‘Fault Lines On The Face Of China: 50 Reasons Why China May Never Be Great’ - Excerpt 45
"Between the years 1978 and 2006 China allowed 1,067,000 of its young citizens to study abroad. More than 792,000 of those citizens never came home.
They never returned to ‘the motherland,’ and have never returned to be Chinese. Three out of four of those more than one million minds, full of new information, education and ideas, nation-building qualities, are still keeping the company of Western economies and living a Western lifestyle.
In the earlier years of this exodus, the most popular study designations were the US, Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom. But more recently many other countries have joined the list. New Zealand. Ireland. France. Germany. Italy. Spain. Austria. Even Russia and the Ukraine. It seems that almost any country is preferable to departing Chinese youth than China."
The exodus of students from China is indeed vast. And that’s largely commendable – Chinese university education being so shit, the only way to get a decent education is to leave China. And while overseas education does indeed change students, it is not perhaps as effective in doing so as it could be.
The reason for this is that Chinese students, on the whole, opt for an exceedingly narrow choice of study subjects. And the most single popular topic of study is greed. Greed, money, cash, capitalism, all that – students want to study accounting, business, finance, management… and, of course, MBA degrees. Anyone who studies an MBA degree is pretty much guaranteed to be a wanker, by the way.
Add to this a good proportion of students studying computer science (also perceived as a path to financial success) and a smaller (but much nobler) number aiming at medicine, and you pretty much cover the whole diaspora.
These students may well help boost China’s economy.
But where are the students who will help expand China’s soul?
The reason for this is that Chinese students, on the whole, opt for an exceedingly narrow choice of study subjects. And the most single popular topic of study is greed. Greed, money, cash, capitalism, all that – students want to study accounting, business, finance, management… and, of course, MBA degrees. Anyone who studies an MBA degree is pretty much guaranteed to be a wanker, by the way.
Add to this a good proportion of students studying computer science (also perceived as a path to financial success) and a smaller (but much nobler) number aiming at medicine, and you pretty much cover the whole diaspora.
These students may well help boost China’s economy.
But where are the students who will help expand China’s soul?
‘Fault Lines On The Face Of China: 50 Reasons Why China May Never Be Great’ - Excerpt 46
"Nearly 80% of Chinese students – from primary age to undergraduates – list learning English as their top priority. One survey, said Chinese media, suggested that 56% of students not studying English majors spent ‘a large portion’ of their time on English, and another 19% spent almost all their time studying the language. All Chinese university students – no matter what they are studying – must pass English exams otherwise they cannot graduate. For many students, cramming to pass these exams is the single biggest burden on their time.
According to China International Business magazine, English is a ‘status symbol’ and can even be a factor in marriage. 'A man without a grasp of English is nearly paralyzed”'a young Chinese woman told the magazine, describing her requirements for a potential husband. 'It is obvious that a young man without a fair command of English won’t be able to climb up the social ladder.'
English can be viewed as a ‘virus’ in terms of the effect it is having on China. The combination of the internet and widespread ability to read English has created a democracy of communication in China. Government censorship of English-based websites is much less severe than Chinese-based websites – a ‘one internet, two systems’ culture. Yet China does not have a democracy in thought, since its government restricts the combination of free thinking and free expression among its people.
While the Party is remarkably efficient at controlling how people think and speak using the Chinese language, when it comes to English their control is severely limited. Knowledge of English allows Chinese citizens to escape the straitjacket of government control."
"Nearly 80% of Chinese students – from primary age to undergraduates – list learning English as their top priority. One survey, said Chinese media, suggested that 56% of students not studying English majors spent ‘a large portion’ of their time on English, and another 19% spent almost all their time studying the language. All Chinese university students – no matter what they are studying – must pass English exams otherwise they cannot graduate. For many students, cramming to pass these exams is the single biggest burden on their time.
According to China International Business magazine, English is a ‘status symbol’ and can even be a factor in marriage. 'A man without a grasp of English is nearly paralyzed”'a young Chinese woman told the magazine, describing her requirements for a potential husband. 'It is obvious that a young man without a fair command of English won’t be able to climb up the social ladder.'
English can be viewed as a ‘virus’ in terms of the effect it is having on China. The combination of the internet and widespread ability to read English has created a democracy of communication in China. Government censorship of English-based websites is much less severe than Chinese-based websites – a ‘one internet, two systems’ culture. Yet China does not have a democracy in thought, since its government restricts the combination of free thinking and free expression among its people.
While the Party is remarkably efficient at controlling how people think and speak using the Chinese language, when it comes to English their control is severely limited. Knowledge of English allows Chinese citizens to escape the straitjacket of government control."
Perhaps knowledge of English might also help those Chinese citizens with an open mind read more widely about Tibet and Xinjiang and learn to see that these countries are indeed captive possessions of China. 'T' for Tibet and 'X' for Xinjiang.
23 comments:
IF YOUNG CHINESE STUDENTS KNOW THAT LEARNING ENGLISH LANGUAGE WILL END UP DEALING WITH PEOPLE LIKE chinabounder and his followers, I AM SURE THAT THE NUMBER WILL DROP SHARPLY.
cb SHOWS A VERY UGLY SIDE OF WESTERN WHITE MAN, INDEED.
cb, ARE YOU TRYING TO REDUCED THE NUMBER OF ENGLISH STUDENTS IN CHINA?
IF SHAKESPARE KNOWS THAT HIS LANGUAGE WAS USED BY chinabounder TO SELL HIS OWN SEX STORY FOR A PROFIT, HE WILL BE VERY SAD INDEED.
WHITE PRIDE WHITE WASH.
Unfortunately, Anony-Mouse, the Politburo doesn't agree with you.
From The China Daily: "An official with China's Ministry of Education said language teaching in China in the 21st century should train personnel to be competent enough to use English and communicate with the outside world."
wright b - the fake namer
your peanut head does not allow you to think straight.
Chinese government sent this sent that.
Chinese government not allow this and that
Chinese government train this and that.
dummy like you should be staying in your own cave and dream of a flithy China.
i bet my life if a Chinese official meet up with a flithy and pathetic person like you, they will change their mind instantly.
Chinese official use to see westerners such as banker, CEO and so on.
Chinese official do not know there are pathetic person like you living in the west.
Chinese official are very naive on this one.
you and cb can help to break up Chinese official's mindset.
WHITE PRIDE WHITE WASH
wright b,
YES I AM VERY VERY ANGRY OF YOU CALLING ME ANONY-MOUSE.
I AM AN ANGRY MAN NOW.
VERY ANGRY. VERY UPSET.
I THINK THIS WILL DO THE TRICK TO KEEP wright b ( the fake namer ) HAPPY AND STAY ON TO HELP TO SHOW NORMAL CHINESE THAT NOT EVERY WESTERNER WHITE MEN ARE BANKER AND CEO. THERE ARE LARGE PORTION OF THEM ARE PATHETIC PEOPLE BEYOND YOUR IMAGINATION.
WHITE PRIDE WHITE WASH.
Anony-Mouse, what are you saying? Chinese officials are naive?
More naughty dissident talk like that and I will have to report you to your mother....
I DON'T BLAME CHINESE OFFICIAL ON BELIEVING MOST OF WESTERN WHITE MEN ARE GENTLEMEN. BECAUSE CHINESE OFFICIAL HARDLY COME FACE TO FACE WITH PATHETIC PEOPLE LIKE cb AND his followers.
I AM SO FRIEGHTEN BY YOU.
YOUR ARGUEMENT IS SO STRONG.
I AM DEFENDING THE UN-DEFENSABLE.
YOU ARE ALWAYS RIGHT.
HAPPY NOW wright b - the fake namer.
BE A GOOD BOY. PUT ON YOUR SUCKING BOTTLE AND DRY YOUR TEARS.
UNLIKE YOU I WON'T TELL YOUR MUM ABOUT THIS.
wright b - the fake namer
please come out of your cave and read these 2 comments from others.
I tend not to use the word "loser" to describe cb and his followers, at least, they help ordinary Chinese to understand the dark side of some western white men.
So enjoy the reading.
"china is wonderful for foreigners, chinabounder must be grateful in his heart to china for the opportunity to be somebody."
"The book and "chinabounder" tell you a lot about the kind of foreigners flooding to China. The most disturbing part is that these losers and castaways from their own country are on university campuses. Not one foreign academic with a real grownup's job (on a tenure-track position) in America I know of over the last decade has gone to China on a long-term basis. China is certainly not attracting the brightest minds in the world. Most of those foreigners on Chinese campuses are not even qualified for adjunct staff (a very sorry position) here. Even China's own people, the Qinghua and Beida graduates who are now the top two most likely candidates to earn American Ph. D.s, are staying away from its universities. (Number 3 is UC Berkeley. Its undergraduates are 45% Asian. How many of them are Chinese descendants?) Why are the patriotic Chinese overseas dragging their feet in America? Is their patriotism fake? No. It is because Chinese universities are filled with losers like chinabounder and "professor" Zhang Jiehai. These two are quite a match. How desperate you have to be to want to join these guys?"
^
".....Chinese universities are filled with losers like chinabounder and 'professor' Zhang Jiehai."
Who calls the noble professor a "loser"? He is an enemy of CB, right?
Have you forgotten the revolutionary edict that "my enemy's enemy is my friend"? You must defend the noble professor, not humiliate him in front of the world.
Go back and study your Little Red Book. Yes, you! Ten thousand years!
ARE NOT TRUE LOSERS GUYS OR GIRLS WHO MAKE FACILE COMMENTS ON BLOGS LIKE THIS ONE, INSTEAD OF HAVING THEIR OWN BLOG?
ZHANG JIEHIE IS NOT A LOSER!
A MASTERBATER SURE... BUT NOT A LOSER LIKE ANONY-PUSSY, CAUSE HE USED HIS REAL NAME...........
HA HA JUST LIKE ME!
For all your righteousness and fury, you have not answered directly any one point that I have made. I am beginning to wonder if you ever care about the DEPTH OF TRUTH, rather than the superficial truth.
As I said, these posts of yours serve no better purpose than displaying your good nature and good standing with modern moral values. It has very little to do with what is truely going on in China.
In addition, it is clearly you are not an expert in China. Apparently, you lack knowledge in a great number of things. Please refer to my posts in Reason number 17, as well as this particular reply.
You have made so many new claims since Reason Number 17,
http://chinabounder.blogspot.com/2008/08/reason-number-17-faux-pop-culture.html
I will choose three of your points to reply to.
1. Suicide China.
"My only question here, to all those Chinese citizens leaving comments to defend China -- why is it that so many of your fellow citizens are killing themselves? If China is ‘getting better every day,’ why the huge death toll?"
Take a look at this site:
http://www.heatherhays.com/sp_statistics.html
Now a few points:
1) Among western societies, Canada has the highest suicide rate. A quick research showed that male suicide rate to be over 20 or close to 20.
Here:
http://www.fathersforlife.org/health/cansuic.htm
And here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_rates
The numbers vary depending on where you found them.
Whereas, Japan has a much higher number in male suicide than China.
2) Suicide has been one of the leading causes of death among all countries, and it has seen a huge percentage increase over the past 50 or so years.
3) Youth groups are now at the highest risk in a third of all countries in relation to suicide fatalities.
As you can see, suicide is not a problem UNIQUE to China. Your post has been very misleading and mis-representing.
The only merit in your post was that China seems to be one of the few countries that has a higher suicide rate for its females than its males. But then again, for your post to be truely valid, you will have to ask "Why are Chinese women killing themselves?"
Each country has its unique advantages and its set of problems. You need to probe deeper through the apparent numbers and statistics to discover the cause of these problems. THAT would be asking the right question. That would be the right start, NOT getting a simple conclusion such as "Why are the Chinese killing themselves if the country is so great?"
You are purposefully misleading.
By the way, I don't know why the Chinese women are more prone to suicide, but I do know it does not in anyway demean China. Would you have accused US for its firearm death rates? You will have to look at the problem more deeply to come to a fair conclusion.
Finally, for added points for China, this is the WHO's website:
http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide_rates/en/index.html
Notice they only had year 1999 for China on this site. Now that you are already producing statistics given by China's Health Ministry with far more convincing figures. For a country that you claimed to be so vile and constantly plotted and conspired and lied to the world for its good images, I think it is doing a pretty decent job at being honest here. Don't you think?
2. Once the Master of Inventions
"So where is China’s inventive streak? The nation that gave the world the compass, paper, the printing press, gunpowder - what has it created in the last few hundred years?"
If you do not know the answer to this question, OR, if you haven't figured it out yet by reading some of my posts, then I really doubt your intention of making all these posts.
What has China suffered for the last hundreds of years? Where did China's national wealth go ever since the 19 century started? Surprise huh? I don't think it should have surprised you, someone who claimed to be so knowledgeable about China just by your mere few years of visiting, and I bet you are very fluent in both spoken and written Chinese.
Anyways, the answer is simple. You cannot make invetions on an empty stomach. Where the United States and other western countries had gone so much further ahead in terms of technology, capital as well as having developed the proper social and economical mechanism that propelled the advancement of modern researches, China was still busying feeding its billions of people, and recovering from the war.
For God's sake, we drilled our own oil in 1959, imagine the industrialization that HAD HAD TO TAKE PLACE, FROM SCRATCH, TO ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN.
It is very hard to make invetions for the world on an empty stomach, huh? Don't you think?
Lastly, your theory of China directing the path of innovation, through channeling funds to politically impressive projects, such as space or military projects, just showed how ill informed you are about China.
Perhaps you do not know that billions of RMB are allocated every year to support institutional studies as well as environmental technologies and IT innovations, and the number is increasing.
THE MECHANISM of distributing these money are still being improved, and present loopholes allowed moderate cases of corruptions and frauds to happen from time to time, but it is a MATTER OF DEGREES OF PERFECTION. Even Your "perfect" western research and development mechanism couldn't have prevented plagiarisms or fraudulent researches.
It is completely DIFFERENT from you saying China purposefully dampening the course of innovation.
3. Taiwan
I see that I got precisely zero answers to an earlier question, in which I asked how Taiwan could possibly 'part of China' be when it had its own laws and leaders.
This is perhaps the ONLY valid question where I cannot produce a convincing answer for you.
I will simply say that I support my nation's stand on this issue, and I do not expect you to agree with me for it is in large proportion based on emotions and common senses widely accepted among the Chinese people, ie., MY PEOPLE, TAIWANESE PEOPLE.
Perhaps you were not informed that Taiwan shared similar languages among its original locals with the seafaring natives of the southern China shore. It is in fact that the original locals were a migrant branch from the mainland fishing natives. A majority of them could be traced to have mainland ancestry tides, although the population has lived so long separated from the mainland that I suspect many of them consider themselves to be "truely" locals.
There are also to be considered a great population of Taiwanese that came from mainland China by the end of the war. A majority of them actually is NOT opposed of the idea of ONE CHINA. It could be demonstrated in the near tie election between the Green side and the Blue side in 2004? (My memory doesn't serve me here).
The Blue side actually had a winning streak until the now impeached president Chen Shui Bian performed the little gun shot episode. Dirty politics, nevertheless, Blue side, the party adopting the One China policy had gained enough support that actually splitted Taiwan in political riots during the following years.
What do you have to say about the will of the people? You know precisely nothing. To simplify my points:
1) A considerable number of Taiwanese still considered themselves to be Chinese, or partially mainland Chinese, or have close relations, emotionally or physically, tied to mainland China.
2) The Blue side, the current running government, actually is not opposed of the idea of ONE CHINA, since the majority of its supporters are the taiwanese that have emotional or physical ties with their "motherland".
3) Now, the truth of your democracy, the proud, independent Taiwan that is 100 times greater than China. The "nation" that China should have become:
The Blue side, representing the current majority of the people's will, was actually very open about SUPPORTING the One China idea, until the blue-green struggles that had brought such turmoil among its people, it gradually adjusted to the present state being admitting that Taiwanese and mainlanders both "belonging to one big family that is China".
A compromise that CPC acknowledges.
Oh yeah, by the way, both the blue and green parties consisted among themselves posers and political dirt bag opportunists that are either on the payroll of China or United States. Some of them are directly associated with the running Taiwanese government, while some are civilian affiliates.
So if I were you, I wouldn't hold so much faith of the Taiwanese people's will as being either pro One China or against One China, for either side represents the will of the people who benefit the most from exploiting the democratic system. The perfect, what-China-should-be, system.
That is the reason why I am not overly emphasizing on the fact that Taiwanese leaders taking favorable approaches to mainland China ever since the Blue victory in the election, because THESE VERY PEOPLE WHO REPRESENT DEMOCRACY are not much better than the Green scums. They have an economical interest in this thing too, just as the green scums exploited the system for their own political gains as well as, later revealed, shockingly large economical benefits.
The people never had a fair chance of truely voicing their opinions.
Thus, to the final conclusion.
1) The Taiwanese people consisted mostly people who have had ancenstral origines in China or people who recently, not more than 50 years, moved from China to present locations.
2) A credible number of them have cultural, emotional or more complex connections to the motherland, in addition to sincere heritage recognitions.
3) Both sides could accept the idea that both mainland China and Taiwan belong to the one big family that is the Chinese.
4) Historical origines of Taiwan, to which you said fuck the history. Funny, Tibet historically and presently belongs to China, so RIGHT NOW, it is part of China. And considering what a cruel Lama regime was, I doubt the Tibet people want to go back to its former "free-from-China" state of slavery. They didn't even know what "freedom" meant until it was given them.
Anyways, historically, Taiwan was part of China. Having that said, I know you disagree it has any valid holds in the present situation. I just had to say it.
5) Democracy being the huge lie as it PRESENTLY is, I wholly support my nation's approach in that it will at any cost neccessary prevent Taiwan from going independent, and, hopefully, in near future (talking about 50 to 100 years), that economical and socials ties could prosper so robustly to the point that Taiwan and China become inseparable part of each other, AND China having advanced so much that its political system is a much better and cleaner version of what it is today, that PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES, having the benefits of the years of exchanges and understandings, finally understand the truth of our shared heritage and the joint interests in maintaining one strong union that a federation or reunion sort of a thing could naturally and gradually take place.
In short, my nation is holding on to Taiwan in hope that we would one day re-unite.
For we are of the same people, and I do not expect you, a foreigner, to share that understanding and emotional feeling.
I am sorry to say this man, your greatest failings are two things:
One, you are not acknowledging the valid progress that China has made on all fronts. Despite some of the information that has been shown to you, you refuse to acknowledge them and China's admirable efforts in development and change.
Two, you are not addressing the root of the problems.
For example, miner's health. A major danger to a miner's health comes from illegal operations of private mines, or small scale mines where owners do not strictly comply with the safety standards. China has taken efforts to confisticate illegal mines as well as shut down or merge smaller mines.
However, as it always turn out, local government usually has an interest in these mines, and sometimes, these orders are not carried out efficiently. This is an issue of local power versus central power, which I doubt you have great knowledge of, since it is usually not knowledge you would come in contact with unless you have access to some really serious Chinese publications. However, the importance of the local versus central issue concerns a great many aspects of China's present difficulties as well as its reform, one simply must know it.
That is why my repeated advice, if you really care about what you are saying, dig deeper. For if you stay at the face values, you provide nothing but instant gratifications to the simple minded mobs who love to see China bashed, while those with more knowledge and intricate understandings will not give them much thoughts.
Leo,
A most interesting and illuminating post. I won't take issue with your main points, but I have to challenge this:
"The Taiwanese people consisted mostly people who have had ancenstral origines in China or people who recently, not more than 50 years, moved from China to present locations."
That is simply not true. The Taiwanese people represent an ancient Austro-Polynesian culture (a bit similar to Malay or Filipino) who were barged aside by invaders from Fujian in the 17th Century and then further marginalised by a wave of KMT immigrants in the 1940s.
In response to Leo, congratutlations for being the only Chinese person to respond reasonably and thoughtfully. I found a lot of what you wrote really interesting, and I wish I had ever actually encountered a PRC citizen with your level of insight (not holding my breath on that one).
Just a few thoughts. I think you should be careful about making claims about the 'superficial truth' of others.
With regards to your assertions on Taiwan and Tibet:
Do you really think that the monstrous picture painted of Lamaist Tibet by the Communist Party contains 'depth of truth'?
Make no bones about it, it's clear by anyone's standards that Lamaist Tibet had a truly grisly side to it, but if you are ever able to access a Western university's library, read up on Tibetan society. For one thing, reputable scholars have presented a strong case for in excess of 50% of the Tibetan population being landed peasants at that time...not the whipped, flayed, amputated serf chattel that they are presented as in China. No doubt they revelled in their 'freedom' when they were forced onto collective farms.
Now, it could be the case that the Communist/Chinese perspective is wholly correct, and that those academics are a thousands miles off the mark. But I hardly think you considered the evidence deeply (and nor would you be able to, living in the PRC) before you made such claims. Deep truth, I think not.
Furthermore, you really don't seem to differ from any regular ignorant 奋轻 kid, in that you utter fail to conceptualize nations as the complex, multilayered entities that they are.
Nations and races are not 'one big family', This is a completely crass thing to write. You make a good point about the need to understand the complex relationships between local and central government (a subject on which I'd be very grateful if you gave some advice on decent sources) on one hand whilst making claims on behalf huge chunks of the Taiwanese population and the entire Tibetan race! This is nothing if not superifical.
On another point entirely, I would love to hear what the opinions of the Tibetan and Taiwanese people you've encountered have been on these issues.
Furthermore, I detect the all-too-familiar 'you are a foreigner so you don't understand' attitude...in fact, you more or less wrote it at one point! It's like saying that historians can't understand the past unless they've got a time-machine, but even more absurd. It's hard to take someone seriously as a 'deep thinker' when they're bound by this blind chauvanism. I'm sure Chinabounder hasn't got an indepth of classical Chinese poetry, but this doesn't disqualify him from passing comment.
Chinabounder is not duty bound to bend over and kowtow to the achievements that China has made. He is making the claim China may not become great and you're not really doing much to undermine him.
For example, he claims that China hasn't invented anything of note for centuries...you offer some reasons why this is the case...he claims that miners are subject to dangers...you offer some reasons why this is the case...it doesn't matter how the situation came about, it HAS come about and Chinabounder claims it'll impede China's progress. Like the Chinese textbooks which harp on about the relatively trivial Unequal Treaties whilst barely granting the utter carnage of the 太平天国运动, you come across as an apologist, not someone willing to tackle claims head on.
But hey, I'm only a foreigner, so no doubt I can't understand...ha, 开玩笑。。。although many a true word is spoken in jest...
Quote: Wright B.
"Who calls the noble professor a "loser"? He is an enemy of CB, right?"
LOL No, that would being giving CB or whatever the hell his name is too much credit.
Hey CB, you dumbass you better start putting google ads on this blog pretty soon cause when your 5 and a half minutes of fame is up you won't have anything left but bad memories and a case of Hepatitis A. lol
Do you even have a copy of your own book? Probably not you still got the originals right? and the napkin it was written on LOL
I hope you get a paper cut for what its worth!
Or maybe I shouldn't say that I don't want it appearing in your next book "ChinaBounder The Drunk Sexual Adventures of a British Man in China and 50 Other Reasons Not To Become Intoxicated"
Quote ChinaBounder:
"But where are the students who will help expand China’s soul?"
Yes, please help the Chinese we need you ChinaBounder especially the young tender virgin Chinese women, they really need you to help them "expand" their soul.
Oh please help our women ChinaBounder! Impregnate as many as you can so we can evolve using your DNA to create creative thinkers just like you.
hahaha
Hurry ChinaBounder the young ones are starting to get a bit ripe!
Leo,
Let me just back up what 'cognizant' said -- it is a pleasure to read your insightful and measured responses to the issues raised in this blog.
David,
What I was really trying to say was that Taiwanese population consisted of many that has emotional or cultural ties to mainland China that the number was enough to cause the Blue/Green stand-off that had been ravaging Taiwan for the recent years.
For an objective view, please refer to these links:
2004 election
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China_presidential_election,_2004
One China Policy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-China_policy
You can familiar yourselves with groups such as Pan-Green or Pan-Blue.
Evidently, the Pan-Blue side, traditionally viewed to be less inclined to Taiwanese Independence and more tolerant of the One China policy, has enough supports to be a force on its own.
However, you could also discern that so many powers and so many groups of people have taken interests in Taiwan issues, the conflicts of interests and its resulting war-like political hostilities are a constant day to day reality for regular Taiwanese. Although at one time, Pan-Blue leader claimed that One-China policy means mainland China belonging to the regime of the Republic of China (ie, Taiwan), the Taiwanese leaders are later claiming that both mainland China and Taiwan belong to the one big family that has always been China.
You can see the slogans change, and players rotate. People in Taiwan are actually conflicted among themselves about various issues.
That is why I support my country's approach being that hold on to Taiwan, until we both grow to be better and to be inseparable from each other, in hope, at which time, the Taiwanese people would realize the historical and present ties are too strong to ignore the truth of our shared heritage.
Cognizant:
When I said both Taiwanese and Chinese belong to the one big family that is China, I am neither failing to conceptualize nations' complexities, nor generalizing for a group of people.
This is a spoken line by the blue leaders that currently run the Taiwanese government. It is acknowledged by CPC, and I presume, must be acceptable to many Green supporters in Taiwan as well, for it is many folds less offensive to them than stating the One China policy.
This line has more to do with acknowledging historical bonds and genuine heritage acceptance rather than where one politically stands. Thus I assume, must be more receiptable to many green supporters as well.
I didn't make this up.
One the topic of Tibet, please read here:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7355
I have my facts from western scholars, therefore, I do not make my claims based on "the monstrous picture painted of Lamaist Tibet by the Communist Party".
Note that Dr. Michael Parenti is someone who has intentions for truth, rather than opinions. You will have to make that judgement yourself once you read the articles.
Lastly, the depth of truth.
It is true China stopped making great innovations to the world since the last couple hundred years. Is that the reason to validify China for being a lie
of what it is? Because this is what intention I get from Chinabounder's post. To prove China is a lie, and he seems willing to produce any proof to support his thesis.
My explaination of why China stopped these innovation activities was that China had suffered large setbacks where innovation is no longer possible for the last few decades.
He failed to point out these real limitations when he made the implication that China has not made active efforts in contributions to the world.
There are a lot of reasons that China are NOT great, but this is NOT one of those reasons. This style of misleading is what I have a problem with.
Chinabounder may be free to comment as he feels like it, but he is also responsible for making them as accurate as possible. When leaving so much unsaid, removing vital context, or focusing only on whatever at face values, his comments go off the mark on truth, and become misleading.
Another example, millions of people are still under poverty line in China today. Looking at these figures by itself, one maybe astonished by the large number of the poor. However, in truth, the percentage of poverty has been reduced by a very impressive amount ever since the reform and free-market transition. It is because of the large population basis that the total number seemed so high.
This style of presentation has been a persistent format in Chinabounder's posts. I detest them as purposefully misleading, presenting partial truth, or presenting superficial truth. Thus, the lack of depth.
P.S. The local versus central issue, I learnt from a Chinese publication named "决策前瞻”, Forsight Decision-making, published by Beijing Rui Hai Xing Economical and Management Research Center. It is a monthly publication for corporate managers and decision makers as well as higher level of government. It is sort of a think-tank kind of thing.
Thank you both David and Cognizant for your kind words, however, I assure you, many Chinese are intelligent and aware enough of the present difficulties. Maybe it is the large population basis that gave you difficulties to encounter someone worth talking to.
In addition, it may be the case that those who are truely concerned with these problems do not often care to undertake the intensive and laboring task of explaining them to foreigners, that, combined with lots of mis-matching information, would always produce a very disoriented picture of China. However, being honest and all, I believe we ARE aware of the huge pile of shits we are in, and recognize the grusome difficulties ahead of us in climbing out. Already more of these problems are seeing spotlights in national news and various media channels.
Well, i am a local guy of this city and i happened to notice this blog which drew some attention. Within few seconds of reading the posts on this Chinabounder, i find it is totally waste of time and it smells rotted when these ignorant savages thinking they are telling something. Shame this is your destiny here and now with your Chinabounder. I would rather speak in Chinese but i suppose you could not understand.
Go home, go back to your filthy land please.
Give me your names please, "Western Scoundrels telling all". You do not have guts or you hope to get shot on your NUTS. -
Thanks for your response Leo.
Just one thing, I don't really know how far I would be willing to base my assessment of Tibet on the Parenti article. The guy, as much respect I have for the political positions he takes, is not a scholar of Tibet. Not only that but he uses some seriously questionable sources.
I haven't found any reputable academic sources which support the view that the Lamaist regime was quite as monstrous as Parenti or the CCP (for their assessments of it are more or less the same, regardless of the intention behind them). In fact Tom Grunfeld, whom Parenti cites several times, claims that the CCP "has mythologized and demonized Tibetan life and society prior to 1950 while glorifying it ever since" (http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-AN/102888.htm)
Furthermore, others such as Melyvn Goldstein have not been shy of criticising China's rule in Tibet in the sources which Parenti draws from. So it's not a cut and dry as it seems at first glance.
Interestingly, a number of Chinese people have mentioned this article to me, but I've never heard any of them mention the conclusion that Parenti makes.
(By the way, i meant '愤青' earlier...I'll blame that error on the Microsoft East Asian languages package, it simply doesn't keep up!)
Haha, I know you meant '愤青', it is a title I highly despise of, and I hate you for branding me that, yuck!
Anyways, it is true I didn't mention the conclusion, and it was for a variety of reasons.
For starters, I wanted whoever reading it to reach the end of the article on their own, not with me telling how the article ends.
Another reason is, if we go so far as to discuss the conclusion of his article, then our discussion has turned into a whole different direction.
To discuss Parenti's conclusion, we first have to accept his credibility, for he based his conclusions on the materials he presented in his article. He does his research and he does not make stuff up out of thin air, and his research is something I could accept. Therefore, if we reach the point where we could debate his conclusion, then we already agree the fact that old Tibet was no picturesque holy land, and possibly more akin to nightmarish.
Once we agreed on that, then whatever discussions we make afterwards have also have to take into account these facts. That makes the differences.
I am not willing to debate the Tibet issue itself at this point, for it is too mind consuming unless you absolutely have to discuss this topic with me. I am just presenting this article to make the point that it is not as simple as CB makes it out to be. That is all.
I glimmer of hope:
A Chinese girl I was seeing took me outh with her friend and the friend's boyfriend and while the girls were busy shopping the guy, who could barly speak a word of English and me listen to his own created music; he played the guitar, he sung, he played some more instruments and he mixed it all together on his computer. Not my kind of music but it wasn't bad.
This is in essence creativity!
I just wrote a long post about how the discouragement of innovation in China might have historical background but for some reaons internet or my browser wouldn't agree with me and it was never posted. I don't want to write it again :(
Post a Comment