sure had lots of practice.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-22-2020
** 22-May-2020 World View: Constitutional law
(05-20-2020, 11:11 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: > But you seem to have your own interests, so I wouldn’t expect you
> to concentrate on the same things.
> This conversation has made a little clearer how stepping out of
> the Industrial Age pattern has several semi independent aspects.
> There is xenophobia, the Enlightenment values, the colonial
> aspect, and each could turn at independent times. The Reformation
> had something to do with it, splitting the Catholic south off of
> the Protestant north and helping to create the Protestant work
> ethic which became part of the Industrial Revolution which in turn
> fed off colonial exploitation. There are many areas to focus on,
> and you can easily get off either focusing too much or too little.
> People focusing on different things would naturally come up with
> different definitions.
You're right that you and I look at these issues from very different
angles.
I've looked at some aspects of this, though I try to relate social
progress to technology. For example, I would think that the invention
of the printing press would have had a big impact on social progress.
Going from the Agricultural age to the Industrial revolution would
seem to be technology based.
When I was writing my book on Iran, I had to dive deeply into the
development of constitutions, since Iran's Constitutional Revolution
in the 1900s decade was a generational crisis war.
Constitutional law is mainly concerned with human rights. You have
Roman Law and Sharia Law that have been around for millennia, but
those bodies of law have to do with things like marriage, children,
commerce, or tax collection. But constitutional law is different
because it's objective is to limit the power of the monarchs (i.e.,
human rights). In Europe, the first law of that type was the Magna
Carta in June 1215, when King John's barons forced it on him.
The U.S. Constitution is thought to be the oldest written constitution
still in use today. After it was successfully adopted in America, it
started to spread across Europe. Napoleon announced a constitution in
1800 which was greatly admired. In 1804, this became the Napoleonic
Code which you've mentioned several times.
In my book, I quoted Jean-Antoine Chaptal, one of Napoleon's
ministers, who was pleased that it limited some of Napoleon's powers:
"Truly it is difficult to conceive of a constitution which offers more
guarantees for the rights of the people. It is difficult to leave less
to the fiat of the head of the government. The limits of power are
clear and unambiguous."
Norway and Belgium followed suit, adopting their own constitutions.
They didn't just copy the US constitution, but they were inspired by
it.
It took until the early 1900s for Iran to finally develop a
constitution. The reason it took so long was because Iran was pretty
isolated from Europe.
Your view and my view are not contradictory, and ideally they can be
merged in some way.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Bob Butler 54 - 05-23-2020
I too acknowledge technology as playing a critical role in defining cultures. The very definition of the Industrial Age depends on the steam engine, the printing press, gunpowder and democracy. The first three are obviously technology. The fourth is not directly tied to it, but is somehow the result of the changing technologies I’m sure.
The biggest difference is that I am looking for a basic pattern transformation with nukes and computers. You have incorporated many observations of one age, and tried to apply them in another. I don’t think you can. The basic pattern would shift, but you are still looking at how things were before the change. Thus, if anything, you are not seeing how technology drives progress enough. The process of how nuclear powers step closer to crisis confrontation would be very different from in the Industrial Age. Yet, you are still looking at xenophobia rather than the much changed way that governments send messages to each other these days. You are stubbornly refusing to see that nukes traumatize.
For example, the Industrial Age awakenings were centered around the Great Awakening and the Second Great Awakening. Very religious. Very emotional. Quick to burn out. In the 1960s Consciousness Revolution we had hippies, protests, significant changes in the roles of gender and race and major legislation. I concluded that awakenings would be very different in the Information Age, and anticipate that the next awakening would be closer to the 1960s than the old religious revivals. It might even be transformational in the way only crises used to be.
On the other hand, the latest unravelling had much the same flavor as always. I am much more inclined to accept the basic patterns observed by S&H as holding. This is what I mean by having to double check observations made in one age before just assuming they will hold in another. You may not have to throw them out as obsolete, but you may. Confirm, not assume.
On my part, I acknowledge being less interested in places like Africa and South America. There is a large hole in my thinking that needs to be filled.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-23-2020
** 22-May-2020 World View: China or Japan?
Guest Wrote:> I'm in Seoul and tonight people in my office were arguing about
> who Korea would choose in the coming Cold War between America and
> China. Most said "both". You can't sit on the fence post on this
> one. South Koreans want American military protection and
> technology, but they want to keep the Chinese market. Don't think
> that will happen.
> Looks like a hot war is in the offing anyway.
John Wrote:> Suppose it's a choice between China and Japan? Which side would
> your office mates choose in that case?
Guest Wrote:> Japan.
> Japan is viewed with mixed feelings. While many are angry about
> the past, no one fears Japanese invasion. China, on the other
> hand, has shown its true colors too many times. South Koreans
> sympathize with the Tibetans, the Taiwanese, and Hong Kongers.
> South Koreans view the Chinese as vulgar and uncouth. The mainland
> Chinese are just dirty and loud peasants.
This makes a lot of sense. Despite the history of invasion,
colonization and comfort women, as you say, there's no chance of an
invasion from Japan (though there may be one from North Korea).
I keep trying to figure out who's an ally of China. The US was an
ally of China in WW II, but today it's almost impossible to find
anyone who's an ally of China, except for Cambodia and Pakistan.
China manages to piss almost everyone off either by extortion to force
them to not recognize Taiwan or through a BRI debt trap. I guess
that's to be expected, since the CCP thugs consider themselves a
Master Race having the mandate from heaven, and everyone in any other
nation to be a barbarian. Who wouldn't hate the CCP under those
conditions?
And now it's become clear that China has inflicted the Wuhan
Coronavirus (Covid-19) on almost every country in the world, causing
economic destruction and millions of deaths. So it's really no wonder
that nobody likes China. Unfortunately, that just makes them more
irrational and dangerous.
By the way, the CCP apparently hoped that nobody would notice their
crackdown on Hong Kong. Instead it's been major international news
all day, and the US, UK, Canada, and EU are all issuing statements
condemning China's actions in Hong Kong.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-23-2020
** 22-May-2020 World View: Peaceful reunification with Taiwan
Guest Wrote:> China drops word 'peaceful' in latest push for Taiwan
> 'reunification'
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-parliament-taiwan/china-drops-word-peaceful-in-latest-push-for-taiwan-reunification-idUSKBN22Y06S
Quote:> Chinese Premier Li Keqiang left out the word “peaceful” on Friday
> in referring to Beijing’s desire to “reunify” with Chinese-claimed
> Taiwan, an apparent policy shift that comes as ties with Taipei
> continue on a downward spiral.
> Getting closer...
This does look really ominous, particularly because similar words
were also left out of the speech on Hong Kong, as I mentioned in
my article.
Perhaps it means that an attack on Taiwan is imminent, or perhaps
it means that it's not imminent since omitting the world "peaceful"
removes an element of surprise.
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-23-2020
** 22-May-2020 World View: Taiwan
![[Image: Taiwan-Airfields.png]](https://i.ibb.co/cgKcbNK/Taiwan-Airfields.png)
Navigator Wrote:> Right now, there is just a lot of rhetoric. And like the saying
> goes "talk is cheap". Nothing of note is going to happen until we
> see preparations begin to take place. I will shortly describe
> what I think the Chinese plan would be for an actual invasion of
> Taiwan, and how it would start to execute those plans.
> The first thing I would tell you is to take a look at the map in
> the previous post. This shows the locations of airfields in
> Taiwan territory.
> Taiwan owns territory VERY close to China. The main islands are
> Quemoy (now more often called Kinmen county) and Matsu. Matsu is
> too far north to really be involved in the Chinese invasion plan,
> but not Quemoy (I will use the modern Kinmen hereafter).
> Next, note the 3 airfields on islands between China mainland and
> Taiwan proper. These are Magong, Wangan, and Qimei. These are in
> the Pescardores islands (now called Penghu county). Magong is on
> the main island, which is also the location of MAJOR port
> facilities.
> In an invasion of Taiwan, the Chinese cannot allow for enemy
> occupied airfields to remain along the invasion route, and along
> the supply lines from China to the landing beaches. Also, the
> invasion would have major airfields as immediate objectives.
> In a rough outline, what the Chinese would probably do is:
> 1. Secure Kinmen
> 2. Secure Penghu (with its airfield and port facilities much
> closer to Taiwan than those in Mainland China)
> 3. Secure beachheads on Taiwan, with the immediate objectives
> including a good airfield (much better to fly in Reinforcements
> than ship by sea).
> To do this, the Chinese would first have to mass troops around
> Xiamen. This would probably follow landing exercises that the
> Chinese would do everything possible to conceal.
> Kinmen, so close to China, is not really defensible, and although
> the Nationalist Chinese were successful in fighting off a CCP
> invasion in 1949, I don't think they could do it now. The Chinese
> could conceivably secure Kinmen before the USA, if it even wanted
> to, could interfere.
> With forces massed, they would then move quickly to sieze Kinmen.
> Once done, they would then move to take the Pescadores (Penghu
> county). This would be MUCH more difficult, as it would involve a
> major sea lift across about 80 miles of sea.
> The US would have the opportunity to interfere with the Chinese
> landings in the Pescadores. But the Chinese could bring enough
> force to bear to defeat or neutralize the Carrier group sent to do
> so. This of course would mean war with the USA.
> Once the Chinese have the Pescadores secured, they would, in my
> opinion, land to move to take either the Chiaya airport, or, more
> likely, the Tainan airport, as it is only about a mile and a half
> away from a decent landing beach (the Gold Coast), and there is
> not a lot of urban area between the beach and airfield.
> The Pescadores would be a better staging area for a CCP invasion
> of Taiwan than mainland China due to the much closer proximity.
> The CCP forces would build up here, and the distance for ferrying
> troops and equipment would be less than 20 miles to Taiwan.
> By this time, the Nationalist Chinese would have time to prepare
> for the landings and fighting. I think that they would have a
> good chance of fighting the CCP forces to a standstill, at least
> in the short term. Long term they will run out of resources
> (ammunition).
> The Chinese could attempt landings closer to Taipei initially, but
> this is less likely. It would however be more in line with a
> quicker strike at Taiwan than landing in the Pescadores first.
> But this move would have to be preceded by taking the Matsu
> islands (and their Taiwan controlled airfields) first.
> Note on the map that the open area of Taiwan is the strip on the
> western coast of the country. Further to the east the terrain
> becomes MUCH more rugged, and therefore much more militarily
> defensible.
Wouldn't the Taiwanese anticipate those attacks and set up booby traps
or something that would substantially increase the cost to the
Chinese? Or at least delay things until the US can get involved?
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 05-23-2020
** 23-May-2020 World View: Taiwan and Japan
Navigator Wrote:> Also, I think that if Trump were still president when the Chinese
> attack, the US would get into it immediately.
> I think a Democrat president would take the view that the
> China/Taiwan affair was an internal Chinese affair, and would not
> get involved. Even to the point of watching Taiwan itself fall.
> This would be a disaster for the US, as a later attack on South
> Korea and Japan would mean the US would have to get involved, and
> Taiwan would be a major point the US would have to retake in
> dealing militarily with China. So not defending Taiwan would be a
> military disaster for the US.
I don't think this is true at all. Politicians in the loony left
might want to stay out of it, but both Republicans and Democrats would
demand an immediate response, whether in the Senate or the White
House. It's possible that we'd be at war within six hours, no matter
who is president.
However, I think a far more interesting question is: What would Japan
do if the CCP attacks Taiwan?
Here's an article from yesterday in the Taiwan News.
https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202005210415.aspx
It quotes Japan's Deputy Foreign Minister Suzuki Xinyou congratulating
Taiwan on the re-election of president Tsai Ing-wen, supporting
Taiwan's participation in WHO, and saying that Japan would defend
Taiwan in case of a CCP military attack. This is not a trivial
promise, since Japan's pacifist constitution forbids military action
except in self-defense on Japanese soil. However, in recent years,
Shinzo Abe has been successful in getting the clause reinterpreted to
include "collective self-defense," which would permit Japan to use
military action in support of an ally.
The CCP also knows all this, which means that if they're going to
invade Taiwan, then they'd also be at war with Japan (which is what my
book is about), and would soon be at war with the US. So a "simple"
invasion of Taiwan would be more difficult than it seems.