It was a much harder sell in 1979. But there was at least a coherent story of how we got there, and why the world was split into two irreconcilable camps that needed to struggle, etc. I'm asking what that compelling transnational story is for China now
-
-
Replying to @Pinboard
'The right to speak and think freely is under threat by a Chinese Communist Party that wishes to crush all forms of opposition to itself, not just inside its own borders but outside.' There's your story.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BeijingPalmer
I think you misunderstood me. I mean what story does China tell about the good vs. evil divide that would be the prerequisite to a "cold war II". The Soviet story was, man everywhere is in chains and we are the first socialist state in history, join us in a struggle of liberation
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Pinboard
'China is reclaiming its rightful place in history, and that place can only be led by the Chinese Communist Party.' That might not be a *story* that's appealing to the world, but it's one that the CCP is very ready to use its power and money to impose and maintain.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BeijingPalmer
Yeah, but that is the most boring kind of great power conflict. We've had that for centuries. A big country is flexing and wants others to accept a subordinate role; the others don't like it. That's British Empire II at the very most, lacks the punch and vim of a new Cold War.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Pinboard
I think you're trying to force a very clearly ideological conflict - free speech-vs-CCP censorship - into a great power model that's far less applicable than the Cold War one. Think about the sheer amount of time and money the CCP puts into political influence work globally.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BeijingPalmer
I guess it strikes me as not different in principle than what Britain would have done back in the day if you made fun of Queen Victoria. The limits of CCP influence and control operations seem to be stuff related to China. Maybe I'm not understanding your point?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Pinboard
... people made fun of Queen Victoria *in Britain* all the time. Now, if the monarchy had been all-powerful, very much felt itself to be endangered by any opposition, and willing to use imperial power globally to crush that opposition - we'd be somewhat closer to where we are.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BeijingPalmer
I can accept all that! The distinction I am groping for is that the Cold War was not anchored on individual countries, but two abstract, incompatible belief systems that each made a great sales pitch—freedom vs. communism. It was a religious war with roughly equal numbers.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Pinboard
But I think that's where we disagree. Those belief systems were certainly part of it. But much of it came down to American power-vs-Soviet power. Equally beliefs - in freedom-vs-autocracy - should be a part of it today, even as national power also plays a role.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Yeah, that does sound like the heart of our disagreement. You seem to place a different weight on the totalizing ideological content of the power struggle (and its ability to win over people in unexpected ways) than I do.
-
-
Replying to @Pinboard
I mean, we propped up two Communist dictatorships in Europe throughout most of the Cold War as counterbalances to Moscow!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BeijingPalmer
Which ones do you mean? I'm assuming one is Yugoslavia; what's the other?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.