1. Technically they're not in violation of anything because they don't have these rights/laws on the books. Also, many Chinese would argue that if there was a list of priorities, they'd prefer to fulfill their basic needs by being able to afford food and other necessities, rather than speak out against their government. As long as their incomes are increasing, they do not mind the current state of affairs.2. "Japan has $700B of accumulated Treasuries, and China $200B." from http://www.safehaven.com/article-3097.htm.That's hardly 75%3. Unocal is the 9th largest oil company in the States. One of the largest yes, but ninth doesn't exactly scream oh my god they're going to control our oil supply.
You've stated that China has throughout it's history been the greatest innovator of all time. I've brought up Lu Xun because his works show how different traditional Chinese society is from the modern Western world. The West didn't "build upon" Chinese innovations, its civilization is fundamentally different. You can take Chinese medicine as an example of that.Western institutions, things such as the U.N. and other multilateral organizations, are the total opposite of what existed under dynastic China's tributary system. But let me give you another example--Chinese law. If you read Chinese legal documents during the Qing dynasty, you'll be shocked at what you find.
Great point, Paikea. The Chinese might have been backward vis-à-vis the West by the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (for example, in medicine and the sciences), when the Middle Kingdom had clearly declined and the West had made truly amazing leaps in terms of political and military power, science and technology. But that in itself doesn't disqualify their immense societal and cultural development over the course of the previous millenia. They developed things like gunpowder, paper, and movable type FAR earlier than was the case in Europe (and I would argue these developments were essential, if not sufficient, for the advent of modernity). Their political system developed thousands of years before the Roman Empire and lasted a hell of a lot longer. All of this is nothing to sneeze at, notwithstanding the ideas of some people like Lu Xun and Fukuzawa Yukichi.
Buying UnoCal does not instantly scream they own our oil supply. I never stated that. But it strongly signals the fact that China is out to buy oil companies rather than be a nation dependant on other country's oil. And the scary thing is that they have all the money they need to buy whatever oil companies come their way.
Globalism is not a panacea as professed by some economic pundits whom are largely responsible for this trend toward instability within the US economy. The resulting codependency amongst countries does not necessarily mean that they will not be hostile toward each other. In fact, they might become more hostile, since their basic needs are now obtained from within the borders of the other country.
WOW. All I wanted to say was to not underestimate the Chinese and Indians. Then one poster decides to argue that a country with much greater population has fewer people with higher IQ's and subsequently complains about ad hominems while he/she engages in that very activity. Meanwhile, everyone starts comparing cultural prowess.
You should check this book out:"Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective"http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1843310279/qid=1120835867/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-0853228-6463307It's main point is that now that developed countries have removed (most of) their protectionist policies that helped them grow, and embraced intellectual property rights as critical to encouraging innovation, they now impress the same on developing countries. Needless to say, when developed countries were at the same stage of development as the now developing countries, it was an anything goes type of mentality.Sure, what China is doing may not be "fair," but it really depends on whose perspective you're looking at it from now doesn't it?