But all this can change. Just look at what’s happening right now in South America with UNASUR. It can all change once American power end influence ebb—as is happening now. Interesting times are ahead….

[btw, please please please don't keep repeating the "Russian invaded Georgia" mantra that your news is feeding you. Only in North America reported it that way, check out the international papers--and I'm not talking small lefty stuff, I'm talking mainstream Europe--it was Georgia that invaded South Ossessia which was protected by Russian peacekeepers under an international mandate. The Russians were DEFENDING S. Ossessia, and the people there completely supported their actions and condemned Georgian aggression. Georgia is a US satellite and their president a puppet. What's happened and is happening in Asia, is happening everywhere!]

But all this can change. Just look at what’s happening right now in South America with UNASUR. It can all change once American power end influence ebb—as is happening now. Interesting times are ahead….

[btw, please please please don't keep repeating the "Russian invaded Georgia" mantra that your news is feeding you. Only in North America reported it that way, check out the international papers--and I'm not talking small lefty stuff, I'm talking mainstream Europe--it was Georgia that invaded South Ossessia which was protected by Russian peacekeepers under an international mandate. The Russians were DEFENDING S. Ossessia, and the people there completely supported their actions and condemned Georgian aggression. Georgia is a US satellite and their president a puppet. What's happened and is happening in Asia, is happening everywhere!]

That said, I read the article and some of the same statements Jun notes above stuck out to me to be devoid of any quantitative analysis and heck, even the qualitative was shaky. That sometimes happens when you use anecdotal evidence but it’s usually to bolster a more comprehensive statement. His WHOLE statement was a generalization supported by anecdotal evidence. And that just doesn’t hold water in a real and logical debate.

I don’t agree with the “liberal trash” statement – trash is trash – but I do agree that you probably wouldn’t see this published in The Economist. Well, not a few years ago anyway…

That said, I read the article and some of the same statements Jun notes above stuck out to me to be devoid of any quantitative analysis and heck, even the qualitative was shaky. That sometimes happens when you use anecdotal evidence but it’s usually to bolster a more comprehensive statement. His WHOLE statement was a generalization supported by anecdotal evidence. And that just doesn’t hold water in a real and logical debate.

I don’t agree with the “liberal trash” statement – trash is trash – but I do agree that you probably wouldn’t see this published in The Economist. Well, not a few years ago anyway…

Not only that, but his book on China, “Charm Offensive”, was nominated for the Arthur Ross Book Award, an award specifically for books on foreign policy.

Article aside, I would say the guy himself is legit. Don’t attack his credentials based on one opinion piece he wrote for the WaPo… (why are you even READING WaPo? complete liberal trash!). Have you read his book? Read his research papers? Done anything other than a quick Google search of his name?

What are YOUR qualifications? How many years have you spent studying about or living in China?

Thinking that he can’t be an expert or that he’s an “outsider” just because he’s not Asian… that’s true racism.

Not only that, but his book on China, “Charm Offensive”, was nominated for the Arthur Ross Book Award, an award specifically for books on foreign policy.

Article aside, I would say the guy himself is legit. Don’t attack his credentials based on one opinion piece he wrote for the WaPo… (why are you even READING WaPo? complete liberal trash!). Have you read his book? Read his research papers? Done anything other than a quick Google search of his name?

What are YOUR qualifications? How many years have you spent studying about or living in China?

Thinking that he can’t be an expert or that he’s an “outsider” just because he’s not Asian… that’s true racism.

His conclusions are grounded in his experiences. I wouldn’t reject him out of hand as “unqualified.” Rather, I’d contend that his conclusions are based on experiences that have been colored by latent Eurocentric biases. There’s a distinction between that and simply “unqualified.”

His conclusions are grounded in his experiences. I wouldn’t reject him out of hand as “unqualified.” Rather, I’d contend that his conclusions are based on experiences that have been colored by latent Eurocentric biases. There’s a distinction between that and simply “unqualified.”