each domain to own devices with none telling the other what to do how and when...
Will agree that Washington D.C. is not remotely close to Phoenix... and should not expect to manage its affairs... or know how to do that... given an utter lack of familiarity with Phoenix and its concerns.
Oregon should not tell Florida how to manage coral reefs... or Texas how the border should work... ?
And, neither should Beijing tell Hong Kong how to manage parking spaces... or Taiwan how its people should vote... or otherwise determine their own future...
The problem, of course, always occurs when one domain refuses to acknowledge its own limits... or refuses to recognize those of another...
As when China occupies islands inside the Philippines exclusive economic zone and claims them as its own territory... in spite of having agreed to honor its neighbors boundaries... and to abide by the rules it has agreed to follow... And in spite of that sort of claim being patently ridiculous... to the point of absurdity.
Domains, boundaries, and rules... are not functional when arbitrary... or unilaterally declared... contrived by those in other domains... to apply them to others than themselves ?
China acts like a spoiled child in that regard, now... refusing to acknowledge others legitimacy, both internally and externally... even pretending they can define others domains, boundaries, and rules... not for them... but instead of them... simply by declaring ownership of others as "they are us"... when they clearly are not... they refusing to be considered so... with every right under heaven... willing to fight to sustain the point...
The conflict in result... has China as confused about what China is... as much as any gender confused individual is confused... and in denial about the fact of "gender" imposing real differences.
China's own "domain fraud"... fools no one... but it has ensured neither China's neighbors, nor its own people, are its friends... although, again, I conflate "China" with the CCP, when doing that is an error.
The conception of "democracy" and "meritocracy" as structured under those circumstances... still just boils down to "two CCP wolves and a lamb from out of town voting on what to have for lunch"... but means achieving neither democracy nor meritocracy in the result...
More absurdity ensues... as easily avoided conflicts grow closer to becoming unavoidable... for no good reason... other than the over-inflated egos of impatient idiots who are both unwise in their choices, and in too much of a hurry to prove it...
Conflict is easy to avoid where there is consensus on domains, boundaries, the rules... and particularly on limits in the extent of one's rights versus another's... which requires good faith... rather than purposeful exploitation of the expectation of it... while not intending to honor ones commitments... or reciprocate, rather than eat those who wish to be left alone...
China perhaps not unique in that dishonorable failure to engage in good faith... but, others earn their own dishonor... which it is also good to recognize...
Where one makes an agreement... and then exploits it for benefit... with no intent to be limited by it in the same way others have agreed in enabling that benefit... ?
How clever or stupid that might be... is not really a proper object of concern... when what matters more is that impact in the loss of having surrendered others respect.
Not only is it shameful, but, then, too, conflict is made inevitable...
Better to not make agreements where there is conflict... than to make them and then disrespect them... and all those others party to them... which insures future conflict will take a particular form...
There is no advantage in it... while the assumption in indispensability as a hedge against retribution for abuses metered out... always proves overly blind and self referential... which seems it is true in any context... The holistic presumptions of the indispensability argument
It isn't rocket science... but a bit of common sense that seems uncommon in today's China... as shop keepers who abuse customers who DO have choices... will find themselves without customers... or, depending on the degree of abuse... may find themselves not being rejected, and shunned, but being stoned...
I don't know what the appropriate parallel in a Chinese cultural touchstone would be... for behavior that in America would invite not shunning or stoning, but tar and feathers, or being run out of town on a rail... ?
China, really only the CCP, is now engulfed... surrounded externally by annoyed neighbors... and engorged internally... by more or less passive opponents, as China itself, or the CCP for China, has created them... for no reason... but all of whom do not respect China's (CCP's) choices... as they are not worthy of respect.
The external elements are obvious, as China (CCP) continues to tweak the U.S., Japan, the PI, Australia, India, even Russia, both in Vladivostok, and Tajikistan... seeking now to intervene in Myanmar, and Afghanistan... and, of course, Hong Kong and Taiwan... and now the E.U. ? China's friends, are China's friends, in the same way that China is their friend... convenience often being short-lived.
Internally... the parallel elements in groups engaged in internal conflicts with the CCP are also mostly well known... from Uighur's and Mongolians to Falun Gong, etc., but, beyond those... China engages everyone that way, in the abuses of technology, trying hard to be the Global Karen to all Chinese... and win that brand of respect from its own people, too... through the social credit system... while pretending that's normal ? Tangping seems a minimalist response... but one that's both appropriate and inherently insulated from meaningful approbation... while its aggregate impacts likely will matter... as much or more for the social statement generating a mass social movement... as for any other impact... It is a rational reassertion of individual sovereignty... in a system that only pretends to "satisfy"... anyone. |
