It’s that time of year again when China starts the selection process for its coveted “Confucius Peace Prize.” This time the list includes Bill Gates, former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and a host of Chinese candidates. Let’s hope it’s not a debacle like the first time when they chose someone who didn’t want the prize and then the next year gave it to Vladimir Putin. They have said it’s not intended to counter the Nobel Peace Prize, though it was conceived, or at least announced, shortly after Liu Xiaobo received the award in 2010. The purpose of the award is to celebrate “Confucius thinking” and harmony.
September 13, 2012
The Discussion: 39 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
1
By Xilin
Confucius is only going to be ever used as a T-shirt by the Chinese government.
Why can’t they just call it the Chinese Peace Prize?
September 13, 2012 @ 4:15 am | Comment
2
By Raj
Why can’t they just call it the Chinese Peace Prize?
Or the CCP Peace Prize.
September 13, 2012 @ 4:38 am | Comment
3
By Xilin
How about CCP Peaceful Harmony Prize?
September 13, 2012 @ 5:18 am | Comment
4
By Jason
How lovely. ALready there is three knee-jerk reaction of getting Confucius Peace Prize associated with CCP which was debunked a long time ago.
September 13, 2012 @ 7:48 am | Comment
5
By The Clock
A Suggestion for the Chinese Government To Set Up An International Prize called the “Mao Zedong Prize”
By Math
This is a way to counter the influence of the Nobel Prize. The Former USSR had such a prize, called Lenin Peace Prize. Many American civil right activsts who were persecuted and murdered by the FBI and CIA were awarded this prize, including Doctor Martin Luther King.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin_Peace_Prize
This Mao Zedong prize is a prize open to all people of the world, so it’s very possible that most of the time the winners of this prize will be foreigners, not Chinese. Just like the winners of the Nobel Prizes are mostly not Swedish.
Any one recognized to be innovatively and effectively using general theories of Mao Zedong thought, including the Theory of Contradictions, the Theory of Practice, etc, to contribute to human advancement will be considered for the prize. This prize’s money can be from a foundation established by the descedents of Mao Zedong, so it does not necessarily have to be associated with the government. The committee that reviews candidates can also be made up of any Chinese people or even international Maoists.
There will be several prizes:
Mao Zedong Revolutionary Prize: This is a prize awarded to people who achieved great things in the struggle against imperialism and hegemonism, and made great contribution to the economic and sovereign independence of his/her nation. For example, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Chairman Pulachangda of the rebel militant Communist Party of Nepal, Fidel Castro of Cuba, Kim Jung Il of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, and of course Osama bin Laden of Afghanistan.
Mao Zedong Medicine Prize: This is a prize awarded to people who strove for the general improvement of public health, including improvements in the treatment/elimination of certain contagious diseases in poor areas, reducing healthcare costs increasing health care quality and expanding health care access of lower-income individuals. Possible candidate can be Barack Obama of the United States of America, if he can make real significant progress in health care reform.
Mao Zedong Physics Prize: This is a prize awarded to people who utilize the philosophical aspects of Mao Zedong Thought in the study and research of physics, and make great achievements as a result. It’s not enough to simply be a great phycists, but one must be a great physicists who also integrates Mao Zedong’s philosophy in his research, because physics without using philosophy and politics is mechanical and incomplete. Possible candidate can be Professor He Zhama of the Chinese Academy of Sciences for applying Mao Zedong thought in the study of elementary particles.
Mao Zedong Litereture Prize: This is a prize awarded to artists who serve the people using art based on the principles as outlined by Mao Zedong in his Talk in the Yanan Forum, basically the idea that there’s no such thing as art’s for art’s sake, all art is subordinated to political needs. Possible candidates can be progressive artists in the West who produce music/painting/novel/dance/film/etc and to liberate the minds of the masses and instigate them to fight against imperialism, and capitalist exploitation.
Mao Zedong Humanitarian Prize: This is a prize awarded to people who are recognized to selflessly serve the masses and have utmost moral integrity. Note, it’s not enough to simply donate a lot of money to charity to be considered for this prize, because humanitarianism takes on many forms, and money is not necessarily the most important form. In fact, candidates for this prize do not have to have donated any money to any charity, small people can do good in big ways. Another important condition of this prize is that the humanitarian displayed by the candidate must not be motivated by religion. If a Christian or Catholic who spends his entire life doing charity work, he.she still will not be considered at all.
September 13, 2012 @ 8:22 am | Comment
6
By S.K. Cheung
To the dunce clock,
how utterly lame-ass can you get? A – math or some similar moron has posted it before; B – it wasn’t worth the pixels it was displayed with the first time, and certainly doesn’t warrant a rerun.
If math or whoever that moron was is truly dead, then you sure have a hard-on for dead guys since you don’t seem to tire of recycling his weird stuff.
September 13, 2012 @ 9:44 am | Comment
7
By Richard
This is definitely an antique Math post from two years ago, I think it’s more accurate to refer to The Clock as “The Recycler.”
September 13, 2012 @ 9:51 am | Comment
8
By Gil (AKA FOARP)
I’m surprised they didn’t nominate Kong Qing Dong – at least they would be fairly sure that he would collect the ‘prize’.
September 13, 2012 @ 1:38 pm | Comment
9
By Xilin
Clock,
They tried to start a Mao Zedong prize a couple of years ago but it didn’t get off the drawing board. The problem was that too many people qualified for the awards – I seem to remember something about them only having to be right 60% of the time.
September 13, 2012 @ 3:34 pm | Comment
10
By FOARP
Actually, scratch that – I’m surprised they didn’t nominate Xi Jinping. Maybe, given a cash incentive, the guy would turn up to receive the prize?
I note that we are yet to see any of this blog’s well known trolls dig up an incident in which a (insert ‘western’ country here) politician has dropped off the radar for so long. Could that be because that hasn’t ever happened?
September 13, 2012 @ 4:02 pm | Comment
11
By narsfweasels
Mao Zedong Agriculture Prize For Most Peasants Starved To Death Through Arrogance.
Mao Zedong Sociology Award For Beating People Who We Don’t Like The Look Of.
Mao Zedong Political Science Prize For Promising Communism And Then Living Like An Emperor.
Mao Zedong Marksmanship Award For Most Children Shot In The Back While Running Away.
September 13, 2012 @ 4:24 pm | Comment
12
By Ricepaddy
Mao Zedong Humanitarian Prize.
Great stuff. Pure Math. I love it. It might be an oldie, but it’s a goldie.
September 13, 2012 @ 8:00 pm | Comment
13
By justrecently
I solemnly nominate Shaun Rein and Lisa Carducci.
September 14, 2012 @ 12:10 am | Comment
14
By slim
The only man worthy of a Mao Zedong Humanitarian Prize at the moment would be Bashar al-Assad, who is only slightly less hard to track than Xi Jinping.
September 14, 2012 @ 1:55 am | Comment
15
By Xilin
This year’s Mao Zedong Agricultural Science Prize is posthumously awarded to Trofim Lysenko.
September 14, 2012 @ 2:33 am | Comment
16
By King Tubby
Lisa Carducci. Yikes…..goodness personified. Makes Mother Theresa looks like a whore in comparison.
September 14, 2012 @ 5:19 am | Comment
17
By MAC
The best part of the article:
“Give me $1 million, I will tear it up, I will burn the money. But I will never say something I don’t think personally.
“I may make mistakes, but my mistakes are sincere,” says Carducci, who has donated blood 108 times, including 22 times in China.
If you can’t find a way to make a fact relevant, leave it out.
September 14, 2012 @ 6:33 am | Comment
18
By Xilin
“Lisa is an outstanding staff member, she would never leave any questions unanswered. She often called the African embassies to check facts,” Yu recalls.
September 14, 2012 @ 7:05 am | Comment
19
By S.K. Cheung
Good for Ms. Carducci. For every Carducci, I wonder how many PRC citizens have happily found their “home” elsewhere.
September 14, 2012 @ 9:39 am | Comment
20
By The Clock
Saw some pics of protestors outside the Japanese embassy in Beijing. All I can say is:
Too weak, too few.
If they are real men, make another Christopher Stevens in the Japanese ambassador
September 14, 2012 @ 10:16 am | Comment
21
By S.K. Cheung
You know what, Clock, why don’t you haul your sorry ass over there yourself. Time to walk the walk, instead of the pussy-assed talk that seems to be the extent of your capabilities.
September 14, 2012 @ 12:36 pm | Comment
22
By Gil (AKA FOARP)
So here’s The Clock calling for the death of the Japanese ambassador, a person who is totally innocent. Odd that the Clock hasn’t even bothered to find out the name of the person whose life he would like to see extinguished simply to satisfy his own hatred. This is the mentality of the terrorist.
His name is Uichiro Niwa, he’s 72 years old, from Nagoya, and comes from a commercial background. He’s due to be replaced soon, although the person picked to replace him, Shinichi Nishimiya, had a heart attack yesterday and may not come.
The Clock’s comment reminds me the time Charles Liu approvingly re-posted comments calling for the death of Liu Xiaobo – you suddenly see clearly the mind-set of behind the day-in day-out fanaticism of the fenqing. One that could celebrate the spilling of innocent blood as if it were the letting off of a firework.
September 14, 2012 @ 12:48 pm | Comment
23
By Gil (AKA FOARP)
@SKC – Of course he’s not going to do that. Just like nearly all the fenqing who beset this blog, he prefers the way things are in the US/Canada/Australia or wherever and is likely thousands of miles from Beijing. Am I right or am I right?
September 14, 2012 @ 12:52 pm | Comment
24
By Richard
New York, NY.
September 14, 2012 @ 1:09 pm | Comment
25
By S.K. Cheung
To FOARP #22,
well said. I can handle stupidity…everyone has their station; I can handle belligerence, since I can give as good as i get. And lord knows blogs like this one attract more than their fair share of belligerent idiots like Clock. But what really grabs my goat are the morons who randomly call for senseless killing as though such tough talk can mask their testicular inadequacies. Just another little dip-shit sitting in the Big Apple. Wonder if he’s the type to “celebrate” 9/11.
These pondscum remind me of a line from an old movie called Point Break, which I’ll alter to suit the special breed of FQ that hangs around here: they’re “young, dumb, and full of cum”, and clearly haven’t had the opportunity to shoot their wad off in a while.
September 14, 2012 @ 1:34 pm | Comment
26
By FOARP
@The Clock – Here’s the address of the Japanese consulate in New York:
Now go and show us what a man you are.
September 14, 2012 @ 4:44 pm | Comment
27
By FOARP
. . . or rather, don’t: if you do try to pull something you’d probably just get yourself arrested, and we wouldn’t want that, would we?
September 14, 2012 @ 5:39 pm | Comment
28
By t_co
Actually, if the Clock did do something, you might be liable for inciting an act of violence/giving material aid (the address of the consulate) to a terrorist.
September 14, 2012 @ 7:37 pm | Comment
29
By justrecently
I think there’s always a point where one should stop making fun of pathetic milksops, Foarp. If one wants to enter an argument with them, rather than ignoring them (the better choice in most cases, imo), one should still argue seriously. If that doesn’t work either, it’s probably not worth your time.
September 14, 2012 @ 7:43 pm | Comment
30
By justrecently
t_co, you chose the words might be liable, but even that would be unlikely to happen. Laws may differ from country to country, but in all cases I know, incitement depends on the intention to incite crimes. All the same, I’d generally stay away from exchanging arguments with people like bytheclock or “mongol warrior”, because such “discussions” would only bring the schoolkid out in me.
Btw, your comment remind me of an elementary schoolyard, too, t_co. Like “oh, oh! you are in serious trouble! What will the headteacher say!”
September 14, 2012 @ 8:15 pm | Comment
31
By FOARP
@t_co – Happily, such crimes require proof of intent to incite. Pretty obviously, I don’t actually want Clock to try to murder Japanese consular officials. Instead I want him to look like a fool by pointing out that he’s happy to urge others to commit heinous crimes against innocent people and impugn the manhood of those that don’t, but unwilling to measure himself by the same moronic standard.
And yes, it is rather like shooting fish in a barrel.
September 14, 2012 @ 10:26 pm | Comment
32
By tennessee euler
just curious, who is He Zhama? (google returned no results)
I need to start to use Mao Zedong thought in mathematics too. My next paper will read “I don’t need to prove what I say, you need to prove it wrong!”.
September 15, 2012 @ 3:13 am | Comment
33
By King Tubby
It was a sort of Old Testament Cain and Abel thing. The Clock murdered Math in a fit of rage and then buried him in the root cellar when their mum went out shopping.
Since taking on Math’s online identity, he has been consumed by guilt and madness. His mum also threw him out of the house for his transgression.
A prime example of a lite Faulkner Gothic tale with Sino characteristics.
September 15, 2012 @ 5:09 am | Comment
34
By Jason
@The Clock’s comment reminds me the time Charles Liu approvingly re-posted comments calling for the death of Liu Xiaobo – you suddenly see clearly the mind-set of behind the day-in day-out fanaticism of the fenqing. One that could celebrate the spilling of innocent blood as if it were the letting off of a firework.
This comment seems to blame only the Chinese nationalist (a la random blog commentators) for the audacity to speak of killing individual (s) that they don’t like.
What about the various journalists, politicians, supreme court judge and pundits wanting to assassinate Julian Assange?: http://www.peopleokwithmurderingassange.com/the_list.html And don’t rule out the various commenators on comment sections like Yahoo! News wanting blood as well.
There’s crazy people everywhere not just the fenqings.
September 15, 2012 @ 7:34 am | Comment
35
By Richard
Good comparison, Jason. All those names are hard-core right wing sickos. I have always, always seen them as shockingly similar to the fenqing in their closed-mindedness, nastiness and propensity to violence. I’m delighted you made the comparison.
September 15, 2012 @ 12:43 pm | Comment
36
By Gil (AKA FOARP)
Right. What’s your point again? Unless you’re actually saying that I should either criticise everyone worthy of criticising in the entire world or criticise no-one I really don’t see what you’re trying to say. Personally, I like to simply stick to criticising what comes to hand, and what came to hand yesterday was a man who wanted to pose as a patriot by urging the killing of an innocent people. The fact that so many of your fellow fenqing have no problem with this kind of talk (few objected to Charles Liu’s post) when it was right in front of them should be on their consciences.
September 15, 2012 @ 1:38 pm | Comment
37
By S.K. Cheung
FQ = Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and various Fox News contributors. That’s beautiful stuff. No argument from me on that one.
There are indeed some crazy people everywhere. But that doesn’t make FQ any less crazy, nor does it justify or excuse their craziness.
September 15, 2012 @ 1:56 pm | Comment
38
By Xilin
Jason, by equating fenqing with bigots I think you basically hit the nail on the head.
September 15, 2012 @ 3:34 pm | Comment
39
By justrecently
May I be frank? I don’t find people trustworthy who react to specific criticism by saying that “others do it too”.
September 15, 2012 @ 4:48 pm | Comment