I like Nicolas Kristof too, though I still think his report on Tiananmen and his Pulitzer is overrated. What makes him a good reporter is that he points out one’s problems while acknowledges the progress.

For those who want to read NYT columnists but don’t want to pay for it, here is a good site:

http://donkeyod.wordpress.com/

June 8, 2007 @ 2:45 am | Comment

Please get back to me when the US government is torturing little old ladies who dare protest a corporation. Also, the US military has admitted their (disgusting) misdeeds at Abu Ghraib and punished folks accordingly, I won’t hold my breath for the same from the CCP.

June 8, 2007 @ 2:53 am | Comment

What a shame. Indeed.

Its been done to death, here, but I think it is worth remembering that the damage the US government has inflicted upon itself has largely been the result of the global media being proactive in exposing it, and a convention that exists whereby people are able to question power and not fear for their lives as a consequence.

Both of these stories are horrifying, and both stem from the same cause: the abuse of power, and it shouldn’t matter where in the world it occurs. In my opinion, the “moral high ground” that you claim for the US owes less to the benevolent aspirations of its leaders, and more to a functioning civil society and an engaged minority of citizens who hold the government to account for what it does. In the US, the apparatus of the state still works to support this situation, in China the state appears to do its utmost to prevent such a situation occurring.

That’s my take on this, anyway.

June 8, 2007 @ 2:55 am | Comment

Richard, if you take a zen-like approach, there wasn’t a high ground to begin with. We all are capable of doing awful things as individuals and societies.

June 8, 2007 @ 2:56 am | Comment

There is zen, and then there is moral relativism.

The two are very different things.

June 8, 2007 @ 3:09 am | Comment

If only it was the case that US moral high ground
was lost under Bush, and that it had existed in decades prior.

Unfortunately there’s been a long shameful tradition of human rights abuse sponsored by American governments worldwide.

The difference under Bush is, it’s just a bit more out in the open now , less hidden.

How about the US involvement in Latin America?
The CIA helping brutal torturer/murderer Pinochet stage a successful coup against the democratically elected Allende gov’t, is just one example.

US gov’t financing and training of right wing death squads in other Latin American countries
(El Salvador, Nicaragua, etc.) is indelibly recorded in history.

US support for brutal dicatorships in Latin America (Pinochet), Asia (Suharto in Indonesia,), the Middle East (The Saudi royal family, Musharef in Pakistan,Saddam for many years).

So much for “spreading freedom and democracy”!

I don’t think the US ever had moral high ground.
Richard mentions some of the historical examples
that argue against it, dating from the earliest beginnings when America was still a colony.

And Clinton/Albright allowed the Rwandan genocide to occur, even when they saw it was coming. The US intervenes when it shouldn’t, and refuses to intervene when morally it should.
Sudan (Darfur) is a current example.

June 8, 2007 @ 4:18 am | Comment

“Also, the US military has admitted their (disgusting) misdeeds at Abu Ghraib and punished folks accordingly”

Guest, you must be joking!!

June 8, 2007 @ 5:23 am | Comment

Let’s assume U.S. cleans up its act and being the most “ethical” country in the world.

Does that entitle U.S. to “educate” China how to behave?

I’ll leave that question open to your wise readers.

June 8, 2007 @ 5:30 am | Comment

I’d be interested in knowing why K and MoDo are on your sheislist. Not that I entirely disagree. K’s a bit pompous and twerpy and MoDo lately has gotten into trivial pursuits…but what’s your complaint? I have almost revised my opinion of K bec of his stand on the “Genocide Olympics” despite his sincere affection for China, his Chinese wife and tendency to sidestep in the name of moderation and “a deeper understanding.” He had, as I’m sure you recall, a bit of a Chinese visa problem after his venting his spleen over the Zhao Yan debacle. That seemed to have sharpened his claws when others would have retracted them.

June 8, 2007 @ 5:51 am | Comment

“And Clinton/Albright allowed the Rwandan genocide to occur, even when they saw it was coming. “

Hutus didn’t need Uncle Sam’s permission to kill their Tutsi neighbors. It would have been humanitarian to intervene and stop the bloodshed, but then what? Continue to occupy the country to keep the two sides from fighting? The invasion of Iraq is morally objectionable, not to mention strategically unwise, but the US is not obligated to stop other peoples from killing each other. The military should be used strictly in defense of the country. Period.

June 8, 2007 @ 5:54 am | Comment

Bobb999,

The illusion that America has ever had the moral highground stems from their victory of the cold war. The Soviet Union was a dire enemy not only because they were technologically a match, but also because 1) marxism exposed the fundamental wrong of Western societies; 2) the USSR was a spiritual source of the third-world anti-imperialism movements. The collapse of the Soviet Union served a relief and the vindication that the western political systems are superior. But did they really win the cold war on the moral battleground? Or it was the economic failure that undid communism? For some in the West, current developments in China are unsettling and China’s future becomes a litmus test for the ultimate righteousness of their political belief. But for me, no fan of communism or any fanatic idealism, these arguments are inane. China, with one fifth of humanity, is finding its own way to be successful. We will learn from the West, including democratic practices, but thanks, we don’t want to be a part of your test.

Anyway, I agree, the US or the West never had moral highground in their possession.

June 8, 2007 @ 6:00 am | Comment

When someone is told that he has done something wrong and as answer he replies that you too has done wrong things too, that means… Yes he really did something wrong.

The argumentation is some posts were an example of a a logical fallacy: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque.

Just google it up for examples 😉

June 8, 2007 @ 6:23 am | Comment

I’d get away from the term “moral” and substitute for it “legal.” America is guilty of many injustices domestically, but they tend to be in the public eye and reported with the chance of appeal. China doesn’t have that legal foundation, so to speak of morality ignores a greater omission.
Britain, which had done far worse I think during the 30 year Troubles to its own subjects than what America is doing now could provide an historic example. With its hold on India and control of peoples across continents, did it have the moral right to criticise the Nazis over its Nurenburg laws, or persecution of Jews, political opponents and minorities? When Hitler made his apparent offer of helping maintain the Empire for control of Europe, Churchill is honoured for saying no while refusing to preside over the dissolution of Empire. The latter may have been immoral, but to have remained silent while around greater immoralities occurred at a crescendo would have been collusion.
Sorry if that sounds like an incoherent ramble- I just woke up.

June 8, 2007 @ 7:23 am | Comment

Nobody had, has and will have the moral highground in this world.

The only difference is who has a louder voice.

June 8, 2007 @ 10:03 am | Comment

>>Nobody had, has and will have the moral highground in this world.

Godwin says Hu Jintao and most of today’s CCP have the moral highground over Hitler and most Nazis. I agree. Don’t you?

June 8, 2007 @ 10:24 am | Comment

Not me. I guess you are confused.

June 8, 2007 @ 10:52 am | Comment

@fatbrick,

You believe that Hu Jintao is the moral equivalent of Hitler and the CCP is the moral equivalent of the Nazi party? Tell me more.

June 8, 2007 @ 11:11 am | Comment

“US support for brutal dicatorships in Latin America (Pinochet), Asia (Suharto in Indonesia,), the Middle East (The Saudi royal family, Musharef in Pakistan,Saddam for many years).”

Don’t forget Papa Doc, Mobuto Sese Seko, and the Iranian Shah. America has never stood for human rights.

But that said, that doesn’t make it ok for the prison system, food and drug safety regulations, etc to be horrible. At a cost to the country, too.

June 8, 2007 @ 11:11 am | Comment

88

So?

We are all common people. You are not morally better than Hitler IMO. Satistified?

June 8, 2007 @ 1:00 pm | Comment

@fatbrick,

>Satistified?

For some reason I’m never satisfied when people claim that I am not morally better than Hitler. I guess I am satisified in that you so clearly demonstrated how absurd your orginal statement was, though.

June 8, 2007 @ 1:23 pm | Comment

Letter to Editor, TAIPEI TIMES. June 9 , 2007

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/06/08/2003364356

Wake up to China, America

Friday, Jun 08, 3007, Page 8

To the American people and the US Congress:

It’s time to open your eyes regarding the basic agenda and very real
threat posed by communist China — that country you love to put on an
exotic pedestal festooned with technicolored tourist photos and pretty
Chinese movie stars.

Let’s not mince words: China is a dictatorship ruled by an aggressive
Communist Party that does not believe in human freedom, human dignity,
morality or the pursuit of happiness.

Stop your love affair with communist China. Wake up and smell the
Starbucks being roasted by Chinese chauvinists inside the Forbidden
City tourist trap. China is out to squash the US and will use every
means possible to attain this end. This is not your grandfather’s
China. This is the Chinese Communist Party of the People’s Republic of
China.

But it is a not a “republic” and it is not run by the people or for
the people. It is the old Soviet Union in Chinese clothing.

China is not our friend, by any stretch of the imagination. Yes, Gong
Li (鞏俐) is gorgeous, and Zhang Ziyi (章子怡) is slim and beautiful, but
don’t get distracted by China’s Hollywood exports. Don’t be fooled by
the 2008 Beijing Olympics “show.” China’s leaders, like the leaders of
the former Soviet Union, are bent on world domination. Fly too close
to Hainan and they’ll threaten to shoot your planes down.

No amount of friendly smiles and warm handshakes will change their
agenda. It is not a free, democratic country and never will be, at
least not as it is currently set up.

Did someone say pet food? Did someone say toothpaste? Do you remember
who dumped dangerous chemicals into a Chinese river and didn’t alert
residents living downstream? Who burns coal in coal-fired power plants
as if there were no tomorrow? Does the term “acid rain” ring a bell?

China is a country that covers up SARS and bird flu. Global warming?
China’s leaders never heard of that Western concept.

God? There is no God for China. China is one of the most godless
nations on Earth. So why is the US sucking up to China?

This China you so love to do business with is dangerous. This China
needs to be confronted.

Wake up, America. China is polluting the world, and not only with
carbon dioxide emissions and other atmospheric pollution.

If you hated the old Soviet Union, you should hate the current
People’s Republic. Different clothing, same evil empire. There should
be no compromise with this state.

China is a threat to the American and European way of life. Darfur?
You know the drill.

Stop kissing the ground the Chinese government stands on. Tear down
that Great Wall of lies and deception full of state-sanctioned
cover-ups and fabrications.

The US needs a transparent and democratic China. And the Chinese
people are up to it. But Americans seem to be turning a blind eye.

DAN BLOOM
Taiwan

June 8, 2007 @ 1:26 pm | Comment

richard
wonder if you can put my letter to editor up as a separet guest post on your site and let readers comment pro and con…? danny

i dont’ know your email adress. after you read this, delete

Letter: Wake up to China, America

Friday, Jun 08, 2007, Page 8
To the American people and the US Congress:

It’s time to open your eyes regarding the basic agenda and very real threat posed by communist China — that country you love to put on an exotic pedestal festooned with technicolored tourist photos and pretty Chinese movie stars.

Let’s not mince words: China is a dictatorship ruled by an aggressive Communist Party that does not believe in human freedom, human dignity, morality or the pursuit of happiness.

Stop your love affair with communist China. Wake up and smell the Starbucks being roasted by Chinese chauvinists inside the Forbidden City tourist trap. China is out to squash the US and will use every means possible to attain this end. This is not your grandfather’s China. This is the Chinese Communist Party of the People’s Republic of China.

But it is a not a “republic” and it is not run by the people or for the people. It is the old Soviet Union in Chinese clothing.

China is not our friend, by any stretch of the imagination. Yes, Gong Li (鞏俐) is gorgeous, and Zhang Ziyi (章子怡) is slim and beautiful, but don’t get distracted by China’s Hollywood exports. Don’t be fooled by the 2008 Beijing Olympics “show.” China’s leaders, like the leaders of the former Soviet Union, are bent on world domination. Fly too close to Hainan and they’ll threaten to shoot your planes down.

No amount of friendly smiles and warm handshakes will change their agenda. It is not a free, democratic country and never will be, at least not as it is currently set up.

Did someone say pet food? Did someone say toothpaste? Do you remember who dumped dangerous chemicals into a Chinese river and didn’t alert residents living downstream? Who burns coal in coal-fired power plants as if there were no tomorrow? Does the term “acid rain” ring a bell?

China is a country that covers up SARS and bird flu. Global warming? China’s leaders never heard of that Western concept.

God? There is no God for China. China is one of the most godless nations on Earth. So why is the US sucking up to China?

This China you so love to do business with is dangerous. This China needs to be confronted.

Wake up, America. China is polluting the world, and not only with carbon dioxide emissions and other atmospheric pollution.

If you hated the old Soviet Union, you should hate the current People’s Republic. Different clothing, same evil empire. There should be no compromise with this state.

China is a threat to the American and European way of life. Darfur? You know the drill.

Stop kissing the ground the Chinese government stands on. Tear down that Great Wall of lies and deception full of state-sanctioned cover-ups and fabrications.

The US needs a transparent and democratic China. And the Chinese people are up to it. But Americans seem to be turning a blind eye.

Dan Bloom

Chiayi
This story has been viewed 123,129 times.

June 8, 2007 @ 1:30 pm | Comment

Yep.

You have every right to believe that I am absurd. I have every right to believe that you are absurd. We can say those who died absurd as we want. In another 100 years, people at that time can call us absurd as they want.

A fair world, isn’t it?

June 8, 2007 @ 1:30 pm | Comment

88, I think you misunderstand fb’s original post to a certain degree. It makes good sense for me.

June 8, 2007 @ 1:36 pm | Comment

a taiwanese-americah high school student, who read the letter , wrote:

:Wow, very strongly opinionated article, yet I DO agree with you. I am living here in America, and they sure are blind to the danger of communism, the American government now is so obsessed over “national interests” that, in my opinion, is on its way to downfall. Very few, but there are some, who, like me, are scared of the future for the United States, because seriously…nothing is going right. However, it is not the people that are bad (In both US and China), it is the government. That is what I think.”

June 8, 2007 @ 2:09 pm | Comment

””””””Richard, if you take a zen-like approach, there wasn’t a high ground to begin with. We all are capable of doing awful things as individuals and societies.””””””’

This is the truth, we are all capable of doing bad things, just look at China, even children will kill their teachers so on so on… The problem with China is that the CCP is like the little devil on the shoulder that encourages every person to do the wrong and bad thing. As for who has the so called moral high ground, who cares? If a criticism is correct, it’s the truth and a solution should be sought.

”””’Nobody had, has and will have the moral highground in this world.

The only difference is who has a louder voice.”””

I don’t think thats true. The CCP propaganda machine has the loudest voice, it employ the most drastic measures to control, but look, all it’s efforts are for nothing. It has made China a loud (but idiotic) voice of propaganda and foolishness all against the moral norms understood by people. So just having a loud voice doesn’t lead to happiness at all. The people may have thought the evil of the CCP was beneficial to China, but check it out, it made China suck butt.

“”””Godwin says Hu Jintao and most of today’s CCP have the moral highground over Hitler and most Nazis. I agree. Don’t you?”””””

I certainly do not. The CCP is far more senile and wicked than the Nazi party. Yeah, so there, thats what the CCP is hiding with all its glamorous lying tools.

IF WE WAIT FOR ONLY A PERFECT PERSON TO MAKE CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, WE WON’T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING GOOD, CAUSE WE WILL SPEND ALL THE TIME FEELING INADEQUATE AND GUILTY.

I dont know much about Guatanamo , but as far as I know, this place is not using millions of innocent people as tools to scare the rest of the population and is not forcing them to watch CCTV and brainwashing the, forcing them to give up their beliefs and taking advantage of them as a labor force to boot. And thats just the half of how evil the CCP camps are!!!

Heres a good book that clearly sites the historical facts of the CCP’s stupid evilness

http://ninecommentaries.com/

June 8, 2007 @ 2:31 pm | Comment

I’d like to point this out since it recurs as a point of propaganda spewed as excuses for killing innocent people.
To quote the article: “”””””””I keep remembering a heated conversation I had in Yunnan Province when I lived in China years ago. I reproached an official for China’s torture and arbitrary imprisonment, and he retorted that China was fragile and had lost hundreds of thousands of lives in the chaos of the Cultural Revolution. “If you Americans ever faced the threat of chaos, you would do just the same,” he said.”””””””

With this logic (and with all Chinese propaganda) Chinese would fail a basic logic aptitude test.

So, Ok So China has “lost” hundreds of thousands of lives in the Chaos of the cultural revolution… Ok Ok so lets just make that clear, the CCP killed hundreds of thousands (oh wait it was millions) through ideological killing rampages. I’m not exaggerating, just clarifying. Lets be clear, there was no Chaos, there was CCP ideological insanity. Let’s be truthful.

And so what this prop. bit tries to imply is that it is A.O.K to murder and torture and press and violate the rights of a huge number of innocent people (be they Tiananmen folks, Falun Gong…) because it protects the country from the psychotic rampage of the CCP?

So its’ like the CCP is saying, “I will kill ** many people at this time or if I dont do that, I will kill ten times as many.

So I guess people are either not thinking or are total blubbering cowards.

Oh MY Goodness!

June 8, 2007 @ 2:43 pm | Comment

Dan: “Fly too close to Hainan and they’ll threaten to shoot your planes down.”
RESPECT! What are they supposed to do, hire jets to escort you to the top resort? Where in the world won’t they shoot you down for invading national airspace?
I’m gratified to see so much hatred being articulated against communist China (I had had enough fanatics impulsively apologising for them) but really, we must stop our “love affair” with China and, anyway, they have no God? You’ll have to do better than that.

June 8, 2007 @ 3:58 pm | Comment

“Does that entitle U.S. to “educate” China how to behave?”

Somebody has to do it, because a dictatorship is incapable of moral leadership, education, or responsibility.

The attitude of my students echoes the ‘but look what they did’ counter-argument/justification when they are presented with evidence of wrongdoing. This is very troubling.

The key difference, pointed out ad nauseam here, is that my students (and the vast majority of Chinese, I suspect) are unable to remove national pride from their thought processes, failing miserably to turn a critical, objective eye to any issue that reflects poorly on their own government. For them, with a few notable exceptions, there is only the party line and knee-jerk defensive denials.

Western education isn’t perfect, but we don’t ram party propaganda down students’ throats and look at arguments critically from all sides. Hence, the source of most Chinese criticisms of western governments stems from western media sources.

When will Chinese children be taught to ask questions of and criticise their own history and leadership? More importantly, when will they be taught that being the citizen of a powerful nation comes with a great moral responsibility – the responsibility to act on a purely humanistic level that may run counter to self-interest?

At the moment, they don’t see this; the notion simply doesn’t compute. These are tomorrow’s leaders, officials, entrepreneurs, and, lord help us, teachers. Truly a disturbing thought.

June 8, 2007 @ 5:07 pm | Comment

@Bobb999
After all the fun with US-bashing I would like to add this:

What concerns Darfur, America is the only country, which insisted on sanctions against the murderers in Khartoum for a long time in the UN Security Council. China always rejected them whitewashing the regime.
Darfur is a shame for China not for the US.

One can bring up a lot of cases against the US and other Western states. Our governments too often were involved in bad things, supporting cruel regimes, talking of freedom when they meant money.

But the big difference to China is that people in the West always asked questions about the foreign policy of their countries and because of a free press had the chance to get answers. Because of the pressure from the civil society Western companies and governments had to rethink some of their actions.

Guantanamo is a shame for the US. But the loudest voices against it also come from there.
Where is the outcry in China about the Darfur policy of the Chinese government?

June 8, 2007 @ 5:41 pm | Comment

Blaming Bush or the White House for Guantánamo Bay is fundamentally irresponsible. Politically, it was surely a US fiasco, but in truth, it was humanity in question. Don’t get me wrong, as the most wealthy, powerful nation in the world the US continues to have the responsibility to help better the world. But Guantánamo Bay can be learned in a positive light: that Americans must relearn lessons in humility, respectfulness, and altruism. And by that is not regain some high ground to chastise and judge less accomplished nations (aka, China). It’s just the right thing to do.

June 8, 2007 @ 6:12 pm | Comment

@Mr.Askew,

You’ll have to elaborate. What did I misunderstand? Governments are not morally equal in terms of their actions or the values they promote — neither are individuals.

June 8, 2007 @ 7:30 pm | Comment

Richard, please don’t make the letter to the editor a separate. If Danny Bloom wants comments pro and con, we can just cut and paste any of the most recent threads onto the end of his letter. I feel like that’s all we’d get out of the exercise. (No offense Danny, it’s not about your letter, it’s about the quality of the responses it would receive.)

I don’t know how I feel about all this. (I know this is supposed to be sharp, witty, opinionated debate.) I love China. The CCP does awful things to Chinese people. Most Chinese people are unwilling to confront this fact in any meaningful way (for a plethora of reasons). I am American.

I think the two most interesting posts of this thread are quebechotel’s post about arguments ad hominem tu quoque and xueleifung’s post. I think there is such thing as a moral high-ground (it at least exists in the perceptions of other people), but does being the citizen of a nation with such a high-ground give you the ability to make other people listen to what you say? (I’m not talking about whether you have the right, but whether you have the ability.) I wonder if it’s a Western concept that moral high-ground gives you this power. I don’t know if it works on the Chinese. I don’t know if the Chinese ascribe so much to moral systems that dictate a divine right and wrong as opposed to what a particular society thinks is okay. No matter what, the Chinese answer may be: that’s good. This the Chinese way. (Or more exactly, we are using “Chinese Characteristics.”)

That being said, a friend of mine sent me an email not so long ago saying he needed to get out of America “this crumbling Empire.” I don’t know what it is about America (I don’t dare try to explain now, this post is already too long), but America for me has a stale, decomposing feel. I agree with you, Richard, that our system of government is to some degree self-righting. But there is something else about our society that feels lifeless. I don’t know if it’s just me. China, for all that is infuriating, horrifying, and depressing about it, feels alive. It is partially because of this feeling that Kristof’s article makes me feel sad. It feels like a shout into the darkness.

Most Chinese don’t listen if I tell them their government is repressive, so I mostly try to ask their opinions on what the government is like and what they think should be done. I try to direct them to places where they can read about what is really happening. But, really, I don’t know what one should do.

Nor am I sure that I want to.

June 8, 2007 @ 9:40 pm | Comment

88,
Communists believe that humanity is a series of struggles. Fighting is the way for the Communist. They are Nazi’s, dictators, terrorists, whatever they feel they have to be to maintain power. its a kind of absolute materialism that doesnt take into account compassion or respect for earth and humanity. It’s also a bunk theory and doesnt work, cause the people never truly get as brainwashed as they need to get for the “transformation” into the “new world” under the Commie dictatorship.

So they believe theres no means unjustified by the ends cause they believe that morality is a nonexistent phenomenon.

Thats how I see the Communist theory that makes fatbrick say that he is no better than Nazi…They think all people are so bad and need to be brainwashed by CCP before they can live harmoniously.

Correct me if I’m wrong, actually they probly don’t promote that theory outright anymore but the essence is still propagated.

June 8, 2007 @ 9:44 pm | Comment

shulan

Regarding to Darfur, are sanctions the right thing to do?

US puts sanctions on numerous countries, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Cuba…..What happened? Big stick policy does not always work.

Of cuz American can come, see, and conquer. Then what? Another Iraq war?

June 8, 2007 @ 11:59 pm | Comment

The US has done its fair share of mistreating, abuse and killings, even within its own borders. But it has also done much more than its fair share (compared to EVERY other country on the planet) when it comes to compensating those victims.

June 9, 2007 @ 12:33 am | Comment

Hey, I do not believe there is any moral highground. But I believe there is a highground of knowledge.

For those who like to label other as ”Maoist” “Communist”……How about show some evidence that you have some knowledge about the theoretical background of Communism and Maoism?

Have you read any of the books written by Karl Marx and Mao? I have not read any. I wonder how many books those who like to use the labels have read.

June 9, 2007 @ 12:53 am | Comment

fatbrick,
no sanctions are not the best means. UN-peaceceeprs or somerthing similar would be great.
It’s estimated that since 2003 400.000 people died.

June 9, 2007 @ 2:21 am | Comment

http://cache.tianya.cn/publicforum/Content/free/1/926643.shtml

http://vcom.dahe.cn/dhbbs/dispbbs.asp?boardID=168&ID=629562&page=1

For those of you that can read chinese.

A horrifying story about slave labors in some brick factories in Shanxi province. Move than 1000 kids were sold to factory owners and have been working over 14 hours per day. Some, according to the report, have been isolated from outside world for over 7 years. Most have been phsically abused. There is no medical assistance if you get sick, and if the slave labor dies, he will be buried like a dog.
The youngest kid is only 8 or 9 years old.

Local governents are apathetic to this and barely did anything.

June 9, 2007 @ 3:12 am | Comment

Hi 88, what I think fb’s saying there is that atrocities happen throughout human’s history. Evil side of humanity does not choose a particular country to dwell in, and rather we should be sane enough not to fall to any kind of government-initiated one-side criticism.

I think you concentrate too much on the personal comparison between you and Hitler, which I think was the least of the gist of fb’s post. And maybe, you two have very different ways to perceive how the word “morality” is used.

June 9, 2007 @ 3:24 am | Comment

@fatbrick,

This:

>>I do not believe there is any moral highground.

Then this:

>>Another Iraq war? blah, blah, blah…

On what basis are you (constantly) criticizing the US? You can pretend that you believe all actions, governments, and people are morally equal, but you yourself don’t adhere to this principle of yours. The fact is you can’t allow yourself to admit any kind of moral valuation — even though you are constantly making moral judgments (i.e. what is “right” and “wrong”) — because you know that the Chinese government is a “moral” pariah even in the very immoral company of all nations. In other words, you don’t want to go down that road, so you pretend that everyone and everything is equally moral. If that is the case, then the word “morality” has no meaning.

I realize this is supposed to be a happy occasion and we shouldn’t bicker and argue over who killed who.

@ Askew

>>atrocities happen throughout human’s history.

Yes, they do. That makes all governments, actions, and individuals morally equal? The Third Reich is morally equal to ancient Athens? Why does anyone think Hitler was “bad,” I wonder. His mustache?

The Rape of Nanjing is the moral equivalent of the Long March?

>>fall to any kind of government-initiated

I’m not sure what I said that was “government-initiated.”

>>one-side criticism.

One-sided? You mean I shouldn’t defend Hu Jintao and the CCP against Hitler and the Nazis? Maybe what you mean is that you should never point out any atrocity without also pointing out every other atrocity that every other country has committed. So, for example, when someone in China points out a Japanese atrocity, I should criticize them by pointing out some Chinese atrocity. Then it won’t be “one-sided.” ??

@snow,

> its a kind of absolute materialism that doesnt take into account compassion or respect for earth and humanity.

I’d say communism is a form of religion and that dialectical materialism is neither dialectical nor materialist, but religious and idealist. Marx wanted to replace a religion of god with a religion of man and was deeply motivated by an almost religious love of humanity. Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism, however, were purely motivated by power, paranoia, and fear.

June 9, 2007 @ 5:49 am | Comment

88,

Morality, i.e. moral codes that are accepted by most of the contemporary people, is a fluid concept. It changes overtime. If one day Buddhism takes over the world, the people living now will be all considered as the shameful past. In Hitler’s mind, he certainly wasn’t an immoral man in his own logics. Had he won the war, today’s morality would have left more of his print.

If you really want to test out if you are a better man innately than Hitler (in today’s morality), imagine yourself in his shoes — you lived in 30s’ Germany, your surroundings, your upbringing, etc. Bear in mind within your lifetime, the wholesale slaughter of Native Americans was accepted by the world and didn’t face any outcry.

Among us, there are a whole lot more Steven Greens (the American soldier who raped a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and then killed her family), given the right circumstances, than you may realize.

“On a moral high ground” is a mental state, which IMHO can be quite a slippery slope. People and nations change, and soon you won’t be able to stand on the old “moral high ground”. As much as being a Chinese, the image of Japan is strongly linked to the Rape of Nanking, I have to admit Japan is perceived as a more peaceful and more responsible nation than China today in the world.

I�ve been traveling around the world. If there is a Survival episode to vote one out of 5 permanent UN Security Council members as the moral pariah off the island, and the vote is done by all people in the world today. My money is China will stay. I will let you guess which nation will be voted off.

June 9, 2007 @ 7:51 am | Comment

Oh, Darfur again…

I will let you read a piece by Professor Mahmood Mamdani, whom many consider the most important African voice in the US, “The Politics of Naming: Genocide, Civil War, Insurgency”.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n05/mamd01_.html

“The similarities between Iraq and Darfur are remarkable. The estimate of the number of civilians killed over the past three years is roughly similar. The killers are mostly paramilitaries, closely linked to the official military, which is said to be their main source of arms. The victims too are by and large identified as members of groups, rather than targeted as individuals. But the violence in the two places is named differently. In Iraq, it is said to be a cycle of insurgency and counter-insurgency; in Darfur, it is called genocide. Why the difference? Who does the naming? Who is being named? What difference does it make?”

June 9, 2007 @ 8:02 am | Comment

There is a saying in Korean: Even monkeys fall out of trees. It means that even experts can be wrong or make a mistake. An unqualifiable “many” may call Professor Mahmood Mamdani “the most important African voice in the US,” but his comparison of Iraq and Darfur is off the mark. Both are genocides in that groups of people are being targeted, but Prof. Mamdani is overlooking a key difference: In Darfur, the killing is mostly one-sided. Arab Muslim paramilitaries are slaughtering Black Christians and animists. In Iraq, various groups are killing each other: Shiites versus Sunnis, pro-AlQaeda Sunnis versus anti-AlQaeda Sunnis. The latter conflict is not a true genocide but a power struggle. In other words, in Iraq, Sunnis and Shiites are both mass killers and mass victims. That is why the word “genocide” does not fit. Each side gives as good as it gets. It’s a civil war.

June 9, 2007 @ 8:42 am | Comment

Sonagi, I guess JXie tried to point out US’s role (direct and indirect) in the civil war. Certainly, if there had not been an US invasion, there would not have been a civil war in Iraq.

June 9, 2007 @ 8:50 am | Comment

In Iraq, it is said to be a cycle of insurgency and counter-insurgency; in Darfur, it is called genocide. Why the difference? Who does the naming? Who is being named? What difference does it make?

Oh, the difference cannot be more obvious. The Iraqi government is an anointed democracy; Sudan is a rogue state. It’s that simple.

June 9, 2007 @ 8:52 am | Comment

@88

—“The Rape of Nanjing is the moral equivalent of the Long March?”

And also for rest of the questions, I answer “not quite”. And I know the reason you asked is perhaps that you suppose I think everything is equally moral, which unfortunately, is wrong and IMO not what fb meant.

—“I’m not sure what I said that was “government-initiated.”

Please keep in mind, I was merely voicing my take on fb’s post. And it really has nothing to do with you.

—“You mean I shouldn’t defend Hu Jintao and the CCP against Hitler and the Nazis? Maybe what you mean is that you should never point out any atrocity without also pointing out every other atrocity that every other country has committed. So, for example, when someone in China points out a Japanese atrocity, I should criticize them by pointing out some Chinese atrocity. Then it won’t be ‘one-sided.'”

Basically fb thinks no people have a moral highground against another one, the subject in question is people, not a particular country leader or government, and for that I think he makes a good point. With his moral-highground-nonexisting view, the Chinese people is not morally highger than the Japanese, and vice versa. Sure during WWII the Japanese was the villain, but in a grand view towards history and humanity, that doesn’t grant any Chinese the right to hate the Japanese, becasue both are human, and human errs. Bickering about each other’s historical atrocities and nationalism is not working anything out for the interests of both. And many a time I don’t see the concept “Nation” is helping the human doing the right things. I believe as long as we human beings are still divided, seeing the world through its own windowed perspective of making the most for itself, and working separately only for each one’s own interests, war will remain a permanent issue of our existence.

Again I want to point out that it’s only my humble view, I am not exactly critical of your opinion and it may have been me who’s misunderstood fb’s post, but anyways, I don’t think we should dig fb’s post by comparing Nazi with CCP, which seems to me a direction fb didn’t intend to go and certainly not the point of his post. Cheers.

June 9, 2007 @ 8:55 am | Comment

Empathizing with another human being is not limited by lines on a map.

June 9, 2007 @ 9:32 am | Comment

>>Morality, i.e. moral codes that are accepted by most of the contemporary people, is a fluid concept. It changes overtime.

Everything changes over time. Interpretations of the past (and present) are in constant flux. It is difficult to define an absolute morality without a religious or ahistorical reference point, which is obviously linked to culture. You seem to think that this undermines my point when it really has no bearing on my point.

Human beings make moral judgments based on the information, values, and prejudices they have; you can no more escape making moral judgments than you can escape breathing. When Hitler or the Japanese army invades your country and starts throwing people into ovens you can either let it happen (“non-judgmentally”, of course) or you can fight back — either way you make a judgment. In no case do you escape. When one man commits a murder and another an act of kindness, I judge the murderer to be less moral than the Samaritan. Of course you can’t prove this in some absolute or metaphysical sense — so what? That is a sophomoric objection.

So, I acknowledge this process. I make my moral judgment: Hitler is morally worse than Hu Jintao. How other people may or may not judge them 1000 years from now is irrelevant — their judgments will be different from any of ours in any case. Again, so what?

>>I will let you guess which nation will be voted off.

It is really fascinating to watch these mental gymnastics. You and fatbrick — with absolutely no sense of irony — claim there is no moral high ground and in the next breath make moral judgments/criticisms of a different country. On what basis are you making these judgments? I’m not blaming you for it. You can’t help it…which is my point. You can help pretending that you are somehow above making moral judgments, however.

June 9, 2007 @ 9:34 am | Comment

Another interesting piece.

Thanks!

June 9, 2007 @ 9:55 am | Comment

@Mr. Askew,

>>the subject in question is people, not a particular country leader or government, and for that I think he makes a good point.

That simply isn’t what Fatbrick was arguing. Some quotes:

“You are not morally better than Hitler IMO.” (comparing individuals)

“Godwin says Hu Jintao and most of today’s CCP have the moral highground over Hitler and most Nazis. I agree. Don’t you?

>>>Not me. I guess you are confused.”
(comparing individuals and governments)

>>And many a time I don’t see the concept “Nation” is helping the human doing the right things. etc.

I agree with you. However, my only point was that you can’t escape making judgments, moral or otherwise. And oftentimes when someone claims there is no such thing as a moral high ground in any sense (individual or collective) they are just trying to escape criticism altogether.

A man robs your house and you catch him by the collar and he says, “Come on, now. You are also immoral! On what moral basis are you calling me a thief!? Haven’t you heard? There is no moral high ground.” This is just ad hominem tu quoque on steroids…Raskolnikov in service of the State.

June 9, 2007 @ 10:01 am | Comment

Sonagi,

Maybe you are a whole lot smarter than I am. I am proud of my fast-reading skill — I finished The Da Vinci Code, the book in a bit over 2 hours, roughly the same as the runtime of the movie. However, I had spent almost half day to read through Mamdani’s piece, search the original quotes of all his references, and search debates on this piece. A couple of things I found out during this process:

* The side calling Darfur genocide is long on gruesome details of the human sufferings, extremely short on comprehensive historical and political backgrounds. Its basic view is somewhat comics-like: “villain” Arabs, oppressing “little people” Africans. All the story needs is a superhero.

* Virtually no African nation sides with the “genocide” view. Kind of odd since “Africans” are being oppressed.

Methinks you ought to read the whole thing (judged by your response, I venture to guess that you didn’t read more than the first several paragraphs). It’s a scholarly work, kind of boring to read but very informative.

June 9, 2007 @ 10:21 am | Comment

88

I never said that the Iraq war is morally wrong. I believe US gov is incompetent in the whole issue. See what a mess their policy causes.

It just is a benefit-cost analysis. That’s it. Is this clear to you?

Mr.Askew:

Thank you for your explanation. I do not think I have that patience with 88 on this issue.

Sonagi:
Before invasion, Sunnis is one-sided mass killers. After invasion, both sides are mass killers.

Right now, in Darfur there is only one-sided killing (I doubt it though). Do you think they need one more mass killer over there?

June 9, 2007 @ 10:27 am | Comment

>>I will let you guess which nation will be voted off.

It is really fascinating to watch these mental gymnastics. You and fatbrick — with absolutely no sense of irony — claim there is no moral high ground and in the next breath make moral judgments/criticisms of a different country.

Ha! For the argument sake, did I make a moral judgment or merely report to you what I believe what the world will morally judge?

Argument aside, unlike FB, I do make moral judgments, FWIW. Though slightly changing over time, there is a moral core inside of me.

One thing I’ve difficult time to fully convince myself is, had I been a Japanese soldier in WW2, would I or would I not have committed those horrendous acts?

Once a girl told me by merely asking myself that question, I am already a better person…

June 9, 2007 @ 10:40 am | Comment

>>Do you think they need one more mass killer over there?

What is wrong with mass killings? I’m just interested in your completely moraline-free “cost benefit analysis.”

It’s funny, though, that you think morality and “cost-benefit analysis” are somehow mutually exclusive. JS Mill is breakdancing in his grave…

June 9, 2007 @ 10:48 am | Comment

Hey

I just follow Sonagi’s logic. If one mass killer is bad, 2 is worse, isn’t it?

88, wanna see a moraline-free cost benefit analysis?

To spend 5 min answering your question

Direct cost: 5 min of my precious time in weekend
Indirect cost: 5 min to read your reply for this post

Direct Benefit:
……exercise my poor english……
Indirect benefit:
Show you an example so that I can stop wasting my time

conclusion: I need to stop here and enjoy my weekend.

June 9, 2007 @ 11:08 am | Comment

Sorry to enter the fray late but I’d just like to comment on a few things.

I agree America has done horrible things through its history. It, like the rest of the countries in the world, is made of people and people often make bad choices and hurt other people. It is not enough to point fingers and blame people but we must understand where these abuses come from so that we can do our best to restrain humanity’s inner demons.

This is why I think it appropriate for America to “teach” China about human rights. In the US, there is a real discussion of issues. We are talking about Guantanamo, we are talking about our involvement in the the Pinochet regime. We have debates, we listen to what other people are say and we give space for people to criticize America in America. As a result, we have movement. People are paying more attention to Guantanamo, the military commission ruled that US must show that the prisoners are unlawful combatants. Progress is being made and I can a situation in the near future where the prison is closed and all of this is possible because we are in America. not in China.

In China, this is lacking. Tibet is split up in several sections, some of which foreigners are only allowed with a permit signed from the PSB. A significant proportion of Tibetans are unhappy and the Chinese government has based many Red Army devisions to keep the peace. And the Chinese media is filled with images of happy Tibetans, Tibetans thanking the Chinese and Tibetans proudly declaring they are Chinese. The Chinese don’t realize what is happing there so they think the government is right. There is no freedom of speech in china, there is no criticism and so there is no actually of idea of what is really happening. This is why it is right for America to criticize China. In the US we have access to facts and arguments, in China there is none.

So, I want to make a bet with the next poster who criticizes me. I propose that person comes to China, stands in Tiananmen square for three hours, carrying a sign calling on the Chinese government to apologize for Tiananmen Massacre. If they aren’t thrown in jail, I’ll fly to Washington D.C., stand in Lafayette park and carry a sign saying anything you want (no vulgarities of course).

June 9, 2007 @ 1:47 pm | Comment

Kenzhou,

Let me first say that US has a much better system than China and China has a lot to learn from America. But your justification that we do horrible things but we talk about it is just none sense. Talking about it is good; but it doesn’t make much difference if people do the same horrible things again and again. I am talking about America’s foreign policy here and I think you know what I mean.

June 9, 2007 @ 2:20 pm | Comment

America has a lot to learn from Chinese people as well. Like I don’t know, not being fat, not overspending, not murdering your neighbors, not glorifying violence, valuing education, not mistreating the elderly/weak, etc. Or not raping Iraq, if you don’t mind.

June 9, 2007 @ 3:18 pm | Comment

To the Chinese: Learn from a common phrase spoken in the US, when you as an Asian minority attempt to criticize the US gov’t or its people: “America, love it or leave it.”

China: love it or leave it.

PS. All bets that most of the haters won’t leave China- they’re losers in their own countries.

June 9, 2007 @ 3:55 pm | Comment

I give up.

You know what? I hate to get all simplistic on you folks, but wrong is wrong. The fact that my government is doing incredibly shitty stuff doesn’t make what the Chinese government does okay. I condemn them both.

The fact that so many of you can’t see this simple logic astounds me. But why should I be surprised? I run into this kind of thing among Americans all the time. People have their nationalistic sentiments, and I get that. It sucks to not feel good about where you’re from and who you are.

But here’s the thing. I have an identity separate from my identity as an American. Moreover, my my identity as an American compels me to speak out against crimes committed in my name. I am quite frankly disgusted with my country’s actions in recent years. I can’t defend them. They are shameful and contrary to just about everything I believe and value.

And if I think that something the Chinese government does is wrong, I’m going to let you know about that as well. Since I’m not Chinese, I probably can’t do nearly as much about it as a Chinese person can. I know that there are all kinds of thoughtful Chinese citizens who are working to improve their system and who can stand a little criticism without falling over in a nationalistic seizure. Unfortunately most of them have better things to do than to post a lot of “fatty fatty, you suck” name-calling on a blog that, hey, allows you to say whatever you want, pretty much.

June 9, 2007 @ 5:05 pm | Comment

To the Chinese: Learn from a common phrase spoken in the US, when you as an Asian minority attempt to criticize the US gov’t or its people: “America, love it or leave it.”

That’s so laughable is not even funny. First, I would like to hear your definition of loving America. Btw, American government is not America. America is its consitution. First, US governmet is there to be criticized by its people regardless their ethnicities. Also, last time I checked, American is not a ethnic term unless you are Native Americans. Loving America is to defend its consitution. Do you know why the first two amendments are freedom of speech and right to bear arms? It means to speak up against our government that violates our consitution. If all attempts failed, using arms if necessary. And Will clearly you don’t even know what’s the meaning of being a true American because a true American questions its government. Just like our Bill of Rights are all written against the States to protect people’s rights.

And talk about minority, do you know in 15 years caucasians will no longer be greater than 50% of US population (I think Children under age of 5 only about 45% are consider white with latino to be around 30%). There is a possibility that Spanish will be as common as English. It is already true in Florida, some part of Texas, and Southern California.

As for the story, it is a very sad story, and it speaks that China still has a long way to go toward law based rules instead of men based. However, progress takes time and I think China is moving slowly toward the right path. Even in a well developed nation, injustice exist. Life itself is not fair unfortunately.

June 9, 2007 @ 5:21 pm | Comment

Sorry to bring up Darfur again JXie,
first of all, Sonagi is right. No authority is sacred. But I have to say Mamdis article is interesting.

Genozide or not. Fact is the militia which is backed by the Sudanese government is doing ethnic cleansing. That resulted in the deaths of hundredthousends of people.

There is another side to this conflict, true. But the momentum lies with the Janjawid-militia.
The problem is that the Sudanese government is not trying to end the conflict. They refuse to let a strong force of UN-peacekeepers in, to overlook a ceasefire.
And China is not doing a lot to convince the Sudanese governmet to be more constructive.

In fact Chinese companies profit from the current situation, as American and European companies don’t do buiseness there any more.
Sudan is currently undertaking huge infrastructure projects, and the only one left to do them is China. No competitors there any more.

Honi soit qui mal y pense

June 9, 2007 @ 7:45 pm | Comment

By the way, Sonagi, the conflict is between Muslims. No Christians or Animists involved. They live in the south of Sudan.

June 9, 2007 @ 7:58 pm | Comment

Thank you Lisa for the wonderful dose of sanity. What would this site be without you?

I don’t have the time to police the comments and some of them are pretty vile. Should I just close it all down?

June 9, 2007 @ 7:59 pm | Comment

FB

If there is no such thing as something being more moral than others then how do we have laws and how do we have different degrees of punishment for different crimes of differing severities. The fact is if I punch you and you do not die, you are charge with assault and battery, if you are caught you go to jail and released after a few months or years depending on the severity of the damaged you caused. But if I shoot you with intent to kill in most places even in Communist China you get the death penalty. There is a direct link bewteen crime and punishment both in magnitude and intent.
So who is more evil George Bush or Mao , even I will say Mr Bush is by far more benevolent. But if you compared Mao with Hitler in his later years we will have a hard fight on who is more evil.
If you look at how the American Indians were treated then it may not be different from what is being done in Darfur. We in evitable make distinctions and will always do so.

June 9, 2007 @ 8:26 pm | Comment

“I guess JXie tried to point out US’s role (direct and indirect) in the civil war. Certainly, if there had not been an US invasion, there would not have been a civil war in Iraq.”

Yes, and no. The Sunni-Shia division has existed for centuries. Saddam ruled by dividing Iraq, elevating Sunnis above Shias and murdering hundreds of key Shiite leaders, including Mahdi Army founder and insurgent leader Al-Sadr. A civil war was likely in the event of Saddam’s natural death. I am, by the way, opposed to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, but I don’t blame all of Iraq’s problems on the invasion.

@Jxie,

I’ll admit I had not read the entire piece, only the quote you provided. I did read it just now, and the article is thoughtful. I oppose any use of the military for other than defensive purposes. Thus, I oppose the invasion of Iraq and any ideas of sending troops to Darfur. I agree with Mamdani that military intervention in Sudan would be unwise.

“Virtually no African nation sides with the “genocide” view. Kind of odd since “Africans” are being oppressed.”

It does not surprise me that most other African nations have not been critical of the Sudanese government. As Mamdani himself notes, there are more violent conflicts taking place elsewhere on the continent. The only regime that ever earned widespread condemnation from other African nations was aparteid South Africa.

“However, I had spent almost half day to read through Mamdani’s piece, search the original quotes of all his references, and search debates on this piece”

I work full-time and thus am unable to devote several hours to researching an article. What do you do for a living, may I ask?

June 9, 2007 @ 8:50 pm | Comment

Arty: China, love it or leave it. Best, Will

June 9, 2007 @ 9:46 pm | Comment

“America has a lot to learn from Chinese people as well. Like, I don’t know… valuing education”

Ah, yes…so many prime examples of that time- honored tradition recently…

http://tinyurl.com/2qs7g3

http://tinyurl.com/2946jq

Wait, I’m falling into the he said/she said trap again…

June 9, 2007 @ 9:48 pm | Comment

“Let’s assume U.S. cleans up its act and being the most “ethical” country in the world.

Does that entitle U.S. to “educate” China how to behave?”

I believe the best way for the U.S. to export democracy and freedom is to practice it at home and set the best example that it can at home. Yes, we may occasionally criticize another government for human right abuses but in the case of China, given the tremendous economic and political advances it has already made in the past 25 years, it is shown that it is capable of achieving full democracy. It will take a long time, say 20 to 30 years. But viewed from the perspective of their 5000 years history of feudalism, it is perfectly reasonable and realistic.

June 9, 2007 @ 11:29 pm | Comment

– Argument #1: “Americans can criticize our government whenever we want, you Chinese can’t.”

Isn’t your criticism based upon your personal moral standard?

This is exactly what’s wrong with America today. Complacency and blind faith in the system. I am worried, really really worried.

– Argument #2: “Why don’t you stand in Tiananmen Square and yell ‘Free Tibet!'”

Why don’t you stand in front of the white house and yell “Jihad!”, better yet, wear a stuffed backpack while you’re at it. You’d be lucky if you don’t get shot at the spot.

This is the result of complacency and blind faith — losing your freedom and don’t even realize it.

– Argument #3: “This is America, take it or leave it!”

This is what it comes down to when the above two arguments failed – childish rant.

Arty puts a correctly: “To love America is to defend it’s constitution.”

June 9, 2007 @ 11:46 pm | Comment

correction:

Arty puts it correctly: “To love America is to defend it’s constitution.”

June 9, 2007 @ 11:56 pm | Comment

A former US government leader said this in his dealing with the Chinese:

American: if you solve the problems between us, then we can become friend.

Chinese: if we become friend, then we can work on the problems.

June 10, 2007 @ 1:24 am | Comment

“American: if you solve the problems between us, then we can become friend.

Chinese: if we become friend, then we can work on the problems.”

Typical Chinese negotiating ploy: ‘pay us first so that we can renege on the deal’

June 10, 2007 @ 1:57 am | Comment

“Love it or leave it” is a childish argument, whether the country in question is the United States or China. It speaks of insecurity and blind faith, traits which do not belong to strong, moral individuals or lead to competent, ethical governments.

I will step up for a moment and praise the American Constitution, Bill of Rights and principles of separation of powers and rule of law – not because these things make us perfect or “the best,” but because they are worthy of praise, a sturdy framework upon which to build a government and have rescued us from our own worst tendencies time and time again. We will need all of these things to recover from the last seven years of the Bush Administration. I’m hoping we as a people have the strength to listen to our own “better angels of our nature” (quoting Lincoln, I think). If not this will be a much more dangerous, bleak world – for everyone, and not just Americans.

The same thing goes for China. I’ve said this time and time again: the world cannot afford a failed China. It needs a strong China that will act cooperatively and wisely as a world citizen.

In both cases, that means looking honestly at ourselves and our mistakes and accepting criticism with grace and dignity.

I’ve had enough flag-waving and phony patriotism to last me a lifetime.

Richard, I feel your pain. I suppose you can look at threads like this as providing a safe outlet for some people to get their rage on, but is it too much to ask for actual discussion?

Yeah, I guess it is.

June 10, 2007 @ 2:02 am | Comment

Lisa, I can ask for it ’til I’m blue in the face, but with the likes of AC and Arty and others I don’t see much cause for optimism. If I threaten to delete idiotic comments I’ll be accused of censorship and subjectivity. If I let them stand I’m accused of encouraging frivolousness and trolling. Ah, the joys of blogging.

June 10, 2007 @ 2:22 am | Comment

Hahaha, i can see the typical trollers hired by the CCP is back in business in the same pattern, using the same arguments… Richard, i am really tired of them… The kind of shameless things they could say, esp Math, they are like countless zombies, you destroy one and ten would emerge

@fatbrick

Maoism or Communism, i don’t claim to have full knowledege of them. But whhy does it matter?Why would i want to bother myself understanding utopia ideals that does not work in reality? Why should i seek to understand an ideology which claims that violence justify the building of an egalitarian society? The USSR collapsed after 70 years of Marxist-Leninst experiment, Deng Xiaoping all but abandoned the doctrine of Maoism, which claimed 30 million Chinese lives in its deadly adventures to keep the “revolution” alive and set China back for a decade.

If a consistent defender of Mao like you is not a Maoist, who can?

@otherlisa
The best way is to carry on discussion and treat pro-CCP trollers as non-existent persons. Once you ignore them, there isn’t much they can do too.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:00 am | Comment

“Typical Chinese negotiating ploy: ‘pay us first so that we can renege on the deal’

stuart, I do not know that you have to pay to get a friend. So sorry for you.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:03 am | Comment

@Richard

For once, why don’t you like Party zealots have a taste of their Party’s most lethal weapon, censorship?

If you are accused of censorship and subjectivity, tell them that loud and clear that “The Central Committee and the Comrades of this blog have decided that it knows what’s best for the readers so as to maintain social stability and harmony.”

If they still object, tell them solemnly that this is democratic centralism.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:08 am | Comment

You know what? I hate to get all simplistic on you folks, but wrong is wrong. The fact that my government is doing incredibly shitty stuff doesn’t make what the Chinese government does okay. I condemn them both.

If the action is only limited to condemnations, honestly, go nuts. However, look at Iraq, getting rid of a dictator can be only good, right? The world is way too complicated to be fathomed through some simplistic views. A better way to handle many issues, is to start with emphatic listening.

Shulan,

There has been an African Union peacekeeping force under the UN mandate in Sudan, but it is too undermanned and underfunded to be effective. Can those who are being indignant over China’s involvement in Sudan, which BTW in my best judgment is net positive, pony up the cash or make sure their politicians to pony up the cash to make the AU peacekeeping force effective — since now talking about Darfur is so fashionable? Somehow I am not very optimistic about it.

What do you do for a living, may I ask?

Let me just say full-time jobs are way overrated. That half day was probably due to a rained-out round of golf.

Don’t get me wrong, I will be working my tail off soon, but for myself.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:10 am | Comment

sp

Glad that you confirm that you know nothing and do not want to know about what you said.

Feel sorry for you. However your idea about “ignore” is good. Lets do that.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:19 am | Comment

@ferins

“America has a lot to learn from Chinese people as well. Like I don’t know, not being fat, not overspending, not murdering your neighbors, not glorifying violence, valuing education, not mistreating the elderly/weak, etc. Or not raping Iraq, if you don’t mind”

America, or China or even many countries aren’t perfect. Why go into endless mudslinging?

Not being fat? A lot of fat children in China, are known as “little emperors” esp the sons because the One Child Policy means that parents would pool all their resources on him/her.

Not overspending? People can argue back about not over-speculating. Look at the volatile stock market in Shanghai and the growing bubble in real estate.

Murdering neighbours? Valuing education? Mistreating weak and old?
But how about manufacturing food products that are poisonous? Allowing fake drugs by Zheng Xiaoyu who was bribed? Covering up Sars by Zhou Yongkang?

Iraq? Yes, Bush ought to be shot for that. But is the PRC doing anything constructive too? I don’t think Hu Jintao is better than Bush by dealing with Zimbabwe, Sudan and Myanmar. Both are morally wanting.

So instead of looking at others, why not make an effort to be better yourself?

There is a Chinese saying “Laughing at a fellow desserter who flees at a rate of 100 steps when you yourself is fleeing at a rate of 50 steps.”

June 10, 2007 @ 3:26 am | Comment

@fatbrick

Oh i see that that brings you relief. That’s because i don’t want start a lecture on Maoism and Marxism. I called you Maoist for simple reasons.

Maoism, a brand of Marxism-Leninism, is obviously from Mao Zedong himself. Maoism stressed absolute egalitarianim and its main difference with Marxism is that instead Marx did not regard peasants as the revolutionary base like the proletariat, Mao saw the peasants as the “sea which they could swim in”.

The peasant life is highly regarded by Mao. Maoism is the claims to be the anti-thesis of elitism and bureacracy, hence Mao’s opposition to the Soviet model of development and industrialization. Mao wanted to showcase that Maoism would take China a giant step towards utopian Communism through mass labour and the use of manual labour.

That gave way to Great Leap Forward and Mao’s prestige was damaged with its failure. Deng and Liu, the moderates, began to stress economics and pragmatism over ideology.

Mao, resenting his loss, decided to launch his “war” against the Party of the “capitalist roaders, bureaucrats, Soviet revisionists, rightists” so as to keep China “on its revolutionary path”.Of course, thats just an excuse to purge Deng and Liu and those who might threatened his power. That started the Cultural Revolution.

You want me to start lecturing? So by faithfully defending Mao’s legacy and glossing over his role in those Maoist campaigns, its not difficult to se why fatbrick is not a loyal, hardcore, undying follower of the Great Helmsman anf the Red Sun in the people’s hearts, Chairman Mao Zedong.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:38 am | Comment

@fatbrick

And i can see that you emerge from hiding at the appropriate time.

Who is the one who said that Mao’s body should be buried because we should not disturb the dead? So after all, you respected him? Disturb the dead, Mao should be thankful that we are not whipping his f***ing corpse.

You have not said whether you support the victims of the GLF and CR in suing the PRC for compensation since you have said that the comfort women should sue the Jap govt.

Where have you hide yourself? Why didn’t you answer these questions? The guilty only have to look into the mirror….

The Party is full of cowards and scambags that like you. Fatbrick, tried harder to replace Math as the “sinner of a thousand years” in this thread. You are almost there 🙂

June 10, 2007 @ 3:47 am | Comment

@fatbrick

And save your “sorry” to your f***ing self. If you do feel sorry, which i was surprised because a Maoist cannot possibly be a human at the same time, who don’t you spare your “sorry” for those who had died in the Anti-Rightist Campaign, GLF, Cutltural REvolution and those on Tiananmen Square in 1989? At least your crocodile tears is more useful in that sense.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:57 am | Comment

“Can those who are being indignant over China’s involvement in Sudan, which BTW in my best judgment is net positive,”

Explain.

“Let me just say full-time jobs are way overrated.”

In my full-time job, I teach kids from non-English speaking homes how to read, write, and do math. About half of my students are in the country illegally. My colleagues teach all children, regardless of language, mental, and physical capabilities, how to read, write, do math, and understand how the world works (a fancy description of science and social studies). I feel our jobs are UNDERrated.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:59 am | Comment

@fatbrick

And seeing your comments, i guess Lu Xun would be quite horrified to see that people like you in today’s China is still stuck with the “阿Q” mentality if he was still alive.

June 10, 2007 @ 4:01 am | Comment

@JXie

“Shulan,

There has been an African Union peacekeeping force under the UN mandate in Sudan, but it is too undermanned and underfunded to be effective. Can those who are being indignant over China’s involvement in Sudan, which BTW in my best judgment is net positive, pony up the cash or make sure their politicians to pony up the cash to make the AU peacekeeping force effective — since now talking about Darfur is so fashionable? Somehow I am not very optimistic about it.”

First of all, China is not broke. In fact, it is holding on to the world’s largest foreign reserves at present. That aside, did China send any peacekeepers to any war-torn nations? At least Clinton had sent American peacekeepers to Bosnia and Somalia before, both places which has little strategic significance to US interests.

The least China could do is to stop its business with countries like Sudan, Zimbabwe and Myanmar. Just as the world is equally infuriated with Reagan’s business with the Apartheid regime despite international concern back then, we are equally infuriated by China’s continual involvement with Sudan, Myanmar and Zimbabwe.

Once again, why can’t China prove to others that she can be better than any self-righteous Western nations in terms of genuine humanitarianism? Can’t China present herself as a benevolent power which can have a higher moral standing than that of the US?

June 10, 2007 @ 4:18 am | Comment

I Want to Elect the CCP to Continue Its Current Dictatorship of China for at least another 100 years.

Chinese, as long as there is unity and strong leadership, as long as people put their efforts into one united force, then I believe there is nothing China cannot achieve. When the Communists first established the democratic dictatorship in China, most people snickered and said this regime will not last more than a decade, to their dismay, China joined the nuclear club, sent their own satellites, and forced the US Troops to negotiate in Korea. Both the US and the UN had to face reality and recognize China and kicked out Taiwan. Then when Mao died, people said, this regime will soon collapse due to internal fractions and poverty. To their anguish again, Deng took the helm and initiated economic reform and things started to get even better. After the 1989 Tiananmen Incident, every “China expert” in the world predicted that China will fall within 10 years just like the USSR, to their sadness again, China since then only became more prosperous and the dictatorship became more stable and vibrant and today almost every rich nation’s leaders are trying to pamper China and even the US is being quiet about China’s “human rights abuses”, not to mention the EU. I cannot help but smile when those “China experts” or “Freedom activitsts” see their predictions refuted by reality again and again.

I know a lot of people want unfortunate things to happen to China, such as a political turmoil, or economic crisis, or ethnic tension, or civil war etc. When those things happen, they are of course very very happy. Just like when your business competitors sufferd a robbery and loses million, it gives you an advantage in the competition. Everyday those people scream, “Look, SARs has spread to 10 thousand people!”. “Look, Hongkong sucks now!”, “Look, Chinese gov’t killed babies again!”, “Look, another earthquake in China, haha!”

What China needs to do of course, is to prevent such unfortunate events from happening. The goals of such “democray-lovers” is to spread the American multi-party system, and make China lose its political direction, to start color revolution in China, and end up in such tragic state like Russia or Indonesia. These efforts are very scary: they are like missiles, not physical missiles, but spiritual/ideological missiles. My job is to defend against those missiles, and perhaps develop my own missiles to retaliate.

And the fact of the matter is, China’s situation today is optimistic. The Japanese Economic News did a global survey of 1600 businessmen and entrepreneurs trying to assess the future World’s economic and political landscape. The 50.1% of them believed that China’s economy growth will definitely lead the world. 49.2% people the future world will be of “3 pillars”: America, Europe, and China.

China is not like North Korea or Iraq, nor is it like the old rigid USSR Empire. It is inevitable that China will become a great power in the 21st century. In this process, as a Chinese citizen, I am willing to become a “cheerleader” for China’s tomorrow. More importantly I want to be a cheerleader for the Chinese Communist Party.

I want to say “May the CCP continue to rule China for another 100 years, no make it another 500 years”, just to raise the blood pressure of some demcoracy lovers here.

June 10, 2007 @ 4:48 am | Comment

Math, except that the CPP wouldn’t even let you vote for that. The idea of you, a mere common worm in their view, having any say over their future is anathema to them.

And before you say “but they don’t need to because everyone would vote them back in”, they don’t want to take the chance a majority would vote for multi-party democracy.

So obviously the CCP doesn’t trust most Chinese, otherwise it would allow direct elections.

June 10, 2007 @ 6:48 am | Comment

I just read Math’s post.

Its shows a good example of how it is a bit difficult to not get emotional and frustrated when someone seems so wrong to you. But, I think the thing that can get stupid about this site is when people bring too much of their emotions into the discussion. Like name calling, or criticisms of individuals leaving comments rather than just listenning learning and expanding on the subject…

It seems that there are people in this discussion that believe in the traditional understanding of right and wrong, being good and being bad, and they are here to point out such things…

Then there are others who might be more concerned about nationalism or their reputations, or they might be politically motivated to come here to discuss.

June 10, 2007 @ 6:49 am | Comment

“I want to say “May the CCP continue to rule China for another 100 years, no make it another 500 years”, just to raise the blood pressure of some demcoracy lovers here.”

Far from raising my blood pressure, your posts often give me a dose of medicinal laughter and remind me not to take any internet discussion too seriously.

June 10, 2007 @ 6:54 am | Comment

For those who are here to discuss whats good and bad and right and wrong and expand understanding and info, what we need to do if be more informed, know China and know what’s going on with the Chinese people etc…

And for the people who are here to defend the party or don’t think that right and wrong are an issue…

I just want to ask what kind of pride can you have in a gang that tramples on peoples mind and bodies like crazy to “gain” so called stability? I mean wheres the glory? ANyone can stoop that low and rape for pleasure, exploit innocence and ruin people and nature to accomplish some fast cash. It’s just that most countries try to restrain themselves to not do that.

It’s a question of how one treats the world.

DOn’t you care about being good?

June 10, 2007 @ 6:55 am | Comment

For those who are here to discuss whats good and bad and right and wrong and expand understanding and info, what we need to do if be more informed, know China and know what’s going on with the Chinese people etc…

And for the people who are here to defend the party or don’t think that right and wrong are an issue…

I just want to ask what kind of pride can you have in a gang that tramples on peoples mind and bodies like crazy to “gain” so called stability? I mean wheres the glory? ANyone can stoop that low and rape for pleasure, exploit innocence and ruin people and nature to accomplish some fast cash. It’s just that most countries try to restrain themselves to not do that.

It’s a question of how one treats the world.

DOn’t you care about being good?

June 10, 2007 @ 7:00 am | Comment

On another point,

Richard,Lisa,

Did you know about this? And would you do a peice on it?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover060807.htm

CFP: China works against practitioners of Falun Gong through North American
news media

By Judi McLeod

Friday, June 8, 2007

The Peoples’ Republic of China, whose tainted food exports continue to plague
North America, has for a long time been polluting peoples’ minds with
propaganda.

China’s message is delivered in daily newspapers overseas. And the message
deliberately targets groups maligned by the Communist government.

The message is served up on a daily basis in a town close to you.

“In Canada, the Toronto-based Chinese Canadian Post is distributed with an
insert of the People’s Daily, the official mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist
party, which is larger than the newspaper itself. The paper’s publisher, David
Lim, is known in the Toronto Chinese community for his ties to the consulate.”
(The Epoch Times, June 7, 2007).

Shamefully, the publication receives advertising from the ultra politically
correct Ontario government and the City of Toronto, both corporations kept
afloat by taxpayers.

Taxpayers, whose dollars pay for the advertising, likely do not know that their
money goes to support a regime with one of the worst human rights records in
history.

The Toronto edition of the Ming Pao newspaper, one of the largest newspapers
read mainly by Hong Kong Chinese in Canada, also prints content from a Mainland
Chinese newspaper.

“Ming Pao Canada CEO Ka-Ming Lui wouldn’t describe in detail his newspaper’s
arrangement with Guangzhou Daily. He denied that Ming Pao was paid to publish
the content, but he also admitted Ming Pao was not paying for it. (The Epoch
Times).

“He also said his newspaper has a clear policy not to publish Falun Gong
advertisements. ‘This (policy) has been in place for many years–it’s no
secret.’ Lui said Ming Pao papers across North America follow the same policy.”

The “policy” is one that allows discrimination against a minority–the
practitioners of Falun Gong–and if any other government imposed such a policy
public outrage would be the result.

New Tang Dynasty Television, which reports regularly about the persecution of
Falun Gong in China ran up against this policy when it tried to place an ad for
its international classical dance competition to be held later this month.

Ming Pao said at least three other Toronto Chinese-language newspapers refused
to print the paid advertisement.

Surely it is a travesty that no Chinese-language newspaper, aside from the
Chinese edition of the brave Epoch Times, would print the ad in Ottawa.

That’s Ottawa, the nation’s capitol and home of the Conservative Canadian
minority government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper!

The information on the status of Chinese controlled newspapers comes from Chen
Yonglin, who made a high-profile defection from the Chinese consulate in
Sydney, Australia two years ago.

In an era where the politically correct mainstream media follows the path of
least resistance, The Epoch Times conducted an in-depth interview with Chen and
publicized never-before-released documents to substantiate his charges. The
documents show how China is following a course to “discredit” and “intimidate”
five specific target groups: Tibetan exiles, Taiwanese, Uighur Muslims,
democracy activists–and most of all Falun gong practitioners.

The strategy of this ongoing campaign is an attempt to control Chinese-language
media overseas, and through student and community groups acting as front
organizations. Chen, whose conscience forbade him from doing the work, which he
says came complete with spying on Australians in five groups and interfering in
their activities, raised the alarm.

Chen served as the first secretary of the consulate in Sydney and oversaw the
consulate’s political department, which was in charge of combating the five
groups.

As head of the political arm, he was a member of the Special Anti-Falun Gong
Working Group, which included the head of each department at the Sydney
consulate and the Consul general.

This sort of set up is not peculiar to Australia. According to Chen, the same
type of group in is action in Chinese missions worldwide.

Minutes of one of the Working Group’s meeting obtained by The Epoch Times,
dated February 7, 2001, were signed off by both the consul general and deputy
consul general of the consulate and included reports of 22 anti-Falun Gong
activities.

Among them is an entry about a Chinese-language newspaper that was reprimanded
for publishing a Falun Gong advertisement.

Meanwhile, not even a distance marked by thousands of miles can keep the
practitioners of Falun Gong safe from the Peoples’ Republic of China.

June 10, 2007 @ 7:05 am | Comment

That’s quite a comprehensive list of strawman arguments from AC.

June 10, 2007 @ 7:21 am | Comment

The trade war with China has begun
(from the IHT)

BEIJING: Raisins and health supplements imported from the United States failed to meet Chinese safety standards and have been returned or destroyed, the country’s food safety agency said Friday.

The move comes as China itself faces international criticism, especially in the United States, over a series of scandals that have plagued Chinese food, drugs and other products from poisoned cough syrup to tainted toothpaste and pet food.

Inspectors in the ports of Ningbo and Shenzhen found bacteria and sulfur dioxide in products shipped by three American companies, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine said.

“The products failed to meet the sanitary standards of China,” the agency said in a brief notice posted on its Web site. No details were given on when or how the inspections were conducted.

The agency said it was asking “all local departments to increase quarantine examinations of foods imported from the United States.”
Today in Business
EU ministers fail to agree on rescue of Galileo project
Trade deficit drops in April as exports hit an all-time high
Rising pork prices in China signal pricier times worldwide

Telephones at the administration’s office were not answered on Friday.

The companies were identified as K-Max Health Products, CMO Distribution Center of America, and Pervalu International Division.

The agency said K-Max and CMO exported health capsules, including honey and bacteria-fighting supplements. Pervalu exported raisins, it said.

The shipments from K-Max and Pervalu have been destroyed and CMO’s capsules were returned, the notice said.

The notice did not say which contaminants were found in which products, although sulfur dioxide is sometimes used as a preservative in dried fruit. It said they were found in amounts that surpassed acceptable levels, but did not give any details.

Late last month, France’s Groupe Danone said China rejected five containers of Evian water in February citing high bacteria levels.

The rejections came after concerns spiked over the safety of Chinese food exports. Deaths of cats and dogs in North America were blamed on tainted pet food ingredients from China.

In recent months, U.S. inspectors have banned or turned away a growing number of Chinese exports, including monkfish containing life-threatening levels of pufferfish toxins, drug-laced frozen eel and juice made with unsafe color additives.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has also stopped all imports of Chinese toothpaste to test for a potentially deadly chemical reportedly found in tubes sold in Australia, the Dominican Republic and Panama.
Back to top

June 10, 2007 @ 8:31 am | Comment

Sonagi,

What do you mean? Are you saying I am making these up?

I’ve been reading this blog for a couple of months now. Those are the arguments some people usually make. “Argument #1” is the most frequent one.

As a matter of fact, you can find “Argument #1” in kenzhu’s comment above, you can also find “Argument #3” in Will’s comment above. “Argument #2” is a variation of “Argument #1”, I read it in another topic on this blog a while ago, I forgot who made it though, you can do a search on “Free Tibet” on this site, you will find it.

June 10, 2007 @ 8:34 am | Comment

AC,

Go back and reread Will’s comment carefully. You have misunderstood his point.

June 10, 2007 @ 9:15 am | Comment

A poster (I forgot who) in another blog thread here gave an experiment, the experiment, according to the poster, is something like:

We stand in Tianamen and yell “Free Tibet” or something like “Tiananmen Square is a massacre”. And we stand in the white house lawn and yell “Down with Bush, down with Iraqi war”. And the poster wants to demonstrate that the Chinese version of the experiment will see the protester arrested, while the American version will not.

But I think that was not a fair experiment. I want to re-design this experiment. I will keep the Chinese version exactly the same, but I will change the slogan in the American version. Instead of yelling “Down with Bush, down with Iraq war”. I want to ask the experiment to yell “Osama Bin Laden Rocks”, or “Saddam Hussein is the hero of the Iraqi people!”.

Now, what do you think of this re-designed experiment?

June 10, 2007 @ 9:17 am | Comment

Does that entitle U.S. to “educate” China how to behave?

Nothing is “entitled”. But that is not a fair question. I can see one government simply can’t afford to have another government breathing down its neck. US “education” can be overbearing, or at times, downright ugly (think Iraq). But, as to the Chinese people, if US or any other countries can help them get to where they want to be, to bring about the kind of changes they themselves cannot force their own government to make, what is so bad about that?

National pride alone does not explain everything. Mostly, I think it is the historical scar which runs deep inside the psychic of every Chinese that is telling them: foreign intervention is bad, no if’s and but’s about it. Separating the people’s interests from the interests of the government is problematic to most when a foreigner enters the picture. Individuals would right away assume the identity of their government when confronted with the situation. Strange, but true. The people would rather suffer at the hand of our own government than to let “foreign devil” has any say. How about this one: how much of the progress made in China the last 20 years, in aspects big and small, can be attributed to US “meddling” in some way?

One thing at least the Chinese can learn from the US, which Americans have abundance of, is their individualism. The Chinese are mostly asleep when it comes to protecting and fighting for personal rights. And the government is getting away with it.

June 10, 2007 @ 9:24 am | Comment

But, as to the Chinese people, if US or any other countries can help them get to where they want to be, to bring about the kind of changes they themselves cannot force their own government to make, what is so bad about that?

yando, could you please tell us where the Chinese people want to be? It seems that you have the answer. Does the US government know?

June 10, 2007 @ 9:49 am | Comment

“How about this one: how much of the progress made in China the last 20 years, in aspects big and small, can be attributed to US “meddling” in some way?”

Could you please elaborate?

June 10, 2007 @ 10:10 am | Comment

Separating the people’s interests from the interests of the government is problematic to most when a foreigner enters the picture. Individuals would right away assume the identity of their government when confronted with the situation…

If you follow the public sentiments and intellectual trends of China over the past three decades, you will find an incredible period of infatuation for America during 1980’s. Everything American was rosy then and nobody trusted what the government had to say. We all know what marked the climax of the period. But strangely, the trend was completely reversed in 1990s. Don’t blame it all on the crackdown of the government. Chinese people now have plethora of channels to get information from the outside world. The internet, personal contacts, spending vacations abroad, sports, movies, pirated movies (in case censored by the government), better command of foreign languages, returnees with foreign-earned degrees… and the Faaluunguung never has trouble sending their propaganda to your email box or fax machine. You have to explain why the Chinese has become bitter when their access to outside information increased.

June 10, 2007 @ 10:23 am | Comment

In the era under Deng XiaoPing, China saw America as its future and wanted to learn everything American. Now, China has found its own way for development, and it has been working quite well. At the same time, America is not moving much and lacks the will to solve its own problems.

I still believe China can learn lots of things from America. But the Chinese are smart enough to learn on their own; they don’t need to be taught. US has been teaching what’re good for the Iraqis, and what’re the results now. There are lots of talks; but no lesson is learned.

June 10, 2007 @ 10:24 am | Comment

I believe Brgyags made some good points. And I want to follow up on what he said.

Basically his point is: in the 80’s, the CCP had a lot more control on media and information flow in China. in the 90’s and onward, the CCP loosened its control a lot more, and China had more access to Western content (movies, music, travel, even news). But, today’s Chinese are much more pro-CCP than the 80’s generation. You can say during the 80’s: “It’s not fair, give me a chance to feed Chinese people some of my content, and they’ll start to be more pro-West”. Well, you admit that you are able to feed much more content to the Chinese during the 90’s and onward, yet the Chinese people were not convinced, and what’s worse, they became more pro-CCP and “nationalistic”.

So how do you explain this contradictory result? If your content is much more “enlightened” and “fair” than the CCP’s, how come after receiving a larger dose of your content, the listener became more opposed to you?

Please explain this logical conundrum to me.

June 10, 2007 @ 10:42 am | Comment

>>You have to explain why the Chinese has become bitter when their access to outside information increased.

This is a good point, actually. I would argue that you are linking the wrong things here, though. Is there a causal relationship between increased access to information and hostility to the US or is this merely incidental? It is obviously complex, but I’d say one link is increased wealth and national self-confidence…. pride, in other words. As people grow richer, more self-confident, and more optimistic about their future, they are probably less willing to “take lessons” and less willing to look to outside models. There is probably an inverse relationship between “willingness to learn from foreigners” and national wealth/power. I’m not claiming this a rule, however.

The actions of the US government over the past 7 years haven’t exactly helped either. And, of course, the CCP isn’t exactly neutral in this game.

June 10, 2007 @ 10:48 am | Comment

Both Brgyags and 88 made some good points.

After the 90’s, Chinese know more about not only the outside world, but also it’s own history too. That gives them confidence. On the other hand, US is not exactly the “shining city upon the hill” these days.

June 10, 2007 @ 11:09 am | Comment

Math, I’d take it up, if you were willing to stand in Tiananmen square with a poster saying “I support the Nanjing massacre”

June 10, 2007 @ 11:10 am | Comment

I will only do it if you stand in front of the White House with a poster saying “I Support 911 and Roadside Bombs in Iraq”

June 10, 2007 @ 11:11 am | Comment

“I will only do it if you stand in front of the White House with a poster saying “I Support 911 and Roadside Bombs in Iraq”

In the States…you get a trip to the station, pay a fine and set you on your merry way (and this is all a BIG maybe).

In TX2…. a minimum of four years in the Lao Jiao system (after a nice beating by plain-clothed thugs with crew cuts).

Apples and oranges. Apples and oranges.

June 10, 2007 @ 12:22 pm | Comment

Math:

I take it back about supporting the Nanjing massacre. I just find supporting that and 9/11 morally repugnant.

So lets step back. You come to Beijing with a signboard demanding an investigation to the Tiananmen massacre and if you’re not arrested, I’ll take a sign demanding an investigation into Kent state.

June 10, 2007 @ 1:08 pm | Comment

It would be foolish to think that the US government is as repressive as the Chinese government. Even when China becomes a well developed country one day, there will be more emphasis on order and collectivism, quite different from the US where every thing goes. I don’t believe that there is automatically something wrong with them if they don’t believe as strong as you do on free speech.

June 10, 2007 @ 2:57 pm | Comment

Lisa, I can ask for it ’til I’m blue in the face, but with the likes of AC and Arty and others I don’t see much cause for optimism.

I only post once (twice now) in this thread and I have to be named as either idiotic or frivolousness and trolling.

Arty: China, love it or leave it. Best, Will

Don’t live in China nor a citizen of PRC or ROC.

June 10, 2007 @ 3:20 pm | Comment

Richard,

I’m not sure if America has ever really had the moral high ground, even during the giddy days following the Soviet Union’s collapse. So I see the Bush era merely exacerbating a pre-existing phenomenon rather than singlehandedly trashing America’s reputation. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t hold Bush accountable, however, which is a point we certainly agree on.

June 10, 2007 @ 4:44 pm | Comment

I see Math ignored my point. Obviously he wants to ignore that incovenient truth….

June 10, 2007 @ 6:38 pm | Comment

I’m not sure if anyone got what I was trying to say when I wrote:

Bush has deprived America of what was – after we stopped exterminating the Indians and ended slavery and Jim Crow, and after the Tuskegee Experiment and Kent State, etc., etc. – our moral high ground.

You see, all countries do terrible things at various times. Most, however, do learn from these terrible things, and society grows more aware and more self-critical. There will always be setbacks, but what I was trying to get across is that even as the Kent State Massacre took place and other awful things, America still could claim a moral high ground. The openness with which Kent State was examined, for example, ultimately strengthened my belief in America’s morality, to give just one example. When our friends, and even our enemies, needed our help through the past century it has always been America to the rescue even for an earthquake in Iran or Pakistan, even for ethnic cleansing in Muslim Bosnia. Sure, our government’s motive may have been more one of self-interest than maganimity, but the trend is certainly there. Lots, and lots of badness along the way, like installing the Shah of Iran, Pinochet, the military in Guatemala – all kinds of unforgivable stuff. But where we also take the moral high ground is allowing such stories to be told, and even, on occasion, punishing the politicians who break the law. All of these things are out in the open thanks to a relatively fee media and rule of law. The extermination of the Indians is something we learn in junior high school, along with the Klu Klux Klan and Jim Crow. So maybe I was wrong all those years when I did feel that America did have a moral high ground, especially when it came to human liberties such as habeas corpus. I had no reason to believe otherwise. I knew all the mistakes and evils, but I also knew the nature of our system, which seemed fundamentally sound and moral. And now I have a much harder time making the argument. Especially the argument that America tends to learn from its mistakes and improve and grow. Bush has taken us back to a darker, uglier age, and I only hope it isn’t too far off when we can once again see some light.

June 10, 2007 @ 8:24 pm | Comment

But where we also take the moral high ground is allowing such stories to be told, and even, on occasion, punishing the politicians who break the law. All of these things are out in the open thanks to a relatively fee media and rule of law.

Richard:

When was Jeff Sachs’ article published in the New York Times ? Answer: it wasn’t. This is not an isolated case.

The generalization is anything that makes the US look bad in the international arena (e.g., how other countries react negatively to its actions), isn’t publicized in the mainstream press, like the Times. On the contrary, anything that makes other countries look bad will be emphasized over and over, to no end (e.g. 5+ articles in the Times on China’s food safety already, daily yellow peril articles, etc. China’s rebuttal on the food safety issue in the China Daily was never published in the Times).

The American people are being hoodwinked, because the “free press” is not free. There’s a self selection mechanism that takes place in the so-called “free press” and anything that is dangerous to the power structure will not be published or emphasized [e.g. Jeff Sachs saying that America’s approach to developing countries sucks, the world bank is a farce, and the model to follow is Chinese. Yes Chinese. I know the racists (i.e. most people here) don’t want to hear that.] A few token articles, or a few sentences pasted at the end of an article, may pass through. The former would be just to emphasize how “free” the press is and so people like you can use it to say you have a moral high ground. These are tokens- they in no way ever end up changing society.

Average Americana won’t buy or read anything that doesn’t re-affirm his/her own superiority, and other’s inferiority. No one wants to read Sachs saying America sucks. Mainstream white people want to read about black pimps and ho’s, evil Chinese, and crazy Arabs. That’s how the self selection mechanism works in a “free” capitalistic society, and how it feeds the belief in a “superiority”. T

he press is “free” only in a narrow, immaterial sense. You were fed a diet of this….. stuff….. since birth- small wonder you believe what you do. Get fed a diet of Al Jazeera, Pravda, People’s Daily, IHT, and the Times since birth- you might be able to put 2+2 together and figure no single country or people has a monopoly on truth or morality.

The more people defend the American “free press”, instead of questioning it, the more dangerous a tool for propaganda it becomes. I’ll argue that the American propaganda machine is far more dangerous and far reaching than China’s- no sane Chinese takes the People’s Daily at face value. But the thing is, you do take your “free” press, and your system, at face value.

That’s really worrisome.

June 10, 2007 @ 11:44 pm | Comment

Richard, the earthquake bit. First, Pakistan has been always a US ally, not an enemy. Second, in the recent Iran earthquake, the US provided aids to Iran (much like many other countries) and Iran accepted them knowing it would provide gigantic photo ops to the US. In the world opinion, Iran actually scored very well on that one: it put aside ideological difference and genuinely cared about its people.

On the other hand, after the Katrina, when Venezuela provided aids to the US, it was refused. Chavez spoke fondly about Clinton, so he was more anti-Bush than anti-US. It just made America so small in the world opinion.

A “moral high ground” if it exists and you can stand on it, is anointed by others, not yourself. In that sense, yes, the US had it at one point. But what have you done to me late, the world asks?

It’s more than just Bush… After Jim Rogers were back to the US after his second around-the-globe travel, he noticed that many Americans treated their own ignorance to the outside world as a badge of honor — because “we are the best”.

June 11, 2007 @ 12:01 am | Comment

Will,

If you rework that racist bit then you may have a good point. The US press overall is free — you can always find non-mainstream reporting without the interference of censorship. However, there are only maybe 10 news outlets in the country that effectively control the information to the majority of the Americans. Especially recently, the editorial biases of those news outlets have become very apparent, if you compare to the news being reported outside of the US.

June 11, 2007 @ 12:21 am | Comment

@Will (at June 10, 2007 11:44 PM)

Thank you, Will!

That’s exactly what I have been trying to tell people here. I can only wish I was as articulate and eloquent as you.

June 11, 2007 @ 12:28 am | Comment

The American people are being hoodwinked, because the “free press” is not free. There’s a self selection mechanism that takes place in the so-called “free press” and anything that is dangerous to the power structure will not be published or emphasized [e.g. Jeff Sachs saying that America’s approach to developing countries sucks, the world bank is a farce, and the model to follow is Chinese. Yes Chinese. I know the racists (i.e. most people here) don’t want to hear that.] A few token articles, or a few sentences pasted at the end of an article, may pass through. The former would be just to emphasize how “free” the press is and so people like you can use it to say you have a moral high ground. These are tokens- they in no way ever end up changing society.

This is a very similar point to an article I have written before, named “American media is a more sophisticated liar than the Chinese media”. Basically, both American and Chinese media are propaganda and mind-control organs. The difference is, the American one is much more skilled and sophisticated than the Chinese one. One non-important issues, the American media can afford to be very objective, very fair, very self-critical. But when it comes to “fundamental issues”, America’s media is just as self-censoring and defensive. For example, have you seen any American main stream (key word is main stream) media do any self-criticism (not superficial criticism) on the American Constitution itself, on capitalism vs. socialism objectively, etc. Of course you do not. Because these issues are too “fundamental”, therefore the mainstream media will not touch these issues. But the dangerous thing is Americans themselves naively believe that their media will always give them a very in-depth and objective outlook of the world. At least the Chinese people themselves are aware that People’s daily are a joke sometimes, but Americans are never aware that NBC and CNN are equally a joke. That is the difference.

June 11, 2007 @ 12:31 am | Comment

yeah JXie,
stronger UN-troops would be great. If only Sudan would be willing to let them in. That’s the point. Not the money.

June 11, 2007 @ 12:55 am | Comment

A “moral high ground” if it exists and you can stand on it, is anointed by others, not yourself.

Hear! Hear!

June 11, 2007 @ 1:04 am | Comment

There is no doubt that the US system is much better than China’s as far as protecting people’s rights. US is a country of rule of law, people in the US can have open discussions on past mistakes, they can speak up against their government if they want, etc., etc., nobody can argue with that.

However, no matter how good a system is, it can not correct itself by it’s mechanism alone. After all, all systems are run by people, therefore only people can correct the mistakes. I see a banner on your main page, it says “Don’t blame me, I voted for Kerry.” If you throw that argument to a Chinese citizen, he/she will not let you off the hook so easily. He/She will argue: ” We Chinese don’t get to select our leaders, we don’t have any say to what the government does, therefore we can’t be held responsible. But Americans should be held responsible, because they put the guy in office and did not stop him from making mistakes.” If people put a blind faith in the system (like some of the posters here) and stop listening to other’s opinions, a good system will eventually become corrupt, it will only repeat the past mistakes again and again.

June 11, 2007 @ 1:14 am | Comment

@AC

“But Americans should be held responsible, because they put the guy in office and did not stop him from making mistakes.” If people put a blind faith in the system (like some of the posters here) and stop listening to other’s opinions, a good system will eventually become corrupt, it will only repeat the past mistakes again and again.”

I don’t think you should hold ordinary American people for what Bush had done. And the electorate had done what they can do to check the excesses of the Bush Administration: by voting to give the Democrats control over the US Congress. That’s all they can do to stop Bush according to the Constitution of America. Unless Bush has been found breaking US laws, you cannot impeach him. The term limit on each president also means that there is damage control, for an incompetent leader cannot stay on forever.

Just as it is important to seperate the deeds of the CCP regime from the ordinary Chinese people, American people should not be held responsible for Bush’s policies.

And you know what? In his video-tapes, Osama bin Laden justified killing innocent American citizens because “they pay taxes to the federal govt.” I don’t think that’s correct. In any case, to blame the people for their govt’s actions is not justified be it a democracy or otherwise.

June 11, 2007 @ 2:08 am | Comment

After the 90’s, Chinese know more about not only the outside world, but also it’s own history too. – AC

I want to also emphasize: they also learned from the experience of former Soviet-bloc countries and the world’s developing countries in their perpetual struggling for better living standards, social structures, dignity and governance.

June 11, 2007 @ 2:18 am | Comment

@sp

I didn’t make up the statement. I got that from a friend in China when we had an argument. I told him I didn’t vote for Bush, and that was exactly what he said to me.

I don’t think I should be held responsible since I am speaking up here to remind people, I’ve done my part.

I think you should be held responsible though (if you are American citizen, of course), because you are still defending what’s wrong of the system instead of questioning it.

June 11, 2007 @ 2:24 am | Comment

Just as it is important to seperate the deeds of the CCP regime from the ordinary Chinese people, American people should not be held responsible for Bush’s policies.

I understand the first part. CCP is a dictatorship, so you are right that ordinary people cannot be held responsible for CCP’s actions. But America is a democracy, so I don’t understand why the American people cannot be held responsible for its gov’t actions.

American people voted for Bush twice, clearly those who voted for him supported his policies on a whole, including the war in Iraq. So explain, why can they not be held responsible?

IF there were a relection in Germany in the middle of WW2, and Hitler was re-elected by the German people even when they know about the concentration camps, you don’t think the German people should be held responsible?

These days, the world “the people” have been put on a sacred worshiping altar. No matter what, “the people” can never be blamed, it’s always the government’s fault. “The people” are always sacred and above blame. But does it make sense from an engineering mindset? I believe “the people” can certainly be blamed by many things. There are many cases where the government is right, and the people are wrong, and we should not be afraid to say it. For example, during the 1989 incident, the gov’t was right, the people were wrong. For the Iraq War invasion, the American gov’t was worng, the American people were equally wrong.

Don’t be afraid to criticize the people and punish the people if necessary.

June 11, 2007 @ 2:40 am | Comment

“I’ll argue that the American propaganda machine is far more dangerous and far reaching than China’s- no sane Chinese takes the People’s Daily at face value. “

I was inclined to agree with you until I read about the Chengdu daily copy editor who accepted the infamous Tiananmen Square ad because she didn’t know what it referred to and believed the story about it being a mining accident. China and other nations practice vigorous censorship because CENSORSHIP WORKS. Ask an educated Chinese about Farlonggong , the liberation of Tibet, or sending back North Korean refugees in violation of a UN agreement signed by China. The Chinese had a field day over Abu Ghraib in blissful ignorance or callous apathy towards victims of their own extrajudicial system.

While I accept the arguments here that US freedom of the press and freedom to elect pubic officials is overrated, I still prefer to keep our imperfect freedoms. As an avid user of the internet, I truly appreciate not having a net nanny decide for me what I can and cannot view.

June 11, 2007 @ 2:48 am | Comment

Just as it is important to seperate the deeds of the CCP regime from the ordinary Chinese people, American people should not be held responsible for Bush’s policies. – sp

June 11, 2007 @ 2:49 am | Comment

Is it my imagination or does Math’s writing style appear different from the essays he used to post in the pond?

June 11, 2007 @ 2:51 am | Comment

@AC

“I didn’t make up the statement. I got that from a friend in China when we had an argument. I told him I didn’t vote for Bush, and that was exactly what he said to me.

I don’t think I should be held responsible since I am speaking up here to remind people, I’ve done my part.

I think you should be held responsible though (if you are American citizen, of course), because you are still defending what’s wrong of the system instead of questioning it.”

I don’t think you can find a perfect political system. But i would say that constitutional rule, the rule of law, transparency, respect of civil rights and an independent judiciary should be the key element of any government.

When i support democracy to take root in China, i am not advocating China to copy everything wholesale from the West or the US. I want to see China having the rule of law, transparency, respect of civil rights and an independent judiciary. That’s all we want in China and i sincerely believe that the pursue of such elements in a Chinese government is to pursue justice and happiness for the Chinese people at large. I don’t see that as blind faith or unquestioning of any system. In fact, with these elements within a political system, questioning could be conducted freely and openly. I can say whatever i want of President Bush, burn his pictures whatever and i would be detained without trial. In China, it is not even safe to be openly critical of the Government.

Jiang Yanyong exposed the SARs cover-up and he was swiftly dealt with by the authorities. But what he did was for the benefit of the folks, cover-ups would only made the Sars outbreak worst.

Even such a civic act was not tolerated, and Jiang was detained for a brief period.

In a decent democracy, one should be and is able to speak his mind. Any citizen should have the right to be part of the politcal process. And that is why Dr Sun had wanted to est. a democratic consitutional system in China by overthrowing the autocratic nature of dynastic rule.

When Bush launched his war in Iraq and even up till today, so many, including alot of Americans themselves, were dead set against the war. Look at the massive anti-war demonstrations in America. Why didn’t you see that as questioning the system? Michael Moore? Can there be a Michael Moore equivalent in China?

And if you recalled, North Vietnamese President Ho Chi Minh actually wrote a letter to President Johnson during the bitter Vietnam War in 1967.

Ho said in his letter, ” Our just cause enjoys strong sympathy and support from the peoples of the whole world, including broad sections of the American people…”

Even Ho Chi Minh understood that the enemy was not the ordinary American on the streets, but the US government.

And recently, America’s most bitter foe, Iranian President Ahmedinejad, wrote an open letter to the American people and largely distinguished the policies of the US administration from that of the American people.

June 11, 2007 @ 4:05 am | Comment

@Math

You are really deranged beyong redeemption.

“American people voted for Bush twice, clearly those who voted for him supported his policies on a whole, including the war in Iraq. So explain, why can they not be held responsible?

IF there were a relection in Germany in the middle of WW2, and Hitler was re-elected by the German people even when they know about the concentration camps, you don’t think the German people should be held responsible? ”

Yes, Bush was re-elected. But did you notice that almost half of America always voted against him? In fact, many felt that he had stolen the election in 2000 in Florida. How about the Republican Party’s crushing defeat in the Congressional elections who forced Donald Rumsfeld to resign?

Going by your reasoning, all of the German, Italian and Japanese population back in 1945, everyone of them should be sentenced as Class A war criminals by the Tokyo and Nuremberg trials, am i right to say that? Does that sound logical to you?

On the other hand, many governments in Southeast Asia, such as the Suharto regime and the military juntas in Thailand adopted discriminatory measures against ethnic Chinese during the Cold War years after the Communist takeover of China in 1949. To them, a Chinese was synonymous with being a Communist. They don’t give a shit whether you supported communism or even have a say in over the govt in China or not.

Save your ramblings to yourself.

June 11, 2007 @ 4:20 am | Comment

Bush cheated. Twice.

That doesn’t remove the stain on the Republic, and it does nothing to relieve the sorrow and rage I and millions feel about the war and the shredding of our Constitution.

I’ll let you know what I think our chances of redemption are after the next election.

June 11, 2007 @ 4:32 am | Comment

And as a p.s. – I and millions of people demonstrated. Worked for and funded candidates opposed to the Bush administration and the war. I have friends who have worked tirelessly on these issues, who’ve protested time and time again.

Many of us tried, and tried very hard.

June 11, 2007 @ 4:35 am | Comment

Going by your reasoning, all of the German, Italian and Japanese population back in 1945, everyone of them should be sentenced as Class A war criminals by the Tokyo and Nuremberg trials, am i right to say that? Does that sound logical to you?

This is an interesting point. In fact, I have been thinking about this for a long time. The Germans and Japanese clearly supported their military leaders during World war 2, and the citizens are also aware of such incidents as the concentration camps and Nanjing massacre. Yet they still supported their leaders.

If I tell you, if you let me drive this car, and I will go crush someone with this car. And you say, Ok, I support you, go ahead. And if I then go kill someone, can you say no share no responsibility for this?

Both the Nanjing massacre and Concentration camps are considered Genocide. And most of the Japanese and German population supported these genocide. So if Hitler and Tojo are class A war criminals, then shouldn’t their supporters (eg, the citizens) at least be class-B criminals? The citizens’ support is the direct reason for the success for Nanjing massacre and concentration camp, so from an engineering mindset, you can say that their support contributed directly to the success for the two genocides. So yes, perhaps those supporters and Tojo and Hitler should be also tried as Class B criminals.

Does my argument make sense? If not, please refute me using an engineering mindset.

June 11, 2007 @ 4:46 am | Comment

@sp,

This post is about whether US has the “moral high ground” to criticize others, not about what’s wrong with the Chinese government or whether China should adopt democracy or not. We had those discussions in other threads, remember?

Oh, also. The only hardcore pro-CCP guy here is Math, can’t you tell? So please stop lecturing us how democracy works and stop telling us 49.999% didn’t vote for Bush. Start examining why the other 50% voted for him! That’s what went wrong, isn’t it? Get it now?

June 11, 2007 @ 4:52 am | Comment

@otherlisa

Bush cheated. Twice.

Vey good. Now please tell us how he did that and why the public bought it?

I recommend Will’s comment (at June 10, 2007 11:44 PM)

June 11, 2007 @ 5:22 am | Comment

>>I think AC has already explained why it is more dangerous if a democratic system goes wrong.

Nazi Germany.
Stalinist Russia.
Maoist China.
The DPRK.
Pol Pot.
Imperial Japan.
Ceau�escu.
etc.

Ok, let’s compare those to democracies. Care to count up the dead and the tortured? Or GNP, if you prefer. Obviously democracies are more dangerous when they “go wrong.” Obviously. And “go wrong” means what exactly? Oh yeah, become authoritarian, as in the case of Germany.

June 11, 2007 @ 5:28 am | Comment

Nazi Germany.
Stalinist Russia.
Maoist China.
The DPRK.
Pol Pot.
Imperial Japan.
Ceau�escu.
etc.

Ok, let’s compare those to democracies. Care to count up the dead and the tortured? Or GNP, if you prefer. Obviously democracies are more dangerous when they “go wrong.” Obviously. And “go wrong” means what exactly? Oh yeah, become authoritarian, as in the case of Germany. – 88

How many people were killed, tortured, robbed and subjugated by the British, French and American empires? How many people died as a result of internal strife while democracy is experimented in countries such as Indonesia, Iraq and Russia?

Well, you do have a point. The regimes you piled together do share a common characteristic, which is that they are unstable. They either collapse because of internal troubles or are removed by external forces when they try to release their internal pressure by military adventures. I am also willing to go further by pointing out that the current Chinese authoritarian system is not stable. I did not mince my words when I pointed out the authoritarian nature of the system. However, unlike the USSR, Nazi or imperial Japan, the Chinese system is an open one in that it actively engages the world. In addition, virtually nobody in China claims, “This is it, our system is the best in the world”. That happens to be the trademark of most Americans and is what makes me think the blind faith in democracy is dangerous. I am not saying that the danger will necessarily lead to massive death or torture, although many Americans acquiesce when such death is indirectly caused in Iraq by the US. The real danger is that America’s democracy will gradually slide into a hopeless morass and I do not see a mechanism is in place to correct it.

June 11, 2007 @ 6:24 am | Comment

AC, google Al Gore’s new book, The Assault on Reason. It’s a piece of the explanation.

Another one is the respect for rule of law to some extent – I heard Gore remark the other night about 2000, why he allowed the results to stand, and he said: “The only step after a final Supreme Court decision is violent revolution.” He went on to say that he had to respect the results of the process because he respected the rule of law.

I don’t think he (and many others) realized the extent to which the Bush Administration is not bound by these ideals, acts lawlessly and respects no authority other than itself.

As I remarked way upthread, I think the basic American system of government is a good one. It’s smart and for the most part, it works pretty well. One of the reasons I say this is because it contains mechanisms to self-correct when things get out of balance. This really is a built-in advantage to democracy (not just American, but democracies in general). Regime change in autocracies rarely proceeds smoothly, and though the ability to order large numbers of people to do what a central authority wants can be very useful in some situations, it can also stifle innovation and disenfranchise a majority of citizens. I think the lack of control that the Chinese central government has over the provincial authorities and the endemic local corruption is one consequence of this.

Now, in terms of where the US is now, as I remarked upthread, ask me after the ’08 election if I think we can fix this horrific mess we are in now. I am honestly not sure. I think the foundation of our democratic system has been damaged, and perhaps in fundamental ways. It is certainly going to take a lot of time and effort to fix. I frankly don’t know at this point what will happen. There are forces at work in our culture that are toxic. It could go either way.

Do I think that the United States has much in the way of moral authority right now?

No. I don’t. It saddens me to say that but it’s the truth.

But as also stated upthread, I am not going to let the fact of my citizenship stop me from pointing out wrongs wherever I see them.

June 11, 2007 @ 7:03 am | Comment

My God; I actually agree with Math.
Forget the fact that most Americans did not vote to replace Bush (either because they stayed home because illegal wars far off in lands don’t affect them or whatever was on TV at the time), how many are in the streets trying to get him impeached? Is it any wonder LBJ and Nixon could invoke the ‘Silent Majority’ up until the end of Vietnam?
Such behaviour is the same in every country except for those with superfluous armies. I mean, you don’t hear the Canadians next door so angry and indignant about Iraq that they’re protesting.
But to my mind a rebuttal to Math’s argument can be found in Britain; Blair is only a first minister after all with the vast majority having been against Iraq from the start with the largest public demonstrations since the Corn laws. Now that he’s gone his party is disassociating itself from the quagmire when only one cabinet minister ever resigned in protest. What on earth can people do? There’s one party more than in the US, but all are equally bad (the Tories supported Iraq even more, and the Lib Dems have no coherent policy about anything). When you do everything you can to stop an immoral policy and the government ignores the will of the people while lying all the way, you end up….
…in China.

June 11, 2007 @ 7:39 am | Comment

Well, Keir, I won’t agree that there’s no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. Just try this thought experiment: imagine if Al Gore were in the White House. You think we’d be in Iraq? Not a chance.

June 11, 2007 @ 7:43 am | Comment

Oh, oops, sorry. You’re talking about parties in Great Britain. Oops.

June 11, 2007 @ 7:46 am | Comment

Whenever I feel that my life isn’t moving forward and I don’t have enough time, I will always return to this thread, read these comments, and be heavily reminded that my life is moving forward and I do have enough time.

June 11, 2007 @ 7:56 am | Comment

I feel sorry for Bush
What a scapegoat.
American people wanted the war. he happened to be the one that started

June 11, 2007 @ 9:16 am | Comment

wk, you know nothing. Bush lobbied and propagandized for that war at an unprecedented level.

This thread really tells me I should simply delete the more deranged comments and keep the site from becoming a three-ring circus.

wk, I give you a chance to redeem yourself – what do you base this accusation on that Americans wanted war against iraq? Put up or shut up.

June 11, 2007 @ 10:25 am | Comment

Richard I think this calling of accounts you are suggesting to wk is good. So much just slips by in all this. theres s om any people and the subject flips and changes too much. Everyone has such a diferent perspective, not just different opinions….

So I think when people say things that are just looney and incorrect, maybe someone like you should insist for posteritys sake that we can agree on a peice of info..

Cause we are just sayiing a lot of opposites it seems…

Anyway, since reading through all this for a few months now, I just realize in my face how people are just not educated at all.

No offense to anyone, this I already knew. The CCP wants least that people be educated. If people were educated, people like Math and bryags would be laughed off the scene. I mean I dont want to laugh them off, but if we do not know China and it’s crimes especially Falun Gong since its happening right now (brutally), then how can we know whats the deal and where we stand?

It just seems to me that theres not enough info, research, investigation, truth going on here, just a lot of regergitation of preexisting notions…

How come theres no realization or general understanding throughout these threads? If this is a tactic of CCP, then this is one that I did not know about, like if they come to places like this to divert the conversations to US all the time.

Is it possible that people who want to talk about US can go somewhere else to comment? This is supposed to be about China, so why do we always have to talk about US?

Most people around the world know about the US, its crimes and tactics are not to far off from all the other big name countries. china however, is not similar to the others, so thats why I prefer to discuss China. It’s important for awareness of this country to be raised.

June 11, 2007 @ 11:38 am | Comment

“So please stop lecturing us how democracy works and stop telling us 49.999% didn’t vote for Bush. Start examining why the other 50% voted for him!”

‘Repression in China’ is the official theme, so let’s forget about Bush.

Instead, let’s examine the question of who elected Abbott and Costello (that’s Hu and Wen, btw). Tell us how democracy works in China.

Please, please, don’t blow what vestige of credibility you have left by mentioning ‘Chinese characteristics.’

June 11, 2007 @ 12:17 pm | Comment

@Math

“This is an interesting point. In fact, I have been thinking about this for a long time. The Germans and Japanese clearly supported their military leaders during World war 2, and the citizens are also aware of such incidents as the concentration camps and Nanjing massacre. Yet they still supported their leaders.

If I tell you, if you let me drive this car, and I will go crush someone with this car. And you say, Ok, I support you, go ahead. And if I then go kill someone, can you say no share no responsibility for this?

Both the Nanjing massacre and Concentration camps are considered Genocide. And most of the Japanese and German population supported these genocide. So if Hitler and Tojo are class A war criminals, then shouldn’t their supporters (eg, the citizens) at least be class-B criminals? The citizens’ support is the direct reason for the success for Nanjing massacre and concentration camp, so from an engineering mindset, you can say that their support contributed directly to the success for the two genocides. So yes, perhaps those supporters and Tojo and Hitler should be also tried as Class B criminals.

Does my argument make sense? If not, please refute me using an engineering mindset.”

Yeah, Math, you are so right! Hurray, when will you start building dentention facilities for 127 million Japanese, 82 million Germans and 58 million Italians?

And by the way, i remembered when Mao came to power in 1949, he claimed that the “Chinese people had finally stand up” and that the Communists and himself were “fishes in the pond where the pond is the people.”

Hmm… so Math, so we can established that Mao had the masses support when he came to power? During the Cultural Revolution, there were so many who idolised him. So i guess Math, you would tell the victims of the Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward loudly, “You people deserved it; after all you guys brought Mao to power in the first place.” Would you say that to them? I would like to hear from you on this.

June 11, 2007 @ 1:03 pm | Comment

@AC

“This post is about whether US has the “moral high ground” to criticize others, not about what’s wrong with the Chinese government or whether China should adopt democracy or not. We had those discussions in other threads, remember?”

Yeah, we had those discussions before, but who was the one who always conveniently slip away half way through?

Example, where is justice when the People’s Supreme Courts were essentially kangaroo courts with no judicial independence? Where is the right to an open and fair trial? The right to protect against forced confession and self-incrimination?

AC, you left too many things unanswered.

June 11, 2007 @ 1:12 pm | Comment

WK, you can kiss my American ass. Really. Or my world citizen ass. Take your pick.

Do you know how many of us fought against the Iraq War? Do you have any idea? Do you understand that the Bush administration lied about the WMDs, and more to the point, lied that Saddam Hussein was somehow behind 9/11?

Look, I am sick and disgusted with the laziness and lack of education of a significant percentage of Americans, who were so easily fooled by this pack of villains who knew how to sell their “product.” Those of us who were paying attention knew it was lies. But what were we supposed to do about it? We tried. It wasn’t enough.

And on the other hand, I can’t entirely blame people who are overwhelmed and just trying to get by for trusting their leaders. Some absurd percentage of Americans bought the lie that Saddam was connected to 9/11. There was a very deliberate campaign to sell this misinformation to them.

The problem is that in order for a democracy to work, its citizens have to be educated, engaged and involved. I don’t know what it’s going to take to fix those particular disconnects. I don’t know if they can even be fixed.

But tell me something: do China’s citizens have any say in the decisions of the leadership? Are they able to stop actions that they disapprove of? When the Chinese government does things I think are wrong, like subsidize the genocide in the Sudan, do I blame the Chinese people?

No, I don’t. Because the Chinese people right now don’t have the power to affect that decision one way or another.

So, to sum. Kiss my ass. M’kay?

June 11, 2007 @ 3:58 pm | Comment

Lisa, once more, I love you.

Now, will someone put up a new post so I can put this disgusting thread to sleep? In the history of this blog, this thread ranks among the most repulsive.

June 11, 2007 @ 8:44 pm | Comment

It seems to be a free for all. So adding a little Tibetan mystique (while there is still some left) to the mix can only help:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070610/ap_on_re_as/china_human_rights

Let’s see how long it takes a CCP internet troll to make one of Kristof’s ‘but look what you did’ counters.

June 12, 2007 @ 12:01 am | Comment

Just in case any of you don’t know, Ultrasurf can be use to ultra surf your way around blocked websites.

June 12, 2007 @ 1:53 am | Comment

Right,

So we wanted to talk about whether USA has some kind of right to criticize China on human rights and stuff.

1. US citizens have this basic right, they have freedom to criticise whoever they want because they dont live in a terrorist brainwahs state that will torture you for thinking critically.

2. Everything is up for debate in America, yeah certain people will try to hide things or cover up but it is not a masive departmental imperative applied within every level of society to control peoples viewpoints. So Americans can still think, if they so wish to take that initiative. In China, the information is systematically blocked, skewed or outright fabricated, so there is no way a mainland Chinese can debate anything on a factual basis.

That is to say, whoever wants to be critical, and takes enough initiative to be educated and caring indeed has that right, thats a basic.

But Chinese do not have rights, they are fed falsehoods making them critically impotent, so even having any debate with them on something outside of the subject of breaking out of brainwahsing, is bound go go all over the place.

I think this Moral Highground is directly corelated to level of stupidity.

Whoever is less stupid is more welcome to be critical. Whoever sees things more clearly can be more helpful in such critical dicussions. Also those who can admit to their mistakes (not the CCP) is much more welcomed to criticise than someone who wastes a billion peoples money covering up its crimes.

June 12, 2007 @ 4:38 am | Comment

Absurd logic:

Americans have every right and know every peice of information.
Chinese know nothing and have all wrong information. So Chinese did not fix any problem.

According to Lisa, they fought but cannot fix their problem either, at least in the past 8 years. Maybe they can get it right in 2008, but who knows.

Does it make Americans more stupid according to your logic?

———————————————————
Democracy is good. CCP is bad on human right. I think that is right. But according to snow, mainland chinese really have no human right either way. Then why bother change regiem? You are just an another CCP, using democracy to shut everyone else up.

——————————————————–
Why do people need a moral highground to blame others?
Is that because you need to be pretty to mock the ugly, you need to be rich to make fun of the poor, you need to be big to bully the small kids?

June 12, 2007 @ 5:47 am | Comment

I’ll leave you with this thought (and then maybe we can close this thread).

AUTHOR: Benjamin Franklin (1706–90)
QUOTATION: “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

ATTRIBUTION: The response is attributed to BENJAMIN FRANKLIN—at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation—in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention.

That is the question facing America today, even if many Americans don’t realize it. Can we keep our Republic?

I don’t have the answer.

June 12, 2007 @ 6:44 am | Comment

I’d like to conclude my discussion with a question to SNOW:

Since when did CCP’s human rights abuse become the excuse for mistakes American government made?

Thanks for the discussion. Have a nice life.

June 12, 2007 @ 7:50 am | Comment

According to Lisa, they fought but cannot fix their problem either, at least in the past 8 years. Maybe they can get it right in 2008, but who knows. – fatbrick

According to what principle a democracy should be run by voters who are ‘knowledgeable’ about the issues in hand? Who determine who are knowledgeable and who need to be educated? Who is there to say opinions of world travellers like Lisa carry more weight than those of, say, a farmer in Idaho? Who is there to say how a democracy should be run anyway? These are my final thoughts for this thread.

June 12, 2007 @ 8:17 am | Comment

The problem is that in order for a democracy to work, its citizens have to be educated, engaged and involved. I don’t know what it’s going to take to fix those particular disconnects. I don’t know if they can even be fixed. – otherlisa

According to Lisa, they fought but cannot fix their problem either, at least in the past 8 years. Maybe they can get it right in 2008, but who knows. – fatbrick

June 12, 2007 @ 8:39 am | Comment

The thought crossed my mind today about the moral high/low ground…

I think the thing that defines one as being “high” is if one actually cares about people and doing the right thing…

I think anyone who has the thought that right is right and good is good and morality is a highground, then they be on it.

It’s tough when it comes to a whole country cause how do we know who in that country actually cares and has a good heart and intentions.

By the recent findings available, it looks like Bush doesnt have a moral highground cause it looks like he went to war for fun or something… That means he wasn’t moral in his policy. However, he fooled Americans right, so can you say Amercia is not moral because they vote Bush? No, cause they were fooled. (Of course this is just on that one scenario)

As for China, I know that the CCP is morally backward and thinks morality is superstition and should be purged from peoples thinking. They want people to loose their consciences and devote their thinking to supporting the party, no matter what evils the party commits.

The people of China, well its hard to say if they are to blame for not being good… Their country is turning to crap cause of the way the CCP has formed their thinking… But is being brainwashed and excuse, well maybe, but it still doesnt give them any moral highground, because although they might not be at fault, they do manifest not giving a crap about morals and human and natural dignity. (of course this is a generalization)

I think there are plenty of Chinese who have moral high ground and care, thats why the CCP is not succesful at totally brainwashing everyone. They try and try to block people from conscience and truth but they will not succeed.

Anyway, thats my understanding, moral high ground=genuine caring and respect for moralty itself.

Some like Lisa may think this is a granted, but check fatbrick etc, the CCP says morality is like some non chinese concept that doesnt apply to this period of socialist development or some garbage like that.

AC, are you putting words in my mouth? I never said that. In fact, it seems what CCP people are always doing is to harp forever on the US’s stuff to get away from facing the problems in China. Check Lisa, she’s fine about criticising Bush and whatnot, it’s normal, its healthy for the mind to not be forced to metally acccept and twist your mind to justify the governments stupidities. I don’t care who commits the stupidities, if the CCP was in Africa and not China, I would be talking about the opression in Africa. I think the CCP is the most vile dictator in history, just happens to be in China.

June 12, 2007 @ 12:08 pm | Comment

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21086

With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the quick collapse of the Soviet
Union, many embraced the idea that the world had become free, or was headed in
freedom’s direction. That one-quarter of the world population remained under
communist dictatorship in China seemed of less concern than the dissolution of
Soviet Russia. The Tiananmen Square Massacre in June of 1989 reminded the West
that communism was as deadly to those who opposed it in China as it had been in
the Soviet Union. But the West’s attention span is short and soon American
companies were happy to do business with China because our commitment to the
bottom line is stronger than it is to the moral line.

“The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression” by Stephane Courtois,
Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Panne, Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek and
Jean-Louis Margolin lists by country the number of people murdered under
communist regimes: 65 million (and counting) in China; 20 million in the Soviet
Union, 2 million (and counting) in North Korea, 2 million in Cambodia, 1.7
million in Africa, 1.5 million in Afghanistan, 1 million in Vietnam, 1 million
in communist Eastern Europe and 150,000 in Latin America.
In short, communism, an evil ideology unlike any the world has seen, is
responsible for the slaughter of more than 94 million human beings. It tops all
plagues, natural disasters, crime, and other political ideologies, probably
combined.

June 12, 2007 @ 12:13 pm | Comment

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21086

With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the quick collapse of the Soviet
Union, many embraced the idea that the world had become free, or was headed in
freedom�s direction. That one-quarter of the world population remained under
communist dictatorship in China seemed of less concern than the dissolution of
Soviet Russia. The Tiananmen Square Massacre in June of 1989 reminded the West
that communism was as deadly to those who opposed it in China as it had been in
the Soviet Union. But the West�s attention span is short and soon American
companies were happy to do business with China because our commitment to the
bottom line is stronger than it is to the moral line.

�The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression� by Stephane Courtois,
Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Panne, Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek and
Jean-Louis Margolin lists by country the number of people murdered under
communist regimes: 65 million (and counting) in China; 20 million in the Soviet
Union, 2 million (and counting) in North Korea, 2 million in Cambodia, 1.7
million in Africa, 1.5 million in Afghanistan, 1 million in Vietnam, 1 million
in communist Eastern Europe and 150,000 in Latin America.
In short, communism, an evil ideology unlike any the world has seen, is
responsible for the slaughter of more than 94 million human beings. It tops all
plagues, natural disasters, crime, and other political ideologies, probably
combined.

June 12, 2007 @ 12:37 pm | Comment

Why do people need a moral highground to blame others? Is that because you need to be pretty to mock the ugly, you need to be rich to make fun of the poor, you need to be big to bully the small kids?

Yes: this is the fundamental issue and why these debates even start. Think about it….

In the psychology of the western dualistic mindset: if I ain’t superior to this guy, then I’m inferior. I can’t be inferior- otherwise i’m worthless. therefore I must try to be superior….. It follows logically that he has an innate psychological need to make fun of the poor, so he has to invent ways in which he is rich.

If it isn’t slavery, then its colonialsim. If it isn’t colonialism, its economics. If it isn’t economics, its technological superiority. If it isn’t technology, then its the last ditch effort: moral highground.

The purpose of this board, the purpose of western insitutions (like the gov’t, like institutions of “higher learning”, etc.) is to reaffirm in one way or another this specious mode of reasoning, reaffirm a faltering sense of self worth in the post colonial world and the rise of China, reaffirm racism, violence, and hate.

And that’s why westerners are getting kicked out of Africa and why the Chinese are moving in. You tell them, Sachs tells them, yet they don’t believe it, they deny, they fight. Because in the dualistic mindset, that means the westerner is worthless. That goes against all the ideology and brainwashing and racist teachings that have been forced into his brain since birth (propaganda that would make the CCP look like foolish children, I might add). Hence, *itching and moaning on this board, the pointing fingers at the CCP, falun gong, talk of “Chinese repression”, immoral chinks, etc to endless, endless delight.

Seriously guys, not everyone thinks the way you do. I would advise you to learn from other cultures, but I know this is impossible- accepting advice from the “dirty, immoral Chinaman” isn’t possible in the system of logic in your brain.

Hence, more debates, more wars, more destruction……

June 12, 2007 @ 1:01 pm | Comment

Talking of a dualistic mindset, … Will you surely aren’t guilty of having a to complex picture of the world, and the West.

June 12, 2007 @ 6:17 pm | Comment

Can you be more specific about what your adice is Will?

Are you saying that you dont believe in morality?

June 13, 2007 @ 11:49 am | Comment

Richard,

I am cautiously optimistic that America will learn its lessons, though I would be even more so if there was a firmer repudiation of Bushism rather than just Bush amongst the Presidential candidates of both sides.

In respect to Iraq, most Democrats appear to treat it as an aberration rather than the result of a military-industrial complex established with the express purpose of fighting conventional wars. Too few prominent politicians have come out and say, “Well, maybe the whole concept of invading foreign countries and attempting to force them to adopt pro-Western governments ends up backfiring”. It’s still- “If I were in charge, I’d have done it better than Bush because he’s, well, an idiot”. Not that I disagree with that, but it isn’t really the most relevant point.

Anyway, the fact remains that in China even modest conversation about 6/4 or Tibet or Taiwan results in detention and pursed lips, not entirely in that order. American foreign policy blunders should not obscure the fact that China has its own massive issues with (apologies) human rights.

June 13, 2007 @ 4:03 pm | Comment

The basic premise around moral highground blah blah blah is the importance of tone when trying to communicate.

Objective and reasonable writings are mostly acceptable for most people that hear them, but no one wants paternalistic diatribes from a mellowed out serial killer. They just can’t take things like that seriously.

June 14, 2007 @ 1:59 pm | Comment

I heard this speech in a dream last night:

It was titled

”China, tear down this gate!”

and it went like this:

Longtime observers of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have said,
“The China question is open as long as the CCP rules China.” And as
long as the gate of freedom in China remains closed, as long as this
scar of a gate is permitted to stand, it is not the China question
alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all
humankind. Yet, today there is a message of hope inside China, a
message of triumph, where slowly people are trying to take matters
into their own hands and set up a democratic movement inside the
country that can finally replace the CCP. It can happen and it will
happen.

Leaders of democratic countries around the world understood the
practical importance of liberty — that just as truth can flourish
only when the journalist is given freedom of speech, so prosperity can
come about only when the farmer and businessman enjoy economic
freedom. China will learn that soon enough.

In fact, even now, in a limited way, the current leaders of China may
be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from
Beijing about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political
prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts and
Internet sites are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises
have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state
control.

Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the CCP? Or are they
token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to
strengthen the Chinese system without changing it? We welcome change
and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together,
that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of
world peace. There is one sign the Chinese communists can make that
would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of
freedom and peace.

President Hu Jintao, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for
China and Hong Kong and Macao and Taiwan, if you seek liberalization:
Come here to this gate of tyranny, and replace it with a gate of
freedom! Mr. Hu, replace this gate! Mr. Hu, let freedom ring!

I understand the fear of war and the pain of division that afflict the
leaders of China today — and I know that my country will use all its
efforts to help overcome these burdens. When freedom finally comes to
the Chinese people, they and their leaders will be surprised how
wonderful it feels.

Today represents a moment of hope. We in the West stand ready to
cooperate with China to promote true openness, to break down barriers
that separate people, to create a safe, freer world.
The totalitarian world produces backwardness because it does such
violence to the spirit, thwarting the human impulse to create, to
enjoy, to worship. The totalitarian world finds even symbols of love
and of worship an affront.

As one looks at China today, from across the sea, one can perhaps
catch a glimpse of some words crudely spray-painted upon the gate,
perhaps by a young Bejinger: “This gate will fall. Beliefs become
reality.” Yes, across China, this gate will fall. For it cannot
withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The gate cannot withstand
freedom.

(with a tip of the old hat to Ronald Reagan, of course….)

June 17, 2007 @ 3:29 pm | Comment