Home > Uncategorized > Obama vs Xi Jinping

Obama vs Xi Jinping

With the mid-term election over, Democrats in disarray, Obama attempted to rally with carbon agreement with China and continued veiled attempt at containing China with Japan and Australia abroad, domestically, his pending immigration executive order and signature achievement in Obama-care face total Republican opposition and financial blockade as House controls the budget, the next 2 years will be interesting to see the once messiah of the liberals falling apart.

When Xi came to power we have a bunch of articles about Red Princelings, as if it’s a crime being off springs of revolutionaries, while nobody bat an eye of the Bushes, Kennedys, or Rockefellers in U.S., nepotism doesn’t exist in so called democracy. Now with the APEC over, Xi is being portrayed as a statesman, while memoirs of former cabinet officials described Obama as aloof, poor manager, if not totally incompetent. We have narrative of the rise of Xi, his more than 30 years working from village to city, to province, and national office.

Being a minority in U.S. you have 2 ways to rise to the top, one is sellout your race and join the conservative movement, denounce affirmative action while being the token minority in the Republican Party, you can rise high by helicopter as Clarence Thomas did, but that path is crowded nowadays as more opportunists, blacks, Indian Americans, women, and Latinos join in the easy path. The other way is work your way up the ladder in Democratic party, that way is also crowded, but if luck is on you as it did Obama with corruption, indictment, an open House seat, ambition clashed, Obama’s patroness Alice Palmer trying reach higher by not seeking re-election on her state senate seat, and left an opening for Obama. With his autobiography attracting interest in Wall street backing, more corruption opening Illinois senate seat, charismatic speech in 2004 democratic convention, and the race card Obama got the presidency. When during the primary, I read that Obama consider Reagan as his model not FDR, I knew Democratic Party would be in trouble. We got Hope and Change, Nobel peace prize,  and now lame duck.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:
  1. United Chinese Diaspora
    November 28th, 2014 at 04:33 | #1

    “Being a minority in U.S. you have 2 ways to rise to the top, one is sellout your race and join the conservative movement, denounce affirmative action while being the token minority in the Republican Party, you can rise high by helicopter as Clarence Thomas did, but that path is crowded nowadays as more opportunists, blacks, Indian Americans, women, and Latinos join in the easy path. The other way is work your way up the ladder in Democratic party, that way is also crowded, but if luck is on you as it did Obama with corruption, indictment,..”

    This applies to the work place as well, if you want to keep you job, you better do the anti-China or anti-Chinese thing. Like we better safeguard our computers because all Chinese are spies. Somehow you have to agree with that. or “I have problems understanding that Chinese engineer, he don’t speak good English.”

    “When Xi came to power we have a bunch of articles about Red Princelings, as if it’s a crime being off springs of revolutionaries, while nobody bat an eye of the Bushes, Kennedys, or Rockefellers in U.S., nepotism doesn’t exist in so called democracy. Now with the APEC over, Xi is being portrayed as a statesman, while memoirs of former cabinet officials described Obama as aloof, poor manager, if not totally incompetent. ”

    Here is something I am trying to figure out, after APEC, China lowered interest rates, oil price went down. I read somewhere that Obama asked China to buy over $240 billion in US bonds.

    Are there any correlations, anybody with insights

  2. Zack
    November 28th, 2014 at 05:41 | #2

    @United Chinese Diaspora
    doubtful, oil prices went down because the US and the Saudis are co-ordinating a strategem to bring Russia to ruin by keeping the oil prices low since Russia needs the oil price to be about $110 in order to balance its books. Right now it’s about $80 or so.
    It sucks for Russia but it’s great for China and here’s the thing; it also kills off a lot of shale oil producers in america as well

  3. November 29th, 2014 at 11:01 | #3

    I feel that comparing political leaders even in the same historical period can be meaningless. For example, Empress Cixi vs Lincoln vs Bismarck vs Disraeli. Would there be a totally different outcome if all the above leaders are switched?

    The Qing would still collapse if the leader was substitute with Lincoln, Bismarck or Disraeli! The social economic political structure of a country took a few generation to build up. Assume a country is a big ark, whoever is at the helm matters not that much. It is already on the move and it is the people inside that dictate its direction, the leader can only make a symbolic rallying.

    Another example, the KMT was almost decimated in the local election. It showed that the voters don’t really care who is at the helm. I predict in the presidential election a certain KMT leader with the last name Chu would win. And he will end up as another lame duck, is it really his fault? Just like Ma has been. And what about Chen, Lee and the two Chiangs?

    Basically, what I am saying is it is the core belief of the people that will decide the fate of the country. The majority of the populace must shared the same outlook and worked for it.

  4. November 29th, 2014 at 11:06 | #4

    Speaking about princeling politics, the worst offender in East Asia is actually Japan. Having universal suffrage actually make it worse. Look up all Japanese PM and his cabinets. The majority are related to previous ministers. Like I have said it is because of the social economic structure.

  5. United Chinese Diaspora
    November 30th, 2014 at 16:30 | #5

    The most celebrated democracies in Asia are South Korea and Japan, yet both have US troops on their soil.

    How much democracy and sovereignty do you really have when you have foreign military on your own land. What self respecting country would allow foreigners to occupy their land. (China knows about subjugation to foreigners, now China finally rid of the scourge.)

    China Pride is on, people.

    Look at Apple Daily, it was going bankrupt a few years ago and now it’s got tons of money (over $2 million paid to pro democracy Hong Kong politicians) because Fedex is supporting it with ad revenue, so how independent can Apple Daily be when its bread and butter are dependent on foreign companies like Fedex.

  6. pug_ster
    December 2nd, 2014 at 21:25 | #6

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/in-saudi-arabia-women-struggle-to-gain-equality-respect/

    While western propaganda has no problems chastising China for being a ‘repressive’ regime, somehow they don’t seem to be too bothered about Saudi Arabia.

  7. December 9th, 2014 at 10:34 | #7

    @Ray

    The Qing would still collapse if the leader was substitute with Lincoln, Bismarck or Disraeli! The social economic political structure of a country took a few generation to build up. Assume a country is a big ark, whoever is at the helm matters not that much. It is already on the move and it is the people inside that dictate its direction, the leader can only make a symbolic rallying.

    Basically, what I am saying is it is the core belief of the people that will decide the fate of the country. The majority of the populace must shared the same outlook and worked for it.

    I don’t know. I think with the right leaders at the top of the Qing government, China would have had a chance to modernize a la Japan.

    This is a complex issue … being armchair historians (as we all are). But people at the time, I don’t think they were fighting aimlessly … hopelessly.

    There are two schools of thinking on history. Some think leaders are just people who opportunistically fall into certain places and are those “actors” who know how to cater to the political winds at the time. As such, leaders make no differences. They simply are opportunistic individuals.

    But there are instances in history where true “leaders” step up to create history – who articulate visions, catalyze historical acts, etc. It’s true that even these “leaders” have to wait for conditions to be right, to “feed off the masses” – so to speak, but even when change is fomenting, change require leaders to coagulate.

    I am not saying a different leader in Taiwan the last few years would have led to different results, I don’t know. I somehow doubt it. Taiwan is in a flux and I think will remain in a flux for a while longer. But to stretch that situation to also to the Qing in its waning days also, I am not sure. Maybe it’s a valid comparison, maybe not…

  8. December 10th, 2014 at 15:47 | #8

    @Allen
    History has shown that all leaders are propelled into place. Their personality will leave their unique imprint, for example Hitler and Churchill both left different legacies that are uniquely theirs. But does this mean that if Hitler didn’t exist WWII would not start in Europe? If Churchill didn’t exist would the UK lost the war? In my view if neither of them existed the outcome would still be the same.

    The foundation of the Qing was its unique 8 banners system and typical Chinese imperial bureaucracy. By late Qing, both have become corrupted and incompetent to the core. If Meiji was to be born as a an emperor in China, there is no way he can prevent the fall of Qing unless he abolished the 8 banners and reform the bureaucracy. By contrast, Japan was actually run by a military family (shogunate) using the emperor as a figure head who cannot be replaced. By Meiji’s time, the shogunate has become totally corrupt and incompetent. Other military leaders rallied around the emperor and formed a new military dictatorship. China has no shortage of visionary leaders at the same period, but they have no platform for them to perform. The only venue for them is to become revolutionaries trying to overthrow the Qing.

    Another example, have it ever occur to you that no countries/culture/civilization outside of the western European sphere of influence ever managed to industrialize during the 15-18th century period? If the theory of “great leader” is valid, there must be others other than Japan and western Europe that managed to industrialize and modernize, right? Also in history, there is always a cycle in place. Spain and Portugal who are very outward looking become very conservative and inept after a hundred years or so.

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.