View Single Post
Old April 9th, 2013 (6:38 PM).
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,742
I have to object to liberal usage of "communist". If you mean that they are both ruled by communist parties, then yes they are communist. Are these parties revolutionary? In fact they are conservative parties, hardly revolutionary and increasingly difficult to enact change. The Communist Party of China (CPC) isn't looking towards the establishment of a stateless, classless society - okay maybe in a 1000 years, but we know that's not what's on the table when it comes to party meetings. What they are concerned about is improving free trade, encouraging foreign investment, and encouraging domestic entrepreneurship - at least in an economically equitable framework, but define that how you will because there is a capitalist class in China who own the means of production privately. There isn't even commun-ism in China anymore, as communal agriculture was disbanded long ago and the private sector is booming.

As for North Korea, I don't know if there were any developments recently, but the private sector is probably tiny, basically a black market, so economically, yes they are still collectivized and state-directed. But North Korea isn't even Marxist-Leninist anymore, they've replaced that with the Juche ideology. Korea can never be communist because the culture is far too nationalist. The Soviet Union was actually communist in this sense because they tried to break down the national identities of the countries that formed it and replace it with a Soviet citizenship. That would never happen in Korea, and not in Japan or China for that matter because East Asians are just too damn nationalist XD. Anyways the culture of North Korea is highly ethnically chauvinist and xenophobic, things we would usually call the far-right.

From the above it's pretty clear that they don't share similar ideals. China is looking to modernize its economy, broaden its trade relations and gain political influence in East Asia. North Korea seems hell-bent on preserving the party's status and power. You're right that China supports North Korea partially out of preventing US troops on its borders, but a united Korea would probably get rid of US troops as quickly as possible. First of all, because nobody would want US troops on Chinese borders on that point because it is an absolutely obsolete relic of the Cold War, and will do nothing but raise tensions. Of course it may be the goal of a future conservative South Korean or American administration to keep things the way they are, but at least we've taken out a big reason for keeping them there. Of course the US has bases in Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan already so China might be okay as long as the US doesn't boost troop sizes or add more bases. I would qualify the use of "ally" as well, as Pakistan is a major non-NATO ally of the US and we all know how wonderful that relationship is. To add more context, article two of the Sino-North Korean Mutual Aid and Cooperation Friendship Treaty says: "the two signatory nations guarantee to adopt immediately all necessary measures to oppose any country or coalition of countries that might attack either nation". Hahahahahaha like that's going to happen.

But yes, this probably isn't going to lead to war. Jon Huntsman is probably a really good authority as he was Ambassador to China, so he actually knows what he's talking about. Here's an example of the expertise of a diplomat vs. a journalist:
Reply With Quote