Thread 101

101-dawn.jpg

This is a very tall building in Taipei. Impressive, if not quite beautiful in the classical sense. Photo came to me from Jerome Keating.

______________

Richard Burger is the author of Behind the Red Door: Sex in China, an exploration of China's sexual revolution and its clash with traditional Chinese values.

The Discussion: 105 Comments

Sorry Richard, I posted my last comment before I know that you are closing the thread. I’m now copying my last comment here:

Xin, it is absurd for you to blame China’s problem with the US and Japan on Taiwan. I thought the Chinese government’s foreign affair policy itself is a sufficient reason for causing conflicts. It is as absurb as blaming the U’ghars in Xinjiang for the soical unrest that’s been boiling in many cities and rural areas in China.

You are right in pointing out that US schools won’t ask their students to speak British English. For the same reason you shouldn’t be expecting dialect speakers of Chinese to speak Beijing style Mandarin or speak Mandarin at all. Vilifying dialect speakers in order to promote the CCP’s One China Polcy will only create more division, not unification.

Since you know now that Liu Yixi is from Taiwan, you should perhaps make an effort to make friend with him/her – that is if you are so keen to see a “peaceful unification”. You are not my friend, not until you’ve shown some courtesy and friendship to Liu and other people from Taiwan. Since you are not my friend, you don’t need to know where I am.

P.S. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not related to Taiwan, Japan or the US in any way. Have never visited any of those countries in my life – just to let you know – save you from barking up the wrong tree, so to speak.

January 26, 2006 @ 8:04 pm | Comment

From the last thread, Xin said: what do you mean by “my people were slave too.”???

The Jews were once slaves to the Egyptians

January 26, 2006 @ 8:07 pm | Comment

richard,
I think most chinese will get over japanese thing in A.D. 4006. lol.

Hi, I believe chinese is one of 12 jew tribes that in bible. I mean those 100% purely Han-chinese.

January 26, 2006 @ 8:23 pm | Comment

Damn! I missed all the fun in that last thread.
Btw, that building looks like they put the first block in upside-down.

January 26, 2006 @ 8:25 pm | Comment

“richard,
I think most chinese will get over japanese thing in A.D. 4006. lol.”

They’ll get over it in a hurry when the current regime loses it’s grip and the truth about China’s own history comes to light.

January 26, 2006 @ 8:30 pm | Comment

I believe that universities’s students should be forced to attend classes and work at the same time.

There’s a mistaken thought that Universities are for attending classes and studying from books. This is actually a very poisonous thought that originated in Ancient China as well as in ancient Greece. When Chinese parents come together, they talk about nothing but their children’s studies, that always makes me very sad.

A person goes to college to study. Studying includes reading books, doing homeworks, and listening to lectures; but studying is not limited to those three things. Mao Zedong once said, “reading books is studying, application and practice is also studying, and is a more important form of studying.” In other words, application comes first, reading books comes second. Of course, you should not be so extreme as to think reading books is useless.

Before the Chinese Cultural Revolution, I went to elementary school. In school, we had classes after classes. There was Chinese class, math class, art class, etc. Then the Cultural Revolution began, and all schools were closed. So I went out onto the streets and idled my time away. When the Cultural Revolution ended, the schools re-opened. But it wasn’t all classes anymore, we spent so much time working in the field: irrigating, planting trees, hiking on mountains. Even the math we learned in class was about measuring areas of various random-shaped objects in real life. I remember that class was called “Measurments”. It was a completely practical classes whose knowledge we can use directly on the field. Of course no such class is offered today, but it was a very enjoyable and useful class for me.

Then I went into the Army. From today’s viewpoint, my education back then was very incomplete. Today’s high school and college students learn a very complete set of things and spend almost all the time in classrooms. But what surprises me is that those “completely-educated” students all appear less competent when they go into workplaces, compared to when I went to my workplaces in their age.

The education in China and USA today, that’s based on lectures and homeworks and tests, are complete failures. It raises millions and millions of useless people. How many of today’s students in college classes can use their knowledge of Thermodynamics or Calculus for anything other than solving problems on their exercise books?

Universities (in China and USA) today perform the role of giving students a “certificate” to go into white-collar workforce. The knowledge you learned in your classes, you either forget 80% of them when you graduate, or you find no use for them in the workplace. But without that “certificate”, then even if you have a lot of knowledge to do real things in the workplace, you will less likely be hired.

Therefore, Education needs big reforms. This post suggests that China and USA both pass laws that says a University student must work at least 4 hours a day, 5 days a week, only the rest of the time can be used to attend classes. The workplaces must be the same as real life work places, and the jobs must be made very close to real world jobs. What kind of jobs? Well, if you are a medical student, you treat patient by yourself (with supervision perhaps). If you are a computer science major, you go work on a project in a real software company. If you are a mechanical engineer, you help build robots for real companies. If you are a humanities major like philosophy or art history, then I’m sorry, you’ll be sent to the most arduous and painful jobs such as cleaning toilets or irrigating farmlands. All Students must be required to work on their major-related jobs everyday for four years as part of the graduation requirement.

Accordingly, tests and homeworks should be reduced. Perhaps tests can be abandoned all together, or at least, like Mao suggested, students should be allowed to look and copy each other’s answers in tests. Copying and discussion is also learning, so I find nothing wrong with that. In real workplaces, it’s all about sharing knowlege and helping your co-workers on a project.

A student’s final grade or GPA should be heavily dependent on how well he/she performed in the workplace. Tests and homework grades should only be secondary. If a student developed something new in the workplace, then he’ll be allowed to graduate early, even if he has failed some courses in the classrooms; those can be overlooked. If a film student made a great film and became famous, then he’ll be able to graduate early, and his/her tests and homeworks become negligible garbage.

Why is today’s college graduates having trouble finding jobs? Because companies want people with experience. If you are required to spend half of your time working in your college years, then you’ll definitely have experience upon graduation, and your employment prospects will improve greatly.

Also, students’ tuitions can be reduced because as they are working in their college years, they are contributing to the society and therefore generating revenues. This way, even the poorest kids will have equal chances of higher education.

January 26, 2006 @ 8:32 pm | Comment

Fat Cat,
You get me wrong. You think in real life i hate taiwanese and would rather wipe them off. Of course that’s not correct. I HAVE taiwanese friends.

Sorry, making me to think Taiwan is not part of china is really impossible. :( I know your reasoning. I understand the logic that you think taiwan is an independent country. But sorry. :(

If one day there are two China in this world, I would have some weird feeling that I was born by two women. I sincerely hope not.

Richard,
Regarding to american people don’t like japanese things talk, I read from book “clash of civilization” writen by american. maybe this book is not the whole picture.

January 26, 2006 @ 8:35 pm | Comment

Fat Cat wrote: “It is as absurb as blaming the U’ghars in Xinjiang for the soical unrest that’s been boiling in many cities and rural areas in China.”

Fat Cat,
Have you ever seen any CCP announcement like “U’ghars people are the social unrest…?”

So you think those people trained by Bin Ladin are not terrists anymore because they are fighting with han-chinese now?

January 26, 2006 @ 9:18 pm | Comment

Been in this blog for a week, at least you guys won’t think “wai guo ren” as offensive, isn’t it?

That’s my little contribution. A little thing I do for China, my great country that includes grassland, snowland, muslin land, and presious island. ;)

lol

January 26, 2006 @ 9:28 pm | Comment

I love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love love China!

Chun Jie Kuai Le.

January 26, 2006 @ 9:29 pm | Comment

Hey, Xin, what are the answers to your Beijing ERR quiz?

January 26, 2006 @ 9:44 pm | Comment

Lisa,
here,
Here are four kinds of food. In beijing accent, only one of them got “err”, please pick:

A: You Bing (fried pie) + err
B: Kao Ya (peking duck)
C: You Tiao (fried, same as fried pie but different shape)
D: Mi Fan (rice)

Here are four tranportations, che, which one in beijing accent got “err”

A: Jiao Che (sedan car)
B: Huo Che (train)
C: Dian Che (tram)
D: Zi Xing Che (bike) +err

Some more here:
http://cul.sina.com.cn/s/2004-07-15/68616.html

This is not a serious language test. Just a entertaining game.

January 26, 2006 @ 10:02 pm | Comment

thanks, Xin! I need to work on my “pirate” Mandarin.

Xin Nian Kuai Le everyone!

January 27, 2006 @ 12:39 am | Comment

I think the Taipei 101 building looks like Chinese take-out boxes stacked up on top of each other.

Coincidence?

January 27, 2006 @ 1:04 am | Comment

And while I’m at it, I find Xin hilarious.

Go ahead, Xin. Take your precious island back. I just hope you didn’t watch the end of ‘Matrix 3′…

January 27, 2006 @ 1:08 am | Comment

#1: Why do all these type of towers look like colossal syringes?

#2: A happy New Year’s to everyone. ×£ÄãÃÇÔÚÐÂÄêÀïÌìÌì¿ìÀÖ,ÊÂÊÂÈçÒâ.

#3: I had a long and rambling rant about the import of Japanese atrocities on Chinese cultural memory, how it will endure -fortunately or unfortunately – even if China revisits its own shameful internal history, and how to state that China’s psychosis when it comes to Japan is entirely the result of CCP brainwashing is both insulting and way too simplistic, but I want to keep the mood happy, and so I’ll save my rant for another day.

Anyway, cheers, everyone. *raises a tumbler of Wu Liang Yi*

January 27, 2006 @ 1:23 am | Comment

Johnny, at least last time I pointed out you are wrong! lol

Look at this picture, the symbol between two lunch box like structure, the “one square in the center of circle”.

Do you know what that symbol means and where it came from?

It was the chinese coin symbol adopted after Qin Dynasty unified other 6 chinese countries into ONE. lol, again, sorry. From then on, all chinese coins were in this shape with square in the centre representing the ONE spirit is being inherited. China is always the ONE. Maybe after taiwan come back one day, the coin will be redesigned to this shape again. Inheriting the spirit as well as saving some natural resouces.

I just read an article from singapore website that actually people supporting KMT is increasing these days. And KMT is unification advocates. lol

Have a nice day. Johnny~~

Xin

January 27, 2006 @ 1:31 am | Comment

Xin, not to tease a compatriot, but are you Math’s second cousin thrice removed?

January 27, 2006 @ 1:37 am | Comment

You mean Johnny? Is he chinese?

January 27, 2006 @ 1:55 am | Comment

Xin,

If you were allowed to learn about Taiwanese politics, you would see KMT is popular because the DPP has corruption problems. Reunification is a small part.

And as for the Chinese coin, just because two countries share a same symbol doesn’t mean they have to be the same country.

For example:
-Every Western country has many Christian cross symbols, but they are not the same country.

Of course Taiwan can display the Chinese Qin coin and be proud of Chinese cultural heritage. I would be too, China has an amazing culture. But that doesn’t mean Taiwan must be part of Chinese state. (not to mention that Taiwan wasn’t a part of the Qin empire…)

I am proud of the culture given to USA by Britain, France, and Greece. But USA is not same country as Britain or France or Greece, and we all do not want to be.

So I say to you, sorry. I corrected your logical fallacy.

January 27, 2006 @ 2:00 am | Comment

Christine cross symbol has no meaning of ONE spirit.

My logic is not fallacy and yours is not either. Just rooted from different cultures. And they are not even communism-democracy issue.

Johnny!!!You are wrong again. lol

It seems you have a little difficulty to brain-wash me. ;p I am gonna get some KFC, oh!, I am affected by american KFC culture. Yummy~

January 27, 2006 @ 2:13 am | Comment

My roommate is a psych major here at Penn and he says it is indeed more difficult to brainwash someone who has already been brainwashed to a different and contradictory degree. You are right, Xin, I have trouble brain-washing you, for the Chinese government has beaten me to you.

Oh, and Xin, here’s a hint: Catholic Church…you know what Catholic means? it means UNIVERSAL. The Universal Church, uniting all of humanity under God (oh, and the church).

check and mate.

Did I mention Taiwan wasn’t in the Qin Empire?

January 27, 2006 @ 2:30 am | Comment

Xin wrote: Fat Cat ….. I know your reasoning. I understand the logic that you think taiwan is an independent country…..

Xin, you don’t understand my reasoning. Not at all. Don’t you see that I’m indifferent to the issue of whether Taiwan is or should be a part of China or not. My understanding is that this is an issue best for the people in China and in Taiwan to decide. After all you are they are the ones who have to live with the consequence. However, I don’t think that a mutually beneficial decision can be made if the people and the government of both sides do not start to have a rational dialogue. Any attempt to manipulate the situation through inciting hatred and fear through propaganda will only delay this kind of dialogue from taking place.

Xin, if you really love China, I challenge you to contribute to this rational dialogue by not using internet as a tool to attack you Taiwanese neighbours. Use it, instead, as a tool to promote mutual understanding and respect.

Please refer to the thread titled “More Important than Google” below for the source of my Uighur comment.

By the way, Xin, I don’t yet consider you as a friend. But I do consider you as someone that I can have a conversation with, even though I don’t agree with some of your view points. So let’s keep the dialogue going.

“Xinnian kuaile “ to you as well.

January 27, 2006 @ 3:09 am | Comment

@Xin

It was the chinese coin symbol adopted after Qin Dynasty unified other 6 chinese countries into ONE. lol, again, sorry. From then on, all chinese coins were in this shape with square in the centre representing the ONE spirit is being inherited. China is always the ONE. Maybe after taiwan come back one day, the coin will be redesigned to this shape again. Inheriting the spirit as well as saving some natural resouces.

You forgot to mention that the One-Ideology of these times wasn’t about a Chinese Nation-State but meant the whole world, all under heaven (tianxia).
This didn’t change until the late 19. Century when the Western idea of nation-states and with it nationalism came to China.
People of ancient times didn’t think in such categories as nation-states. The Chinese emperors ruled over the whole world not only over China. To use this old ideology as an argument today is a tricky thing, at least.

January 27, 2006 @ 3:14 am | Comment

But no matter how much evidence anyone brings to the table to say that Taiwan was or wasn’t part of China at a certain moment in history, it doesn’t matter because the issue is now.. Right? I think one could argue that many empires the existed in what we now call China had controlled Taiwan, you could also argue that at certain times Taiwan was independent, you could also argue that it was Japan at times too, but the bottom line is that was then and this is now, and now Taiwan is independent.
Another thing I think many people are missing when they bring up historical facts is, “what do the people of Taiwan think?” I’m under the impression that they want to be independent because if they wanted to be part of China, they would be, but now they clearly are not.

January 27, 2006 @ 5:40 am | Comment

Darin, haven’t you learned that logic will get you absolutely nowhere in this conversation? If there is any one topic where most Chinese people are truly brainwashed, this is it. Data, history, reason, facts, common sense — all get thrown out the window when it comes to Taiwan. Even my dearest, most beloved friends in China won’t budge on this one. When the topic is raised, their eyes glaze over and it’s as though a ventriloquist is doing the talking: “Taiwan is like a child that longs to return to its mother.” I swear unto whatever gods may be, I am hardly exaggerating. It is one of the most intriguing, unsettling phenomena I’ve ever seen. Just mention Taiwan, and your Chinese interlocutor goes onto automatic pilot.

January 27, 2006 @ 5:58 am | Comment

“It was the chinese coin symbol adopted after Qin Dynasty unified other 6 chinese countries into ONE.”
The square and circle go back to before the Qin dynasty and actually stand for the unity of heaven (round) and earth (square) with man (represented by the monarch) in the middle. This idea goes back at least to Zhou dynasty state religion.

January 27, 2006 @ 6:11 am | Comment

“You forgot to mention that the One-Ideology of these times wasn’t about a Chinese Nation-State but meant the whole world, all under heaven (tianxia).”

Hi Shulan,
To be honest I don’t believe China’s name ZhongGuo, or Middle Kingdom came from an image that chinese thought they are the centre of the world. I think most of chinese misunderstood this. China HAD some trade with Rome, and China, at that time, was having a war with XongNu, north barbarian. If government recognize Rome’s existence, I believe they also, at least, heard about Rome’s size. Then they would not think they are middle kingdom.

According to an ancient chinese book “Shan Hai Jing”, the land was surrounded by seas including north seas, south seas, east seas and west seas. Remember the story about Dragon king under these four seas? ZhongGuo can from that myth, which should excatly mean Middle Land, like in Lord of Ring.

So I don;t think chinese ever claim the whole word, not like Hitler. But why would ancient chinese claim their land wa surrounded by waters, I don’t know, was that a guess? or the book is recording the time before continents splited from each other?

Some people think bible is not just talking about Jews, some theory says chinese could be one of the 12 tribe. I believe there are some reason behind.

“ZhongGuo is centre of world” is only Manchurian’s misunderstanding as they refused to research anyway. Ming Dynasty was always having trouble with manchurian and mongolian, how could they think they are middle kingdom? Yuan dynasty is just part of total mongolian occupation, we surely were not middle kingdom, Song dynasty was totally f**ked, you knew it. Tang dynasty was strong, and I believe at that time they were the strongest of the world but emperor was not Han-chinese (most Han-chinese would not agree with me on this). See? I already listed 1000 years during which china was not MK right? Taiwan is part of china as well as TuBo(tibet’s old name) as well as HuiHu (XiJiang’s old name) but Korea no way was.

So as a result, do not mislead western people by saying TianXia includes california, that ‘s not true. ;) And face the truth and give me a hug. lol

January 27, 2006 @ 6:44 am | Comment

Xin … I strongly suggest you consult a book called Chinese History, A Manual, by Endymion Wilkinson, on the issue of the origins of the term Zhongguo, and its uses. Displays of inaccurate knowledge just serve to undermine any point you might be attempting to make.

January 27, 2006 @ 6:56 am | Comment

Oh, and Richard … I don’t see what you were complaining about in the last thread. Stalingrad was a lot of fun wasn’t it? Or at least, it helped hasten the fall of people who desperately deserved to fall …

January 27, 2006 @ 6:57 am | Comment

“Christine cross symbol has no meaning of ONE spirit.”

Xin, did you actually think about this one before you posted it? I hope (for your sake) that you accidently typed “no” when you meant to type “the” … otherwise … well … ummm …. well … all I can say is that you’ve succeeded in doing something to me that no other poster has ever managed. You’ve rendered me speachless. I mean, what the f@#$?

January 27, 2006 @ 7:00 am | Comment

Filthy Stinking No.9 wrote:
“Xin … I strongly suggest you consult a book called Chinese History, A Manual, by Endymion Wilkinson, on the issue of the origins of the term Zhongguo, and its uses. Displays of inaccurate knowledge just serve to undermine any point you might be attempting to make.”

Regarding to name Zhongguo’s source, I was just talking about my own thought. Not really any school of historian. Middle Kingdom’s saying was held by chinese historian too. But not me.

I read WenYan myself, and I believe I can have my own opinion right?

I remember you are studying China, do you? “Wai guo ren” is not offensive yo!!!

I will “see see” the book you recommended when I got time. ;)

January 27, 2006 @ 7:17 am | Comment

Filthy Stinking:

I think you misunderstood. ONE spirit I said does not mean one spirit. I meant China’s thought about china should be only one in the world.

January 27, 2006 @ 7:27 am | Comment

Any historical claim that China had on Taiwan has been voided by 50 years of Japanese rule under a forced (but still legal) treaty.

This 50 year break plus the fact that Japan never formally ‘returned’ Taiwan to the mainland means that Taiwan’s ownership should be based entierly on ‘squatters rights’ (I live here, so it’s mine).

January 27, 2006 @ 8:40 am | Comment

Since the Taipei 101 is on this thread, ever ask hard core CCP mainlanders what the tallest building in the world is?

I haven’t personally asked this question, but what I’ve heard first hand in conversations regarding the Taipei 101 include:

Changing the topic:
“It’s in shanghai, and it’s currently still under contruction.”

Changing the scope:
“I heard the top three floors are not useable.”

I’m sure there are bound to be more.

January 27, 2006 @ 9:28 am | Comment

ACB wrote
“Any historical claim that China had on Taiwan has been voided by 50 years of Japanese rule under a forced (but still legal) treaty.”

I suggest you do some logical training before opening your mouth. Are you suggesting that forced treaty is legal? So german’s treaty with France can be considered “legal” in the middle of WWII?

I actually wish your logic became true. Coz it will help solve taiwan issue within 7 days. good on you.

Your post is even worse than Ivan’s.

January 27, 2006 @ 10:14 am | Comment

Ed,
just a building, big deal? If this one is tallest, then this is.

I care my dick size, not building’s. OK?

January 27, 2006 @ 10:18 am | Comment

ACB’s (I live here, so it’s mine) is so cool.

I love this. Make this as internatinal law please.

And also make japanese invasion legal please too.

It will not only good for china to solve all the territory problem, it is also good for USA to solve iraq issue.
;)

January 27, 2006 @ 10:22 am | Comment

When the topic is raised, their eyes glaze over and it’s as though a ventriloquist is doing the talking: “Taiwan is like a child that longs to return to its mother.”

Richard, I think you are stereotyping the Chinese people. True, a lot of my follow Chinese are emotional on this issue. On the other hand, many of my friends understand the majority of Taiwanese people want to maintain status quo. They also understand that Taiwanese enjoy a vibrant, although young, democracy and they do not want to live under a CCP government. Personally, I hope and still believe Taiwan will eventually be united with the mainland. It does not mean, however, I will support a military solution. Chinese people have already seen too much bloodshed.

January 27, 2006 @ 10:28 am | Comment

Funny how you talk about your dick rather than addressing the comments.

Since I don’t need to worry about mine, I’m using the Taipei 101 as an example. When the Shanghai Finance Center is complete in a few years the media will use it as a source of national pride, and many of you will be talking about it, even long after the Dubai finish their 800m structure.

The point is that even simple things, like architectural structures that can be physically measured, cannot be agreed upon by hard core commies. If we can’t even agree on this, there certainly isn’t any hope for fuzzier issues like political reform.

January 27, 2006 @ 10:34 am | Comment

Xin is a man? I always thought he/she was a woman. There’s just something very girlish in the way Xin writes – almost like I can hear him/her giggling giddily while he/she files his fingernails.

January 27, 2006 @ 10:37 am | Comment

Just had a thought about the whole Google thing. Anyone know if they’ve said that they won’t boost something UP their rankings on the say-so of any government?

Just a thought. To me that would be much worse than what’s currently taking place which, by the way, I’m with Danwei, ESWN etc in regarding benignly.

The thought came to me when following the links Richard posted in another entry — first a link to the image-search results for Teesquare on chinese Google, & then the results on normal Google. I then clicked to the web results (ie not the image ones) on the chinese version, and saw how high on the rankings is a piece about some evil cult burning its members in said Beijing open space.

January 27, 2006 @ 11:38 am | Comment

Hey Ivan, how about some poetry, history, a few comments on good leadership characteristics, or a good tall tale. Remember your words truth and compassion.

January 27, 2006 @ 11:38 am | Comment

Is Ivan MAJ?

Case for the prosecution:

Both hijack threads.
Both write poetry.
Both write at length and at length.
Both have skyscraper high opinions of their respective self-worth.
Both prefer to try to demonstrate their superiority through pissing-contest abstract argument and oneupmanship rather than actually engage with any issue under discussion.

Case for the defence:

When MAJ lacked the ability to maintain an argument on TPD he resorted to posting paragraphs upon paragraphs of bluster.
When Ivan lacks the ability to maintain an argument on TPD he resorts to posting paragraphs upon paragraphs of nasty insults and childish name-games.

MAJ threatened to try to get TPD closed down. Ivan threatens to kill MAJ.

When MAJ invented personas most of us were fooled for a while…

The case continues.

January 27, 2006 @ 11:57 am | Comment

KLS,

I’m simply going to leave it to Richard and other friends here, to defend me against that last vicious comment of yours.

January 27, 2006 @ 12:26 pm | Comment

what about the earlier vicious comments?

January 27, 2006 @ 12:37 pm | Comment

KLS, most of us recognize Ivan’s comments by the first line or two. He has a distinctive logical writing style. Many of us recognize Maj’s writing too, also a distinctive style. I don’t know that most of us were fooled by Maj’s personaes There’s no way Ivan would or could be writing as Maj.

January 27, 2006 @ 12:51 pm | Comment

Math,

While some of the changes to education you suggested I agree are positive ones, I get the impression you dont’ have a clear understanding of the American education system.

Education
For example, from as early as Junior high, there is a very active science-fair component for those interested in science. And getting the Westinghouse National Science Talent search award, for example, is very helpful for getting into college. By the time I was in high school, I was working summers at university research facilities (this is common in the US), learning applied scientific processes. During undergrad, every summer I worked at a different company, getting a perspective on the finance, technology, and business industries.

Creativity
I spoke with a greater-China based executive director at a major management consultancy recently regarding talent. His comments were that from his experience, asian educated have 1) a strong ability to form relationships with clients, and 2) have weaker critical problem solving skills, when compared to western counterparts. (this is business model or management issues, and not necessarily “integrate ln(x).”

This is consistent with the education systems of the two culture. At MIT or Harvard for example, you can easily ask any professor to prove what he said. And he’ll do it, or get the information for you. My Asian friends don’t want to be disrespectful and just regergitate what they’ve been lectured. In college, just about every homework problem required lots of thinking, and you simply could not plug equations in to solve problems, unlike what I hear from my asian friends who have gone to top schools there. Lectures, while the most visible part of the process, is not where most of the learning takes place.

Work Experience
Academic degrees simply establish a standard on a student’s academic knowledge before they enter the workforce. While integrating industry into schools is helpful, we also need people to get their feet wet on purely academic disciplines, since they feed into the research community, where innovation really comes from. In europe for example, where education is cheaper, people dittle dattle between school and work or research projects until they’re near 30 before graduating. The costs in the US means people just want to start working.

January 27, 2006 @ 1:00 pm | Comment

BTW, to everyone quoting Mao, remember that doing so does little to push your argument forward from a logical standpoint.

We’d much rather hear YOUR reasons for thinking what you do instead just Mao saying so. That’s in the same class as “As our great leader Kim Jun Il says”…

January 27, 2006 @ 1:05 pm | Comment

Quite right Skystreaker. If you want to know the taste of a pear, you must change the pear by eating it yourself.

January 27, 2006 @ 1:15 pm | Comment

KLS, Maj posts pictures of himself, Ivan goes to lengths to maintain anonymity. Maj is from Oz, Ivan is from US, or Britain, or Russia depending on how far back you go. Ivan asks for help from friends, Maj doesn’t. Maj looks for women, Ivan has too many. Maj is a teacher, Ivan is a lawyer. Ivan has a templar background, Maj probably doesn’t.

January 27, 2006 @ 1:19 pm | Comment

I propose that Ivan and MAJ mud-wrestle to settle the question.

Anyway, did y’all hear? Oprah, America’s arbiter elegantiae, admits her mistake and finallybusts James Frey’s ass.

Ha. Loserrr. Even more pathetic than the so-called JT Leroy.

January 27, 2006 @ 2:17 pm | Comment

KLS, are you Maj?

January 27, 2006 @ 2:22 pm | Comment

No, yuanme, I’m just a soul whose intentions are good. Anyway I was being facetious about MAJ and Ivan … of course they are different people. But you can’t deny that their personalities, as revealed on TPD, are remarkably similar!

January 27, 2006 @ 2:34 pm | Comment

It’s good to see the US is pragmatic enough to not let rhetorics on democracy and human rights to derail cooperation on matters of real import at the UN:

US aligns itself with Sudan, Iran, China, Zimbabwe in a coalition of the homophobic

January 27, 2006 @ 2:46 pm | Comment

“If you want to know the taste of a pear, you must change the pear by eating it yourself.”

I’m not sure how this relates to the fact that quoting someone doesn’t make the quote reasonable.

Clarify?

January 27, 2006 @ 3:55 pm | Comment

Richard… actually I have noticed how difficult it is to talk about the Taiwan issue with a person from mainland china since they go into repeat everything that was said to me for the last 20 years mode. But that doesn’t stop with Taiwan… Just yesterday a girl from hong kong mentioned how Hong Kong’s birth rate is the lowest in the world (at 0.5 children per woman) and a guy from the mainland yells “HONG KONG ISN’T A COUNTRY!!” and a girl from bejing mumbles, “well no matter what taiwan is china”..
That would have surprised me say 3 years ago when I first came to japan.. but after so many years of being surrounded by chinese people, i know it’s par for the course…

January 27, 2006 @ 5:40 pm | Comment

Ivan and Maj mudwrestling? I’ll buy a ticket to that one! I think we could even find a few more to make it a tag-team match!

January 27, 2006 @ 5:50 pm | Comment

KLS, Ivan is not Madge, of that I can assure you. Everyone, please cut out the personal crap, okay? It doesn’t get us anywhere.

January 27, 2006 @ 9:03 pm | Comment

Hm. After reading some of these comments on Ivan, I did a little digging into the rest of this site on Ivan. (Sorry, just got done with forex trading… bored.)

With all due respect and apologies for being an ass to him, I believe that while he’s slightly full of himself, he’s an ok guy. Much better than some people I know, like my ex.

Apart from that, I’d like to say that the quest for the world’s tallest building is admirable–but tall buildings create their own problems, which are mostly logistical/transportational. One interesting method of solving these problems, in my opinion, is the concept of a vertical city, where residential, commercial, and industrial units/utilities are condensed into one tall structure.

For more on this concept, check out the “Bionic Tower” that was floated around the Shanghai Party Committee a few years back.

January 27, 2006 @ 9:48 pm | Comment

Xin,

Define to me what is a “pure” Han-Chinese. Is it by physical features, by place of birth, by archeological location, by cultural idiosyncracies, by history (if so, people in present Beijing are not pure Hans anymore…), by DNA?

You know, Nazi Germany, without lack of trying, was not able to pin down what is a “pure” Aryan race.

January 27, 2006 @ 9:59 pm | Comment

t_co .. there are similar projects like that in japan too, mostly by the developer, Mori. his most famous one today would be Roppongi Hills. It seems to be loosing more money then anyone could imagine. I think you’re right that rather then just make tall buildings to show off how tall they are, the concept of independent cities in a building is where we as a civilization are heading…. but i think it’s just a bit to early. having said that there seems to be more success in this in china then in japan… so maybe it’s just japan that isn’t ready for it. but i also suspect that the reason is works in china and not japan is because in china, the government tells the people what to do, not the people tell the government what to do..

January 27, 2006 @ 10:29 pm | Comment

Xin,

“just a building, big deal? If this one is tallest, then this is.?

Hmmm… if the tallest building is in China, you’d be praising it to high heavens (and belittleing the Taipei 101, the Sear tower, the Petronas tower to boot), second to your dick.

Admit it Xin. If Shanghai completes the tallest building few years from now, you won’t say “it’s just a building, big deal”.

January 27, 2006 @ 10:33 pm | Comment

The current boundaries of China is not the same as 5000 years ago. This came about by series of conquests, voluntary federation etc. Territories were gained, territories were lost etc. It came about, because it just came about. Decided by series of personalities and events – that’s why it’s called history. There’s nothing sacred about the origin of China. It is remarkable only that as a cultural national entity, it survived to this day, unlike say the Roman Empire or Pharoanic Egypt. But certainly China in many ways is also not totally identical to 1000, or 2000, or 3000 or 4000 years ago.

It would be nice if Taiwan and China get together a nd form one unified political entity, as long as it is MUTUALLY acceptable. If not, and Taiwan wants to go its own way, what’s the big deal. In the end, the nation exists to protect and serve the people (that’s how families, societies and nations evolved), not the vainglorious and imperial crap of people serving the motherland or fatherland. The motherland is and exists for the people.

(I wonder, why CCP doesn’t claim the future “reunification” with Mongolia. After all, Mongolia was part of the Qing dynasty.)

History is not static.

If we follow the argument that once a territory has been “integrated” by past events and it’s inviolable going forward, then maybe Italy should declare that they are the inheritor of the Roman Empire, and that they will now form the Roman Federal Republic, and all the territories in Europe and Middle East that were once under the Roman realm must constitute the Roman Federal Republic now. How’s that for a “one Roman policy”.

January 27, 2006 @ 10:53 pm | Comment

What is it with men and their fixation with big, tall, phallic buildings?
You might as well just paint the tip red and add some slimey gloop.

(PS. Tongue in cheek, guys, tongue in cheek.)

January 27, 2006 @ 10:57 pm | Comment

“Academic degrees simply establish a standard on a student’s academic knowledge before they enter the workforce.”

Not in China, they don’t. More likely, they represent the level of plagiarism engaged in and a system that tolerates cheating. I would say that a Chinese student’s qualifications tell you precisely nothing about their suitability for a particular position.

January 27, 2006 @ 11:02 pm | Comment

There’s also that Wendy Cope poem about “Stupid Men and their Stupid Arguments”.

Not that I think that all arguments are stupid, but…this one has been going on for a long time and I don’t think we’re ever going to finish it. As Richard said, the vast majority (but not every single one) of the mainland Chinese are brainwashed about this issue. Thus it turns into one of those Oxford Union debates where it doesn’t matter how logical, or even correct your reasoning is, nobody’s ever going to change their mind and nobody’s ever going to persuade anyone of anything.

I’m off to make jiaozi.
Happy New Year.

January 27, 2006 @ 11:03 pm | Comment

The Roman Federal Republic can tell France: “you are my daughter. I am your long lost mother. Come and live in my house now, poor daughter. No arguments please!”

January 27, 2006 @ 11:11 pm | Comment

Dishuigaunyin,

Hmm…, I’d like to taste your jiaozi (no sarcasm intended).

Everyone, Happy New Year.

January 27, 2006 @ 11:15 pm | Comment

Richard,

It’s interesting that the posted Taipei 101 photo was taken on September 11.

Is there more to it than coincidence?

January 27, 2006 @ 11:38 pm | Comment

“Not in China, they don’t. More likely, they represent the level of plagiarism engaged in and a system that tolerates cheating. I would say that a Chinese student’s qualifications tell you precisely nothing about their suitability for a particular position.”

Well, when you have idiot Mao saying that people should be allowed to cheat, this is of course what happens. He really fucked up China.

January 28, 2006 @ 12:28 am | Comment

It is too simplistic to just label mainland Chinese as being brainwashed on the Taiwan issue. It doesn’t explain why many oversea Chinese who never have lived under the CCP government hold the same opinion on this issue. And CCP propaganda/brainwashing has failed terribly on many other fronts, why are they particularly successful on this one?

January 28, 2006 @ 12:38 am | Comment

Didn’t Taiwan declare independence in May of 1895 after Japan won the Sino-Japanese war to say that Taiwan was never China’s to sign away? So that would mean that Imperial Japan took Taiwan, not from China but from the Taiwanese people? So then after WW2 was over and Taiwan was not Japanese anymore, it wouldn’t return to China, but back to Taiwan itself?

January 28, 2006 @ 12:43 am | Comment

It is too simplistic to just label mainland Chinese as being brainwashed on the Taiwan issue. It doesn’t explain why many oversea Chinese who never have lived under the CCP government hold the same opinion on this issue.

Much as I dislike the oftentimes ridiculous and paternalistic rhetoric that fellow mainlanders spew out on the whole Taiwan unification issue (as in, “return, oh prodigal son!”), I have to echo CLC here. I mean, what is it with with you enlightened Western pandits and the word ‘brainwashed”?

Why are the Chinese nationalistic? Because they’ve been brainwashed by the CCP. Why are they angry over Japan’s past atrocities? Because they’ve been brainwashed by the CCP. Why do they claim to appreciate stability over individual freedoms? Because they’ve been brainwashed by the CCP. Why do they consider Taiwan as their own? You guessed it -because they’ve been brainwashed by the CCP. One would think that the Chinese had never had any “nao” to “xi” in the first place. Surely such psychocultural phenomena could be explained in better and more complex ways than by the summary prognosis of “brainwashed”?

(Which goes into another thing – the opinions and rhetoric of the Western pandits who post here are sometimes more predictable than they’d probably like to think.)

January 28, 2006 @ 1:29 am | Comment

Arrghh – “diagnosis”, not “prognosis”. Sorry, my coherence in English goes out the window at 3 something in the morning.

January 28, 2006 @ 1:34 am | Comment

I think it’s very easy for westerners to think that China is brainwashing it’s citizens because the flow of information is controlled by the government in China. If Chinese government truly believed that it had a solid argument that Taiwan is China, they wouldn’t effectively make it illegal to debate the issue as they would be confident in victory, they would encourage discussion to strengthen themselves. However by filtering all flow of information on the topic of Taiwanese Independence (Pro.. there are plenty of articles available against Independence) be it on the internet, in books or magazines, or on TV or radio news, it becomes clear that even the Chinese government does not fully believe it’s own argument, and therefore needs to silence the other side in order to ‘win’.

January 28, 2006 @ 3:16 am | Comment

Darin I don’t agree with your logic.
We all know that the Chinese government doesn’t want people to have freedom to discuss wide-ranging political views on media such as TV, papers. So it stands to reason that they’d control ALL such political discussion, rather than risk letting the genie out of the bottle.

January 28, 2006 @ 3:23 am | Comment

Nausica, I stick to my guns n the “brainwashing” in this particular instance, Taiwan. I could plot my case mathematically, based on the number of mainlanders I’ve heard recite, nearly word for word, the party’s stock, sanctimonious phrases about Taiwan – people who are actually cynical about the CCP! It is a true phenomenon that I have personally encountered time and again, with even my best friends from China. I won’t say the Chinese are brainwashed about a lot – only about Taiwan. Some, not all, also show symptoms when it comes to Japan. But with Taiwan, it’s nearly 100 percent, with Tibet ranking No. 2 for knee-jerk, pre-programmed “opinions.” The reasons I apply the term brainwashing in the case of Taiwan and Tibet is the startling, almost eerie similarity in the “arguments,” which are party talking points. I would say, by the way, that many Evangelical Christians in America have been similarly brainwashed, and talking with them about such things as homosexuality and women’s reproductive rights is about as fruitful as discussing Taiwan with most mainlanders. Same stock phrases and slogans.

January 28, 2006 @ 3:28 am | Comment

Actually the comparison of “Taiwan-Talking-Points” with Fundamenetalist “Christian” talking points, is right on point. (er, alright, I meant to do that.) Very apt anyway, because in both cases the authority is self-authenticating and the argument is circular:

1. We know the Bible is literally true because it says it is. How can you doubt the Bible when the Bible already tells you it’s correct?

2. Taiwan is part of China because the boundaries of China are whatever China says they are.

January 28, 2006 @ 3:41 am | Comment

I’m with Richard on this one. I say “brainwashed” because I’m hearing the same arguments and twisted logic again and again and again from people who frequently have interesting and diverse opinions on other subjects.

FChia, you’re welcome to pop by for jiaozi any time you’re in the same continent.

January 28, 2006 @ 3:48 am | Comment

Or … these people all say the world is round and they all parrot the same tired old lines (eg seeing ships coming over the horizon, lunar eclipses etc) — they must have been brainwashed into seeing things different from me!

January 28, 2006 @ 3:55 am | Comment

KLS, cut it out. The world is round. That’s not what I mean at all. That’s not a talking point. I’m referring to phrases like, “Taiwan is a child that must return to its mother.” That’s not like saying the sky is blue. That’s a pre-programmed line.

January 28, 2006 @ 4:00 am | Comment

yeah but I’m just saying that the Pope who maintained, along with popular wisdom, that the earth was flat, could easily have accused the followers of the round-earth theory of being brainwashed.
“brainwashed” is too easy an accusation and a dangerous one to make because it suggests the accuser is refusing to listen any more. A certain Mr Popper might have a thing or two to say about that.

January 28, 2006 @ 4:10 am | Comment

KLS
“So it stands to reason that they’d control ALL such political discussion, rather than risk letting the genie out of the bottle.”
But they don’t… If you search for Taiwan independence you can easily find articles that for example say say america is against it. They only information that is prevented from being seen is information that doesn’t help the governments agenda. For the same reason I avoid the Japanese news paper Asahi like the plague. They have a contract with China’s government that says they wont publish anything China doesn’t approve of in exchange for being the official Chinese source for news on Japan… That’s worse then google’s sell out in my book.

Richard
“But with Taiwan, it’s nearly 100 percent, with Tibet ranking No. 2 for knee-jerk, pre-programmed “opinions.” ”
That’s the about the same as what I’ve experienced too. When everyone says the same thing word for word, it really stops sounding like an opinion and more and more like a 1.3 trillion tape recorders.

January 28, 2006 @ 4:28 am | Comment

Further to what Richard said:

1. There is empirical evidence that the Earth is round, and anyone with some intelligence can at least infer it from his own experience. But the issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty (or lack thereof or whatever) is one which is far more a matter of human choice than of physical science.

2. The Popes never said the Earth was flat. Throughout the middle ages the conventional Church view was that of Ptolemy (Hellenistic astronomer) who said the Earth was a sphere at the centre of the universe. Virtually all scholars AND Popes said the same – the only “unscientific” belief being that the sun goes around the Earth. But from our perspective on Earth, the sun DOES go around us.

January 28, 2006 @ 4:47 am | Comment

@Xin
It’s your good right to have your own oppinion on everything, even if it’s wrong.

January 28, 2006 @ 5:51 am | Comment

I agree with what Shulan said, above. Xin, I think most of what you write here is nonsense, but at least you usually try to say it in fair ways.
So I think overall it’s good to have you around here, to make things more interesting.

And I’m ALMOST sorry about my earlier remark, Xin, about how I thought you were a woman – but you really did set me up for it after you mentioned the size of your own dick.
But otherwise, personally I enjoy seeing you here, Xin.

January 28, 2006 @ 6:54 am | Comment

Modern Overseas Chinese are essentially taught the same Chinese history at least regarding up to the end of Qing dynasty… the same mindset on inviolability of territory, inclusive of Taiwan… and the sense of historical superiority over 5000 years… and the victimhood during the colonial times and the consequent emotionality. This emotionality somehow molds conformity and uncritical thinking – there is peer pressure when you raise a question that may somehow diminish the evils the colonial power had done to China (i.e. “how dare you, we are the victims, we were humiliated, we were subjected to unequal treaties, China must be strong to erase the humiliations, we have to stick it to them”). This leads to a common mindset, no exceptions accepted.

Is this brainwashing? Maybe. But it is not totally deliberate. Not as deliberate as what the CCP is doing on modern history – meaning the period starting from the birth of Communist Party. The KMT also teaches their own selective version starting from Sun Yat Sen period.

By the way, I’m an overseas Chinese (a sojourner so to speak), and went through this education. I believed in that version of history, but I had in me some uneasiness that this may not be the full picture. Only when I graduated that I started to read more from different sources and confirmed that the picture painted are incomplete, selective and unscholarly.

Chinese history is taught in such a way as to be self-congratulatory (5000 year civilization, first to invent this or that etc.!), to convey superiority, but in fact this masks an inferiority complex. There is nothing wrong in teaching history so that Chinese can be made to be proud of themselves for nation building, but the unintended consequence is that it compromises objectivity. Emotion is used to cover our own blemishes that we want to ignore. This makes the people less mature in dealing with the world at large.

January 28, 2006 @ 8:15 am | Comment

Chinese history is taught in such a way as to be self-congratulatory (5000 year civilization, first to invent this or that etc.!), to convey superiority, but in fact this masks an inferiority complex.

I’ve been saying this for a long time. But those words “inferiority co,mplex” make Chinese readers go ballistic, as though it means they are inferior. They’re not at all the same.

Thanks for the excellent comment.

January 28, 2006 @ 8:25 am | Comment

OK, I’m not completely trying to annoy, but it’s worth pointing out that most countries teach their children lies about their history. why else do Americans grow up thinking that their country is blessed?

January 28, 2006 @ 8:57 am | Comment

There is simply no point in debating the Taiwan issue. In case we have all forgotten, China is not a democracy and public opinion will have little influence on the final outcome, whatever that may be. The best we can hope for is the maintainence of the status quo: de facto independence for Taiwan without an official declaration that would precipitate an inevitable military retaliation from the mainland.

Yes, most mainland Chinese are brainwashed on this issue and will continue to be so for a long time to come. Some posters here appear to derive some sense of intellectual superiority and pleasure from engaging in this debate. However, to intellectually bully a brainwashing victim is the equivalent of winning a physical duel with a handicapped person in a wheel chair. There is simply nothing to be proud of and nothing to be gained.

January 28, 2006 @ 10:49 am | Comment

Fchia, I have to agree with you 99% here. Yes, Chinese do have an inferiority complex. ‘Ah Q’ by Luxun is a masterpiece on illustrating this. However, people are many other courtiers teach their histories in a self-congratulatory way (think French), and I don’t hear l lot about the word ‘inferiority complex’ throwing at them.

My point is, human beings have free will and their opinions are contributed by an array of different factors. To simply label other people as ‘brainwashed’ or link their thoughts to ‘inferiority complex’ end the dialogue as well as prevent us to think deeper.

For instance, a staunch Bush supporter may have heard the arguments from both sides and still support him. If you ask for reasons, probably he will say something pretty much in sync with the Republican Party line. Does that mean he is brainwashed by Fox news/ talk show radio/Karl Rove? You may say so, but … …

Sometimes, a knee-jerk reaction to give out labels, convenient as it may be, prevents us to see the whole picture. A Chinese who boast his standard Mandarin accent is a sign of the ‘inferiority complex’? Well, maybe. But, many American do the same thing, not to mention the discrimination against black/foreign accents. A Chinese who doesn’t say Taipei 101 is the tallest building in the world is having the ‘inferiority complex’? Yeah, likely. But, Richard did not acknowledge this when he opened this thread … …

Finally, I am programmed to say “ Happy New Year”. :)

January 28, 2006 @ 11:45 am | Comment

Brainwashing is when you can’t think for yourself, not when you think one argument is better than another. Something akin to brainwashing in the states would be a Republican supporter who still thinks someone like Delay is a “great guy”, in spite of overwhelming evidence of his corruption.

Lemme tell ya, though, Chinese brainwashing runs deep. My dad, who’s been in the states for forever, having grown up under the “Cultural Revolution”, still tends to rationalize every bad thing the Chinese gov’t does as “good for the country”. They kill off protestors – “they’ve gotta do what they gotta do”. They shutdown publications – “they’re just no good rabble-rousers anyways”. All while giving absolutely no arguments in support of his stance. And when you give him a counter-argument, he just refuses to listen. Tunes you out completely. Frustrates the heck out of me. And try getting someone who’s brainwashed to admit. Not gonna happen.

January 28, 2006 @ 3:02 pm | Comment

Huh. Sounds kinda like my dad. I blame too much Fox News, in his case..

January 28, 2006 @ 4:25 pm | Comment

So, the general consensus seems to be that talk is worthless when it comes to the Taiwan issue… Does anyone thing the China is going to take Taiwan by military force or is it all just a bluff?
To me it seems pretty silly for China to invade and “kill their own young that longs for the mothers womb” so I want to say based on their logic as to why Taiwan is their land the wont invade …….. but then what are all those missiles for? And why do they mention every so often that “we will kill every last one if you if it’s what we have to do to remind you what you really want”….

January 28, 2006 @ 5:12 pm | Comment

I disagree with the general consensus. I DO believe it is worth discussing the Taiwan issue with Chinese people, however pre-programmed their views are.

Part of the problem is that (the ones still in China) live in an environment where everyone has the same opinion. Under such circumstances, views tend to become more radicalised. It happens in western countries too, wherever clusters of people gather to agree with eachother, and exclude all opposing views. Maybe you’ll never persuade someone to agree with your diametrically opposed view … but you will force them to moderate their views somewhat, in order to defend their position.

Contrary views, and challenges to conventional wisdom, are vital for the intellectual health of anybody, regardless of their politics, religion etc. Unfortunately, the reason why many Chinese people in the west continue to hold the same views is that they live a life that might as well still be in China, as far as their friends, language, news etc is concerned … the only difference is that they see more foreigners walking around. On the other hand, it’s been very interesting for me to observe the intellectual awakening of many other Chinese who have come to Australia, and who have been prepared to consider the issues, and defend their case. Many still hold the same final conclusions … but their views are a lot less radicalised and more intellectually justifiable.

I have always made it my role in life to disagree. If everyone says “look up” I’ll shout “look down!” I’ve recieved a lot of heat because of it … but personally I think that I am doing a service to those who disagree with me.

January 28, 2006 @ 6:58 pm | Comment

Just an aside to FChia on his comment above on the date of the photo;
actually the photo was taken on November 9th; my camera was programmed then to put day/month/year. I had to do a double take on your comment and then remembered where I was going on that day and why I was there.

January 28, 2006 @ 7:26 pm | Comment

Jerome, thanks for the clarification.

January 28, 2006 @ 8:28 pm | Comment

>>they live a life that might as well still be in China

Too true. I am always amazed by the lives that I see Chinese students living here in the US. I’ve asked some of them why they bothered leaving China in the first place — they have almost no contact with non-Chinese, speak Chinese 99% of the time, and read Sina all day.

People have one of two reactions to living in a foreign country: 1) they re-examine their own culture, see the world differently, and become less nationalist, or 2) they become ten times as nationalist because of feelings of isolation, alienation, and being foreign in the new culture.

Actually, I find it a lot easier to discuss China with people who have never left China — and especially nongmin or people in rural areas generally. There is a strange inversion in China compared to the West. In the West, the more education you have, the less nationalist you tend to be. For example, in the US the stereotypical nationalist is some uneducated hill-billy from the South. In China, you have the reverse (well, in my experience): the more educated Chinese are, the more nationalist they are.

I’ve had a lot of interesting — and surprising — conversations about China, politics, and the US with nongmin. With the Chinese “elite,” I always get boilerplate, reflexive nationalism.

Anyway, that is my experience.

January 28, 2006 @ 8:57 pm | Comment

As an aside, it seems this site is unduly harsh on Republicans and Fox News.

I think both Republicans and Democrats have people who are overly obstinate on their stand. And both sides have hard core people that will not ever change, but these are in the minority. It works both ways.

But the important thing is that there is an open market of information available. If one doesn’t like Fox News, there’s CNN, MSNBC, and vice versa. Better yet, watch all of them from time to time, sometimes one carries news not available in the other. A debate can be had without fear of official retribution (personal retribution is another thing :) … ).

But if the choices are CCTV4 and CCTV9 and CCTV(fill in the number), that’s a different story. And if Google is filtered, it compounds the problem.

Sorry for detouring a bit. OK, let’s get back to the regular topic.

January 28, 2006 @ 9:01 pm | Comment

Jim, because the educated ones got more educated on the CCP line of thought. It’s not surprising.

January 28, 2006 @ 9:08 pm | Comment

Well another major reason why so many Chinese elites become disappointed in Europe or America, is because in China you really don’t have to have much talent to rise high.
In China, success is mostly a matter of how much you can bribe and cheat – and of course the Communist Party is the network where most of the cheating and stealing goes on.

Then they go to America or Europe and find out that they actually have to DO something, and they actually have to have some real talent, to succeed or be taken seriously. It’s a blow to them, to discover that just being connnected in the Communist Party doesn’t impress anyone outside of China. Quite ther reverse if anything. It’s kind of like uncovertible currency…

January 28, 2006 @ 9:33 pm | Comment

sorry, meant to spell “unconvertible” currency. Like the RMB, not fully exchangeable outside of China. Chinese “qualifications” are very similar – mostly worthless outside of China, because mostly achieved through cheating and stealing…

January 28, 2006 @ 9:36 pm | Comment

A Chinese who doesn’t say Taipei
101 is the tallest building in the world is having the ‘inferiority complex’? Yeah, likely. But, Richard did not acknowledge this when he opened this thread

Of course I didn’t acknowledge it. When I refer to what was the World Trade Center, I would never say it was the tallest building in New York – everyone knows that already. Or so I would hope.

January 28, 2006 @ 10:00 pm | Comment

We’ve reached the magic number of comments, and this thread wil be closed in a minute. Speak now, or foever hold your peace – at least until I get the next thread up.

January 28, 2006 @ 10:13 pm | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.