Sam Robinson Follow
It’s incorrect to assume that China is reemerging as a world power. How are you emerging as a world power if you can’t even project your power? In order for you to prove that China is a reemerging world powers, you have to compare China to other countries who have risen in recent history. No other country in the world has risen the way America has.
When we examine America’s rise, we saw that America was able to control a lot of world finances; establish military bases; crush its enemies; spread propaganda; create allies; and foment political movements.
China does not fit that descxtion one bit.
Today’s China is weaker than it was in 1966. In 1966, China could freely back, train, and arm political movements all over the world, including movements inside the US such as the Kent State riots. However, today, it would be unheard of for China to be backing a violent political movement inside the US.

认为中国正在重新崛起为世界强国是不正确的。如果你连你的力量都不能投射出去，你怎么能成为一个世界强国呢? 为了证明中国是一个重新崛起的世界强国，你必须将中国与近代史上崛起的其他国家进行比较。世界上没有任何一个国家像美国那样崛起。
当我们审视美国的崛起时，我们看到美国能够在全世界范围内控制很多国际资本、建立军事基地、粉碎敌人、传播宣传、创建的盟友、煽动政治运动。
中国一点也不符合这种描述。
今天的中国比1966年的它更弱。1966年，中国可以自由地支持、训练和武装世界各地的政治运动，包括美国境内的运动，如肯特州骚乱。然而，在今天，中国支持美国国内的政治运动将是闻所未闻的。

You can also tell how strong a country is based on its media. If you look at strong countries like the US, they have global reach with their media. They are able to get their point of view across the world. Through Google, Facebook, and Youtube, the US is also able to get the world to side with them, and against its enemies. You regularly see the west criticizing China. However, if you open the Chinese media (CRI), you rarely see China ctiticize the west. Actually, if you compare China’s media in 1966 to today, you would think it’s 2 different countries. In 1966, China was very critical of the west, claiming that the west was imperialist, racist, and violated human rights. Today, the tables have turned, and you don’t hear China saying any of these things anymore. Instead, it’s a one way battle with only the west criticizing China. The Chinese media is also unable to influence anyone. How many of you can actually name a Chinese media outlet? In the 60’s, many workers, and leftists regularly tuned in to CRI, and read the Beijing Weekly.

你也可以从一个国家的媒体判断它有多强大。如果你看看像美国这样的强国，他们的媒体具有全球影响力。他们能够把自己的观点传播到世界各地。通过谷歌、Facebook和Youtube，美国也能够让世界站在他们一边来反对它的敌人。你经常看到西方批评中国。然而，如果你打开中国媒体，你很少看到中国批评西方。实际上，如果你把1966年的中国媒体和今天的相比，你会认为这是两个不同的国家。1966年，中国非常多的批评西方，声称西方是帝国主义，种族主义，侵犯人权。如今，形势发生了逆转，你再也听不到中国说这些话了。相反，这是一场只有西方批评中国的单向战斗。中国媒体也无法影响任何人。有多少人能说出所知道的中国媒体的名字? 在60年代，许多工人和左派人士定期收听中国国际广播电台，阅读《北京周报》。

Another way you can tell how powerful a country is through its allies, and enemies. When the US was getting stronger in the 80’s, we saw the US was able to eliminate its enemies, particularly with eastern Europe, and the USSR. We saw this again in 2003, when the US took out Iraq, and again in 2011, when they took out Colonel Gadafi. Now let’s take a look at China. Who have they been able to take out? No one that we know of. China has no shortage of enemies either. We know China has Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, and many more, but China has failed at neutralizing any of them. Now, let’s look at allies. In the early 90’s, the US was able to absorb eastern Europe, and former USSR countries like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. This allowed the US to get stronger. Who has China been able to absorb in the past 40 years? No one really. In fact, it’s been quite the opposite. China has actually lost long time allies such as Malaysia, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka, who are all anti Chinese now, but were Chinese allies for decades prior. The fall of Malaysia has actually dealt a huge blow to China’s highly publicized One Belt One Road, also known in China as yidaiyilu. This shows the world just how vulnerable China is, and how it is unable to protect its interests. But this wouldn’t be the first time. Back in 2011, China suffered great losses in Libya, when Colonel Gadafi was killed. China had many more allies in 1966 than they do today. One of the reasons is because China was a militant country back then. China was willing to arm, and train leftists, even if that meant offending the west. Indeed this gave China a huge bargaining chip against the west. In fact, China had armies of revolutionaries all over the world, as far away as Latin America, and it would be common for Latin American revolutionaries to train in China, and return to Latin America to tell glorious stories about China, and everyone would get all hyped up. The story repeated itself in Indonesia, Thailand, and even Europe. In this period, even the most unlikely characters ( ie Ronald Regan) was inspired by communism. The American Black Panthers were also invited to China for training. It was through these revolutionary methods that China was able to be a world power. This is no longer the case. In 1977, China shifted its allegiance. They went from backing poor workers, and farmers to backing western multinational corporations. Instead of backing those who were perceived to be pro Chinese, today’s China supports those who are anti Chinese. Think about this. Who is the most anti Chinese country in the world? America right? Yet notice how China gives trillions of dollars to America. If this isn’t a perfect example of digging your own grave, I don’t know what is. Not only can China not gain any loyalty, but it also gave China’s enemies more money, and resources to continue subverting China. China had also abandoned all those allies, and revolutionary workers that they were supporting in 1966. This is why China has very few, if any supporters today. China pours its money, and resources into feeding corporations like Apple, and Amazon. Despite this, western multinationals are amongst the biggest critics of China. The left also no longer supports China as China had turned against them 40 years ago.

另一种方法是我们可以通过一个国家的盟友和敌人来判断这个国家有多强大。当美国在80年代变得越来越强大时，我们看到美国能够消灭它的敌人，特别是东欧和苏联。我们在2003年美国攻占伊拉克时又看到了这种情况，在2011年他们击败卡扎菲上校时也看到了这种情况。现在让我们来看看中国。他们干掉了谁? 据我们所知没有。中国也不缺敌人，我们知道中国有日本、中国台湾地区、韩国、新加坡和更多的国家作为对手，但中国未能压制任何一个国家或地区。现在，让我们看看盟友。在90年代早期，美国能够吸收东欧和前苏联国家，如拉脱维亚、立陶宛和爱沙尼亚这些国家作为盟友，这让美国变得更强大。
在过去40年里，中国吸收了哪些国家为盟友呢? 没有一个。事实上，情况恰恰相反。中国实际上失去了长期的盟友，如马来西亚、缅甸和斯里兰卡，这些国家现在都不在亲中国了，但在几十年前它们都是中国的盟友。马来西亚的倒戈实际上给了中国高度宣传的一带一路项目一个巨大的打击。这向世界展示了中国的脆弱，以及它是多么无力保护自己的利益。但这不是第一次了。早在2011年，卡扎菲上校被击毙时，中国在利比亚损失惨重。1966年中国的盟友比现在多很多。其中一个原因是中国当时是一个好战的国家。中国愿意试图团结全世界的左翼分子，即使这意味着冒犯西方。
事实上，这给了中国一个与西方讨价还价的巨大筹码。事实上，中国领导下的革命军遍布世界各地，远至拉丁美洲，拉丁美洲的革命领导人都曾在中国受训，然后回到拉丁美洲宣讲中国的辉煌故事，这是很常见的，每个人都会兴奋不已。在印度尼西亚、泰国，甚至欧洲，同样的故事也在重演。在这一时期，即使是最不可能的人物(如罗纳德·里根)也受到了共产主义的启发。美国黑豹党也被邀请到中国进行训练。正是通过这些革命性的方法，中国才得以成为世界强国。现在情况已经不同了。1977年，中国改变了立场，他们开始接纳西方跨国公司。
想想这个，世界上最反华的国家是谁? 美国对吧? 但请注意，中国是如何向美国提供数万亿美元的借款的。如果这还不是自掘坟墓的完美例子，我不知道什么才是。中国不仅得不到任何忠诚，还给了中国的敌人更多的金钱和资源来继续反对中国。中国也抛弃了所有他们在1966年支持的盟友和革命工作者。这就是为什么今天中国的支持者很少，如果有的话。中国将其资金和资源投入到了像苹果和亚马逊这样的公司。尽管如此，西方跨国公司仍是中国最大的批评者之一。

Defense is also commonly used as a factor to gauge a country’s strength. Last summer, India invaded China’s Donglang region. Now I might be wrong, but if China was an emerging super power, shouldn’t it be China invading India, and not the other way around? I mean correct me if I’m wrong, but haven’t reemerging super powers done the invading historically? At least in 1962, China was able to invade India. Today, they can’t even do that. If you’re an emerging super power who’s getting invaded by second tier countries, then is there really a point in being a super power?

国防也经常被用作衡量一个国家实力的一个因素。去年夏天，印度军队进入了中国洞朗地区。现在我可能是错的，但如果中国是一个新兴的超级大国，不应该是中国入侵印度，而不是反过来吗? 我的意思是，如果我说错了请纠正我，但重新崛起的超级大国应该是重拾历史上的荣光吗? 至少在1962年，中国能够进入印度的国土。今天，他们甚至不能这样做。如果你是一个被二线国家入侵的新兴超级大国，那么成为超级大国还有意义吗?

Hong Kong. Let’s use Hong Kong as a gauge of Chinese strength here. In 1967, China backed a historical riot in HK against the British. Thousands of Hongers took to the streets and protested against British colonialism. Protestors were seen carrying posters of Chairman Mao. Patriotism was their game. Let’s fast forward to 2014, and the tables have turned. Hongers were protesting against China, and praising the west. Most of these protestors are claiming that they prefered British rule. So, we can see from this example, that in the past 50 years, China has gotten weaker, not stronger. Not only are they not able to protect their own interests within their own territory, their own compatriots have turned against them. Just imagine for a moment if Texans rose up and turned against America. Would you, at that point, consider America to be reemerging as a world power? Of course not.

香港。让我们用香港来衡量中国在这方面的实力。1967年，香港爆发了一场反对英国殖民者的政治运动。成千上万的香港人走上街头，抗议英国殖民主义。抗议者们举着中国领导人的海报。爱国主义也是他们的战场。让我们快进到2014年，情况发生了逆转。香港人抗议香港政府，赞美西方。大多数抗议者声称他们更喜欢被英国统治。所以，我们可以从这个例子中看到，在过去的50年里，中国变得更弱了，而不是更强了。他们不仅无法在自己的领土内保护自己的利益，而且部分香港人还发生了动乱。试想一下，如果德州人站起来反对美国，从这一点上，你会认为美国是一个重新崛起的世界强国吗? 当然不是。

What’s the significance of the HK riots you ask? Let’s look at it like this. Remember the USSR? Their collapse actually started with protests and riots. Did you know that over 70% of Soviets were loyal to the USSR? In fact, only a small % of radical protestors really opposed the country. But that didn’t matter. What was important was who was backing the protestors, and would the USSR be able to defend itself against them. History has shown us that the USSR was not able to, and the small % actually prevailed. China also showed that it was unable to cope with the unrest in HK. How many people supported the riots was not important. What is important is, how strong are the people backing the riots, and how weak is the person defending himself from them. In that specific incident, the west showed China that it was the west who ran the show in HK, not the Chinese themselves. Scholars often claim that China suffered 100 years of humiliation, however, the west showed China that the humiliation picked up right where it left off, as the west is able to do whatever they want inside of China. In that case, China looked more like a declining regional power rather than a emerging world power.

你问香港暴动的意义是什么? 让我们这样看，记得苏联吗? 它的崩溃实际上始于抗议和骚乱。你知道超过70%的苏联人忠于苏联吗? 事实上，只有一小部分激进抗议者真正反对这个国家。但这无关紧要，重要的是谁在支持抗议者，苏联是否有能力抵御他们。历史告诉我们，苏联做不到这一点，而这一小部分人实际上占了上风。香港的动荡也是如此，有多少人支持暴乱并不重要。重要的是，支持暴乱的人有多强大，而抵抗暴乱的人有多软弱。在那次事件中，西方向中国表明，在香港作秀的是西方，而不是中国人自己。学者们经常声称，中国遭受了100年的屈辱，然而，西方向中国表明，屈辱从它停止的地方重新开始，因为西方能够在中国做他们想做的任何事情。在这种情况下，中国看起来更像是一个衰落的地区大国，而不是一个新兴的世界大国。

Speaking of Hong Kong, let’s look at their one country two systems. In essence, what you have in Hong Kong is a version of extended colonialism, where Hong Kong is run by “western standards”. Now, if I was an emerging world power, why would I be accepting standards dictated to me by countries that previously humiliated me? Wouldn’t I be creating my own standards? At least that is what one would expect from an emerging world power. Today’s China is essentially split into 4 countries. You’ve got China proper, then you’ve got Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. There’s no chance it can ever emerge as a world power unless it was 1 country 1 system. The 4 countries, 4 systems is actually an excelent indication of China’s weakness, and shows us that China is far from an emerging world power, and it is unlikely that China will become an emerging world power within our lifetime. The fact that the west can openly back independence movements inside of China, while China can’t do the same in the west is indicative that China has a long way to go, that’s even if China proper is still entact in 50 years. Even declining powers like Britain, France, and Spain have some control of their education, media, and markets within their territories, which is more than what we can say about China. Today’s China is unable to control ¾ of its territories in the realm of education, media, and markets. Did you know that Hongers, Taiwanese, and Macanese don’t even use Chinese websites, or watch CCTV. Instead, they prefer western websites like Google, and TV stations like CNN. Most Chinese brands are nowhere to be found in HK, TW, MC. Likewise, their education system is mostly under the control of their former European colonial masters.

说到香港，让我们看看他们的一国两制。从本质上说，香港是殖民主义的一种延伸，一直被按照“西方标准”管理香港。现在，如果我是一个新兴的世界强国，我为什么要接受那些曾经羞辱过我的国家强加给我的标准呢? 我不是在创造自己的标准吗? 至少这是人们对一个新兴世界大国的期望。今天的中国基本上分为四个国家。首先是中国，然后是香港、澳门和台湾。除非它是一国一制，否则它不可能成为世界强国。“四国四制”其实很好地说明了中国的弱点，告诉我们，中国还远远没有成为一个新兴的世界大国，在我们有生之年，中国也不太可能成为一个新兴的世界大国。
事实上，西方可以公开支持中国内部的独立运动，而中国不能在西方做同样的事情，这表明中国还有很长的路要走，即使中国在50年后仍然存在。甚至像英国、法国和西班牙这样的衰落大国也对其领土内的教育、媒体和市场有一定的控制，这比我们对中国所能说的要多。今天的中国在教育、媒体和市场领域无法控制四分之三的领土。你知道吗，香港人、台湾人和澳门人甚至不上中文网站，也不看中央电视台。相反，他们更喜欢谷歌这样的西方网站和CNN这样的电视台。大多数中国品牌在香港、台湾、澳门都找不到。同样，他们的教育体系也大多在前欧洲殖民统治者的控制下。

Money cannot, and should not be used as a gauge for world power. Japan, for example, has the 3 highest GDP, yet no one calls them a world power. Furthermore, Japan cannot exert its power first without American approval. Japan could not even develop its own satelite without American approval first. Money is often times a trap. Anyone with eyes can see that the “richer” China became, the more it came under US control, and influence. China is not nearly as assertive as it was in 1967. What China has become is like a dope addict. America got them hooked on drugs (capitalism), and now they can’t do without it, but as long as they keep wanting drugs (markets), they have to do as America tells them to. The fact that China is even allowed to do business abroad only means that the US approves of it. The operation can be shut down at anytime, and America can isolate China at any time. China fears this, and that’s why Myanmar is so important to China. It’s also why China launched the one belt one road initiative. ZTE was fined $1 billion by the US. That just goes to show how China does, and has to play by the west’s rules, and is by no means, an independent actor. A dependent China is precisely what Nixon had in mind when he formed relations with China. He, and other American oligarchs knew the corrupt nature of Deng and his associates, and therefore would be easy to control, and manipulate. Their greed, and thirst for markets would mean that they would be willing to sacrifice China’s own national interests in order for short term, and personal economic gains. Although there have been some speed bumps along the way, China is, for the most part, docile. Germany has the 4 largest economy yet they too must obey the US. Neither Japan, nor Germany’s military can even possess offensive weapons. As long as Japan, and Germany wishes to sell Hondas and BMWs abroad, they better do as America says. While it is plausible that China is more independent than Japan, or Germany combined, it is incorrect to assume that China is on the path to becoming a world power. As China becomes more capitalist, it will be further absorbed into the western sphere of influence. This has been happening steadily for the past 40 years. Some western scholars have also mentioned that as Chinese study abroad, and young Chinese are westernized, they will accept western “standards”. This once again is a gain for the west, not China. It’s not western youth who are studying in China, and adopting Chinese values, but the other way around. Chinese people often boast about how strong their culture is, and how all invaders have been Sinicized. However, what we are witnessing today is history in the making. Not only have invaders not become Sinicized, it is actually the Chinese who are becoming westernized, and forgetting their own identity. You can actually already see it when Chinese are going by the name of “Joe”, or “Bob”.

金钱不能，也不应该被用作衡量世界实力的标准。例如，日本是GDP排名前三的国家，但没有人称它为世界强国。此外，没有美国的批准，日本不能首先使用自己的军事力量。如果没有美国的批准，日本甚至不能发展自己的卫星。金钱往往是陷阱。任何有眼睛的人都能看到，中国变得越“富有”，就越受美国的控制和影响。中国现在远没有1967年那么自信。
中国已经上瘾了，美国让他们对资本主义上瘾了，现在他们离不开这个毒品了，但只要他们还想要市场，他们就必须按照美国的要求去做。事实上，中国甚至被允许在海外做生意，这只意味着美国批准了它。行动可以随时关闭，美国可以随时孤立中国。中国担心这一点，这就是缅甸对中国如此重要的原因。这也是中国发起一带一路倡议的原因。中兴被美国罚款10亿美元。这恰恰表明，中国是如何行事的，必须按照西方的规则行事，而且绝不是一个独立的角色。一个依赖美国的中国正是尼克松在与中国建立关系时所考虑的。德国是全球第四大经济体，但他们也必须服从美国。日本和德国的军队甚至都不能拥有进攻性武器。
只要日本和德国想把本田和宝马卖到国外，他们最好照美国说的做。虽然中国比日本或德国加起来更独立是有道理的，但认为中国正走在成为世界强国的道路上是不正确的。随着中国变得更加资本主义，它将进一步被西方势力所同化。在过去的40年里，这种情况一直在稳步发生。一些西方学者也提到，随着中国人出国留学，中国的年轻人被西化，他们会接受西方的“标准”。这又一次是西方、而非中国的收获。并不是在中国学习并接受中国价值观的西方年轻人，而是相反。中国人经常吹嘘他们的文化是多么强大，以及所有的入侵者是如何被中国化的。然而，我们今天所目睹的是正在创造的历史。不仅侵略者没有中国化，实际上是中国人正在西化，忘记了自己的身份。当中国人叫“乔”或“鲍勃”时，你实际上已经看到了这一点。

If China somehow sets the standards for 5g, and convinces Saudi Arabia to use the Yuan, then we can come back and have this discussion of China as an emerging super power, but how can that happen? In the 60’s, China, through its global peoples war, had many bargaining chips against the west. Today, it has none.
Expanding military means nothing. The USSR also expanded their military, yet look where that got them. Power is not always gained through military alone. Real military strategists will notice, and acknowledge that China’s sponsorship of guerrilla warfare around the world was much more powerful, and successful than the program they have today, despite having primitive weapons. In 1966, China could have easily backed a regime change in Malaysia (and probably did). Today, they cannot, despite Malaysia’s anti Chinese stance, and Malaysia’s importance to one belt one road. China also was unable to protect its allies in Myanmar, where is just stood by and watched as the country moved closer to the west, and blocked one of China’s most important routes into the Indian ocean.

如果中国以某种方式为5G设定标准，并说服沙特阿拉伯使用人民币结算石油贸易，那么我们就可以回来讨论中国作为一个新兴超级大国的问题，但这怎么可能发生呢? 在60年代，中国通过全球人民战争，有很多与西方谈判的筹码。今天，它已经没有了。
扩大军事力量毫无意义。苏联也扩大了他们的军事力量，但看看他们得到了什么。权力并不总是只通过军事获得的。真正的军事战略家会注意到，并承认这一点，中国在世界各地支持的游击战比他们今天的计划更强大，更成功，尽管当时的他们只拥有原始的武器。1966年，中国本可以轻易地支持马来西亚的政权更迭(而且很可能确实支持了)。今天，他们不能，尽管马来西亚的反华立场，马来西亚对一带一路的重要性。中国也无法保护其在缅甸的盟友。在缅甸向西方靠拢的过程中，中国只是袖手旁观，这封锁了中国通往印度洋的最重要通道之一。

China can exert all the pressure they want on pacific countries, but the fact of the matter remains that the west can and does exert far more pressure. Those who are in tune with reality know that the world fears the west. They don’t fear China. This is why Canada, on the demand of America, captured the Huawei executive. Ask yourself this, if China demanded Pakistan to capture Mark Zuckerberg, do you think they would? Probably not.
Another prime example is Malaysia. China can exert all the pressure in the world they want, but Malaysia still canceled the port, and railway projects. Going back even further, Myanmar canceled a very important dam project with China. Singapore, likewise, sides with the west time, and time again, often engaging in provacative military drills aimed at China. I can exert pressure against a door, or a wall, but that doesn’t mean that my pressure can knock down the door, or wall.

中国可以对太平洋国家施加任何他们想施加的压力，但事实仍然是，西方可以而且确实施加了更多的压力。那些与现实合拍的人知道，世界害怕西方。他们不怕中国，这也是加拿大应美国要求逮捕华为高管的原因。问问你自己，如果中国要求巴基斯坦逮捕马克·扎克伯格，你认为他们会这么做吗? 可能不会。
另一个典型的例子是马来西亚。中国可以在世界上施加他们想要的所有压力，但马来西亚仍然取消了港口和铁路项目。再往前追溯，缅甸取消了与中国的一个非常重要的大坝项目。同样，新加坡一次又一次站在西方一边，经常参与西方的军事演习。我可以对一扇门或一堵墙施加压力，但这并不意味着我的压力可以把门或墙推倒。

Let’s not be naive here. China has lent money to the west as a protection fee. There are unofficial agreements that the US will not attack China if China pays up. I bet you that if China stopped lending the US money, the US would be much more aggressive towards China than it already is. In fact, I’m willing to bet an anti Chinese riot would magically show up in Hong Kong.
The misconception is that China is buying time, but how about looking at it like this. Maybe China isn’t buying time. Maybe China just has no real effective way at challenging the west. Who says that time will buy favorable conditions? Did Jesus say that? At this rate, China will be weaker in 10 years than it is today. I’ve already used Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Malaysia as examples. All 3 of those countries were Chinese allies 10 years ago. China has fumbled, and lost them all.
America is hardly departing from countries. What we are seeing is the exact opposite. As we speak right now, America is pushing its way back into Venezuela. What we are finding is that American, not Chinese influence is expanding. What has happened with Sri Lanka, and Myanmar is that it is China, not the US who is unable to protect its allies, and the US is the one doing as it wishes. America also kicked Russia out of the Ukraine only a few years ago and now the Ukraine is fully pro western. South Sudan is another example of western hegemony prevailing.

我们不要太天真了。中国向西方提供贷款，作为保护费。有非官方协议称，如果中国付钱，美国就不会攻击中国。我敢打赌，如果中国停止借钱给美国，美国对中国的态度会比现在更加强硬。事实上，我敢打赌，一场反华暴乱会神奇地在香港发生。
误解是中国在争取时间，但不妨这样看。也许中国不是在拖延时间。也许中国只是没有真正有效的方法来挑战西方。谁说时间能买到有利条件?是耶稣说的吗? 按照这个速度，10年后中国将比现在更弱。我已经用斯里兰卡、缅甸和马来西亚作为例子。这三个国家10年前都是中国的盟友。
美国几乎没有离开其他国家。我们所看到的恰恰相反。就在我们说话的此时此刻，美国正在向委内瑞拉进军。我们发现，美国而不是中国的影响力正在扩大。斯里兰卡和缅甸的情况表明，拥有更多盟友的不是中国，而是美国，而且美国是一个随心所欲的国家。几年前美国还把俄罗斯赶出了乌克兰，现在乌克兰完全亲西方。南苏丹是西方霸权盛行的另一个例子。

China may require western companies to surrender their proprietary technologies in exchange for access to the Chinese market, however, having technology, and selling it are two different things. The situation with Huawei shows us that China can possess very important technologies, but not be able to sell it. So it can acquire technology from the west, but not be able to do much else with it, because the west (through force) still controls the markets, and politics, therefore, they can ban high tech Chinese products, and even imprison their executives. In fact, America regularly successfully interferes with many projects around the world, including one such project in Mexico, where China was supposed to build their railway. All America had to do was give one command, and Mexico folded. China may be the looming world dictator, but the west is the current world dictator, and this is not set to change within our lifetime.
Instead of China waiting out the west, it appears much more plausible that the west is waiting for China to continue screwing up, shoot themselves in the foot, and dig their own grave.

中国可能会要求西方企业交出专有技术，以换取进入中国市场的机会，然而，拥有技术和出售技术是两回事。华为的情况告诉我们，中国可以拥有非常重要的技术，但不能出售。所以中国可以从西方获得技术，但不能用这些技术做其他事情，因为西方(通过武力)仍然控制着市场和国际政治，因此，他们可以禁止中国的高科技产品，甚至监禁他们的高管。事实上，美国经常成功地干预世界各地的许多项目，包括在墨西哥的一个这样的项目，中国本该在那里修建他们的铁路。美国只需要发出一个命令，墨西哥就会屈服。中国可能是即将到来的世界霸权，但西方是当前的世界霸权，这一点在我们有生之年不会改变。
相比中国等待西方走出困境，西方似乎更有可能等待中国继续搞砸，搬起石头砸自己的脚。

The success of the west relies on usage of both the carot (seized from weaker countries), and the stick. China only has limited carots (it must grow itself), and no sticks (bargaining chips), so their method is likely to be much less effective. This is why Canada arrested Huawei executives, Malaysia canceled China’s rail, and port, and this is why Australia banned Huawei’s 5g. Remember Sadam only thought about trading oil in Euros, and that cost him his life. If China could pull a stunt like that in Malaysia, Australia, or Canada (to punish them), then I will accept that China is an emerging world power. However, what we are seeing, time and time again, is that China cannot retaliate. One very good example is south Korea, and Thad. Now Thad is a weapon used against China in south Korea. China obviously protested this, but despite this aggression against China from south Korea, China continues to buy south Korean products in bulk. This is precisely why countries do not take China seriously. Who would take seriously a country that cant even defend its own national security? Imagine what the American response would be if Cuba installed a HQ-9 aimed at Florida.

西方的成功依赖于同时使用“胡萝卜”(从较弱国家手中夺取的)和“大棒”。中国只有有限的胡萝卜(它必须自己种植)，没有棍子(谈判的筹码)，所以他们的方法很可能没有那么有效。这就是为什么加拿大逮捕了华为高管，马来西亚取消了中国承建的铁路和港口，这就是为什么澳大利亚禁止华为的5G。记住萨达姆只是考虑用欧元交易石油，这就让他付出了生命的代价。如果中国可以在马来西亚、澳大利亚或加拿大这样做(来惩罚他们)，那么我将接受中国是一个新兴的世界大国。然而，我们一次又一次地看到，中国不能发动报复。一个很好的例子是韩国的萨德事件。现在萨德已经是在韩国用来对付中国的武器了。中国显然对此表示抗议，但尽管韩国对中国进行了冒犯，中国仍继续大量购买韩国产品。这正是各国不把中国当超级大国的原因。谁会认真对待一个连自己的国家安全都保卫不了的国家? 想象一下，如果古巴部署了一枚针对佛罗里达州的红旗-9导弹，美国会做出怎样的反应。

With that said, however, what’s most important isn’t what Chinese Americans think about China’s supposed reemergence. What’s most important is how American oligarchs see China’s supposed reeemergence. If American oligarchs feel threatened by China’s perceived reemergence, it could spell trouble for Chinese Americans, as America has not always been kind to perceived enemies. The way America treated the Japanese Americans during world war 2, and Muslim Americans today should be indicative of how Chinese Americans could end up being treated. If American oligarchs choose to, they could turn their anger towards Chinese Americans as a result of their discontent towards China. One concern is will American oligarchs choose to do Chinese Americans like they have done Muslim Americans? If so, Chinese Americans will have a long tough road ahead of them. Paranoia isn’t unique to American. China also can lash out at Chinese Americans. In fact, China had long been suspicious of overseas Chinese, and indeed overseas Chinese have often times sided with the west against China. Chinese Americans can and will be perceived as spies against China for the west. What you may end up seeing is Chinese Americans will be neither welcomed in America, or China. Furthermore, Chinese Americans may also face backlash in other western countries like Canada, or Sweden. This backlash could end up affecting not only Chinese Americans, but Asians in general. If you pay attention to hate crimes, you will notice that Hindus, Punjabis, and Indians are being targeted by white racists even though they are not members of the Islamic faith. All they have to do is look alike, and it’s fair game. This could replicate itself should the west turn against ethnic Chinese.

话虽如此，但最重要的并不是华裔美国人如何看待中国所谓的复兴。最重要的是，美国寡头们如何看待中国所谓的复兴。如果美国的寡头们因为中国的重新崛起而感到威胁，这可能会给美籍华人带来麻烦，因为美国并不总是善待他们眼中的敌人。第二次世界大战期间美国对待日裔美国人的方式，以及今天对待美国穆斯林的方式，应该预示着华裔美国人最终会如何被对待。
如果美国寡头们选择这样做，他们可能会因为对中国的不满而把愤怒转向华裔美国人。一个问题是，美国寡头会像对待穆斯林美国人一样对待华裔美国人吗? 如果是这样的话，华裔美国人将有一条漫长而艰难的路要走。妄想症并非美国人独有，中国也可以抨击华裔美国人。事实上，中国长期以来一直对海外华人持放纵的态度，事实上，一部分海外华人经常站在西方一边反对中国。你最终可能会看到的是，华裔美国人在美国和中国都不受欢迎。此外，华裔美国人在加拿大、瑞典等其他西方国家也可能面临反弹。这种反弹最终可能影响的不仅是华裔美国人，还有整个亚裔群体。如果你关注仇恨犯罪，你会注意到印度教徒、旁遮普人和印度人正成为白人种族主义者的目标，尽管他们不是伊斯兰信仰的成员。他们只要长得像就行了，这很公平。如果西方转而反对华人，这种情况可能会重演。

Obviously, China could just throw in the towel and surrender itself to America. This would make it easy on Chinese Americans, but why should China do something just to please Chinese Americans? They should do what is in the best interest of China, even if it means offending the west, and jeopardizing Chinese Americans status. China’s needs to answer to the workers, and farmers living in China, not Chinese Americans, and not anyone else.
Let me just end by saying that these so called netizens who refer to China as being communist has either never been to China, or have no understanding about China, and or communism. Therefore, they are not qualified to talk about China. Anyone who even studies China from a distance ought to know that China has not been communist for 40 years. There are many books available, even in the west, that acknowledge China’s abandonment of communism 40 years ago. Not only is China not communist, they have staunchly been against communism for 40 years.

显然，中国可以直接认输，向美国投降。这对华裔美国人来说很容易，但为什么中国要做一些事情来取悦华裔美国人呢?他们应该做最符合中国利益的事，即使这意味着冒犯西方，危及华裔美国人的地位。中国的需求应该对生活在中国的工人和农民负责，而不是华裔美国人，也不是其他人。
最后，我想说的是，这些所谓的称中国为共产主义的网民，要么从未到过中国，要么对中国和共产主义一无所知。因此，他们没有资格谈论中国。任何一个从远处研究中国的人都应该知道，中国已经不是40年前的中国了。即使在西方，也有很多书承认中国在40年前改变了其路线，中国现在走得是“中国特色社会主义”路线。