Well Napoleon got it right. We must now ask what type of world has the historically insular China awoke to? China finds herself now the largest producer of manufactured goods, surpassing the US a year ago.

Her prosperity depends on the global trade network, consisting of global trade agreements , a global fiscal policy, a global banking system, a global transport and handling system. These are all managed, directed and owned by the European Banking Cartels.

These Cartels have all first world nations house trained, but can they house train China, whose culture has been homogeneous for all the time they have been a people.

Morris Strong has been one of the Cartels key agents over the past 30 years and right now he is operating in China under the auspices of Peking University. He is also on the Asia Security and Sustainability board.

We will see if they can subjugate the Chinese as easily as they did us. I can’t see it, but greed and consumerism are not just Caucasian traits.

China has a relatively well educated population that has sacrificed liberty and freedoms for a rapid increase in the standard of living.

Growth rates of 8-10% p.a. are fantastic, but probably sustainable only in the short term. China's cheap labour is now not as cheap with wages rising in some sectors by 20% p.a. and manufacturing jobs are moving to India, Vietnam, the Philippines etc.

The danger is as China's growth slows, the people will be less inclined to tolerate the oppression and corruption, and the threat to China may well be from within.

Militarily, it is also not the only emerging super power. India (a firm ally of the US) shares a border is nuclear, and has a large well trained army. If the push for Japan to re arm succeeds, China will be surrounded by considerable forces that are happy with the status quo.

I don't see China emerging as the new hegemon, rather as one of several giants.

Shadow Minister wrote:

>>Growth rates of 8-10% p.a. are fantastic, but probably sustainable only in the short term.>>

China's growth already seems to be slowing.

Rapidly growing manufacturing productivity across the world is making labour costs less and less relevant compared to, say, logistics costs. I think the era in which countries can use disciplined low-wage labour to leverage their way to prosperity may be coming to an end.

The Chinese leadership are well aware of this. I think they understand the next phase of Chinese growth will be harder.

>>India (a firm ally of the US) shares a border is nuclear, and has a large well trained army>>

I wonder whether the Indians will be able to hold it together. In 1947 the Indian sub-continent split into India and Pakistan. then Pakistan split with the emergence of Bangladesh.

I seriously wonder whether India may split between North, South and East.

Note, both Japan and China have rapidly aging populations.

On the whole I think a war with China is unlikely. Countries with aging populations rarely go to war.

It is always possible that China does morph into a fairly decent democracy. That would be the optimal outcome.

If the USA nationalises the US Federal Reserve and ends the wars of imperialism created by the Banking Military Industrial complex,then they will rise again.

Steven,
I subscribe to a range of blogs and news sites from all over the world, mostly ethno Nationalist in their views, from India to Israel to South Africa to Europe and the United States the general outlook is that multiracial societies are not working.
The great experiment, South Africa's "Rainbow Nation" probably only has weeks or at most months to live, India is in turmoil over Assam and the myriad other ethnic and religious problems they have over there, Israel is once again seeing race riots and violence against African migrants. ...rinse and repeat for Syria, Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Nigeria and the U.S.A.
I doubt China is immune to these issues, for the time being they are just better at covering it up.

Dear Steven,

In the last conversation on this topic and this one you are making an assumption that is both yet to be proved and actually stands a good chance of being wrong.

When you say “It is always possible that China, like Taiwan and South Korea before it, morphs from dictatorship into a decent democracy.” and thus contend it is the only way for China to surpass the US in the foreseeable future, you don't seem to be able to entertain the thought that China's one party system and its managed capitalism may well be the most efficient way of attaining global dominance yet concocted by humans.

Three of the top dozen companies in the world are run by the Chinese government. The Communist party structure has allowed it to wield power and advance the country much like a board of directors in a company might. This communist/capitalist combination may well prove to be the vehicle to take China to unsurpassed global dominance within the next two decades. Yet you still questioned it.

Globalization, the unfettering of multi-national companies, the diminution of democratic state power all have contributed to a playing field ripe for a China Inc.

The notion that capitalist/democracy/freedom are inseparable has been a fallacy espoused by the US and its presidents since the Republic began. We shouldn't make the same mistake.