Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

"natural" states in the middle east after the collapse of the ottoman empire

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Herbert West said:
Yeah, that is the goal of most sunni islamist organisations. One big, sunni, Arab Ummah. Persians need not apply :)
Click to expand...

I like a Big Arab Ummah too. Pan-Islamism is fine... but uh... let's keep the Islamist's out? :p

If I were an Arab in 1900 I'd be the Founder of the Ba'ath's I'd bet...
 
User29 said:
I like a Big Arab Ummah too. Pan-Islamism is fine... but uh... let's keep the Islamist's out? :p

If I were an Arab in 1900 I'd be the Founder of the Ba'ath's I'd bet...
Click to expand...

The failure of the secular pan-arabists (in which western meddling is at least somewhat culpable), is a great tragedy of the Middle East.
 
Herbert West said:
The failure of the secular pan-arabists (in which western meddling is at least somewhat culpable), is a great tragedy of the Middle East.
Click to expand...

China figured it out, Russia is figuring it out, and I think the Middle East will forge its own path
 
User29 said:
"Their own path" Something they are satisfied with.
Click to expand...
You are talking about countries ruled by dictators and autocrats, their paths are their leaders', nothing more, nothing less. Japan and South Korea would be countries on their own chosen path instead of China, the Baltics and Poland instead of Russia and e.g. Israel instead of the Middle East, though we don't fully know yet how things develop in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Iraq following the demise of their dictators.
 
Sleepyhead said:
You are talking about countries ruled by dictators and autocrats, their paths are their leaders', nothing more, nothing less. Japan and South Korea would be countries on their own chosen path instead of China, the Baltics and Poland instead of Russia and e.g. Israel instead of the Middle East, though we don't fully know yet how things develop in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Iraq following the demise of their dictators.
Click to expand...

China has proven it is an alternative to Democracy. The People like all people, don't value controlling their government, they value peace and stability and economic gain. China has been doing alright.

As I said, Russia is figuring it out, and the Middle East is on their way. They may find themselves doing it our way, but maybe not.
 
User29 said:
China has proven it is an alternative to Democracy. The People like all people, don't value controlling their government, they value peace and stability and economic gain. China has been doing alright.

As I said, Russia is figuring it out, and the Middle East is on their way. They may find themselves doing it our way, but maybe not.
Click to expand...
China is simply catching up, just like the SU was for a couple of decades. It's not sustainable nor is any free country trying to mimic "its path". Come back when China is a technology leader like Japan in robotics or Korea in electronics and IT, then you can claim it's a viable alternative. It will, however, never happen with the current governance. Do you think the communist will allow de-industrialisation to happen like in the free world? I don't.

Russia is under the whims of Putin. He's simply clinging to power any way he can, like any other autocratic ruler. He doesn't care about his subjects or their well being. He's clearly shown that when he turned Russia into an international pariah on par with North Korea and Iran.

The only development of interest in the Middle East is how the new administrations will evolve, if they devolve into autarchy then it's simply the status quo, possibly worse. Otherwise we can expect them to develop.
 
Sleepyhead said:
China is simply catching up, just like the SU was for a couple of decades. It's not sustainable nor is any free country trying to mimic "its path". Come back when China is a technology leader like Japan in robotics or Korea in electronics and IT, then you can claim it's a viable alternative. It will, however, never happen with the current governance.
Click to expand...

China already has plenty of technologies ahead of some other big economies and has a massive and growing science and high-tech sector. People who believe China is just a one-trick pony, which only manufactures cheap, low-tech stuff are quite wrong, they are already effectively competing with the developed economies in all areas and that's surely only going to increase in the future. I'd say it's practically certain that China will dominate large sections of the high-tech economy for the next few decades, at least.

Sleepyhead said:
Do you think the communist will allow de-industrialisation to happen like in the free world? I don't.
Click to expand...

How do you work that out, exactly? Since China is entirely a market economy the so called "Communist" government doesn't have nearly as much influence on these things as you seem to think.
 
Sleepyhead said:
Russia is under the whims of Putin. He's simply clinging to power any way he can, like any other autocratic ruler. He doesn't care about his subjects or their well being. He's clearly shown that when he turned Russia into an international pariah on par with North Korea and Iran.
Click to expand...

When you say "international" you mean US and its allies right? I dont think he cares that much. As for his "subjects" i´m pretty certain they have it lot better now compared to let say 90s when the oligarchs was were raping the country... :p
 
User29 said:
China has proven it is an alternative to Democracy. The People like all people, don't value controlling their government, they value peace and stability and economic gain. China has been doing alright.

As I said, Russia is figuring it out, and the Middle East is on their way. They may find themselves doing it our way, but maybe not.
Click to expand...
^Complete lie. The people don't really have a real alternative. The last they they tried to control their government they were completely massacred in Tianenmen.
 
darthfanta said:
^Complete lie. The people don't really have a real alternative. The last they they tried to control their government they were completely massacred in Tianenmen.
Click to expand...

The people aren't rioting because everything is improving economically... Their system has proven viable. And in the event of Apocalypse Their Authoritarian Government will be in a decent position to maintain the peace.
 
Hibernian said:
How do you work that out, exactly? Since China is entirely a market economy the so called "Communist" government doesn't have nearly as much influence on these things as you seem to think.
Click to expand...

China is becoming a major player in tech, definitely (Xiaomi, Huawei, not to mention the solar-energy sector) though their international penetration excepting Huawei is a bit underwhelming.

But I simply cannot agree with you in that China is a market economy. Banks don't get to lend to whoever they want in China (or choose not to lend, really), and in fact have to stick to quotas of some sort. Every major company in China has to have a Board made of Communist Party members - recently, Sinopec sold off a portion of its more profitable businesses, defying all economic rationale simply because the CCP said so. Then you also have the fact that a lot of the Chinese companies are controlled by Politburo members (Li Peng's family controls electricity, Wen Jiabao controls jewelry) so there's a very strong element of distortion there. China will never be a free market economy, because the Communist Party is not one that will cede control over the country freely.

Re: User29, there's a difference between a 'peaceful system' and a 'viable system'. Short-term peace doesn't mean that the system can sustain itself forever. Most people would agree that, domestically, Nazi Germany was comparatively peaceful but the German state was so hollowed out by Hitler's structures that it's quite unlikely that the state could have peacefully transitioned had he died a natural death. For the CCP, we already saw how troublesome its succession was, with Xi Jinping almost getting assassinated by Bo Xilai and necessitating a country-wide hunt for supporters. At some point succession troubles in the CCP will tip the Party over the top - and that is assuming that the CCP will forever be able to hold the ship of state steady through all crises, which smacks of blind faith and might not even be true at this point, considering the failure of their Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan, economic (debatable I concede), and international policy.
 
profxyz said:
China is becoming a major player in tech, definitely (Xiaomi, Huawei, not to mention the solar-energy sector) though their international penetration excepting Huawei is a bit underwhelming.

But I simply cannot agree with you in that China is a market economy. Banks don't get to lend to whoever they want in China (or choose not to lend, really), and in fact have to stick to quotas of some sort. Every major company in China has to have a Board made of Communist Party members - recently, Sinopec sold off a portion of its more profitable businesses, defying all economic rationale simply because the CCP said so. Then you also have the fact that a lot of the Chinese companies are controlled by Politburo members (Li Peng's family controls electricity, Wen Jiabao controls jewelry) so there's a very strong element of distortion there. China will never be a free market economy, because the Communist Party is not one that will cede control over the country freely.

Re: User29, there's a difference between a 'peaceful system' and a 'viable system'. Short-term peace doesn't mean that the system can sustain itself forever. Most people would agree that, domestically, Nazi Germany was comparatively peaceful but the German state was so hollowed out by Hitler's structures that it's quite unlikely that the state could have peacefully transitioned had he died a natural death. For the CCP, we already saw how troublesome its succession was, with Xi Jinping almost getting assassinated by Bo Xilai and necessitating a country-wide hunt for supporters. At some point succession troubles in the CCP will tip the Party over the top - and that is assuming that the CCP will forever be able to hold the ship of state steady through all crises, which smacks of blind faith and might not even be true at this point, considering the failure of their Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan, economic (debatable I concede), and international policy.
Click to expand...

No system is long term viable. No state lasts more than 500 years. Most do not last 400 years.
 
User29 said:
The people aren't rioting because everything is improving economically... Their system has proven viable. And in the event of Apocalypse Their Authoritarian Government will be in a decent position to maintain the peace.
Click to expand...
It's not viable.People ARE rioting. There are numerous riots in Chinese villages and provincial cities in recent years, mainly due to corruption. Much of the country's still living below poverty lines, corruption's rampant and the economic 'miracle' is coming to an end. Much of the country's industry are low-tech industries. And as you've said, it's their authoritarian style that's maintaining the 'peace', not because the people in particular liked the style of government.China is also a country with HIGH RATE of EMMIGRATION, not immigration. How exactly are things working out if your people want to LEAVE, not stay in your country?Might I also add it's the rich and the educated who are leaving en mass?
 
Last edited:
darthfanta said:
It's not viable.People ARE rioting. There are numerous riots in Chinese villages and provincial cities in recent years, mainly due to corruption. Much of the country's still living below poverty lines, corruption's rampant and the economic 'miracle' is coming to an end. Much of the country's industry are low-tech industries. And as you've said, it's their authoritarian style that's maintaining the 'peace', not because the people in particular liked the style of government.China is also a country with HIGH RATE of EMMIGRATION, not immigration. How exactly are things working out if your people want to LEAVE, not stay in your country?Might I also add it's the rich and the educated who are leaving en mass?
Click to expand...

There is too much here to talk about and it's far too off topic.

In any case, The Middle East feels like the West is trying to mold it into something, it doesn't care that we want them to have all the little goodies we have like every home has a fridge and old people all get help from the government or that they get to choose their own government. They feel like we are trying to convert them to our ideology. If they want to become Democratic they have to do it on their own terms, if they want to do something else, that's on them.

Clearly we need to back off before Islamists gain too much credit fighting the Western "task masters" or however we are being demonized.
 
Yasko said:
As long as Israel gets unconditional support from west, west will continue to be demonized...
Click to expand...

Not by moderates. And that's all I care about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back