this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
167 points (94.7% liked)

World News

38977 readers
2267 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Chinese President Xi Jinping's first major reform plans a decade ago were also his boldest, envisaging a transition to a Western-style free market economy driven by services and consumption by 2020.

The 60-point agenda was meant to fix an obsolete growth model better suited to less developed countries - however, most of those reforms have gone nowhere leaving the economy largely reliant on older policies that have only added to China's massive debt pile and industrial overcapacity.

The failure to restructure the world's second-largest economy has raised critical questions about what comes next for China.

While many analysts see a slow drift towards Japan-style stagnation as the most likely outcome, there is also the prospect of a more severe crunch.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] iain@feddit.nl 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

China's economic miracle? I don't believe in miracles. I don't believe articles that talk about miracles.

China is both a dangerous enemy and they're about to collapse. The enemy is both strong and weak. Umberto Eco called that one of the characteristics of fascism.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Why does this have so many downvotes? We do sound like fascists talking about China like they are somehow both on the verge of collapse and our greatest threat. Yet they produce all our shit.

[–] Shritish@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you spew this same kind of garbage when the target of criticism is Neoliberalism, or do you only jump in to defend China? Neoliberalism: Political Success Economic Failure

Is this link also characteristic of fascism?

[–] iain@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago

I am not defending China, just pointing out a crappy argument.

We're becoming more and more fascist in the west, with politicians like Trump, DeSantis and so on. This article from Reuters is part of this shift to the right and that's why I'm pointing it out. Fascism is a bigger risk to our way of life than China is.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Umberto Eco's list of fascist characteristics are applied to how they view themselves, not how others view them. Strength is dependent on many things to help maintain that strength and weakness is antithetical - a thing cannot be weak and strong by the same metric. You calling them both weak and strong is fascist, it isn't true because you're using different metrics to measure different parts of China.

[–] iain@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

A thing can't be weak and strong by the same metric, indeed. That's why this article has to call China's economical strength a miracle, as well as so weak it is about to collapse, otherwise the contradiction would be too obvious.