China’s goals

Dragon fields, forever . . .

By JoeAm

My sources of information are spread around the globe, a giant spider web, each node a listening post.

One source is a particularly intelligent student of the Philippine condition and he warns me that the Philippines is in bed with the wrong dragon. Given that he spells realise with an ‘s’ I think he may be in London, perhaps MI-6 or some other capable “research agency”. I don’t demand clarity about such details lest they decide I am one step beyond need to know.

My source has pretty much written the Philippines off as being the blind following the stupid and greedy. But his thinking is impeccable, maybe the best around. I came to this conclusion as I read the following excerpts from a note he sent me:

Here are the six primary objectives of China according to my source:

  1. Political influence/control
  2. Economic opportunity/expansion
  3. Military dominance
  4. Technological standards
  5. Cultural influence on countries – values/ideology/china model
  6. Maintain domestic growth/improvement in living standards.

Boy, howdy, that certainly puts what we can see into order. Looking at the evidence:

  1. We can understand the efforts China is making to intrude into the affairs in the US, Australia, Pacific, South America . . . everywhere. Pushback from these places does not mean stop. It means keep going, or find another way around.
  2. China’s economic expansion has been astounding . . . always on the edge of collapse we are told . . . never collapsing.
  3. Military dominance. Hello militarized artificial islands in international waters. China is building a war machine both in ships, arms, and skilled troops, and in setting up the battlefield to her advantage.
  4. Technological standards: I’ve been reading about the efforts going into artificial intelligence. China is full on to seeking smarter systems than anyone else. We know of their hacking and theft of state and commercial secrets going on. And they had a research ship nosing around into Benham Rise looking for resources to claim, to see if it is worth the effort of conquest, as if having a lock on the world’s precious metals were not yet enough.
  5. Chinese leaders preach, and lecture, and coddle, and criticize, and goad, and push to bring wider recognition that China is the A dog on this planet. I’m determined that my son learn Mandarin, so I’d say it is working.
  6. China’s domestic living standards are pushing upward and outward, each citizen an ambassador for China, in all the good ways and bad ways an ambassador can behave.

My “MI-6” source also notes that there are 12 goals for China’s global expansion via infrastructure, or OBOR (One Belt One Road):

  1. Reduce/eliminate US influence in region
  2. Food security to cater for population/middle class growth
  3. Consumer market for products & surpluses – vertical & horizontal
  4. Access to cheap labour pool
  5. Control supply chain logistics
  6. Secure oil & gas supplies
  7. Secure minerals & commodities supplied
  8. Have voice/ally at international forums – asean/un/wto etc.
  9. Develop dispersed military bases
  10. Influence technical/technology standards
  11. Build Global information network
  12. Foster cultural dissemination.

You can see how these objectives feed directly into the six pronged master plan. And you can see the logic of all that China is doing.

The words she tosses out for public consumption are propaganda and posturing. Softening objection. Probing for weakness. Leveraging opportunities. The real meaning is in the deeds.

The Philippines is a major conquest for China, knocking down the blockade that could have slowed expansion east into the Pacific heartland, the Mariana Islands. With the Philippines under her wings, there is no material blockage between China and Hawaii.

My source has a concise one-sentence summary of the situation that brings a nice close to this article, for your reflection:

“China actually needs the Philippines more than the Philippines needs China but the [Filipino] dumbos don’t realise that.”

Go down China’s OBOR objectives and see just how much the Philippines contributes.

Basically, for free, nothing asked.


110 Responses to “China’s goals”
  1. Joe, what else is really new.. one look at the map of Portuguese and Spanish trade says it all..

    1. OBOR traces the Portuguese route conquering ports in Africa, then India, then Southeast Asia the other way around. The Portuguese were the first colonizers the Chinese dealt with – Macau.

    2. The other side of things is the Americas-Asia link that the Philippines ALWAYS was from 1571. First galleon trade from Mexico to Manila, later continuing the US progression Hawaii-Guam.. Thinking forward, the Chinese may want to go the way of Magellan and Dewey backward also.

    • The part they will have difficulty winning is the soft power part..

      In addition to the fundamentals of military and economic power, “every successful empire,” observes Cambridge University historian Joya Chatterji, “had to elaborate a universalist and inclusive discourse” to win support from the world’s subordinate states and their leaders. Successful imperial transitions driven by the hard power of guns and money also require the soft-power salve of cultural suasion for sustained and successful global dominion. Spain espoused Catholicism and Hispanism, the Ottomans Islam, the Soviets communism, France a cultural francophonie, and Britain an Anglophone culture. Indeed, during its century of global dominion from 1850 to 1940, Britain was the exemplar par excellence of such soft power, evincing an enticing cultural ethos of fair play and free markets that it propagated through the Anglican church, the English language and its literature, and the virtual invention of modern athletics (cricket, soccer, tennis, rugby, and rowing). Similarly, at the dawn of its global dominion, the United States courted allies worldwide through soft-power programs promoting democracy and development. These were made all the more palatable by the appeal of such things as Hollywood films, civic organizations like Rotary International, and popular sports like basketball and baseball.
      China has nothing comparable. Its writing system has some 7,000 characters, not 26 letters. Its communist ideology and popular culture are remarkably, even avowedly, particularistic.
      — Beijing’s Bid for Global Power by Alfred Maccoy

      • edgar lores says:

        1. What can China teach us?

        2. In economic power, China’s main contribution will be the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

        3. In military power, China can offer no innovation except perhaps in electronics. Hacking, stealing military and technological secrets, but also disrupting communications.

        3. In the soft power areas of language, sports, religion, culture, and medicine:

        o If America gave us English, China will give us Mandarin.
        o If America gave us basketball, China will give us dragon boat racing and ping pong.
        o If Spain gave us Catholicism, China will give us Atheism.
        o If America gave us Hollywood, China will give us Peking Opera, circus acrobatic acts, and casino gambling.
        o If France gave us dengvaxia, China will give us shabu.

        4. In martial arts, China will augment our arnis with kung fu and tai chi.

        5. But it is in the central area of government that China will bequeath the greatest soft power enhancement.

        o If America gave us democracy, China will give us subjugation, repression, and mass re-education.

        • And, as to the last point, it astounds me that any reasonable and emotionally strong person would subject himself to that form of government.

          • “4. In martial arts, China will augment our arnis with kung fu and tai chi.”

            The people who practice arnis/eskrima want nothing to do with Chinese martial arts. Chinese martial arts have been in the Philippines, but they too want nothing to do with arnis/eskrima.

            The popularity of MMA over there may be able to bridge the two, but you have to understand the psychology of the folks who study these martial arts— this was Bruce Lee’s biggest hurdles, cross-pollination.

            The only times arnis/eskrima came together with kung-fu was here,

            Even then, Bruce Lee saw it as less, “Game of Death” (unfinished):

            From Wiki:

            Although the pagoda was supposed to have five floors, complete scenes were only shot for three of the floors: the “Temple of the Tiger,” where Lee faced Dan Inosanto; the “Temple of the Dragon”, where he fought Ji Han-jae; and the final floor, where he fought Abdul-Jabbar was the “Temple of the Unknown”.

            Hapkido master Hwang In-Shik was slated to play the guardian of the first floor, a master of a kick-oriented style, while Bruce’s long time student and good friend Taky Kimura was asked to play the guardian of the second floor, a stylist of praying mantis kung fu.

            The goal of the film’s plot was to showcase Lee’s beliefs regarding the principles of martial arts. As each martial artist is defeated (including Lee’s allies), the flaws in their fighting style are revealed.

            Some, like Dan Inosanto‘s character, rely too much on fixed patterns of offensive and defensive techniques, while others lack economy of motion. Lee defeats his opponents by having a fighting style that involves fluid movement, unpredictability, and an eclectic blend of techniques. His dialogue often includes comments on their weaknesses.

            • I should clarify, Bruce Lee saw arnis/eskrima (3rd floor) as less to his Jeet Kune Do (5th floor), but superior to kung-fu (2nd floor). Abdul-Jabbar (yeah, the Laker center) represented Jeet Kune Do (which Lee intends also to defeat).

              What’s prescient is his choice of 4th floor Hapkido, closest to MMA at the time.

          • Loli says:

            It will not astound me. After 100 years of occupation, Filipinos have internalized oppression. It seems the default behavior for many is to submit. It seems that the comfort zone is to have a master telling them what to do and believe and rely on the master to know and protect their best interests. So very much at risk to more exploitation and subjugation. AND the coping to oppression is beat the system and horizontal violence instead of changing the system for the common good. Mass therapy, conscientization on impact of years of being colonized on their psyche, views of themselves and others might help the Filipinos understand why they are working againts their best interests and how they can grow and mature as a nation.

    • karlgarcia says:

      As one Filipino historian said “History does not repeat itself, we repeat history”.

      • Magellan’s slave (he was Filipino? Visayan?) was the first to go around the world. China next.

        • karlgarcia says:

          Sonny and myself had an exchange about that.
          let me look for it.

        • That’s it , karl! I googled Enrique but not much on Wiki. But I remember reading , either “World Lit Only by Fire” or “Over the Edge of the World” (awhile back),

          that Enrique was in fact Visayan , he wasn’t much useful (interpreting-wise) until they landed in Southern Leyte, where he was better than conversant , the folks they came across in Leyte then guided them towards Cebu (I believe the folks in Leyte were Humabon’s subjects, or allies).

          So the theory was that Enrique was captured from those parts and he ended up in Malacca. Which makes sense if he was from present day Malaysia or Indonesia, I don’t think they’d be conversant in Visayan. The closest to Visayan is Tausug, which is spoken in Borneo. So maybe that too.

          I’d have to get a hold of those two books again to be sure. I just kinda read over that part at the time, but do remember the Enrique and Visayan connection.

            • The biggest indication that he might have been Visayan is that he jumped ship in the Philippines, shortly after the massacre by Humabon.

              Could also just have been that he saw the Spaniards were likely not to survive and he just knew the area at least a bit.

              My speculation is that Yoyoy Villame and MRP are among his descendants.

              • Hahaha. Now that’s funny!

              • edgar lores says:

                To honor the occasion, a quote from the inimitable man himself:

                “All people are immoral. We wouldn’t be here in this earth if couples did not do immoral, absolutely dirty, clinically unsanitary, totally not hygeinic acts; 2ndly, 4-letter words and expletives are confined behind closed doors when they come out they wag their tongue on their children for spewing bleeping words; 3rdly nakedness is a sign of purity absence of malice, yet, when I go out naked I get arrested, theefore, Jesus Christ or someone higher than him that made us should also be arrested for indencency; Finally, WE ALL DO IT! STOP THE HYPOCRISY! WE ARE ALL INDESCENT. WE ARE ALL HYPOCRITES WHEN IT COMES TO SEXUALITY.

                When we stand before San Pedro, he will definitely ask about sex. And, absolutely, THEY will all fail. IN THE END, I will end up in heaven by myself and my nemesis, GOD.”

              • Edgar, did Yoyoy say that – or Duterte? Or is that just the Visayan subculture? Or even me?


                Malaya tayong lumaban! Lumaban sa lahat ng kumokontra sa tunay na Pilipino at sa minamahal na Pang. Duterte! Lumaban sa mga ayaw tumanggap ng tunay na katotohanan tulad ng Rappler na iyan, tulad ng Bishop David na iyan, tangina! Bastos sila pagka’t kinokontra nila ang mga bagay na nararapat para sa bansa! Bakit, hindi ba iyong mga taga-Sentinel ipinana nila ang misyonaryong lumapit? Dapat iyan ang ginawa natin sa Limasawa. Mga swapang pati sila, kapag Bisaya pagkain at inom para sa lahat, sa misa pagkain para sa lahat, inom sa pari lang!

                Translation: we are free to fight: to fight all who are against real Filipinos and the beloved Pang. Duterte! Fight all who refuse to accept the truth, like that Rappler and that Bishop David! They are impolite because they are going against what is for the country! Why, didn’t those from the Sentinel islands shoot arrows at the missionary who came near? That is what we should have done in Limasawa. Plus they are selfish, among Visayans food and drink are for all, during mass food is for all, but drink is only for the priest!


                When the Spanish missionaries introduced the Ten Commandments to the natives from 1521 onwards, after Magellan and his men introduced the missionary position to native women, the natives were genuinely confused. What if I want to kill my enemy? What if I feel lust for someone who is not my wife? Some say according to Manny Pacquiao, if she is not your neighbor’s wife it is OK. What I have heard from the diwatas of old is that the natives introduced two more commandments, in order to be able to adjust old ways to the new order of things:

                11th Commandment: Thou shalt not get caught.
                12th Commandment: If caught, thou shalt not admit.

              • edgar lores says:

                The strain of anticlericalism in the country is long and deep.

                It may be said to have started with LapuLapu, entrenched by Rizal, and flowering in the various schisms starting with Aglipayanism, Iglesia ni Cristo, the Methodists, the Rizalist sect, Quiboloy’s Kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the Evangelicals.

                Claro M. Recto attacked the Church when they sought to ban the Fili and the Noli. And PNoy succeeded in passing the RH Law.

                Today, the strain has culminated in Duterte who has been the most vocal, the most outspoken, and the most apoplectic critic of the pope, archbishops, and bishops.

                This, in a country that is 80% Catholic.

                It is not just Visayan subculture, not only Duterte, but a great swath of the populace — including nominal Catholics.

                Speaking of Yoyoy, he not only wrote “Magellan” but also “Butsekik” ostensibly a parody of Chinese-sounding words. Wikipedia says: “The Chinese community in Cebu felt slighted by the song but dropped plans to bring Villame to court because not a single Chinese word was included in the song.”

              • edgar lores says:

                Oh, that was MRP.

            • Thanks for that article, karl! The article seems to be 50/50 about Enrique being Visayan, but one or was it both of the two books I mentioned above, if I remember, was more like 80/20 he was Visayan— based on Pigafetta’s records.

              I miss MRP.

              As to anti-cleric sentiments (is Yoyoy like a Mark Twain of sorts in the Philippines?) , I once was in a bar in Cebu (on Mango Street, i remembered the street from Sandra Cisneros’ book we had to read in HS) partied with military and police types , but weirdly as the night progressed

              ended up hanging out with 5 or so other Filipinos, which I first thought were also military/police types, short cropped hair and fit.

              They were in fact seminary students (getting ready to become Catholic priests), 1 or 2 were already priests.

              Yup, they were drinking and partying as much or more than our military/police counterparts. Which was really weird. There I found out from one of the practicing priests (assigned in Negros island) that not all priests take vows of poverty, only chastity.

              I wish sonny was here to elaborate, I believe he was the one who explained to me that there were secular and religious priests. So i guess the seminarians/priests we met in a bar on Mango Street were celibate but not necessarily poor.

              And they took some girls with them. I’m sure for late, or early morning mass. 😉 I was surprised how matter of fact it was that they were bar hopping.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Re: Yoyoy
                I refer you to this comment by Edgar:
                Also click on the youtube video.


              • karlgarcia says:

                Edgar allso mention Butsekik Which actually gibberish made to sound like Chinese.

                SIGN UP

                Yoyoy Villame

                Pong chuwala (pong chuwalai)
                Chi chi ri kong koila
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)
                Bo bochichang (bo-bochichang)
                Chi chiri kong tong nang
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)

                Chiri wong tong choi, toro kong tong loy
                Chidang bo bochichang chiri kong nong nang
                Chiring cho ro yak kang kong o-ohup butse kik ek-ek-ek

                Pong chuwala (pong chuwalai)
                Chi chi ri kong koila
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)
                Bo bochichang (bo-bochichang)
                Chi chiri kong tong nang
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)

                Chiri wong tong choi, toro kong tong loy
                Chidang bo bochichang chiri kong nong nang
                Chiring cho ro yak kang kong o-ohup butse kik ek-ek-ek

                Choro ro pong pong yok
                Choro ro pong pang plu
                Chidang bo bochichang chidi kong kong plok
                Di bai botchok, chidi di plok
                Chidi dokok wok, chodo dokok ngok ngok

                Pong chuwala (pong chuwalai)
                Chi chi ri kong koila
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)
                Bo bochichang (bo-bochichang)
                Chi chiri kong tong nang
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)

                Chiri wong tong choi, toro kong tong loy
                Chidang bo bochichang chiri kong nong nang
                Chiring cho ro yak kang kong o-ohup butse kik ek-ek-ek

                Choro ro pong pong yok
                Choro ro pong pang plu
                Chidang bo bochichang chidi kong kong plok
                Di bai botchok, chidi di plok
                Chidi dokok wok, chodo dokok ngok ngok

                Pong chuwala (pong chuwalai)
                Chi chi ri kong koila
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)
                Bo bochichang (bo-bochichang)
                Chi chiri kong tong nang
                Butse kik (butse kik) ek-ek-ek (ek-ek-ek)

                Chiri wong tong choi, toro kong tong loy
                Chidang bo bochichang chiri kong nong nang
                Chiring cho ro yak kang kong o-ohup butse kik ek-ek-ek
                Yeah, yeah butse kik
                Ye bah, ye bah, ye bah butse kik
                Choro yoto mo toi butse kik
                Ek ek ek

              • For LCPL_X: Yoyoy Villame tried to become a singer in Manila but people started laughing just when they heard his Visayan accent – so he became a comedian.

              • Thanks, guys!

                I think I ‘ve just become the newest fan. “Butsekik” is pure genius, the music sounds familiar some 60s song American (right? sounds really familiar, motown almost), but yeah, the lyrics is pure genius—- I can understand now why Chinese-Filipinos would have no grounds for a law suit.

                I don’t remember us talking about this guy, or maybe i just missed it, or just never asked about him. But these songs are pure gems! LOL! especially “Magellan”.

                I thought the “Bulaklak” song was the height of metaphors over there.

  2. karlgarcia says:

    I know there is a plan to have a canal for a short cut from WPS to the Pacific here in the Philippines.

    Since China is my main suspect for that long stalled canal in Thailand for a short cut to the Indian ocean, I would not be surprised if one day this canal concept will be ressurected.

    • karlgarcia says:

      Maybe that canal from WPS to the Pacific was all in my imagination. I could not find it.

    • The idea of the Philippines paying for a canal seems ridiculous to me. I presume they mean cutting through the narrow part of Southern Luzon to the Pacific. If China wants it, they should build it, with revenue going to the Philippines for operating it and allowing passage . . . like a toll road for ships. Although navigation may be a little taxing, I think one can sail today south of Mindoro and between Luzon and Samar and get through, or between Leyte and Mindanao probably easier. Don’t need no stinkin’ canal.

  3. NHerrera says:

    Neat. Thanks MI-6 (?) and JoeAm for relaying the information succinctly.

    In this regard, weighing the blog article reasonably well, I recall Heydarian’s note on the dilemma of small powers like the Philippines in dealing with China. He used a phrase, Strategic Resignation. Perhaps we should revise that phrase so as not to sound as abject surrender to Creative and Deliberate Strategic Resignation. Yes, that sounds better.

  4. chemrock says:

    Has western countries been occupied before?
    Yes — UK by Romans
    Most western european nations — went through periods of clashes with each other (royal family quarrels, basically) — occupied by Nazi Germany
    Spain — by the Moors
    USA – never

    Has China ever been occupied before ?
    1644-1912 – by Manchuria
    1862-1877 – By Russia (parts of northern China)
    1830-1949 – By Spain, Portugal, Britain, France, Italy, US and Japan

    How many hundred years? More than any other country, China has a right to see the world differently through their own eyes and experiences. It’s a traumatised country.

    The MI-6 old chap failed to mention the Chinese did’nt go for the gold, the produce of the foreign lands, the slaves. They did’nt bring swords to chop off hands and heads. They did’nt bring religion and force conversion by the swords. They did’nt bring opium.

    I concede much of what MI-6 said may be the goals of China, but as Irineo pointed out — so what’s new?

    What’s new indeed is the fact Chinese “colonisation” is voluntary, with the exception of Tibet and WPS. OBOR may be economic entrapment, but all a country need to do is say no, thank you very much. Whatever happens after the bait has been taken, all creditors needed to be repaid. Painting the Chinese as the evil Fu Man Chu is putting a cloak of decency over incompetent, corrupt, in-ept leadeships of countries who succumb to the money bait.

    The Chinese offered economic opportunities. What the host countries fail to do is to manage that opportunity.

    Post WW2 was the US century. The whole world was enamoured of everything US – economy, technology, culture etc. Such is the nature of the rise and fall of nations in the march of human history. Some would say we are into the China century. Perhaps so, perhaps not. But certainly it has the making of going into a Chinese era.

    • Two points I would make.

      (1) Re what the MI6 chap didn’t say about going for the gold and slaves, I would attach a “yet” to the whole paragraph, and quibble on how to define gold (maybe it is industrial secrets), and quibble that slavery is just the end point of the kind of racist disregard for others that seems to be the Chinese government’s current way.

      (2) “Voluntary” can be shaped by money, lots of it, as in the form of commissions. Therein lies the failure of the host countries to manage their opportunities.

      • chemp,

        I’m glad you’re here to temper any potential anti-Chinese orgy. I’m a fan of your Chinese apologetics here, so much so that when I saw “Crazy Rich Asians” last weekend, and watched the Mahjong scene I couldn’t help but be reminded of everything you say here re China and Chinese culture.

        Basically , the Chinese-American girlfriend is arguing for “happiness”, and her bf’s mother ‘s retort, “happiness is an illusion, you Americans don’t know how to build things that last” (or something to that effect). And you know what, the mother’s right.

        Gen. Smedley Butler, who was a young LT in Cavite City in 1900, the next year shipped out to China, where the Marines protected American interests, along with other European/Russian entities there. China wasn’t raped by the Japanese in WWII, she was already raped by UK, then all manner of Western powers that came after.

        I agree with you that China has every right to expand its own interest. The Philippines is “Nick” (from “Crazy Rich Asians”) , he has to chose between his gf and his mom.

        My point, the choice needn’t be exclusive. Like that Mahjong scene, you can take turns winning (I don’t know how to play Mahjong, but I think that was the analogy presented, I wish they had played Go, thanks to NH here, i’d get the analogy more).

        Essentially this is the question you’re asking:
        So, it’s Okay for Western powers to screw over third world countries, but not China? the Hypocrisy of Democracy.

        With all that said though, I would not appreciate being caned in public for farting in the metro. I love to fart, chemp. That’s the only human right I’d die for. All others are illusions.

        • chemrock says:

          First and foremost I’m not an apologist for anyone. The Libran in me seeks for fairness,

          Like all countries, China has many faults. I always thought their handling of the WPS issue is a terribly bad one. Had they aceded to the UN tribunal ruling, and heeded the rule of law, it would have won them tremendous amount of international trust and goodwill that far exceeds what they hope to achieve with OBOR.

          Historically, China’s international relation has been trade based. The core of OBOR is trade and economic assistance. We read into this all sorts of ulterior motives. It is in the nature and interest of nations and power seeking nations, to read another countries’ moves and project outcomes and make policies based on that. Many see threats looming, others see opportunities. As to my comment on the absence of “gold and slaves” on China’s goal, Joe attached the “yet”. So should we attach “yet” to all feared outcomes, and “nyet” to all possible positive outcomes?

          Mahjong is a complicated game. Once you learnt and played it, it’s addictive. That’s why communist China banned it. I tend to see China’s OBOR as table poker. Who has more table money commands the game.

          Joe has also used the ‘racist’ word on China’s attitude. I don’t think one can apply the word ‘racist’ on the Americans any more than on the Chinese. There is no such thing as an American race. The idea that there is a homogeneous Chinese race is based on ignorance. There are 56 ethnic races in China. What happened in history is that the Han race managed to unite the whole country together and succeeded in welding into the people’s consciousness of a one Han identity. In other words, it is the Han identity that has held the Chinese together for 6,000 years. Put it another way, Han succeeded whereas Tagalog failed.

          Another thing that is mis-understood by many is the idea of the “middle Kingdom”, This ignorance, often displayed here in TSOH too, lead to a criticism of the Chinese world view as somewhat narcissistic, or arrogant. In Chinese the world is 中国 where 中 (zhong) means central and 国 (guo) which originally mean walled city (guo today can mean ‘country’). This term originated during the Zhou Dynasty (about 1,000 BC). In those days there were many states. 中国 was used to mean the central city where all others revolve around. It gradually meant the state where the emperor sits. So it is a dynamic term as emperors seat was not static geographically. Eventually the Chinese called the country 中国.

          The idea that the China call themselves Middle Kingdom and thus others outside of it lower levels of human is a Western invention.

          • chemrock says:

            Addendum haha..

            Similar point is US citizens call themselves Americans, but there are 36 countries in the American continent. Middle Kingdom, as Americans, are terms out of history is all I’m trying to say.

            • a·pol·o·get·ics

              reasoned arguments or writings in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine.

              “free market apologetics”


              I’m not saying you’re apologizing for China, I’m using apologetics very specifically, chemp.

              In “La Reina del Sur” (a scene on Netflix, documentary on Kate del Castillo/El Chapo “The Day I Met El Chapo”) ,

              Kate’s character clarifies that she’s not from the South, Mexico is still part of North America (Norte Americano), you guys (talking to central Americans/Colombians) are of the South!!!

              I thought that was funny. But yeah, Central Americans and South Americans really hate Mexicans.

          • chemrock says:

            Countries take their name from various situations or people or some old stries or places, etc, China took its name from a central city during the Zhou Dynasty. That’s all there is to the Middle Kingdom. It innocuous.

            Canada’s name is perhaps derived from the Huron-Iroquois word kanata, meaning ‘village’ or ‘settlement’. Are we to deride them as villagers?

            Cuba, which is located roughly in the centre of the Caribbean, may have adapted its name from the Taino word Cubanacan, ‘centre place’….hmmmm sounds like Middle Kingdom to me

            Samoa is said to mean ‘Sacred Centre’ because, according to legend, this is where Tagaloalagi created the world.

            The idea is, let’s be sensible.

            • “This ignorance, often displayed here in TSOH too, lead to a criticism of the Chinese world view as somewhat narcissistic, or arrogant.”

              I never thought of Middle Kingdom as pejorative, I assumed the Kingdom what won out the other Kingdoms was in the Middle, hence Middle Kingdom, which it kinda is. But your etymology lesson is very enlightening, and that fact that it’s movable, reminds me of which makes a lot of sense, chemp.

              As for narcissistic and arrogant, one could say the same for America (or USA, sorry 😉 ). But China is a Centralized gov’t, with a Command economy, and with sooooo many people I’m kinda happy that it is, alleviates bigger fears,

              India’s gonna start eating itself up pretty soon, I just hope their best & brightest will be in the USA before that happens.

          • @Chemrock, you remind me of my first ex-wife as she explained the virtues of Mao. One’s vantage point always defines what one sees (it may not be ignorance).

            • I would add that Kenya is not western, nor are Uyghurs influenced much by the west.

            • chemrock says:

              Joe, I see nothing virtuous in Mao. Just another power driven hungry man that history throws up often.

              • Mao like Ho, singled handedly united a nation and fought off foreign power (the USA).

                I think Ho was more virtuous than Mao, but Mao had more people to manage.

                Best to judge their virtue by what they accomplished, now China and Vietnam are on the rise, 2 generations later for Mao; 1 generation for Ho.

                Respect where its due, virtue or no virtue. they did what they came to do.

                This is standard reading for us now, (I guess no one read it for the Korean War and how fast our asses got handed to us was a big surprise)

                Ho Chi Minh was more a fan of the French and American revolutions, I’m sure he’d have read the above too, but I’m not aware of any books he wrote. But both,

                I bow to Mao and Ho. We had Andrew Jacksons too. We can separate virtue and results.

              • Right, but it makes the point that one’s vantage point shapes what one sees. It is not ignorance as such. I’ve started a blog article on the topic to elaborate. My ex-wife’s father was a communist who left the family when she was young to go to China (from Singapore) to write for the party. Her mother was a high official in the Singaporean government who ended her working career teaching at the East West Center in Hawaii. That my wife’s perspective might differ from yours is critical of neither you nor her, but demonstrates that we all learn different lessons, earnestly. Those westerners who judge China are no different than the Chinese who judge westerners.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Very pertinent points about vantage points and ignorance.

              • chemrock says:

                @ Lance

                Have we lost sight of virtue — it’s high moral standards, not of capabilities in uniting a nation.

                Of Mao uniting a nation — he split the nation first before he got it together by the barel of his gun.

                He caused more deaths than Hitler I think.

                I think Ho was more socialist. Mao was just power hungry.

              • I’m saying virtue is usually a luxury when weighing results , chemp. Sure if you can get virtue and results, GREAT!

                Results are either positive or negative— many times you don’t get to know if it’s either or , right then and there, you need some years to ascertain + or –

                They just did eulogies for HW Bush today, yesterday too, and I had no idea he was such a great President. He went into Kuwait and Panama, 30 or so years ago, this guy was seen as a dunce , now he’s the Greatest One Term President?

                Obama and Hillary focused too much on virtues (human rights) and look how much of a bigger mess they left the ME. Virtue is overrated, chemp. Instead of valuing say Mubarak, Qaddafi and Assad result based record.

                Saddam was judged by virtues too, and too late… then we realized how much work it took keeping Iraq together.

                Where’s the virtue in spanking people for farting in public? None. But you get results, and why Singapore smells better than most SE countries. 😉 j/k

      • chemrock says:

        Please see my comment to LCP below re “yet” and “racist”

    • NHerrera says:

      Joining in the fray here. It’s in the nature of the beast — the human beast (or country of humans) — with economic and or military power to deploy that power according to its view, needs and ambitions, be they the Vikings, the Romans, the Americans, the Russians or Chinese whether deployed this way or that way with smoothness, flowery words, guile or arrogance.

      • Anthropologist Jared Diamond hypothesized that the beginning of war was young men looking for women and fighting – much like weekend disco fights between teens. was in early Rome. There are those who theorize that a surplus of unmarried men in any country is a war factor. China has exactly that because women children are illegally aborted more often over there.

        Well, yes, sex is a very important factor, in that I agree with LCPL_X, who is nodding.

        But hunger also is. The rise of Prussia also had a lot to do with the fact that the soil around Berlin is sand mixed with a lot of lake water. Austere living conditions bred a Spartan people who quickly took what they could – the introduction of the potato just fueled more marching.

        There is also inertia, what gets started sometimes cannot stop that easily. The military power of the Spanish and Portuguese Reconquista quickly went further out to conquer. After the USA won the West, they went for Alaska, Hawaii, Samoa and finally the Philippines.

        There is also having to defend what one has gained – from a certain size upwards no choice. The Romans had no more choice the moment they destroyed Carthage, they had to stay an empire or fear being the losers. The USA has no choice either now. History is just like that.


        the other piece of wisdom you have brought in here is that necessity dictates invention.

        Filipinos before 1521 hardly needed advanced organization because they HAD everything they needed to live, the rest of the world was conveniently far. Until the “starships” came.

        • China was also self-contained – after it consolidate itself internally – because of the Himalayas to the South, the deserts to the North and West and the sea to the East.

          It could even afford to ignore its own internal decline – indirectly caused by its own greed for silver from the galleon trade which led to an inflation in 1750, and by the decadence of the Manchu dynasty – because it still remained relatively powerful and richer than all others.

          The Opium Wars – England forcing China to keep its market open for DRAAAGS from India smuggled by Scots – were a shock for China’s highly organized bureacracy and empire. Just some centuries earlier, Chinese had beheaded Portuguese who had the temerity to ask them to do what Malays in Malacca had done when they experience Portuguese firepower. Just decades later, 8 powers would occupy Shanghai and get one treaty port each – HK for the English, Tsingtao for Germany (which is why there is Tsingtao beer) and then some..

          Japan, by closing the country and even harshly showing that it did not want missionaries by crucifying Catholics in Nagasaki, was able to keep the status quo for a while, trading only with the Portuguese in Nagasaki like the Chinese had Macau originally. It was only when the USA came with vastly superior gunships that they decided to open up. Strangely, Japan always managed to dictate the terms by which new things came to them, nearly each time.

          But think that it could have been worse – thinking of the Native Americans who first of all had no resistance to most diseases that had spread in Eurasia due to livestock, and second did not have any form of weaponry similar to what Europeans had, while Asians had cannons. Think of Montezuma suddenly meeting men riding on HORSES, an animal they never had seen before. Wearing heavy metal plates, carrying pipes that they could point at you to kill.

        • NHerrera says:

          Thanks for the historical notes.

          • sonny says:

            NH, the movie 55 DAYS AT PEKING is good dramatization of the coup of China by the Brits. They got Hongkong for 99 years, I believe.

            • “Well, yes, sex is a very important factor, in that I agree with LCPL_X, who is nodding.”

              If you’ve ever seen those monkeys in Gibraltar, Ireneo; I ‘ve never seen them, but same species found in Indonesia and Philippines (though considerably less in the Philippines). Also Japan.

              There are always these groups of 10 to 15 young male monkeys, and yeah they cause trouble for sex and for food. But even if there’s enough food and sex for them, they’ll still cause trouble.

              So if you cross out sex and food, you’ll notice boredom will also do just fine. Bored? Violence.

              • I’ve elected not to publish your commentary on prostitutes in the Philippines. It seems, I dunno, ‘judgmental’ in a racially demeaning way, and I don’t care for that representation in a blog edited by an American who does not care to offend in his host country.

              • I hope the one I just posted passes muster, Joe. I wrote it in formula form. More objective, i suppose.

  5. andrewlim8 says:


    I want to share this video and article of the UP men’s basketball coach’s last speech to his team after losing to Ateneo last night.

    Channeling Heneral Luna, coach Bo rallies his troops for next year, and if you are an alumnus, a sports fan or just interested in what a united community can achieve it’s impossible not to be moved by it.

    Just think of that community getting involved in national issues as a whole.

  6. edgar lores says:


    1. My vantage point is from the long sweep of history.

    2. I make six assumptions:

    2.1. The universe is purposive and not accidental.
    2.2. Consciousness is pervasive.
    2.3. Evolution, while random, proceeds to grow from simple forms into forms of ever-increasing complexity.
    2.4. This complexity is physical and material but moral and spiritual as well.
    2.5. Accordingly, mankind is evolving toward a refined moral and spiritual consciousness.
    2.6. As of our time, the highest spiritual values are freedom, equality, and justice.

    3. By these values, China represents an obstacle and a regression.

    3.1. China does not respect freedom. Proof: The subjugation of Tibet.
    3.2. China does not respect equality. Proof: The Uighur re-education camps.
    3.3. China does not respect justice. Proof: The rape of the WPS.

    4. There are many more proofs and all seem to be interchangeable and applicable to each charge.

    • Do you consider your assumptions to be ‘western’ or ‘humanistic’? The first response China makes to any criticism is that critics are arrogant and don’t understand Chinese ways. There is some truth to it because Chinese ways seem to rely more on authority than law, and it is a common ‘way’ throughout the course of history. Maybe ‘humanist’ is dog eat dog. When my kid whines about not being understood, I suggest he grow up. But then I am using the authoritarian model. It’s confusing.

      • edgar lores says:

        The short answer is that I consider my assumptions to be — while personal — universal.

        I may give a longer comment on 2.6 later.

      • I think Chinese geography allowed a closed Middle Kingdom to stay on for centuries.

        By contrast, the geography of the West including the Near East (yes, confusing but wait) is such that challengers arose to the supremacy of every power-that-was: Greece (former pirates turned democracies) versus Persia, Rome versus Carthage, Jesus versus the Pharisees, German (uncouth barbarians, yes what the Chinese still think Westerners are, “redfaced rednecks”) versus Rome, Luther versus the Pope, Queen Elizabeth versus the Spanish Armada Enlightenment versus enshrined truth. Authority was ALWAYS challenged in the West, sometimes it “destabilized” but in the end, knowledge grew and the British crashed into smug China like aliens coming in spaceships. This is Rogue One speaking.

      • edgar lores says:

        I consider them to be “universal.”

        1. Freedom

        1.1. Freedom can be national, political, or individual.

        1.2. The proof of Tibet I gave was all three combined. Tibet should be free as a nation, and Tibetans should be free to self-govern and be free to exercise their individual freedoms.

        1.3. The concept of individual freedom is accepted to have been developed in the West. The Founding Fathers realized that individual freedom was not a gift of or from the government but was innate.

        1.4. China has little concept of political or individual freedom. Due to Confucianism, she prizes social order above individual freedom.

        1.5. She vigorously espouses national freedom for herself but does not realize how she transgresses against the freedom of other nations.

        2. Equality

        2.1. Equality is the Jeffersonian recognition that all men are created equal. It is the central tenet of America… not that America has achieved it.

        2.2. The proof of the Uighur re-education camps I gave shows that China has little cognizance of this central tenet. This shortsightedness flows from the failure to recognize that individual freedom is inherent. Again, due to Confucianism, China sees human beings as being in a hierarchy. Not only in the family but in ethnicities.

        2.3. China hated to be abused by foreign powers and now she seems, per 1.5, to be reacting to her abuse by being abusive herself. The reaction to abuse, the knowledge of being abused, reveals that China is deeply aware of hierarchy, of inferiority and superiority. But does this awareness not also betray that she has a native, if suppressed, sense of human equality?

        3. Justice

        3.1. Justice is a universal concept found in both Western and Eastern civilizations.

        3.2. Internally, the judiciary in China is not independent of the Communist Party. But externally, China has ostensibly hewed close to the rule of law.

        o China is a charter member of the United Nations.
        o She is not only a signatory to the UDHR, but also played an important role in its drafting. The UDHR is imbued with Confucianism.
        o She is a signatory to UNCLOS.

        3.3. The proof of the rape of the WPS I gave shows that China does not play fair and just pays lip service to her international commitments. She operates in bad faith in many areas:

        o Debt entrapment
        o Theft of technological advances and intellectual property
        o The militarization of the WPS
        o Intrusion into and subsequent claim of Benham Rise
        o Organ trafficking
        o Manufacture of drug precursors
        o Manufacture of fake food (!)

        The first 5 are state-sponsored activities. I don’t know about the last 2.

        3.4. The three values of freedom, equality, and justice are closely intertwined. Because China does not respect national freedom except for herself and does not recognize equality, there is, as you note, greater reliance on authority (the Party) rather than law.

        3.5. With all three values, China transgresses by the use of power for self- aggrandizement. She does not understand her Chinese ways.

        • 1.2 Yet once a union is formed, even western laws make it difficult for states to leave. So there is a universal magnetism to joining forces and clear benefits of union that are enshrined in laws. Individual interests are secondary. China tilts to union and the west to liberty. I suppose restraints on liberty is the arena of great debate and basis for wars.

        • sonny says:

          “1.4 China has little concept of political or individual freedom. Due to Confucianism, she prizes social order above individual freedom.”

          Strongly agree -1!

          The suppression of Christianity (subtle, patriotic Catholic Church) and Islam (subversion, Uighurs re-education) and Buddhism (outright totalitarianism), the sure proofs.

  7. caliphman says:

    Being the simpleton that I am, I need neither philosopical, moral, historical nor geopolitical analysis to know that China is not to be trusted as a friend or ally. Like Lakandula, it matters not that Fernando Magallanesl’purpose was to bring Catholic salvation nor the wonders of Western civilization to the Philippines. Neither did it matter that this interloper could be the vanguard of a mighty armada and army that he and all his warriors would be powerless against. What is important are not possible intentions but observed actions, that of occupying Philippine territory and laying claim to all its seas and the riches underneath.

  8. edgar lores says:


    1. Chemrock’s thesis on corruption is fascinating.

    2. I would like to offer another thesis based on LCpl_X’s (henceforth X) introduction of the Hajnal Line. If you will recall, the Line divides Europe into two areas characterized by different levels of nuptiality.

    2.1. However, the link X provides takes us to a wider interpretation of the Line by a blogger who identifies herself as “hbd chick” (henceforth HBDC). The interpretation goes beyond nuptiality.

    3. According to HBDC, the characteristics of countries inside the Hajnal Line are:

    o Late marriage and 10-20% of adults never marrying
    o Small families, either nuclear or stem
    o Higher average IQs than outside the line
    o The highest concentrations of human accomplishment in Europe
    o More democracy
    o Greater civic-mindedness or orientation towards the commonweal
    o Generally low perceived corruption
    o High individualism
    o And low homicide rates in the 19th century

    3.1. HBDC makes the point that “the historic evidence for the existence of the Hajnal Line goes back to the 1500s, but no one’s quite sure when the pattern first emerged. The only thing that’s clear is that it was sometime between the introduction of Christianity to the Germanics in Northern Europe (which started in something like the 400s) and the 1500s.”

    3.2. She goes on to discuss the two biggest changes to this area of Europe: (a) new mating patterns thanks to the Catholic Church and (b) the introduction of manorialism. She even touches on eugenics.

    4. At this point, let me take a different tack.

    5. Prior to and in the 1500s, there was a flowering of human consciousness in Western Europe that resulted in the formation and furtherance of individualism. To my mind, this was brought about by:

    o 1400 – Renaissance begins
    o 1439 – Gutenberg Printing Press invented
    o 1517 – Luther’s 95 Theses
    o 1534 – English Reformation
    o 1620 – Age of Enlightenment
    o 1620 – Puritans (English Protestants) establish a settlement at Plymouth Colony
    o 1776 — Declaration of Independence

    5.1 Note that in the middle of this period:

    o 1521 – Magellan discovers the Philippines

    6. I derive the following:

    6.1. The Hajnal flowering of individualism may be said to begin with Luther’s rejection of the Roman Catholic Church, which may be said to represent collectivism.

    6.2. The English Reformation, in which Henry VIII broke away from Rome and the authority of the pope, also contributed to the flowering of individualism consciousness.

    6.3. The Catholicism that Magellan brought to the Philippines was pre-English Reformation. Spain used the Sword and the Cross to subjugate the natives, and cemented the collective consciousness of the Filipino for close to 4 centuries. In effect, the country was outside the Hajnal Line.

    6.4. The British diffused Hajnal values throughout its empire and succeeded in setting up individualistic Hajnal cultures in countries majorly populated with new immigrants, such as America, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (?). The other “old” British Empire countries with a large native populations – for example, Egypt, India, and the African colonies – retained their collectivistic nature.

    6.5. Specifically, the Puritans, the Pilgrim Fathers, transported and extended the Hajnal consciousness across the Atlantic. The Hajnal values of freedom, civic-mindedness, and individualism became the foundations of that bold experiment called America. America crystallized and added the value of equality and, consequently, justice.

    7. Now, as we have analyzed here before in past blogs, we have partly attributed to Catholicism the culture of corruption that pervades the Philippines. We have drawn parallels to other Spanish colonies in Latin America which have high corruption indices.

    7.1. What is unique about the Philippines is that we became a colony of America which sought to graft Hajnal values onto our culture. We adopted America’s form of government. Our tragedy is that the Hajnal values of freedom, equality, justice, individualism, and non-corruption did not take.

    • I thought similarly re the start of Hajnal line patterns, edgar, that it was related to Age of Enlightenment.

      but HBD chick insists it went farther than that hence her timeline is 400s to 1500s. She seems to be just a college student, stopped posting now, so I don’t think she was ever truly able to prosecute her timeline of when Hajnal line started manifesting.

      Age of Enlightenment is easier to prosecute, England and Netherlands being the two prime movers. Like i’ve said before until you see Spinoza’s works published, it was all just build up , and that’s 1677 w/

      And where he was , they were more Calvinist.

      The challenge would be from 400s to 1500s. I’m thinking (HBD chick keeps on using Roman era names of tribes/peoples) that maybe Roman slaughter of these parts, necessitated high individualism traditions. which also translated into stronger women figures in these parts, due to less men, for example

      But what bothers me the most about that map is that seeming outlier in Hungary and Romania are, which Ireneo has verified as being accurate. Maps of Roman era peoples/tribes called them Gepids.

    • I don’t know if Gepids and Dacia are separate cultures, but Dacia was where Spartacus was plucked out of and made a slave/gladiator in Rome (or Pompeii to be exact). But he was specifically from Thrace.

      King Alaric too hailed from Thrace, or started out from there to Rome. Interestingly he and his people were Christians by that times (he was the reason St. Augustine wrote “City of God”, though were Arians (so they were non-Trinitarians, ie. Jesus was not in fact God, why Catholics today have to recite the Nicene Creed just as reminder 😉 ).

      The Renaissance came forth out of getting rich (as middle men to the Near East) as a result arts flourished, arts flourish so did thought; the Age of Enlightenment though too related was more religious reformations based, ie. freedom of thought.

      So the map show both in Northern Italy, then England and the Netherlands, but that aberration in Hungary and Romania, suggest the Hajnal line predates the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment, edgar.

      If Ireneo can chime in re Hungary and Romania, we’ll have solved HBD chick’s biggest question.

      • Romania WAS Dacian.. but the Romans made it their Australia, settling convicts and adventurous people there, 1) to man the gold mines and 2) to secure the northeast border. The language there is the closest thing you have to ancient Latin and gene tests have proven that they have MORE Old Roman genes than present-day Italians, who were Germanized from the North and strongly influenced by Arabs and Spaniards in the South.

        Hungary had Gepids, but around 850 AD the Magyars came in, horsemen from the Caucasus. They laid waste to large parts of Austria, Bavaria and Northern Italy. Finally, they were defeated by German King Otto around 900 near Augsburg. They retreated to the, King Stefan became Christian and they were accepted as a European people – Hungarians, building fences against refugees coming into Europe.. wait, that was the present.. killing Bavarian peasant rebels, still on horseback, but that was in 1705, when Hungarian horsemen were among Austria’s most feared troops.

        Hungary interestingly embraced Protestantism, in contrast to heavily Catholic Austria. Romania though Latin in origin embraced Orthodox Christianity and even wrote their own Latin language in Cyrillic until just 200 years ago. Orthodoxy is even more conservative than Catholicism, which at least has study of Greek philosophy. Orthodox (Greek, Russian, Serb, Romanian etc.) is even more about believe and obey your patriarch, and then your King. The Orthodox imagery in both song and pictures is overwhelming, all visual, feelings-based.


      • I just put in a comment, but it has too many links, so Joe will have to release it.

        What I also did was to write an article as a comment to Edgar’s comment..

        The conflict between more Westernized/English-speaking/liberal/”yellow/elite groups and more traditional/authoritarian/”native-culture” groups reminds me fatally of Yugoslavia before the civil war there started. Individualistic values (Rappler) vs. collectivist values (Duterte).

        ..In Serbia, a collectivistic, ethnic hero cult (more similar to bayani than to individualistic heroe) based on a national mythology plus paternalism led to this (p. 85): Decision-making was left to omnipotent rulers, those personifying heroic martyrs of the Battle of Kosovo, who promised to rule in the best interests of collective Serb society. Paternalism impeded the spread of democracy, the implementation of the rule of law, and the development of constitutionalism..

    • “7.1. What is unique about the Philippines is that we became a colony of America which sought to graft Hajnal values onto our culture. We adopted America’s form of government. Our tragedy is that the Hajnal values of freedom, equality, justice, individualism, and non-corruption did not take.”

      You have to have women who’ll insist on marrying late, and/or not have so many kids. Powerful women will only flourish where there’s less men.

      There’s already something similar there where men are OFWs, usually as seamen or mid skill work in the ME, where the wives party it up in the Philippines.

      Then OFW women who are out there, ie. Singapore w/ indian men, etc.

      Here’s a sliver of that now, though most women there are still popping out an average of 4 to 6 kids starting out young. I’ve posited my idea for not having babies, but in the end you’ll need to do what Romans did to these Gauls and Goths and get rid of many of them.

      EJKs = Roman invasions

      • edgar lores says:

        The Philippines is outside the Hajnal Line.

        Therefore, “Late marriage and 10-20% of adults never marrying” does not apply.

        • I’m simply pointing out that in order to create conditions for Hajnal line values, certain things has to happen, ie. replicate what the Romans did to these Gauls and Goths.

          The application is theoretical of course, but my point there’s already similar things happening IMHO.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: