China's trillion dollar plan to dominate global trade

Vox Atlas is a new series looking into the big foreign policy stories shaping the globe, produced by Sam Ellis. Check out the rest of season one of Atlas here – and let us know what stories you want to see: bit.ly/2SThVsf

The US is playing Call of Duty, while China is playing CIVILIZATION

Guess it's time to learn some Chinese

The Chinese are achieving what the Soviets couldn't economically speaking.

My whole life struggling to learn english, and now I have to start to learn mandarin, haha

China is playing the long game pretty well.

I m a Chinese living china. Reading through the comments, I observed: 1, the grass seems greener on the other side. You guys in a democratic country envy our efficiency while we in authoritarian regime envy your civil rights 2, you win some you lose some, you cannot have everything. There are strength/weakness in all systems. We all need to learn from each other, and one day hopefully assimilate and integrate in the best way possible if God willing

Tbh they are playing it so well and in a very straightforward manner unlike america who just sends troops to any country with oil and create chaos there.

My skin is oily Meanwhile : us army is knocking my door

“99 year lease in Sri Lanka” i wonder where they picked that up from 🤨

Its all the more remarkable that China is achieving these things without bombing anyone.

People: Time to learn Chinese Duolingo: Yes.

When I was younger ..a rumor I heard said that the world's next global language is going to be Chinese mandarin and no more English.

Now everyone in the comment section has became professional economist. Read at your own risk.

I like this narrator's voice. He sounds so chill

“China 🇨🇳 is a sleeping giant. Let her sleep! For when she awakens she will move the world.” -Napoleon Bonaparte

In Australia almost everyone already learns Chinese in primary school…

Although I am an American and love democracy, there is one thing I must admit. The key to China's continued success over the past few decades was its lack of democracy. In my opinion, the key problem of democracy is that it forces politicians to focus on short term issues that can be completely solved, or shown to be solving withing a presidential term in order to get reelected or in order for their party to get reelected. Think about it. In US presidential elections, we almost always hear about job growth or fighting terrorism. Why? Because people can see the results of presidential actions on those factors relatively quickly. Your average unemployed voter will be happy if he gets a job within the next four years. However, because of this focus on short term growth, long term issues are largely ignored. Take green energy as a perfect example. It is a great idea in the long run; it will provide lots of high paying jobs in the future while simultaneously helping combat climate change. The only expense is the loss of obsolete trades. Even ignoring the fact that the workers in such obsolete industries can be trained, a transition to green energy would be a large boon overall for America. But people didn't vote for Clinton who said that she would take away coal jobs and support green energy. She was attacked viciously by Trump for this and Trump got support from coal country by vowing to protect coal jobs. American manufacturing is another great example. Trump got the support from the Rust Belt by vowing to protect American manufacturing and he was able to win that region and win the general election due to this key support. But in the long run, allowing for more efficient manufacturing processes such as automation, even at the price of American jobs, will be a boon overall. It would decrease production costs, make American goods far more competitive on international markets, and decrease prices for American consumers. The people would save more money, companies would reap greater profits and America's trade deficit could be drastically mitigated. But since the voters want their jobs now, anyone who voices such plans is sure to lose the support of the Rust Belt. Contrast this with China. The communist party has utter control and as a result, they can focus on long term growth and change without worrying about how the citizens would react. They will invest in Africa to get a foothold on the continent for generations to come. They will go ahead with OBOR in order to establish trade relations with much of Asia and even parts of Europe and exert influence over them. They will put plans into motion that will yield fruit decades later in their quest for global dominance. This is why China is so brutally efficient. The truth is that a dictatorship that truly works with the goal of promoting the well-being of the country will always be far more efficient than a democracy composed of uneducated masses. In a democracy, victory goes not to the best candidate, but to he who can best read the electorate and connect with it. Edit: Some people seem to be confused and I may not have made it clear enough. I do still believe democracy is better at protecting the rights of the people especially since in order to get elected, the candidates have to connect with the people and actively campaign for their votes. Because of this, they are responsive to the voices of the people and their rights are secured. However, what I was trying to argue was that a dictatorship like China's allows for its government to pursue drastic change in order to increase the power of the country as a whole on the international stage.

reminds me of what Napoleon once said:" China is a sleeping giant. Let her sleep, for when she wakes she will move the world

"America's trillion-dollar plan to dominate global oil" By lunch some missiles and send some troop to where oil is