<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Faster American Decline A Good Thing&#8230;For America?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/</link>
	<description>China &#124; Business &#124; Economy &#124; Internet &#124; Technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 00:49:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: SD</title>
		<link>http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/comment-page-1/#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator>SD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/#comment-96</guid>
		<description>You somewhat missed Chandler&#039;s point. Even if he did say Chinese politicians speeches are boring (which he responded to in his blog http://chasingthedragon.blogs.fortune.com/2007/09/23/soft-power-hard-talk/), to just brush it aside saying US politicians make boring speeches, too, entirely ignores the question of degrees. Sure, all politicians make boring speeches, but the degree of boredom instilled by Chinese leaders is much higher than any US politicians.  A similar mistake is made when people talk about the importance of guanxi (connections) in China. Some dismiss it, saying, &quot;you need connections everywhere,&quot; but that, too, ignores the difference of degrees between &quot;connections&quot; and &quot;guanxi&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You somewhat missed Chandler&#8217;s point. Even if he did say Chinese politicians speeches are boring (which he responded to in his blog <a href="http://chasingthedragon.blogs.fortune.com/2007/09/23/soft-power-hard-talk/)" rel="nofollow">http://chasingthedragon.blogs.fortune.com/2007/09/23/soft-power-hard-talk/)</a>, to just brush it aside saying US politicians make boring speeches, too, entirely ignores the question of degrees. Sure, all politicians make boring speeches, but the degree of boredom instilled by Chinese leaders is much higher than any US politicians.  A similar mistake is made when people talk about the importance of guanxi (connections) in China. Some dismiss it, saying, &#8220;you need connections everywhere,&#8221; but that, too, ignores the difference of degrees between &#8220;connections&#8221; and &#8220;guanxi&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Top China Suppliers : Blog Archive : Davos &#38; Dalian</title>
		<link>http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/comment-page-1/#comment-61</link>
		<dc:creator>Top China Suppliers : Blog Archive : Davos &#38; Dalian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:26:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/#comment-61</guid>
		<description>[...] McKinnon (in Global Voices, h/t China Vortex) points to a serious discussion on China’s “Soft Power” in which the US side got a bashing [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] McKinnon (in Global Voices, h/t China Vortex) points to a serious discussion on China’s “Soft Power” in which the US side got a bashing [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:09:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/#comment-60</guid>
		<description>I think Friedman had a point.

And I think that Sha would not have dismissed the idea of Soft Power, if China had any soft power.

I think the world does need a global leader in situations like Rwanda or Bosnia. I think keeping to yourself and &quot;changing your own diapers&quot; in a situations such as those is irresponsible.

Those who can help, should help.

And I think in the future, China is going to be in a position where it is looked to for help, simply because they will be one of the few nations who can help.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Friedman had a point.</p>
<p>And I think that Sha would not have dismissed the idea of Soft Power, if China had any soft power.</p>
<p>I think the world does need a global leader in situations like Rwanda or Bosnia. I think keeping to yourself and &#8220;changing your own diapers&#8221; in a situations such as those is irresponsible.</p>
<p>Those who can help, should help.</p>
<p>And I think in the future, China is going to be in a position where it is looked to for help, simply because they will be one of the few nations who can help.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Archive &#187; Davos &#38; Dalian &#124; China Business Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/comment-page-1/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>Archive &#187; Davos &#38; Dalian &#124; China Business Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:22:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinavortex.com/2007/09/is-faster-american-decline-a-good-thingfor-america/#comment-59</guid>
		<description>[...] McKinnon (in Global Voices, h/t China Vortex) points to a serious discussion on China’s “Soft Power” in which the US side got a bashing [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] McKinnon (in Global Voices, h/t China Vortex) points to a serious discussion on China’s “Soft Power” in which the US side got a bashing [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.326 seconds -->
