nov. 8 - session (china/us to 1842)

[Anonymous]

I find myself in the same predicament as I teach imperialism – my students enraged by the fact that a nation that just a few units before that was being lauded for its contributions to modern democracy with documents like the Magna Carta would wage war over the right to peddle drugs under the guise of violations to its rights to international trade. Like so many chapters in East – West relations, it’s a sad one. If I am not mistaken, I believe the present administration in Bolivia condones the growing of Coca leaves. Can you imagine, if only for a moment, that government or for that matter, any modern day government trying to make the argument in today’s world court over its rights to export illicit drugs. I’m glad Dube further touched upon the fact that the issue in England at the time was a much contested issue and not a simple one, bearing light on the complexities of the issue and of international trade and the manipulations by some to exploit not only the Chinese people but the British people as well – forever marring their name for the stake of profit.

[Anonymous]

As China becomes a more dominant economic power on the world stage, the more anxious people will get about it. The U.S. has financed two wars and multiple bailouts with the aid of the Chinese government. The Chinese seem very willing to buy American treasury notes and the French government and other European markets are contemplating asking the Chinese to help the moribund European economies. An article I read recently talks about how the Chinese rise makes Europeans especially the French uncomfortable. The French have tolerated the Chinese opening up successful business in their country, but financing their debt is more a matter of loss national pride. The fact is that Chinese money would be used to prop up a European-wide line of credit aimed at insulating crumbling economies of Greece and Italy from their overwhelming debts. This has not stopped many people in France, from worrying that they would surrender some of their sovereignty should China change its mind about tapping its foreign reserves to contribute to a bailout. This of course is ironic. Many years ago when Europeans were dividing up China like a pizza, no one was concerned about China's sovereignty. How the tables have turned! For more information go to the following link. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/26/world/la-fg-paris-chinese-20111127

[Anonymous]

A favorite off topic for many of my history students is the alleged 2012 Mayan end of days prediction. I tell them to read up more on the topic, evaluate their findings, and share them with me during lunch time or after school. Some actually have. Imagine now China’s megalithic economy collapsing. Now think of how much of America’s own debt is tied to China? End of days? The repercussions would of course, reverberate world wide with dire consequences. According to several key economist, one in particular who was once hailed as a “ chicken little” for his grim economic predications on China’s economy might now have some substantial data to back such predications. Similar to America’s housing bubble crisis, China might now be facing its own crisis. Not all, however, accept the idea of China’s economy taking a downturn. Read the L.A. Times article http://www.latimes.com/la-fi-china-bears-20111128,0,1334477.story?track=latiphoneapp and evaluate. So i ask, was/is China’s economic miracle all economic growth or economic development or a combination of both?
For the record, on the Mayan predication I am a believer that it simply signifies a new cycle in a 12,000 year long calendar - meaning that I’ll see 2013 and beyond.

[Anonymous]

The United States has had a strong presence in Asia since they defeated the Spanish in the Spanish-American War and obtained the Philippines as a prize, so it makes sense they continue to assert their economic, political and military presence there. But the times have changed and the Chinese are a rising economic and political power in the world and they feel threated by Obama’s new Asia policy, which isn’t that new. Obama’s new Asia policy is an effort to shore up old ties between its allies in Asia and United States, but the Chinese see more as an effort to contain them, sort what the U.S. had done to the Soviet Union during the Cold War. "The aim of America's strategic move east is in fact to pin down and contain China and counterbalance China's development," echoed Jiefang Daily, a Chinese-language version of the official Xinhua news agency, in a commentary on Sunday. What Obama is doing should not be seen as a threat to Chinese interests because the U.S. has been and remains a Pacific/Asian power. At a recent summit of East Asian countries in Bali, Obama also pressed a reluctant Premier Wen Jiabao into discussing China’s territorial claims to the South China Sea, despite China insistence that disputes be handled with each country individually and not in an international setting, but the problem is that China will not take the claims of these countries seriously unless the United States is involved. In Australia, Obama announced plans to locate 2,500 Marines in Darwin by 2016 -- troops that China fears could be used for the defense of Taiwan. He also outlined a new trade alliance called the Trans-Pacific Partnership that would most likely exclude China because of strict environmental and labor standards. The fact is China must accept that the U.S. has important interests in Asia and they must learn to co-exist. Asia is not our Imperialist playground, like Chinese rhetoric states, but rather the U.S. is as much a stakeholder in Asia, as is China. For more information check out this article in the L.A. Times. [font='Times New Roman']http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2011/11/china-obama-asia-policy.html[/font]

[Anonymous]

This week my U.S. History students are looking at the Egyptian Revolution and serving as foreign policy advisers to President Obama. What approach should the U.S. take? Students are considering one of several foreign policy approaches (isolationism, collective security, internationalism, and imperialism) and then trying to use previous examples where the U.S. has used these approaches successfully or otherwise. We also have several documents that students utilize, and one of them deals with the Open Door Policy. Many students use the Open Door Policy to argue against an isolationist approach in Egypt. They note that had the U.S. taken an isolationist approach in China, we might have gotten shut out of trade with China and that condition may have persisted to today. Thus many of these students advise for some type of U.S. involvement to protect our economic interests in the region and to try to preserve the tenous Israeli-Arab arrangement in the region.

[clay dube]

Please use this thread to discuss ideas raised in the readings (Education about Asia) and in the class.

[Author]

Posts