<< NAME CUT ~ MAIN ~ UNPOPULAR FLAG SELLS IN RECORD AMOUNTS >>
THIS MAKES PERFECT SENSE
Society in ruins? Economy sunk? Let’s learn Chinese:
Students at all Zimbabwean universities will later this year be required to learn to speak and write Chinese, Zimbabwe’s education minister has announced.
Maybe the Zimbabweanese are trying to emulate the Chinese in their worthy fight agianst global warming.
Posted by Tommy Shanks on 2006 01 28 at 12:00 AM • permalinkHey, I don’t know why you are knocking this policy. A large number of Chinese-speaking Zimbabweans will be useful for when
Zimbabwe’s flourishing business, manufacturing, and agricultural sectors do international deals; or when their many fine universities contribute to international research projects or conferencesthey need to beg the Chinese for aid.Evidently, the great leader wants to emulate Red China’s resource-wasting “Great Leap Backward” during the 1960s Cultural Revolution.
Posted by perfectsense on 2006 01 28 at 12:01 AM • permalinkThere may actually be some quite logical reason. After all, Chinese was introduced in Queensland schools in the 1990s because the state had just signed a major coal contract with China.
I kid you not.
—Nick
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 01 28 at 12:24 AM • permalinkDave, these things are not static. If Spain has a sensible society now it did not in the 1930s, when hysterical massacres were the response to the Franco revolt. The crazieness of the Spanish was burned out, cauterized, by 36 years of Franco’s tyranny. China’s society could hardly be called sane during the period from 1949 to about 1979, especially during the sixties. The North Koreans are Asians, as were Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge. As for “Hispanics” so-called, keep an eye on Bolivia. Argentina under Peron sane? That needs a rather loose definiation of the word I think. The Argies are an excellent example of how people who were on the cusp of the First World (as we might call it now) threw themselves into the Third World in a fit of sheer stupidity.
On the other hand the Lebanese were quite sane until the PLO showed up in Lebanon and tried to muscle in on ruling the place. They could be again, I think.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 01 28 at 12:31 AM • permalinkMaybe Google and Mugabe can work out a deal too?
Posted by andycanuck on 2006 01 28 at 01:28 AM • permalink#10
I’d love to see someone have the balls to do a thorough study as to why Europeans, Asians and Hispanics can have reasonably sane and functioning societies, and Arabs and Africans cannot.
Probably for the same reason Europe is becoming less functional.
Radical Islam. It’s easy to forget its presence in large parts of Africa.
#16
You’re right. As Europe invites the Third World into its bosom, there will not be sufficient amounts of First Worldian genius and intelligence glue left to counter the effects of Arab/African civilization-dissolving ignorance and violence solvent. America, Britain, and Oz are the only three countries who get this at all, and there are many little two-legged bottles of solvent rolling around in our countries, spilling and dissolving the bonds of freedom which the English-speaking world shares.
It makes perfect sense! China is undergoing a positive economic revolution and they speak Chinese. So speaking Chinese will improve your economy. Looks like Mugabe has learned from the Cargo Cultists.
Posted by drscroogemcduck on 2006 01 28 at 02:13 AM • permalinkStudying Chinese is absolutely absurd unless one intends to live there. First of all, both Mandarin and Cantonese require heavy and continual study, not a few lessons a week. Second, why learn any other language (except out of personal interest) when English is the lingua franca of the world.
Maybe Maniac Mugabe favours the Chinese because they are still worshipping at the altar of Marx (Karl, that is, not Groucho).
Stupid is as stupid does, I guess.
According to Mark Steyn some time ago, Mugabe, following an unfortunate medical situation, was fitted with a rubber penis from China, but it is now crumbling. Possibly there is some connection.
Posted by Susan Norton on 2006 01 28 at 02:37 AM • permalinkAnd the year after that, everyone in Zim will wear their underwear on the outside.
Posted by Mister Falcon on 2006 01 28 at 03:25 AM • permalinkMakes sense. China is - for some reason - acquiring a bunch of shithole African client states. I suppose the Chinese are desperate to look like a big badass superpower. Space programme, client states ... oooer, scary.
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 01 28 at 04:10 AM • permalinkMight be an idea to loom at the http://www.1421.tv website and see what the Chinese were doing in that part of the world in the 15th century.
I have a personal suspicion that the Zulus have some chinese DNA in them.
JW: China is - for some reason - acquiring a bunch of shithole African client states.
Actually, they’re just cutting deals for natural resources, barter trades and weapons sales. When Mugabe asked for $100m in aid, they laughed at him - what he got was $1m. I think you’re falling into the old fallacy of Uncle Sam “supporting” right-wing dictatorships during the Cold War, and applying it to China. These right-wing dictatorships supported themselves - they wouldn’t have fallen over if Uncle Sam hadn’t traded with them. This is why when Uncle Sam said jump, they gave him the finger. Same with China’s new trading partners. China is *trading* with them, much like any other capitalist country. The day that China tells Mugabe to do something he doesn’t like, he’ll tell them to go **** themselves.
Why are Chinese leaders making high-profile visits to some of these places? Because they have high barriers to trade. The Chinese are making these trips to persuade foreign leaders to waive some of these trade barriers so that some mutually-beneficial deals can be done - it’s basically an effort to cut red tape.
also on abc promo for 7/7 bbc programme about suicide bombers in u.k. so public tv doesn’t believe it really happened but they don’t mind making money out of it anyway.
what’s the bet it says they did it because of their socioeconomic backgrounds or because they felt discriminated against.
by the way sbs reported that some fatah supporters who burned a hamas flag were shot. hope the indigenous dero who burned the aussie flag and the others who spat on it while they all spouted hatespeech was watching.Heck, the Chinese and their descendents run half the businesses in the Philippines…since Zim threw out the competent europeans and Indians, the place is a mess…so why not neocolonialism by the Chinese? At least if they run the gamefarms, the crockadiles wouldn’t starve…http://makaipa.blogspot.com/2006/01/things-are-really-badwhen-even-crocks.html
Zhang Fei - I think it’s a trifle naive to assert that China’s selective courting of certain states can only be attributed to trade.
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 01 28 at 10:04 AM • permalinkI think it’s a trifle naive to assert that China’s selective courting of certain states can only be attributed to trade.
James, that is precisely why China is in Africa. They are trying to fuel a semi-capitalistic economy, and for that they need both resources and markets. China, for all of it’s large size, does lack some resources.
As near as I can tell from my admittedly limited reading, the Chinese are getting relatively good deals by not attaching many diplomatic strings to their trade deals. For example, China wouldn’t worried about improvements in human rights, eh?
Seriously, now. Think about it. Do you really think Mugabe is going to let a bunch of Chinese corporations run around Zimbabwe out of the goodness of his heart?
Also, consider the strategic aspects. Africa, for all of it’s barbarism, is a wide open market. Europe and America have limited interests there, mostly by choice. If China can get economic control, and Africa ever decides to come out of the dark ages, just who is going to be high on the hog? Assuming, of course, China doesn’t implode before then.
Nope, it’s not naive at all. It’s cold hearted capitalism mixed with the passions of a communist dictatorship.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 28 at 11:30 AM • permalinkThis is not new. The Chinese made a big push in Africa in the 60’s/70’s. It sort of petered out because Mao made sure China had nothing to offer but rusty AK-47’s and a necrotic ideology…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 01 28 at 01:49 PM • permalinkApparently, China and Mugabe go way back. Maybe he won’t have so much trouble finding those “Mandarin teachers” after all…
From my link:
China’s indifference to political controversy is illustrated in its close relationship with Zimbabwe. China is the principal supporter of the Mugabe regime, which is reviled in the international community for Mugabe’s ruthless crushing of the opposition and his most recent removal of hundreds of thousands of city residents to the rural areas, with no respect for life, health, or satisfactory alternative arrangements. China is investing in minerals, roads and farming, and supplying Mugabe with jets and other armaments. “Zimbabwe is all but owned by China,” say some observers. “In return for a rare hand of friendship in an increasingly hostile world, Mugabe has offered Chinese companies almost anything they want, regardless of payback.”
Why is Africa still well buggered?
Simply put, it’s largely the result of Tribalism in reaction to, and rejection of national delineations imposed by Europe’s colonial powers. As horrible as it sounds to [modern] liberal western ears, the stasis of western hippie conscience is only prolonging and pressurizing the inevitable upheavals by which Africans will sort their continent out - on their own terms - just as Europe emerged from centuries of miserable wars and facsimiles of cultural revolutions.
It’s a truly grim twist of history wherein the technologies available to tribalists today are exponentially deadlier than the crossbows, muskets, and artillery the Euros used to pacify themselves. The problem is that while their conception of pascifism is supposed to not have any losers, it comes with the price of not having any winners either…That is except for those who reject the fantasy ‘utopia’...Hopefully the rejectors aren’t brutes eh?
Anyway, yet another unintended consequence of Europe’s imperial raping of the world…
Tribal societies - once wholly-owned by the former colonial powers - are shopping around for some ‘fourth way’ to not be European pawns. The mistake they continue to make is in being led to believe that the America-centric traditions of liberty and prosperity are tantamount to the European version. Quite a few ‘progressive’ western intellectu-know-it-alls even maintain lucrative careers for themselves promulgating this farce despite the fact that wherever the rubber has hit the road, their radial convolutions shred at their seams.
In the face of this progressive spin, Islam seems to be the next likely cultural
choicemistake for globalism rejectionists. After all, their tribal structures have failed and they can’t very well emulate their former masters.If Islam can at least appear to be that sought after fourth way, it will be - especially for those who’ve experienced the dual depradations of traditional Euro-imperialism as well as the Soviet version of the transnational Marxist/socialist imperialism (With it’s inherent tendency to outright murder those it doesn’t simply impoverish and oppress into equal misery).
Europe’s current version of godless socialism lite has thus far only impoverished those it leeches off for its sustenance…So it’s an improvement, I guess…
/spewage
I hear he’s especially interested in Chinese population control measures.
Well, Mugabe can show the Chinese a couple of tricks of the trade, that’s for sure. Talk about two peas in a pod.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 28 at 04:49 PM • permalinkChina still thinks of itself as the Middle Kingdom, the natural pole of the world. Of course they’re trying to seek overseas clients; that’s the way things “should be”.
Many people will say that China is not imperialist. Well, the majorities in Tibet, Turkestan, Inner Mongolia, Manchuria, and Taiwan are all non-Han; the only reason they wound up considered part of a single unit is the non-Han Manchus conquered them along with China proper. The fact is, over half of the PRC’s territory is an imperial domain; China isn’t any bigger not because of any natural non-imperial instincts, but because it hasn’t been militarily strong enough to incorporate territories protected by the United States and Soviet Union. It tried and failed to conquer all Korea in the 1950s, remember; it tried to invade Vietnam in 1979; and it claims the Spratleys, which are nowhere near China or anywhere China has actually ruled in centuries.
Obviously, China’s going to concentrate on economically and strategically useful client states, but the driver here isn’t economics. Resources are (almost) always cheaper to buy on the open market than to acquire through colonies and clients. The driver here is nationalist pride and imperialist impulses, which China has in abundance.
Posted by Warmongering Lunatic on 2006 01 28 at 07:34 PM • permalinkThe_Real_JeffS, Zhang Fei - In terms of resources, client states are only handy in terms of preferential or discounted access to inelastic resources that cause economic shocks when supply is disrupted. As someone else mentioned above, resources can be bought on the open market cheaper than the combined cost of purchasing them from a client state (even at a discount rate) plus the cost of maintaining said client state. And preferential access for Chinese companies comes at the far greater cost for the Chinese government of maintaining the client - keeping a client state for preferential access does not make economic sense. However, for resources like oil, an oil rich client is an insurance policy. Hence China’s courting of oil-rich Sudan and Libya. This doesn’t explain China’s bedding of Zimbabwe and a number of other non-oil producing African countries.
Thing is, an aspiring superpower has other uses for client states which may not seem apparent at the moment due to events that have not yet unfolded. For example, client states come in handy on multilateral bodies; take Japan’s chum Mongolia, that great - landlocked - seafaring nation Mongolia, who votes with Japan on the International Whaling Commission forum (not that I have a problem with whaling, but you get my point). China maintains client states because they may well come in handy in the future as a rump in one of the many multilateral forums of the world. Once again, an insurance policy.
Incidentally, I strongly doubt Chinese companies are running around Zimbabwe doing much at all (that is funded by the Zimbabweans, I should add) - Zimbabwe is broke. Of course Mugabe would only let them in if it was in his interest. It is in his interest. And it’s much more about cold hard realpolitik on both sides than cold hard capitalism.
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 01 29 at 05:30 AM • permalinkInteresting that so many westerners teach African studies,visit a lot to maintain the rage but don’t want to live there in their Utopia.Oh and they take preventative measures against getting mugged too-just in case their bleedingheartedness is not stamped on their foreheads or does not afford them protection anyways…and who supports all these african studiers from a distance…why despicable Western countries of course…
James, I’ll buy that China is into full tilt imperial mode, and Zimbabwe is a client state. This is consistent with what I’ve read on the subject. Further, China in Zimbabwe sounds an awful lot like the Soviet Union in Cuba, especially back in the early 1960s.
And, just having realized that you live in the Far East (Japan?), doubtless you have better info on the subjectthan I do.
But it seems to me that economics remains a major factor in the Chinese imperialism.
China is ramping up their industrial capacity, and courting international investments into their infrastructure, no? To obtain those investments, they have to show an expanding (and presumably) market that will provide a return on those investments. China by itself may be enough for that, but I have to wonder if some investors want to see Chinese expansion into foreign markets as well.
Yes, this is speculation on my part, but while there may be a huge internal market, I unerstand that it is equally potential and actual. Overseas expansion provides a buffer for the industrial capacity should the internal marker, ummm, er, flucuate.
Or so it seems to me, being an armchair economist and all.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 29 at 12:41 PM • permalinkChina is ramping up their industrial capacity, and courting international investments into their infrastructure, no?
You’re right, of course. However - to use that old cliche - China’s following the money for that stuff ie. the West. Chinese companies are making (mostly abortive) plays for (mostly past-it) Western companies. Chinese whitegoods (and the rest) manufacturer Haier tried to buy American washing machine manufacturer Maytag, but failed when trumped by Whirlpool. Chinese PC maker Lenovo bought IBM’s foundering PC manufacturing arm for a couple of billion dollars - good luck with that whole supercompetitive-Dell issue.
The Chinese even tried to buy oil middleweight Unocal but were - ridiculously IMO - brushed off by US legislators. I believe that CNOOC (the largest Chinese state-run oil company) offered something like US$20 billion for Unocal. How does that compare to Zimbabwe’s annual GDP? There is precious little economic benefit to be derived from propping up a country like Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe is a pile of steaming crap economically speaking - but it’s certainly not pro-West, and potentially pro China if the price is right. Might come in handy at some stage in the future. The economic advantage accompanying any number of African countries like Zimbabwe is small beer compared to China’s other Western forays.
BTW I’m not living in the Far East - have been there a few times, though. I live in Perth - although it’s true that Western Australia is frequently considered a foreign country, by locals and other Aussies alike.
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 01 29 at 03:18 PM • permalinkZimbabwe is a pile of steaming crap economically speaking - but it’s certainly not pro-West, and potentially pro China if the price is right.
Gotcha! Thanks.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 29 at 06:31 PM • permalink52 Waterton
The Chinese even tried to buy oil middleweight Unocal but were - ridiculously IMO - brushed off by US legislators.
Predominantly fuck-for-brains Republican legislators at that. On this sort of issue, they’re as dim as the Dumocrats. Populist twits, the lot of them, and a plague on both their houses!
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 30 at 05:03 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Well when in Zimbabwe….....