Xintiandi Thread

A new thread for the coming weekend….

The Discussion: 96 Comments

first off, congrats to TPD on the job and the big move. How did you pull off getting the job? Any tips would be appreciated as I’m in BJ hoping to come across an opportunity like the one you seem to have found in Taiwan.

Beyond that, there’s an interesting rumor going around. Let’s call it “Democracy at the Barrell of a Microphone.” The surprise insanity that was “Chao Ji Nv Sheng” may not be coming back. The reason is the government was overwhelmed by the “campaigning” going on and the number of votes and having that many people involved in a democratic process is a matter of concern.

September 9, 2005 @ 11:00 am | Comment

On the Freedom of Speech

Of all the “basic human rights”, freedom of speech is put on a prominent place, and is the biggest desire of all intellectuals.

This essay plans to lay out some opinions that support the limitation on the freedom of speech. Of course, I welcome all criticisms. If the moderator does not like this essay, feel free to edit or delete it, I don’t mind at all. It will be ironic of me to write an essay supporting the limitation on the freedom of speech and ask the moderator not to censor it. Also, the essay is not a satire, it is an opinion.

First, we all agree that absolute freedom of speech does not exist. The famous “you cannot falsely yell fire in a theater” is clear evidence that speech that endangers or libels other people is prohibitted. But I am not talking about those kinds of limitations on speech: those limitations are agreed by everyone and is enforced by law, whether in America or in any other place. Therefore I will focus on those speech that are allowed by law. By “allowed by law”, I mean there’ll be no legal procedures, no sentencing, no fines.

Now, you will ask, if the speech is legal, then it should be spread freely. It is a sacred human right. If it is legal, what you say should not be interferred. That is the point I want to investigate.

Let’s first talk about human acts. There are a lot of acts that are legal. But amongst those acts, some are harmful to society. It’s just that those harms are not as evident and immediate as the ones through illegal acts. Or, some harms are just as immediate as illegal ones, but there’s no laws yet to prohibit it. For example, cooking. Cooking needs the burning of fuel, and burning creates carbon dioxide in the air, and hydrogen gets reduced as a result. Now is cooking illegal? Of course not. But, if there’s an excess production of carbon dioxide, such as too many cars, turning on lights in empty business buildings, etc. Will those be harmful to human society? Of course they will. This example illustrates that even if something is perfectly legal, it can still be harmful to society if done in excess. And that’s the reason there are so many environmental groups trying to stop the waste of energy.

Now, let’s get back to speech. I believe you know what my opinion is now. I believe in the system of human society, there contains a large amount of harmful speech and harmful information. But their harm is not very immediate and direct, so there’s no law prohibiting them, and there’s no need to prohibit them. But interferrence is a must, that is, interferrence of harmful speech outside the legal system is a necessary precondition for the defense of human social system.

Especially, there exists a method, a method to massively infuse into a society certain kinds of speech or information that is legal within that society, but very harmful to the society. This method can be elaborated into a big systematic project. So that you can collapse and destroy a country’s system from the outside. For example the USSR, it’s not collapsed by war or by nuclear bombs, it’s collapsed by the the continual injection of harmful information.

Then, why can’t a country fight back using the same method? The reason is that human soceity has always been a society where one class rides on top of another class. This has been a tradition that is deeply rooted in the system. Socialism, other the other hand, is a relatively new system. And a new system of course lacks tradition. In other words, when people enter a socialist system, it takes a long time for their mindset to leave the old system. So the socialist system lacks a tradition, or a root if you will. So it’s very much like a tree that has not solidly grasped the soil yet, and is very easily knocked down. Therefore it is critical to enforce information control. As time goes on and the new system becomes a not-so-new-system, as it gains its own tradition and its own root and its own grasp of soil, then it can relax such control, because it is strong enough to withstand some wind.

Now, let’s go a step further. Imagine someone invents a new drug in his lab, is that illegal? Of course not. But if he starts to advertise his drugs in society and sell them, without testing, without approval by any agencies, is that illegal? At least in America, that is absolutely illegal. Even if his drugs proves to be good and effective, it’s still illegal. Because in order to massively spread a new drug, there must be a legal procedure of approval.

Now, imagine for a moment that there’s a “mind” laboratory, and someone invents a new “ideological drug” in that lab. That drug supposedly will solve certain social problems of human societies. Is that illegal? Of course not. But if he starts to spread his drug without testing, can it be potentially harmful to society? Of course. Therefore anyone has the right to experiment in the ideological lab, but to massively spread something into society without testing is a quite different thing. The spreading of a thought among scholars is one thing, the spreading of a thought through society using the media is quite another thing.

If a social scientist suddenly stops a person and asks: “why should you respect your parents?” and tell that person that some advanced nations do not have the tradition of respecting their parents. This question would be very difficult to answer, it involves philosophy, behaviorial science, etc. And that person who respects his parents may not really have an answer. So after a few discussions with the scientist, he starts to think: “maybe the scientist is right. Why should I treat my parents so well? There’s no reason!”. From that point on, the seed of destruction has been planted in his family.

In fact, we do not have answers to many questions of our soceity. But the society does not stop going because we have no answers. We continue to research the unknown, and therefore any kind of opinions can be raised. But selling your products from the ideological lab before reliability testing can create social disasters. Very much like selling defective cars. If someone says there is no need to respect your parents, and says the respect for parents is conditional. It’s entirely possible that his reasoning would be sound and correct. But if he starts to spread his views with the help of the media, and people start to read “we don’t need to respect our parents” on the newspapers everyday, the harm done is evident.

Especially for the hardworking, poor workers of China: they did not learn too much from books. So when they listen to certain scholars who are well versed in the art of rhetoric and argumentation, they’ll be very easily convinced. And if those rhetoritians and argumentationists massively control the media, I believe the harm is great.

In reality, most of China’s intellectuals complain about lack of freedom of speech. What they are really complaining about is not that they can’t say stuff after dinner in their houses, if they do, no one will know and they will be safe. What they are complaning about is that they don’t have control of media tools such as newspapers, TV’s, radios. They wish to spread their “products” to society. But they have not proven that their products have passed reliability testing.

In conclusion: I believe we cannot view the non-judicial limitation of the freedom of speech as a violation of human rights.

September 9, 2005 @ 11:11 am | Comment

Especially for the hardworking, poor workers of China: they did not learn too much from books. So when they listen to certain scholars who are well versed in the art of rhetoric and argumentation, they’ll be very easily convinced. And if those rhetoritians and argumentationists massively control the media, I believe the harm is great.

You’ve just described the current state of media control by the CCP and how it harms the masses. Under a free system, different voices can be heard and the people can choose which to accept or reject. I hate Fox News but acknowledge their right to broadcast. When you have a free system, diverse views can be expressed, and we can condemn Fox News and expose it, or we can embrace it and defend it. Give the Chinese people a bit more credit – they have the intelligence to think for themselves and decide which views to accept or reject.

I have to say, it looks like you are a classic apologist for the Party. In 24 hours you’ve rationalized just about every sin the CCP has committed, from the TSM to its totalitarian ban on free speech. Congratulations.

September 9, 2005 @ 11:25 am | Comment

first off, congrats to TPD on the job and the big move. How did you pull off getting the job?

Thanks; I got the job through connections I cultivated when I lived in Asia. It was not an advertised position and I was incredibly lucky. It’s a multinational company offering a decent expat package and a contract I couldn’t refuse. It won’t make me rich, but it’ll sure be better than what I had in the States, and I’ll be able to live a pretty comfortable life and still pay for my mortgage in Arizona.

Keep us posted on that “Democracy” rumor – it sounds totally believable, I’m afraid.

September 9, 2005 @ 11:31 am | Comment

From Rod Dreher of the ueber-conservative National Review Online:

It would be very wrong, I believe, to let the ignominious Michael Brown be the scapegoat for FEMA’s sins. Check out this front-pager from the WaPo. Turns out that a raft of FEMA’s top leaders have little or no emergency management experience, but are instead politically well connected to the GOP and the White House. This is a scandal, a real scandal. How is it possible that four years after 9/11, the president treats a federal agency vital to homeland security as a patronage prize? The main reason I’ve been a Bush supporter all along is I trusted him (note past tense) on national security — which, in the age of mass terrorism, means homeland security too. Call me naive, but it’s a real blow to learn that political hacks have been running FEMA, of all agencies of the federal government! What if al-Qaeda had blown the New Orleans levees? How much worse would the crony-led FEMA’s response have been? Would conservatives stand for any of this for one second if a Democrat were president? If this is what Republican government means, God help the poor GOP Congressmen up for re-election in 2006.

Bushies (those that remain of the dying species) will no doubt attribute this to the liberal echo chamber’s “blame game.” Hah.

September 9, 2005 @ 3:43 pm | Comment

When you have a free system, diverse views can be expressed, and we can condemn Fox News and expose it, or we can embrace it and defend it.

But living in America, I can watch CNN, MSNBC, Foxnews, and none of them is too different to me. They all try to maintain the dignity of their government and try very hard not to embarrass the US on fundamental issues. Of course, there are a lot of times where they criticize the government, but if you look at those criticisms very very deeply, you realize that ultimately they still support the government. In other words, at the end of the day, fundamentally, the medias are exist to maintain the rule of the government. If you don’t believe me, would any mainstream American newsbroadcast openly call for a military rebellion to overthrow the current government and abolish the Constitution. No of course none will. Because no matter how much they may “disagree” with the government, they still ultimately operate under the big framework of the American society and ultimately works to keep the American system running.

So in that sense, the CCTV is doing the same thing. Perhaps CCTV is not as skilled and mature, but give it some time, it will also appear very very mature and often criticize the government, but ultimately still a tool for the government. The only difference is of course CCTV is state-owned, but if CCTV goes private like CNN, I don’t see how that willl change much.

September 9, 2005 @ 3:56 pm | Comment

Math, you obviously aren’t watching CNN this week. You are dead wrong. And you are only talking about the major corporate networks – there are hundreds, thousands of smaller media, many of which are brutally critical. And many of the commentators on these big networks are brutally critical as well. Even Shepard Smith on Fox News blasted the government more than once in the past 10 days. CNN just called one of Bush’s appointees “incompetent.” I’d love to see CCTV say that about one of Hu’s top ministers.

Are you on the CCP payroll? Serious question.

September 9, 2005 @ 4:08 pm | Comment

richard, CCP has lots to improve, but it’s not all that evil. You make it sound as it’s pure evil. This is getting tedious. Applauding the good things the CCP has done, criticizing the wrongs…that’s the only fair position to take. However, to omitt the former and only to focus on the latter, is not fair.

September 9, 2005 @ 4:39 pm | Comment

I’ve withdrawn from much mainstream media watching lately but it seems to me very odd that FEMA did a decent job for 5 years including some critical hurricanes in Florida last year and only when the levees break in New Orleans does everybody discover that FEMA is full of hacks. These were the same “hacks” doing a good job in Florida in 2004. Had they been incompetent, hurricane response problems could have played a major role in unseating a second Bush presidency.

There will be time enough for recriminations after the facts are in (and investigations will go on at all levels of government, including some levels controlled by Democrats as well as Republicans) but the current atmosphere reminds me of the 2 minute hates of Orwell. That sort of mass anger is dangerous and should be discouraged.

September 9, 2005 @ 4:43 pm | Comment

Please quote me where I make it sound like the CCP is pure evil. What are you referring to?

September 9, 2005 @ 4:44 pm | Comment

richard: “I have to say, it looks like you are a classic apologist for the Party. In 24 hours you’ve rationalized just about every sin the CCP has committed, from the TSM to its totalitarian ban on free speech.”

Totalitarian ban on free speech eh? Tell that to the ordinary Chinese and they will be surprised.

September 9, 2005 @ 4:50 pm | Comment

TM, go scroll through conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan’s blog of the past two days, and check out Michelle Malkin (!) and the National Review (!) – they are all condemning FEMA for taking hackery to new levels, for playing insidious games having firefighters work as PR peo[ple (did you read about that, and if so, you can still defend FEMA???), and for Brown’s pathetically slow response to crisis, let alone the blatant lies on his resume. And you wonder why there’s an uproar? The outcry is just getting started, and it’s not going away, so get used to it. It’s as loud on the conservative side as the liberal side. Amazing; I never thought I’d see this day.

If the shoe fits, wear it. The blame won’t be limited to the Feds — ther state and local governments screwed up monumentally and they’ll get theirs, as well. but the nation looks to the president for leadership in a national crisis, and everywhere we feel we have been let down and betrayed. (“Brownie, you’re doing one heck of a job!”)

September 9, 2005 @ 4:52 pm | Comment

Ask anyone in China who wants to write about democracy or installing a new government if they feel comfortable doing so. Ask Liu Di about freedom of speech. Ask these students from a frikkin’ study group rotting in jail for the best years of their lives for discussing democracy. Ask them about free speech in China. I’m talking about political speech, about the freedom to discuss democracy and change (not the freedom to buy dirty magazines). In this area, the ban is totalitarian.

Go read that link right now. Then come back and tell me political speech isn’t controlled with totalitarian ruthlessness. This is not calling the CCP “evil.” It is simply a matter of fact. You don’t pick up a bullhorn and walk through the streets advocating free elections and the end to one-party rule. Do you? Do you?

September 9, 2005 @ 4:58 pm | Comment

Richard,

Seems like the US government can also mess up BIG TIME. More dead in New Orleans than what happened with the SARS episode in China.

Bush is one of the best thing that ever happened for the PRC.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:12 pm | Comment

Yes, we can mess up big time, when we have men like Bush and Michael Brown in charge.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:14 pm | Comment

But their harm is not very immediate and direct, so there’s no law prohibiting them, and there’s no need to prohibit them. But interferrence is a must, that is, interferrence of harmful speech outside the legal system is a necessary precondition for the defense of human social system.

Math, do you fine this “http://tinyurl.com/dlten” a harmful article that needs to be deleted if posted and the poster’s ID frozen? That’s what happened to me.

Now, let’s go a step further. Imagine someone invents a new drug in his lab, is that illegal?

Now, imagine for a moment that there’s a “mind” laboratory, and someone invents a new “ideological drug” in that lab.
That drug supposedly will solve certain social problems of human societies. Is that illegal? Of course not. But if he starts to spread his drug without testing, can it be potentially harmful to society? Of course.

Imagine for a moment someone invents a drug that makes people oblivious to everything around them, believes whatever they’re told be it lies or more lies, and generates anger towards foreign nations.
Well, it’s being administered to people everyday at 7:00 Bejing time, CCTV-1.

And if those rhetoritians and argumentationists massively control the media, I believe the harm is great.

They do control the media. The harm is great. The only difference you make is who does the massive controlling, if the government does it you think it’s a good thing.

They wish to spread their “products” to society. But they have not proven that their products have passed reliability testing.

Did they test socialism before enforcing it?

*I’m sorry but I couldn’t help myself!

September 9, 2005 @ 5:18 pm | Comment

To Garn,

If you want to talk about the China media generating hatred towards foreigners, let’s talk about the American media, which had done such a great job in alienating the American people from China and everything Chinese. There’s nothing positive that ever came with reporting on China. IT’s always China the bad, China the evil, China the aggressor out to take over the world…
This just played handsomely into the strategy of the neocons in Washington for a time right before 9/11, when their primary target was China.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:34 pm | Comment

When someone has the time to write essays praising the CCP for its persecution of its own citizens then that guy has to be Madge.
Jeeze Richard, didn’t you read the previous thread when it was proven conclusively that this guy isn’t using any real critical analysis in his argument, he’s simply stirring up trouble? He’ll never respond to you but will simply move on to a new monologue. If this guy isn’t Madge (which would be remarkable) then he should be allowed to continue of course, but by rising to his bait we’re only feeding his ego.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:38 pm | Comment

What’s the USE?

CNN, NBC, FOX, CBS, all reporting about the hurricane in Louisiana…so what? Too much TALK, and too little action…too much “democracy” and too little EFFICIENCY…

The people in New Orleans are dead. ok? keep reporting……..

September 9, 2005 @ 5:39 pm | Comment

Imagine for a moment someone invents a drug that makes people oblivious to everything around them, believes whatever they’re told be it lies or more lies, and generates anger towards foreign nations. Well, it’s being administered to people everyday at 7:00 Bejing time, CCTV-1.

Well, come on. I think you are being insincere here. I watch CCTV as well through satellites, and I certainly do not feel anger towards the US when watching CCTV. CCTV oftentimes is very very polite and gentle towards the US, and in fact is gentle towards every foreign nation (except maybe Japan). Contrarily, sometimes I watch CCTV and feel that it is painting too nice a picture of the US, especially when it provided live coverage of the US launch of the Discovery Shuttle, the Deep Impact vehicle, and even some Chinese citizens are angry at CCTV for providing such unnecessary coverage. On some Chinese forums, people wrote “Is CCTV paid by the US gov’t?! “. Clearly people are complaining that the CCTV is too Pro-US.

Did they test socialism before enforcing it?

Of course, many many “soviets” and “communes” were established during the dawn of the Soviet as well as the Chinese revolution, and they all proved very popular and succesful and spread like a wildfire, that is what partially precipitated the revolution.

Anyway, I think many people on this forum simply wants to block their ears and do not want to hear anything but total condemnation of China. But on one hand, they advocate diversity of opinions and freedom of speech. But on the other hand, they hate any opposite opinions. I think we should praise and condemn China fairly, only then is the atmosphere of opinion diversity created.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:40 pm | Comment

I haven’t heard anyone condemn China, just their government. I condemn Bush all the time. I do not condemn America.

Maybe you’re the one with the stopped ears. Are you on the CCP payroll?

September 9, 2005 @ 5:45 pm | Comment

Keir, I don’t think it’s Madge (he’s not obnoxious and long winded enough for that). But your right, engagement if totally futile.

AC, you’re just as bad. You can have democracy and a lot of dialogue AND have stroing action. But only when you have true leaders at the helm. Like Roosevelt and others. With the current administration, there’s no action because they only care about spin and perception. Your implication that it’s democracy that’s caused the screw-ups in New Orleans is odious.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:49 pm | Comment

Yes, I line up every week at the Chinese consulate in New York and receive a check for $200

September 9, 2005 @ 5:50 pm | Comment

is anyone who support Bush on his payrole? I do not understand this logic.

also China has a different threshold on freedom of speech, just as the US has different one compared to other Western countries. In some European countries, racism is forbidden by law. In the US, racism can often be defended by freedom of speech. In China, you cannot overthrow the government, and this can be seen as subversion. The concept of subversion exists in all countries. In the US, I cannot proclaim the Jihad, basing it on freedom of speech. So it’s important to see the broader context, and not view this in black or white.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:52 pm | Comment

I knew it, Math!

AC, I really have to wonder about you when you write, “If you want to talk about the China media generating hatred towards foreigners, let’s talk about the American media, which had done such a great job in alienating the American people from China and everything Chinese.”

You’re either lying or being remarkably dumb. For years, the US media have been filled with story after story gushing about the China economic miracle, but somehow you just missed those stories. The wave of “China threat” stories is a relatively recent phenomenon that only picked up speed after the last election.

September 9, 2005 @ 5:55 pm | Comment

zhj, arguing with you is as tedious as arguing with Math. Liu Di didn’t encourage overthrowing the government. She wrote satiric essays about democracy and elections. One thing is very black and white, indeed: You cannot talk about Tiananmen Square or deomcracy or free elections in China, at least not if you’re writing in Chinese. In the US, you can write about anything you want. You can’t advocate terrorism, but you can praise Osama Bin Laden to the skies if you so wish. That won’t land you in jail. I’m still waiting for you to comment on my study group post. Did you read it? What did you think?

September 9, 2005 @ 5:58 pm | Comment

Äã¿´Äã¿´£¬Richard usually is very civilized and intelligent and has high quality writings. But whenever someone says anything positive about the Chinese government, ËûÂíÉÏÄÕÐß³ÉÅ­£¬and starts to accuse people of being on someone’s payroll, and basically become hostile.

Maybe you are too angry right now, but I think denying opposite opinions is not a good style. Come on, it won’t hurt to tolerate some other opinions.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:02 pm | Comment

richard, i have read your link. I am not familiar with what that group has written. If that small group was just brainstorming about China’s political reforms, and got persecuted for that, then I obviously oppose that. I read this news critically, so it’s one side of the story. What is the other side of the story?

btw, I largely agree with the comments made by contributor Math. I hope richard does not mind hearing “dissenting” opinions in this all-American Pekingduck club. Sorry for spoiling your party. 😉 And no, I am not paid by anyone. These are my personal opinions based on my personal experiences.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:09 pm | Comment

Math, you have to back that up. I believe this is the first time in the history of this blog I EVER asked someone if they are on the CCP’s payroll. And I have had many civilized discussions about the CCP with people who like them, and I give them credit for improving things after the nightmare of the Cultural Revolution. But your arguments are irrational and, as Keir said, you never engage, just change the subject. I tolerate everyone’s opinion, but I insist they back it up and be able to defend it.

And no, I’m not angry at all. Bemused, but not angry. I see this kind of game-playing all the time.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:10 pm | Comment

zhj, if all you can say after reading that story is that you have to hear “the other side of the story,” then all I can say is there’s no sense engaging with you. You’re welcome to your opinion. But anyone who is inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to thugs who put students in jail for ten years for discussing democracy – well, you have to live with yourself. Of course, you’ll never learn the other side of the story from the news sources in China, because in China these students and their trial records do not exist. What a great system.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:14 pm | Comment

fine richard….at least you have gained a couple of brand new “dissidents” who will move to the US, after serving jail, to lash out against the CCP now and then.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:25 pm | Comment

Richard you say that I “never engaged”. But I was never engaged by anyone at all. The most “engaging” response to my post was that I am someone “Madge”, or some witty comments to show how evil CCP is.

So if you want me to “engage”, you have to “engage” first. Otherwise I don’t know what to “engage” with.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:34 pm | Comment

Even the Chinese themselves (ourselves? a bit confused with the correct grammar here) think the XinWenLianBo news program is ridiculously predictable. Here are some wildly spread articles (pretty funny stuff actually) (They’re in Chinese):

Observing XinWenLianBo
Don’t let your kid watch XinWenLianBo, Else he’ll write essays like this

People aren’t trying to condem China, China isn’t all bad, we know that. We just can’t let messeges praising and preaching suppression of human rights go unchallenged.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:49 pm | Comment

Yes, I have read the above two jokes many times before, they are all very popular on Chinese forums, and none of those jokes is deleted. Those are just some normal and healthy complaints that happen in every society.

I am not a big fan of CCTV news as well, and I think they are very boring. If if you don’t like CCTV, you can watch many other stations in China, like FengHuangWeShi (Phoenix TV), Hunan Weishi, etc. Or you can go onto sina.com and other portals to get your news/entertainment. In fact, CCTV’s ratings are not doing so well in China these days.

September 9, 2005 @ 6:54 pm | Comment

The thing is watch XinWenLianBo has become a ritual in most Chinese families, it’s like breakfast with gruel, lunch with tea, dinner with XinWenLianBo.
Yes, I do go to other portals for news services, I don’t have satalite now and it’s the only choice(did you know in Shanghai it’s illegal for an individual to own a satalite dish?). Sina’s frontpage is really horrible though, they cram everything on the frontpage.

September 9, 2005 @ 7:10 pm | Comment

To Garn,

If you want to talk about the China media generating hatred towards foreigners, let’s talk about the American media, which had done such a great job in alienating the American people from China and everything Chinese. There’s nothing positive that ever came with reporting on China. IT’s always China the bad, China the evil, China the aggressor out to take over the world…
This just played handsomely into the strategy of the neocons in Washington for a time right before 9/11, when their primary target was China.

Posted by AC at September 9, 2005 05:34 PM

—————-

very true, sounds just like how chinese media look at japan

September 9, 2005 @ 7:11 pm | Comment

Maybe you’re the one with the stopped ears. Are you on the CCP payroll?

———-

LOL

bellevue said i was on the CCP payroll before, he believes that i could earn 0.5 RMB per post at BingFeng teahouse, such post is called Wu Mao Tie, so in bellevue’s theory, i could earn 0.5-1.5 RMB at the teahouse!

very creative and very funny!

actually, some commercial bloggers appear and i think blogs could also be used for political purposes

September 9, 2005 @ 7:19 pm | Comment

zhj, arguing with you is as tedious as arguing with Math. Liu Di didn’t encourage overthrowing the government. She wrote satiric essays about democracy and elections. One thing is very black and white, indeed: You cannot talk about Tiananmen Square or deomcracy or free elections in China, at least not if you’re writing in Chinese. In the US, you can write about anything you want. You can’t advocate terrorism, but you can praise Osama Bin Laden to the skies if you so wish. That won’t land you in jail. I’m still waiting for you to comment on my study group post. Did you read it? What did you think?

Posted by richard at September 9, 2005 05:58 PM

——————-

Liu Di, the stainless mouse in Cat Eyes forum, WAS advocating overthrouwing the government

September 9, 2005 @ 7:23 pm | Comment

Deleted – Madge spam

September 9, 2005 @ 7:29 pm | Comment

did you know in Shanghai it’s illegal for an individual to own a satalite dish?).

———-

really? there are hundred dishes in the community i live and almost every community has some dishes, ranging from a few to a hundred

fly over shanghai and you will understand what i mean

September 9, 2005 @ 7:30 pm | Comment

“Helen” = MAJ, based on writing style and method of argumentation.

September 9, 2005 @ 7:53 pm | Comment

from the photo, richard looks quite handsome and not that different from a blue collar worker in china

September 9, 2005 @ 7:57 pm | Comment

Yea Richard is probably a very handsome man. But I think he’s not as handsome as me.

One day, Richard was visiting China, and I saw him. And when he saw me, he looked very embarassed, and his face turned red, and he whispered to me in a trembling voice, “I’m not as handsome as you are.”

I tried to console him and said “It’s normal that you are not as handsome as I am.”

Ok the above was a humor.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:04 pm | Comment

Bingfeng, on what do you base your claim about Liu Di? Here’s why I say you’re wrong:

Detained in solitary confinement for more than a year, Liu Di, 23, a post-graduate psychology student at Beijing Normal University, learned a lesson the hard way about the dangers of participatory journalism or blogging in China. Finally released from Qincheng Prison, she has resumed her university studies. News articles revealed that her subversive cyber crimes, committed under the screen name, “Stainless Steel Mouse”, were mainly criticisms of renewed restrictions on Internet cafes, a plea for more freedom of expression on the Internet and – oh, yes – a satire of the Chinese Communist Party.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:05 pm | Comment

Well why should Liu Di be spending so much time writing these articles online? She is a student and should be studying her courses.

My nephew in China is in college too, and he does not do such stupid things, he studies hard and is leading a very good life, and he is very happy.

So you should also be optimistic and happy, and not think too much about this and that, just enjoy your life.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:17 pm | Comment

Math, I’m beginning to wonder if you’re a troll. Keep up the bullshit and you’ll be accorded troll status. Are you just being funny, or are you being serious?

September 9, 2005 @ 8:21 pm | Comment

If Math is being serious in that last bit about “not think too much about this and that, just enjoy your life” – then he’s something straight out of “Brave New World.”

“So-ma! Soma! Soooo-maaaa, gimme that soma!”

September 9, 2005 @ 8:27 pm | Comment

Come on, just trying to lighten the mood a bit. Liu Di is now released, so why focus on her, she’s fine now.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:31 pm | Comment

She’s only fine because a huge international outcry got her out of prison. I wouldn’t make light of such stuff – many other young people are behind bars, many serving long prison terms in Chinese dungeons, for lesser “crimes” than hers. She was lucky enough to capture international attention. What a tragedy for those who weren’t so lucky.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:43 pm | Comment

Well, back in America’s Old South, slaves were given lots of alcohol whenever they had any free time, like on holidays. The slaveowners didn’t want the slaves to start thinking too much, so they gave them lots of booze whenever there was any time to think freely.

China’s control of information is analogous to that. Keep the people ignorant and tell them to “enjoy the happy life”, so that the slaveowners (or Communists) can keep stealing from their slaves.
That’s why it’s easier to find pornography than foreign newspapers in China. The Communists don’t mind so much if the people fill their minds with trash – actually they WANT the people to fill their minds with trash. Oh, but not BBC news on the internet, no, THAT would be dangerous, so it’s censored….

September 9, 2005 @ 8:45 pm | Comment

Right on, Ivan.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:47 pm | Comment

Gloss on my last comment about slaves and alcohol: Some years ago I remember a Black American comedian (was it Dave Chappelle?) doing a satire of “Aunt Jemima” – her husband did an adverstisement for “Uncle Tom’s Whisky.” It was hilarious except for the overly PC.

Anyway, the Communists use Chinese TV like a drug to keep the people ignorant.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:52 pm | Comment

liu di said something like that CCP members should withdraw from teh party and do soemthing to correct the party’s mistakes, she delivered leaflets on streets

come on, i am a long-time reader of cat club and followed the issue for a long time, you say you know better about the liu di case?

September 9, 2005 @ 8:53 pm | Comment

Ivan, I don’t think that’s true. Pornographical websites have always been cracked down in China.

When I was in China last month, I tried to look for some “swing” clubs online and “voyeur” pictures that couples post online, and I could not find anything substantial from google.cn or yahoo China or baidu.com

But if you go to any major forum in China, like Strong Nation Forum (www.qglt.com) , or the forums in Baidu. Some of the most frequent articles are very critical of government.

For example, I’m in the “deep discussion” section of Strong Nation Forum, and some of “hottest” posts right now are:

1) “Where’s the mayor when there’s a 10,000 car traffic congestion?”

2) CCTV, you should lower your standard?

3) Who took away our attitudes of “masters”?

4) The Polish rebellion against the USSR: those who lose people’s hearts will lose everything

5) When will China’s “Higher Education” become higher?

September 9, 2005 @ 8:53 pm | Comment

And anytime there’s a big riot by the workers, Sina.com always puts the news on the top section and the news always is followed by 1000+ comments from readers, some of the comments are as explicit as: “It’s time for another revolution”. And those comments are allowed to stay on and not deleted.

In fact, I once made a test, and commented once on Sina.com after a news about a provincial official’s corruption “I think we should support our government officials and not always criticize them, those who always criticize them are traitors of China!”. And 5 mins later, that comment was actually deleted.

September 9, 2005 @ 8:56 pm | Comment

Bingfeng: liu di said something like that CCP members should withdraw from teh
party and do soemthing to correct the party’s mistakes, she delivered
leaflets on streets

Do you think that justifies imprisonment for many years? A kid handing out leaflets saying the leaders should correct their party’s mistakes. Heavens. They should have just shot her in the back of the head.

September 9, 2005 @ 9:00 pm | Comment

As we all know from watching CCTV, we Happy People of the Autonomous Happy Place of Chinese Tibet are very Happy, living the Happy Life under the correct leadership of the Communist Party and the correct line of MaoZeDong-Dengxiaoping-Jiangzemin thought!

Now I’m going to put on a silly costume and smile a lot and dance in front of the TV cameras. So, please do not fire me from my job and please do not beat up my relatives.

Sincerely yours,
Ivan the Very Happy Tibetan on CCTV

September 9, 2005 @ 9:05 pm | Comment

Õâ¾Í¶ÔÁËÂÃñ×å´óÍŽáÂï¡£

September 9, 2005 @ 9:23 pm | Comment

By the way, Hu Jintao is coming to New York in a few days. The Chinese student association here in my university and in collaboration with other Chinese communities are making welcome banners and organizing rallies here for him. We’ve had a few consultants from the Chinese consulate here as well.

September 9, 2005 @ 9:37 pm | Comment

Well Math, as an American I say Welcome to Hu Jintao.

By the way, about two hours ago I just had my first collision in China, first one in my several years here. Usually I’m hyper-careful, but a bicyclist hit me from behind, knocked me over, mangled my arm (just superficial wounds.) The other guy was sprawled on the ground as well, and when I got up I was tempted to beat the shit out of him – but I won’t hit a man when he’s down. And THEN, I got a taste of the great side of the Chinese people: Some nice old ladies guided me to a doctor nearby. AND, my passport fell out of my pocket, but two young people found it and ran after me to give it back to me. I would have lost my passport if it weren’t for their good hearts.

Typical day in China, for me anyway. One moment someone does something incredibly stupid – like crashing into me from behind – but then in the next moment, many OTHER Chinese people demonstrate just how great most of them are. 🙂

September 9, 2005 @ 11:26 pm | Comment

Interesting open thread but a bit tit-for-tat for my liking.

zhj – I’m a guest blogger and commenter on TPD and I’m not American. In fact, you’ll hardly ever see me comment on US affairs or even mention America to any great extent.

The arguments of zhj, AC etc aren’t that dissimilar to Richard’s. I think we all agree that *in certain areas* the CCP is repressive and over-the-top. I think we also all agree that basic freedoms (movement, marriage, jobs etc) have improved considerably in the last two decades.

There are great economic freedoms in China but little political rights. The number of reporters/Internet users that rot behind bars is the largest in the world – but – a tiny % of the population.

If readers are disappointed that the points of view here focus too much of the negative, then put forward the opposing point of view! Comments will never be deleted for their political views. Therefore, I’d encourage readers to do just that – change the site by putting forward your views.

Everyone would welcome that.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:04 am | Comment

Yes I do think there’s too much negativity about China here. Hopefully I can provide a strong enough counterweight.

——-

I Believe The Secrets To A Nation’s Strenth Is Low-efficiency

There’s a mistaken thought, that the workers of advanced nations are very efficient. How wrong that is. I have looked at the performance of 911 firefighters in America, and their efficiency cannot be called high. If they were Chinese firefighters in China, it’s impossible that the attack site is allowed to be smoking after 1 month.

In fact, low effiency is the secret behind the strength of advanced nations. America is actually one of the most inefficient countries in the world. As a result of its inefficiency, its GDP per capita is the highest in the world. Now, you will say, “are you being satirical again?”. No. And I’ll explain to you why.

Are Americans very inefficient in utilizing their products? I believe they are. For example, the cars that Americans drive, are the cars for the most time on the roads or parked in the garage? Of course they are for the most time parked in the garage. That’s inefficiency. For a family of 3’s house, are there a lot of people in a big house, or very few people living in a big house? The answer is there are very few people living in a big house. That is again inefficiency. And because of inefficiency, there’s huge waste, and huge waste leads to huge demands for products. Therefore America’s per capita production of garbage is the highest in the world, that indicates that Americans’ inefficiency in using products.

Now let’s look at doctors. China’s doctors are very efficient. An experienced one takes only 10 minutes from diagonsis to writing prescriptions (for a common illness). But an American doctor deliberately reduces efficiency. For example, he/she would take one hour to treat a patient, and examine the patient from head to toe, then patiently listen to the patient talk a lot of non-sense, then nod politely and pretend to agree with the patient, etc. etc. And at the end, he/she just tells the patient that it’s important to get a lot of sleep. Total time: 1 hour 15 minutes. That’s a doctor who is smart. Why should he see 20 patient in one hour, if he can see only 3? It’s much less work and less stress, and longer lines means patients may need to buy some food, pay more for parking, and the chairs may get worn quicker and get replaced faster, etc. All these things are counted into the GDP and boom, as a result of ineffciency, we got extra spending and earnings and GPD growth!

Also, in the case of Microsoft. Microsoft has two secrets to its success: monopoly and low efficiency. Microsoft’s products are known for their low efficiency. To copy an entire harddrive only takes about 10 minutes with a product like Symantec Ghost. But to install some files onto the harddrive takes 30 minutes with some of MS’s products. The MS Office suite is several hundred MB’s in size, and the majority of users use about less than 10% of its functions, the rest of 90% are wasted and results in reduced performance and large file size. But the result is that Microsoft’s revenue doubles every few years.

So, I think it’s fair to say that seeking low efficiency is an instinct of human nature.

If you don’t believe me. Let’s say I suggest to you that whenever you have to walk to do complete daily chores (like walking to the bathroom), you jog. Jogging moves you faster and is good for your health. So jogging is more efficient than walking. If you say you get tired from jogging, then at least walk fast rather than walk slow. You agree that jogging or walking fast to complete chores is more efficient. And yet I can guarantee that almost none of you will take my suggestion and starts to jog whenever you need to walk. That example itself illustrates the human nature to seek low efficiency.

Therefore I advocate completing tasks slower rather than faster. The slower the better. But you must do things carefully. Carefulness plus slowness result in quality. If a country’s citizens all work very slowly on their jobs, but very carefully. I believe that country’s GDP per capita will improve dramatically, do you believe me or not?

The problem with, say, China today is that people are too efficient. People put 100% into their jobs. They are busy from morning to evening, and have no time to enjoy anything. If people have no time to enjoy anything, then there won’t be any demand for products. And low demand leads to sluggish economic activity. As a result of that, unemployment rises. All of this is due to excessively high efficiency.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:11 am | Comment

I thought Hu had postponed his trip to the US?

did you know in Shanghai it’s illegal for an individual to own a satalite dish?

The other day I counted thirty-five private satellite dishes on one side of a single nice Shanghai apartment building (where Chinese live, not in an expat community).

Sure, it’s against the law, but it’s quite common. Hello, that’s China! 🙂

September 10, 2005 @ 12:28 am | Comment

Yes, because of the Hurricane Katrina, Bush asked Hu to delay the trip, and that delay turned into more delays and delays, and now a formal state visit to US is cancelled. Now Hu will come to New York to participate in some UN events, and meet Bush during that.

Originally, there were some slight disagreements over what kind of “treatment” Hu would get when he comes to Washington. China wanted Hu to get both the 21-gun salute in front of the White House as well as a visit to Bush’s ranch in Texas. The White House asked China to pick one of those two, but not both. And there were a bit of embarrassment over that for both sides.

So I think the cancellation of the “formal” visit is best for both, since there’s not much to celebrate in the US-China relationship these days anyway, especially given the tension of trade, etc.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:38 am | Comment

Hi Slim

The White House cancelled Hu’s official “visit” but agreed that President Bush would meet with Hu on the sidelines of the High Level Plenary of the United Nations General Assembly and 60th anniversary.

Hu also went ahead with his scheduled trips to Canada, Mexico and the UN in New York.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:43 am | Comment

Okay, Math. That was a fun post.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:46 am | Comment

The “too much efficiency is bad” one I mean.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:46 am | Comment

Math writes:

“Yes I do think there’s too much negativity about China here. Hopefully I can provide a strong enough counterweight.”

Fantastic, please do. You sound articulate enough to do a good job of it.

Also, sorry Math, I posted a reply to Mr. Slim re Hu’s US trip before reading your above post. I wish I had read it as it would have saved me a job.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:51 am | Comment

The problem with, say, China today is that people are too efficient.

Wow, that’s definitely the first time I’ve ever seen anyone make that statement! It’s such an absurd proposition, I don’t know where to start.

At the company I work for, three adult Chinese men show up to re-stock the candy vending machine. One holds the door open, one places the candy inside, one watches.

I remember the first time I went to look at an apartment in China. There were five real estate agents on hand to show me a one-bedroom apartment!

Are these the kinds of efficiencies you were referring to, Math?

Of course not everything here is inefficient, and in China the low-cost of labor can sometimes lead to situations that appear at first glance to be inefficient, but aren’t necessarily so (e.g. gangs of men using sledgehammers may well be more efficient that one man using a large, expensive machine).

However, to portray China as a land plagued by over-efficiency is, well, not a statement I can take seriously.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:53 am | Comment

Slim

The satellite dishes are just one example of the govt turning a blind eye to freedom-squashing rules and regulations. One other blind spot, far bigger than the technically-illegal use of staellite dishes, is dog ownership.

As a proud owner of three lovely doggies, I know that doggies in China must have licenses. The price varies from province to province, city to city but here in Guangzhou – a dog license is RMB10,000 on application and RMB6,000 per year afterwards! I kid you not.

Also, my biggest dog – Pheobe – is very large and would therefore never receive approval as she is too big. (Yes, they have a special dog-measuring stick!). Large dogs are considered a treat to society or more accurately, many Chinese people are frightened by them.

It never fails to amaze me how many large men (particularly Cantonese men) run away almost in tears when my tiny little Tibetan Terrier playfully goes anywhere near them! Perhaps it’s not so funny when confronted with a dog that’s NOT on the menu! Haha.

September 10, 2005 @ 12:56 am | Comment

Shanghai Slim. The examples you gave are indeed examples are inefficiencies. So I guess even in China there are cases of inefficiencies. But I’m talking about overall, overall, China’s workers are more efficient than American ones. You said there are 3 people restocking a vending machine in China. America, there could be 5 people restocking the same machine

September 10, 2005 @ 12:58 am | Comment

Math

I could add many more examples like the one Slim makes but in the work arena but Slim has made th epoint I think.

Also, and this is just a personal opinion, but try and keep the posts down to a reader-friendly length. Many people will not bother to read long posts, irrespective of whether they are brilliant or not. Again, this is just a personal observation.

September 10, 2005 @ 1:01 am | Comment

Thanks, all, for the clarifications on Hu’s visit. 🙂

In honor of the august occasion, I invite all Open Thread commenters to continue this imaginary dialog (a la the famous “Hu’s on First”):

Bush: “Okay, if Hu is Number One in China, who is Number Two?”

Rove: “Wen.”

please continue!

September 10, 2005 @ 1:05 am | Comment

Bush: “No, I asked who is number two, not number one.”

September 10, 2005 @ 1:07 am | Comment

Math

The US economy is, by far, the most awesome economic machine ever created in the history of man. It leaves the economies of your average country in the dust. An exaggeration? I don’t think so.

The same goes for efficiency. China is cracking along well. Three decades ago it started from zero – not even 1% of the global economy. Now it’s about 6%. Great progress, but to compare the China economy to the ruthless efficiency of America is, quite frankly, madness.

One of things that keeps high-ranking CCP officials awake at night (apart from their girlfriends) if the haunting spectre of mass unemployment. China has to provide jobs, whether from foreign FDI or domestic fixed asset investment every single year in increasing numbers to provide employment for new job-seekers. This is a very real pressure.

Trust me, one thing China is not – is efficient, as least as far as labour goes.

By the way – I’m not American.

September 10, 2005 @ 1:11 am | Comment

I agree that American economy is very strong. But the reason for that is because of their inefficiency. USA may appear very efficient from the surface, but is in actuality inefficient. China may appear inefficient on the surface but is in fact very efficient.

September 10, 2005 @ 1:14 am | Comment

Sorry Math mate, you’ll have to do better than that. Backing up your points about perceived US inefficiency and vice-versa for China would be a start.

September 10, 2005 @ 1:26 am | Comment

Math,

I’m sorry, your remark about five guys re-filling candy machines in the US leads me to conclude you are not a serious person, no matter the length of your posts. C’mon, many of us around here are Americans and simply know better.

And I ought to know: I once re-stocked a candy machine as part of my job, and I never had any assistants. 🙂

Martyn,

Funny you mentioned dogs, as I was going to use that as an example of local effiency. I had two friends who owned three enormous dogs which they brought to Shanghai. I heard all about how many people worked in the local pet registration office.

I know the fear of dogs phenomena! At first I thought my friends were exaggerating when they said people actually cried “Wolf!” and ran from them, but it’s true!

I can’t recall the name of the breed of this couple’s two huge dogs, they looked like dobermans, but … larger. One was solid black, named “Satan”. The “smallest” dog was an adult Alaskan Husky.

You can imagine how, to urbanite Shanghainese eyes, an excited Husky might look just exactly like a ravenous timber wolf!

On the other hand, if I were to turn a corner and confront a tame 200-pound hog, I would probably re-act just as if it were a charging boar. 🙂

September 10, 2005 @ 1:27 am | Comment

Haha!

September 10, 2005 @ 1:30 am | Comment

Shanghai, I don’t think we are supposed to take it seriously. I think Math’s post is pretty funny and deliberately so. And he definitely has a point about the modern world’s collective tendency to not “stop and smell the flowers,” as it were. Even though in all seriousness I think that those of us in wealthy societies could lead better quality lives if we weren’t fixated on acquiring more and more consumer goods…which as Math points out, is an inefficiency, and therefore contradicts his argument.

But I thought it was a fun post. I always enjoy it when someone posits a somewhat logically constructed argument that is at the same time absurd. He’s right you know. The global economy right now is fueled by wasteful consumption. Which in the long run is not a good thing. But it makes for a good argument.

September 10, 2005 @ 1:42 am | Comment

really? there are hundred dishes in the community i live and almost every community has some dishes, ranging from a few to a hundred

fly over shanghai and you will understand what i mean

I live in shanghai, the dishes are illegal, only hotels are allowed to have satalite dishes.
There are, however, a lot of illegal satalite dish providers. The thing with illegal satalite television is you never know how long your smart card’s gonna last, there’s no customer service to call, and you can’t sue’em either. So very often you’ll find you’ve spent thousands(RMB) to find the signal only lasts a month.

September 10, 2005 @ 1:57 am | Comment

Maybe the confusion over satellite dishes involves size. If we’re talking about the large 10+ foot diameter models that collect for a building, okay – those are found mainly on hotels and the like.

If we’re talking about private dishes, the small ones of about 2 feet diameter, they are a common sight all over Shanghai. I just stepped to the edge of my balcony, my 24-story building has three private dishes on my corner (I can’t see the other corners of the building). I think I’m the only foreigner in my building, so the dish owners are locals.

I get ads under my door every month for private dishes. Often the ads explicitly mention “adult” channels – also “illegal”. 🙂

September 10, 2005 @ 2:10 am | Comment

And about the dogs, there’s a curfew for them too: No dogs allowed on streets past sunrise. I thought it was rediculous but I read if from Sohu News Shuttle (直通车,what’s that called?)

September 10, 2005 @ 2:18 am | Comment

“When I was in China last month, I tried to look for some “swing” clubs online and “voyeur” pictures that couples post online, and I could not find anything substantial from google.cn or yahoo China or baidu.com”

Censored search engines fail to turn up dodgy material… hold the front page.

Curiously, I’ve found google.co.nz or the other localised pages (though they still search the whole web, of course) to be good for getting round CCP search blocks.

You’ll need an anonymiser or better yet the Firefox proxy plugin to get to the actual pages half the time, of course.

September 10, 2005 @ 2:25 am | Comment

Yes, I meant to just say they were illegal (It came as a bit of a shock to me when I first found out because I spent the previous 15 days watching HBO and AXN in hotels).

Even though my smart-card doesn’t decrypt the signals anymore, I still haven’t gotten around to taking the dish down yet either (more than a year now…I wonder how much dust it’s collected), I wonder how many of those dishes outside are like mine

September 10, 2005 @ 2:26 am | Comment

Firefox proxy plugin

!My UltraReach stopped working a month ago and who knows when they’ll block anonymouse. Please tell me where to get this!!

I searched on google, is this it? –SwitchProxy Tool – Firefox Extension

September 10, 2005 @ 2:29 am | Comment

That sounds like the one. It’s available off the getfirefox.com site.

It puts a little right-clickable message in your status bar. I’m currently cycling between three servers – in Japan, Malaysia and the Philippines – depending on which one is working the best.

Been able to read the BBC News for the first time in ages.

September 10, 2005 @ 2:48 am | Comment

China expressed shock at the acquittal of an American border officer accused of roughing up a Chinese tourist and said it will closely monitor her $10 million lawsuit against the U.S. government.

Homeland Security officer Robert Rhodes was found not guilty on Thursday of violating the civil rights of Zhao Yan, 38, a businesswoman who was touring Niagara Falls near the Canadian border in July 2004.

Rhodes told the court in upstate New York that Zhao took off running when he ordered her inside his inspection station to question her about a drug suspect with whom he thought she might be associated.

He was charged with using excessive force after he allegedly sprayed her with pepper gas, threw her against a wall and struck her head on the pavement.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/09/10/international/i005701D06.DTL

——
Even Chinese abusive policemen would find it difficult to immitate the American Homeland Security officer Robert Rhodes. Beating a woman is one thing. Beating her when she’s down is another. Then beating her with a chair. Her face was totally bruised. Coming to America….I think not.

September 10, 2005 @ 4:38 am | Comment

I agree with Other Lisa about Math’s “efficiency” argument. I think that he’s trying to be funny by playing around with logic.
I don’t know that installing satellite dishes at home is illegal in China. That explains why all my friends from China, the first thing that they’ll do when they move into a new place here is to have a dish installed. That explains. By the way, I’m not American either. I’m an Aussie living in Australia. Like Martyn, I very seldom make comments on American current affairs. zhj, the standard of freedom of speech here is very much the same as the US or Europe. So in other words, China is an exception, not the norm. And if you are exercising your critical thinking, you’ll probably want to ask WHY.

September 10, 2005 @ 4:51 am | Comment

That’s an interesting point, Fat Cat. I never really noticed, but very seldom do I ever comment on politics in Britain or Australia.

September 10, 2005 @ 5:20 am | Comment

I give up.
I’ve had it with some loser stuck in an office all day with no girlfriend or future outside of daydreams who has nothing better to do than effortlessly making offensive statements about how wonderful the CCP is by people who clearly have no idea what they’re talking about apart from meaningless statistics. As a teacher I am completely antagonistic towards a regime that survives by preaching ignorance and lies. Wait for next health epidemic when the gov’t covers that up from the people the Madges of the world proclaim are only after their best interests. No longer will I challenge such well-to-do laowei larging it here and doing so while ignoring the suffering all around, but demanding AD NAUSEUM that we thank this hateful regime for making our lives so much more agreeable than they would be in the West. I refuse to keep commenting only for such moral pygmies to ignore any of my points and have this attention-seeking idiot continue unabated his essay-long digressions on how the CCP is no different than the local chapter of the Boy Scouts of America.
Long ago it was decided that Madge, who has shown that he has serious issues not merely in his cut-and-paste ramblings but in his bizarre split-personalities (assuming the identity for a period of time as a 64-year old woman ami\ among many, many others), should continue to be humoured because it’s so funny to laugh at people clearly mentally ill.
I simply can’t continue to wade through yet more fascist apologia taking up paragraphs and paragraphs. Life’s too short and the hypocrisy too galling.

September 10, 2005 @ 5:25 am | Comment

ZHJ Said:

Even Chinese abusive policemen would find it difficult to immitate the American Homeland Security officer Robert Rhodes. Beating a woman is one thing. Beating her when she’s down is another. Then beating her with a chair. Her face was totally bruised. Coming to America….I think not.

Maybe the next time a uniformed police officer tells her to stop, she will listen instead of resisting and trying to flee.

Iguarantee she wouldn’t have tried that shit with police in China!!

September 10, 2005 @ 6:56 am | Comment

You’re right ZHJ, we all know that at least Chinese police are kind enough to sedate a woman before she is forcibly sterilized

September 10, 2005 @ 7:01 am | Comment

I Believe A Country Is Strong If It Can Build Stuff

Ever since the Opium War, Chinese have been looking for ways to make
China strong. There has been many suggestion, some say democracy is the
path to greatness, others say education, or culture, etc. et.

Well I think all the above suggestions are mistaken. I believe in
“Saving a country through knowing to to make stuff”. That is, if there are
things other countries can build, we should also learn to how to build
them, and should start building them. If others know how to build
jetliners, we should also know how to build jetliners. If others know how to
build computers, we should also know how to build computers.

Why did the Japanese become so strong? Mainly because the Japanese paid
attention to building things. They didn’t really pay attention to
science, or democracy. THey only cared about how to build things. Of course
Science is the foundation for building things, but scientific
principles are differnet from technological know-hows. The first are open to the
world, the latter is protected in secrecy.

When the Nationalists came to power in China in 1927, they had a
relatively stable period, and tried to develop the economy. But they did not
pay attention to building things. But when the Communists took over in
1949, in 20 years time, they figured out how to bulilt cars, airplanes,
tanks, atomic bomb, satellites, freight ships, partical accelerators,
And they were able to build all of those under economic sanctions by
the world. And that’s a critical reason why the US decided to pay more
attention to China. Unlike the Communists, the Nationalists in the 20’s
did not want to spend time to figure out how to build stuff, instead,
they bought those stuff from countries who already know how to build
them. This is like someone who copies others homework instead of trying to
understand the material on his/her own.

But today, the Chinese government lost its drive to build things.
Instead, it wants to promote globalization. Basically, it’s saying, “others
already know how to build those advanced stuff, let’s just buy the
stuff they already built , while we make cheap clothes…”. What they fail
to understand is that while making cheap clothes and toys and selling
them to walmart may be very very profitable, they won’t contribute to
the strength of a nation. This is like two people, who studies
theoretical physics and knows how to design DVD Players or Laser Projectors, the
other thinks it’s too much waste of time to try to do that, since you
can already buy them at stores, so he decides to become a waiter, since
a waiter can earn more than an engineer through tips.

In conclusion, my view is that the criteria for a country’s strength is
not democracy, not science, not education. The only criterion is
whether the country has the ability to build stuff that others can build, and
can also build stuff others cannot build. If one day China can also
land on the moon, or have a space station, or explore the mars, or have
world-class cancer detection technology,etc. If that days comes, I can
guarantee you no one would open his/her mouth and accuse China about this
and that. Even if China is backward in all other aspects of society,
but leading in building things, then China will be respected, and the
entire world would be talking about how to learn from the “China
Experience”, or the “China Model”, and China will be looked up to just like the
US is.

So my advice to the Chinese government today is: “spend less time
making clothes and toys, spend more time making passenger jetlines and
computer chips”. The profits may not be as easy and as immediate, but it’s
worth it, trust me.

September 10, 2005 @ 11:26 am | Comment

This thread is approaching 100, time to move to the new one.

September 10, 2005 @ 1:08 pm | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.