Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (8704)	6/9/1999 4:00:00 AM
From: Frodo Baxter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

>I ask that question because it seems clear to me that a concerted effort is being made to paint China as an enemy and as a direct threat to the security of the United States. The motivation seems to be political, and pathetically short-sighted. They want to accuse the current administration of consorting with the enemy, and in order to do this they have to create an enemy. China is not a friendly power. Neither is it an enemy. It is a country in transition, and our long term economic and security interest clearly lies in encouraging and promoting that transition. Treating China as an enemy can only retard that transition and encourage those who want to reverse it. This is clearly contrary to our interest, and to embark on such a policy for purely political purposes seems downright stupid. Everything you say is true. But as a card-carrying member of The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight, I tell ya, there's very little reason to believe the Republicans will be successful in painting China as the next Great Enemy of the Free World. It's a half-hearted attempt anyway. The Presidency is so weak, the easiest way to score political points is to be against anything he's for. The next President (who will not be Gore) will likely be given plenty of leeway to reassert American diplomacy on a internationalist bent. This will sadly be nothing more than a rebuilding effort, as Clinton sure has made a mess of things. >My feeling is that the Republicans are taking this course because it allows them to avoid the inherent conflict between voters like me - fiscally conservative but socially liberal - and the religious right, which controls a large minority bloc of votes but demands policies that are totally unacceptable to most Americans. Clinton-bashing may be the only thing these two groups can agree on, but avoiding the issue won't make it go away. Big deal. All successful political parties must thread the needle with conflicting constituencies. That Republicans have not been able to do that bespeaks more a lack of strong party leadership rather than any structural defect inherent to its voter base. >All this bitching is taking on a wimpy overtone that I dislike. I want to hear a lot less about what the Democrats have done wrong and a lot more about cogent and practical alternatives. A true conservative will tell you the only cogent and practical alternative is to allow these petty, wimpy altercations to carry on, as they must, but all the while devolving their power center. A 50% tax cut ought to do the trick. :)