Maybe you're the indoctrinated one, and you only believe in Socialism because you avoid reading anything that disagrees with your preconceptions. Certainly what I've read about planned economies and dictatorships of the proletariat makes me think they just end up making most people poor, unfree and unhappy while a spoiled, vicious elite wields absolute power. If someone seriously advocated them to me, I'd argue with them just like people argue with you. The GP doesn't seem to favor Socialism or Capitalism or whatever from his post. Why the digression anyway? Pointing out "self-indoctrination" that exists in many so called "free" countries doesn't mean that he wanted to avoid reading things he disagrees with. Quite the contrary I think.
And incidentally the fact that you're able in America to read only progressive media that agrees with you while other people are free to watch only Fox news that agrees with them tells me that the government is not indoctrinating people, it's more that they indoctrinate themselves. Which is fair enough of course, they will all end up being wrong politically but in different ways. Exactly. But if everybody gets indoctrinated one way or the other, isn't that a problem? If that's not a problem, why is government indoctrination worse than "self-indoctrination"? If it is, why not try to tackle the problem instead of saying "oh well that's the way it is"?
The only thing close to an attack on USA is Pearl harbour if I am not mistaken, unless you also count the Independence War. Pearl harbour is a minor skirmish compared with the scale of things in WWII... And I don't really recall Canada, Austrailia, New Zealand being subject to any invasion (besides from the perspective of the indigenous population)...:-/ (My knowledge of world history isn't good though, correct me if I'm wrong)
My argument was not really a justification for xenophobia. It was trying to explain the meaning and intention of the original poster.
The reason why people of that time were engineering graduates is because that's what the country needed. What do you expect? A country which has been through a period of warlordism, a civil war, an all out Japanese invasion, and then immediately the resumption of the civil war, then economic disasters, etc. You think the people needs lawyers (which many politicians in western countries are) instead of engineers to build their country?
The Chinese government must be flattered. This craze is actually an example of how the Chinese government *can't* control the people. The craze doesn't gain them anything.
The difference is that, by saying "you are bad" it's more of a personal insult. "You're doing something bad" can be a way to point out something to be fixed. "You are bad" leads to "I don't like you", and easily degenerates into hate speech.
And if you think insulting people is the best way to solve things, don't be surprised that some angry people in China thinks that hacking CNN is the best way to vent their anger.
All you've basically said is, "I am China; leave me alone so I can beat my wife in peace. I'm too big for you to do anything about it, so fuck off." Those would hardly be the words of a good man, would they? Or does that not matter to you?
It just means that if I am tried in court for domestic violence, I don't want to be convicted by a judge who beats his wife... and the west doesn't even have that power to "convict" China (well, fact), so all it can do is condemn China morally -- and the objection is that morally many countries don't have that moral authority to do it because they are just as bad themselves. I don't think it's an excuse, but it's a valid argument to tell the other party to STFU. I mean, sometimes the criticism isn't even constructive (i.e. not "I'm trying to help you) but merely "I'm going to bash you because that makes me feel more moral". In this case the answer of "no, your a hypocrite" is extra valid.
Constructive criticisms with real suggestions on how to improve things in China are scarce. The attitude is usually "oh yeah? we'll boycott you if you don't heed our hypocritical advice!". It's hard not to feel victimized when you're at the receiving end.
There is the right thing to do, and there is the right thing to say. If one is really genuinely concerned with the situation in China/Tibet there are better ways to get the message across and to improve things than to scream "Free Tibet" and assault torch bearers.
The bottom line is this: there is this thing called diplomacy. It doesn't hurt (and makes people look less stupid). You either give criticisms in a sound, diplomatic manner (assaulting torch bearers is NOT), or you don't. In the latter case, that means forcing the argument through by force (economic, political, military or whatever). Since there are people who don't do it the diplomatic way, the response that "you can't force us to do it, we're too strong for you" is understandable (to me at least), since the underlying attitude was "we'll force you to do it".
I'd also like to address your repeated use of the phrase, "The West:" You've created a fiction, a big bad horrible monster that you call The West, and you act like it wants to conquer China.
Uh, that's not too far from the truth. That was what almost happened one hundred years ago. That's a short time in Chinese history... It might be a fiction now since the Chinese military has gone to the point that no country in its right mind would want to even consider that for a moment, but the mistrust somehow persists.
It's funny, because once upon a time the Bush administration cooked up a fictional monster too: They called it Al-Qaeda, and they said that it was big, scary, and intent on destroying the US (and blowing up Mom and Apple Pie).
They used this fiction to scare Americans into supporting whatever they did without thinkig about whether it was right or wrong.
But you know what? Al-Qaeda doesn't exist. There are a lot of angry Muslims out there pissed off at the US, but there's no big shadow organization led by Osama. The man had to hire extras in the videos that show him walking with men carrying AKs!!
There are idiots in every country. The terrorist fear wouldn't be so easily instilled if the Al-Qaeda didn't strike down the WTC. There are red blooded, (semi-)brainwashed people in China, and please don't make it easier for the "anti-west" outrage to turn into something really bad (I don't mean "Iraq-level" bad, stupid boycotts [by Chinese on foreign goods] are bad enough). I know asking this doesn't seem to be a "good" solution, but let's face it, we can't kill every idiot in our countries, and sometimes the clear, rational thought somehow escapes them.
Giving the Chinese (government) the middle finger may well be within your rights, perhaps even within reason, but it won't make things better. I really don't intend this as a threat, I really hope these things won't happen, but it might, and does nobody good. Ther
Did you even read the GP's comment? He was saying, that the sense of "nationalism" is not merely due to CCP's influence, but the bias of western media itself.
And by preferring stories that portray a negative image of the Chinese government, you are probably a part of the cause too.
Odds are that what China is doing to Tibet, they'll eventually being doing to us. China is NOT going to invade/occupy America and is NOT going to make America a province.
Before you say "but changing a term isn't as bad as a DDOS!", remember that organizing a DDOS only takes a few dedicated (cr|h)ackers and a big botnet. It doesn't mean that the entire Chinese nation is behind this effort.
These days most Chinese people are probably on the "freedom fries" level of hostility. Childish, stupid, lame... but don't think that USA is really a lot better.
So why the hell have I yet to meet a Chinese person critical of their own government?
I think the problem is, firstly, that most of the Chinese that actually gets out of the country are mostly the privileged ones. When China adopted a more capitalist policy, it created a bunch of really rich people (yes), and a whole lot of relatively poor people. Usually the richer guys don't have as much to complain about.
The second factor might be that the situation in China is actually improving in a really fast pace. Most visible economically, but the whole country is modernizing fast in many aspects. And people are seeing this, so if things are getting better, why complain?
And then I've heard about many protests and resentments that happen inside China, but mostly on economic and social issues. Land disputes, corrupt local officials, rigged village elections (yes, they exist in China), injustices in the legal system, etc. That stuff happens, but the Chinese you met probably never was on the receiving end, and might not know or bother.
In fact, it's worse than that. Even the many Chinese-Americans I've known -- people who either were born in the US or moved here as small children, people who you would think would not have been bombarded by the Chinese state media -- tend to be Chinese nationalists, supportive of whatever the country does.
It's not only the state media, it's the culture. The Chinese culture prides itself as having a long and noble civilization and tradition. The culture and civilization is also strongly linked to the nation, since China had in its history mostly been a single country/nation.
Sometimes it's even the western media. I mean, some criticisms against Chinese policies might be legitimate, or even most of them (I dunno, I don't live in a "western" country), but I take it that there's a lot of misunderstanding from westerners, and it only takes a number of completely groundless accusations (by idiots maybe?) that an "automatic anti-idiot stance" is taken every time the stereotyped ignorant westerner criticizes Chinese policy.
And sometimes you might be talking to your fellow Chinese friends by assuming Western values. The Chinese have a long history of effective government, administration and politics. The Chinese controlled a huge empire *centrally*, and even now I don't think any government in the world (save for India perhaps, and to some extent the USA, because the USA comprises different states, and each governs itself to some extent) is doing this job as efficiently ("efficient" doesn't mean it's "good") as they are. Many Asian and African countries have adopted a western style of government because they never had a strong and efficient government in their history, but the Chinese way of administration has always been... different, and it worked OK.
That's why some, if not many, Chinese are reluctant to accept by default the western liberal style of government and politics. I know it's not exactly an "excuse" to modernize things and allow more freedoms and rights (there are other more valid excuses;-p), but if you speak to a Chinese and say "your government is censoring your Internet!! don't you even care?!", chances are that #1 he doesn't understand the importance of access to free media, and #2 he really doesn't care, because in the "Chinese way" of governance these things were not even half important.
1 - "You're just racist." Way to use an ad-hominem argument there. Even if I am, that doesn't mean I'm wrong.
I *hate* this word when used in this context. I don't think it's "racist" than "idealist" (I'm making up a new meaning of this word, namely "discriminating people with different ideals"). How many people automatically think communism is bad? How many people think automatically "if your government is not democratic, it must be really evil" (and vice versa)? How many people believe that there's only ONE way to govern a country -- by those set of Western democra
But did they bring Opium to China? No. Are they the reason Opium is a problem now? No. Does this matter? All the "original poster" said was that the British (etc.) forced the Chinese to buy opium against the Chinese government's (legitimate) wishes, and what a prick the western powers were back then. You might say it's a distorted view, but these historical incidents explain why the Chinese had this kind of xenophobia, and why they are wary of western powers who want to "open up" China.
( Blaming Afghanistan for the poppies is like, (duh) blaming China for the crap exported.;-p )
They are? When the trade deficit comes up I generally get mad at Bush and Walmart. China is just selling to who will buy.
If so, they are idiots. But I've really not read the same conclusion you have. Seems like somebody made these connections, and I'll note that this comment has fueled much of the recent outrage within Chinese circles.
Not all developing nations were engaged in patent and copyright violation on a national scale, nor putting poison in pet food to make it sell for more. If I remember correctly America was _the_ land rampant with "pirated" books, before their domestic IP industry was built up. Don't know whether they sold poisoned pet food though. A lazy google search: http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/pva/pva74.html (see 2nd paragraph)
There's an unstated assumption that, whenever people are free to make their own opinions and voice them they will complain. A 100% favorability rating is proof of foul play. Considering the number of times I've heard Chinese over here (there are a lot of them on student visas) say "whatever the government does is for the best", while simulantiously spouting the party line of "opressed China", who believe without consideration that claim by the Chinese media that US media lies and we Americans believe it without consideration, the more I see "indoctorination". I see where you come from. I think I agree generally with your points, but I'd like to point out a few things (which may be wrong). "Whatever the government does is for the best" is sometimes a response to the allegations that the government is somehow evil and takes action due to malice and twisted motives. Most Chinese see/perceive(/hope?) their government as a benevolent dictator (at least those at the top).
As for the "oppressed China" thing, I don't think it's exactly the "media", although they have played a role. Just look on slashdot, and tell me how many discussions vaguely related to China became a flamefest of China's human rights etc., or how many of those comments had to insert a snide remark or two, even if the topic was not related at all. And a lot of misinformation, twisted facts, and flawed logic float around (and of course with some good, reasoned arguments too). I do feel that there has been some kind of "special treatment" -- when the topic India shows up nobody speaks about the poverty nor the discrimination to women there, when topic of UK comes up nobody screams "free Northern Ireland".
I personally don't think it's "oppression", it's more like a kind of engineered misunderstanding and inciting unnecessary sentiments on both sides.
To me, a group has individuals when they disagree. I rarely see two (pro-China) Chinese people disagree. I don't know how much of a factor this is, but it's generally considered by Chinese to be shameful to argue in front of "outsiders" on "domestic" matters. I do agree with your conclusion somewhat, though.
And in my experience, the only people I've heard say that the west hates China were the Chinese. There are enough people who hates the Chinese Communist party that makes it a half-truth. Interestingly there are probably even more CCP "haters" in my community (Hong Kong)... Well on a more serious note, the "original poster" acknowledges that the west doesn't hate China.
Out of curiosity, how do you (and fellow countrymen) reconcile these facts that your country was founded in these circumstances with national pride/patriotism and conscience?
Not all strong things are threats. They can be powerful allies too.
The major source of opiates, the drug of choice for centuries in China, is your neighbor Afghanistan. Don't blame us for that.
Others have mentioned but I'll repeat out of completeness: Opium War.
No we don't. That's why there aren't petitions to China to change what they charge. We blame our trade agreements with you for costing us jobs and try to change US consumers and leaders.
But the media is quoting the trade deficits with China as a means to inflame the sentiments of Americans against China.
As someone from a country that provided troops and supplies to you during WWII, has never invaded you (minus perhaps a few miles near the Korean border after you attacked us), and that is largely responsible for the rapid growth in your economy thorough our trade (even gave you favored nation status), I'm really confused who you are talking about.
I don't think your economy was related to the free Tibet movement. Was it an invasion? Seems you have a red-herring there.
"When we put the broken pieces back together again" means not having the different regions being controlled byexternalpowers.
That's fair. You hated us for being a republic.
When did that happen? AFAIK people are still condemning China to be "communists" (they're not now), while nobody condemns America for being "republicans".
I'm looking for the "China sucks because it's capatalist" group but I can't find that. You are lying.
I always see members of the "China sucks because earning our money, and now we owe them money (which is typical capitalist behavior)" group.
I'll side with you here. I think the one-clid policy was a good idea and it's wrong for those who criticize it to do so without offering solutions.
Fair enough. I think they could have done it with a bit more tact though...
Both simple lies. Our debts are the fault of our government and our buying. Few people are saying differently.
Look around. I don't think people are directly blaming China for the debts, but many are arguing along these lines:
1. We (Americans) owe China money. 2. ??? 3. They're EVIL!!! (See what CNN has to say. [I'll note that this is one of the things that built up the flame])
You are warming the globe, your toothpaste tends to kill people. They are valid complaints.
Valid complaints, but America is dumping more CO2 per capita. A developing nation has to go through a few steps before being able to have the resources and technology to reduce its damaging effect on the environment. Every developed nation went through these stages. China is simply asking for their fair chance. I think that's a valid appeal too.
Are we committing genocide in Iraq? Is putting $80,000,000,000 per year into a country with no real return and loosing thousands of American lives "exploiting"?
Getting a bad deal out of a unjustified war doesn't mean America isn't committing those things in Iraq. It's just that somehow your country has decided to go into a lose-lose situation.
Don't get me wrong, I oppose the invasion of Iraq, but "exploting genocide" would have been continuing to support Saddam, much like China and Sudan.
Duh. Like America had no part to play with Saddam's rise to power.
The surprising thing is that Westerners somehow magically "know" what the Tibetans are thinking and feel dignified to speak on their behalf, even though unbiased information is scarce.
You don't even have to imagine. Just look at the freedom fries discussion above. What the French did was simply saying "there are no WMD and so we're not getting ourselves into this mess" (which was true), and the Americans jumped upon them.
It took America 4 frig'n years to realize the obvious. And some of them still hate the French for pointing out their mistake.
Can't say about Tibet independence because it has gotten hypersensitive and very few hard facts except from politicized media from both sides.
About Taiwan independence... well not everybody there supports it. Most people just want to get along with their lives instead of debating over what their passport says or by what name they are called.
As for China being expansionist... how about the UK and France who still has colonies lying around, the USA who installs puppet regimes in Middle East and invades them when they get out of control... and in the whole history of China you can only quote Tibet as evidence of "expansionist" behavior?
In addition, China is Totalitarian. Had they been a democracy, then the leaders would have a difficult time screwing over America Says democratic America who had no problems screwing up everybody around the world.
As it stands, they just tell the citizens that 1 trillion of AMERICAN money was wasted, not Chinese money Wtf are you talking about?
Iraq had invaded two countries in the last 25 years. Iraq had invested heavily in a nuclear weapons program. Iraq donated considerable funds to terrorist groups USA has invaded countless countries in the last 25 years. USA has the most extensive nuclear weapons program. USA funds many terrorist groups....
What's the difference? That the allegations against the USA are actually TRUE? (instead of some fabricated shit created by the US media-propaganda)
American invaded Iraq who posed no real threat. Where's the "difference" you speak of? If a "threat" to the rest of the world is a reason for invasion, the USA should be the first country to be exterminated from the face of the planet.
We all are flawed. But there are things you cannot sanction. We'd like to see Bush and his warmongers sanctioned for their war crimes.
> When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.
Not many US policymakers consider China to be a threat, though China is the closest thing to a threat the US has. Consider it a badge of honor, only two other nations in history ever really were.
Let's start the discussion with a wholehearted "fuck you". Consider it as a badge of honor, since I don't think I've been using this level of profanity since my first comment on slashdot.
> When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.
But forcing Tibet's doors is just fine. I'll freely admit that the US has committed many, many wrongs. Acting like China hasn't does not paint a healthy picture of you.
Nobody said USA "forced them open with drugs and guns". When this began to happen USA didn't even exist. Heh. Or you'd think the USA is the only Western country? Get a perspective. Take a look at the Opium Wars.
> When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!
It was an invasion. No matter how atrociously Tibet's previous leadership treated its people, it's still an invasion. In truth, it would not concern us so much if you did not try to suppress or co-opt belief systems.
The Tibet occupation/invasion was not a religious crusade of any kind. Unlike you Americans and those bible-loving-fundamentalists, the Chinese are at least tolerant with religion as long as they don't involve politics.
> When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.
Ah, yes, I suppose we should have let Japan run free and build the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. How many Nankings do you want?
In 1900, Your troops invaded Beijing, robbed and pillaged the city. The Japanese were resisted in China by the Communists and KMT.
> When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products.
Lead and arsenic in products is, by Western standards, inferior. Your point?
The point is, you don't bother to crank out the money to buy higher quality products. If you pay crap, you get crap. Simple.
> When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.
America has long appreciated peace. Peace is good for business. These past few decades have been an odd spot.
Lol? Tell me which in decade America hasn't been at war invading others. Look at Chinese history in the past 300 (that's BEFORE your country was even established) years and the ONLY instance of so called "invasion" is Tibet?
Yeah right America has long appreciated peace.
> When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts.
Who's blaming -you-? You could always not lend, but that's not an option for you. When two people place themselves into a mutual trap the fault is not the sole fault of one or the other.
Trap????? Tell that to the Bank of America who should to be blamed for lending money to all these people and holding them mortgage. Duh money lending should be criminalized! I mean, a bankrupt person should be able to file suit on his creditors because they entrapped him into borrowing money from them!!
> When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."
No, we said 'the planet is starving', and an American man showed you how to feed a billion people.
Who is this great American man? You?
> When we are NOW silent no more, you say we are merely "Brainwashed".
You have your points, and we have ours. If you are unwilling to look at another side of an issue, you are.
You mean, since you are all knowing, always correct, never wrong, you've investigated all sides of the issues, that if we don't agree with you
WEll maybe we are hypocrites, but I can still write an invective against my government and not get trundled off to prison where I'm to be re-educated.
Better a hypocrite than a slave to tyrants. It's not like the Chinese people CHOSE to be born in China, CHOSE to live in a place with restricted speech and you're simply being egoistic over the fact that you were born in a (supposedly) better place.
If you were born in China, would you risk your freedom (and maybe life) to criticize the government? How disgusting it is for you to insult the billions of Chinese in China who are too struggling to make a living to be concerned about Bush-chimp jokes and to trivialize all those who have made sacrifices towards a freer and more open China.
Don't think that simply because you're saying the same things as the Tienanmen student protesters you're as righteous as they are. Show me how you've voiced your concerns despite government oppression, show me what you've done to ensure the civil and political rights in your country. Then talk about mocking slaves to tyrants.
No, you're simply making arrogant, asshole comments on slashdot simply because you can.
You might as well have said "Better be a rich asshole than starve on the streets".
Actually 200 years is a really short time in Chinese history (accurate written history dates to almost 3000 years ago). Of course Americans think that's an eternity since their history merely spans around 300...
Slashdot Mirror
The only thing close to an attack on USA is Pearl harbour if I am not mistaken, unless you also count the Independence War. Pearl harbour is a minor skirmish compared with the scale of things in WWII... And I don't really recall Canada, Austrailia, New Zealand being subject to any invasion (besides from the perspective of the indigenous population)... :-/ (My knowledge of world history isn't good though, correct me if I'm wrong)
My argument was not really a justification for xenophobia. It was trying to explain the meaning and intention of the original poster.
Are you serious?!
The reason why people of that time were engineering graduates is because that's what the country needed. What do you expect? A country which has been through a period of warlordism, a civil war, an all out Japanese invasion, and then immediately the resumption of the civil war, then economic disasters, etc. You think the people needs lawyers (which many politicians in western countries are) instead of engineers to build their country?
> but in China the government controls the people
The Chinese government must be flattered. This craze is actually an example of how the Chinese government *can't* control the people. The craze doesn't gain them anything.
The difference is that, by saying "you are bad" it's more of a personal insult. "You're doing something bad" can be a way to point out something to be fixed. "You are bad" leads to "I don't like you", and easily degenerates into hate speech.
And if you think insulting people is the best way to solve things, don't be surprised that some angry people in China thinks that hacking CNN is the best way to vent their anger.
All you've basically said is, "I am China; leave me alone so I can beat my wife in peace. I'm too big for you to do anything about it, so fuck off." Those would hardly be the words of a good man, would they? Or does that not matter to you?
It just means that if I am tried in court for domestic violence, I don't want to be convicted by a judge who beats his wife... and the west doesn't even have that power to "convict" China (well, fact), so all it can do is condemn China morally -- and the objection is that morally many countries don't have that moral authority to do it because they are just as bad themselves. I don't think it's an excuse, but it's a valid argument to tell the other party to STFU. I mean, sometimes the criticism isn't even constructive (i.e. not "I'm trying to help you) but merely "I'm going to bash you because that makes me feel more moral". In this case the answer of "no, your a hypocrite" is extra valid.
Constructive criticisms with real suggestions on how to improve things in China are scarce. The attitude is usually "oh yeah? we'll boycott you if you don't heed our hypocritical advice!". It's hard not to feel victimized when you're at the receiving end.
There is the right thing to do, and there is the right thing to say. If one is really genuinely concerned with the situation in China/Tibet there are better ways to get the message across and to improve things than to scream "Free Tibet" and assault torch bearers.
The bottom line is this: there is this thing called diplomacy. It doesn't hurt (and makes people look less stupid). You either give criticisms in a sound, diplomatic manner (assaulting torch bearers is NOT), or you don't. In the latter case, that means forcing the argument through by force (economic, political, military or whatever). Since there are people who don't do it the diplomatic way, the response that "you can't force us to do it, we're too strong for you" is understandable (to me at least), since the underlying attitude was "we'll force you to do it".
I'd also like to address your repeated use of the phrase, "The West:" You've created a fiction, a big bad horrible monster that you call The West, and you act like it wants to conquer China.
Uh, that's not too far from the truth. That was what almost happened one hundred years ago. That's a short time in Chinese history... It might be a fiction now since the Chinese military has gone to the point that no country in its right mind would want to even consider that for a moment, but the mistrust somehow persists.
It's funny, because once upon a time the Bush administration cooked up a fictional monster too: They called it Al-Qaeda, and they said that it was big, scary, and intent on destroying the US (and blowing up Mom and Apple Pie).
They used this fiction to scare Americans into supporting whatever they did without thinkig about whether it was right or wrong.
But you know what? Al-Qaeda doesn't exist. There are a lot of angry Muslims out there pissed off at the US, but there's no big shadow organization led by Osama. The man had to hire extras in the videos that show him walking with men carrying AKs!!
There are idiots in every country. The terrorist fear wouldn't be so easily instilled if the Al-Qaeda didn't strike down the WTC. There are red blooded, (semi-)brainwashed people in China, and please don't make it easier for the "anti-west" outrage to turn into something really bad (I don't mean "Iraq-level" bad, stupid boycotts [by Chinese on foreign goods] are bad enough). I know asking this doesn't seem to be a "good" solution, but let's face it, we can't kill every idiot in our countries, and sometimes the clear, rational thought somehow escapes them.
Giving the Chinese (government) the middle finger may well be within your rights, perhaps even within reason, but it won't make things better. I really don't intend this as a threat, I really hope these things won't happen, but it might, and does nobody good. Ther
Did you even read the GP's comment? He was saying, that the sense of "nationalism" is not merely due to CCP's influence, but the bias of western media itself.
And by preferring stories that portray a negative image of the Chinese government, you are probably a part of the cause too.
Before you say "but changing a term isn't as bad as a DDOS!", remember that organizing a DDOS only takes a few dedicated (cr|h)ackers and a big botnet. It doesn't mean that the entire Chinese nation is behind this effort.
These days most Chinese people are probably on the "freedom fries" level of hostility. Childish, stupid, lame... but don't think that USA is really a lot better.
So why the hell have I yet to meet a Chinese person critical of their own government?
I think the problem is, firstly, that most of the Chinese that actually gets out of the country are mostly the privileged ones. When China adopted a more capitalist policy, it created a bunch of really rich people (yes), and a whole lot of relatively poor people. Usually the richer guys don't have as much to complain about.
The second factor might be that the situation in China is actually improving in a really fast pace. Most visible economically, but the whole country is modernizing fast in many aspects. And people are seeing this, so if things are getting better, why complain?
And then I've heard about many protests and resentments that happen inside China, but mostly on economic and social issues. Land disputes, corrupt local officials, rigged village elections (yes, they exist in China), injustices in the legal system, etc. That stuff happens, but the Chinese you met probably never was on the receiving end, and might not know or bother.
In fact, it's worse than that. Even the many Chinese-Americans I've known -- people who either were born in the US or moved here as small children, people who you would think would not have been bombarded by the Chinese state media -- tend to be Chinese nationalists, supportive of whatever the country does.
It's not only the state media, it's the culture. The Chinese culture prides itself as having a long and noble civilization and tradition. The culture and civilization is also strongly linked to the nation, since China had in its history mostly been a single country/nation.
;-p), but if you speak to a Chinese and say "your government is censoring your Internet!! don't you even care?!", chances are that #1 he doesn't understand the importance of access to free media, and #2 he really doesn't care, because in the "Chinese way" of governance these things were not even half important.
Sometimes it's even the western media. I mean, some criticisms against Chinese policies might be legitimate, or even most of them (I dunno, I don't live in a "western" country), but I take it that there's a lot of misunderstanding from westerners, and it only takes a number of completely groundless accusations (by idiots maybe?) that an "automatic anti-idiot stance" is taken every time the stereotyped ignorant westerner criticizes Chinese policy.
And sometimes you might be talking to your fellow Chinese friends by assuming Western values. The Chinese have a long history of effective government, administration and politics. The Chinese controlled a huge empire *centrally*, and even now I don't think any government in the world (save for India perhaps, and to some extent the USA, because the USA comprises different states, and each governs itself to some extent) is doing this job as efficiently ("efficient" doesn't mean it's "good") as they are. Many Asian and African countries have adopted a western style of government because they never had a strong and efficient government in their history, but the Chinese way of administration has always been... different, and it worked OK.
That's why some, if not many, Chinese are reluctant to accept by default the western liberal style of government and politics. I know it's not exactly an "excuse" to modernize things and allow more freedoms and rights (there are other more valid excuses
1 - "You're just racist." Way to use an ad-hominem argument there. Even if I am, that doesn't mean I'm wrong.
I *hate* this word when used in this context. I don't think it's "racist" than "idealist" (I'm making up a new meaning of this word, namely "discriminating people with different ideals"). How many people automatically think communism is bad? How many people think automatically "if your government is not democratic, it must be really evil" (and vice versa)? How many people believe that there's only ONE way to govern a country -- by those set of Western democra
Are they the reason Opium is a problem now? No. Does this matter? All the "original poster" said was that the British (etc.) forced the Chinese to buy opium against the Chinese government's (legitimate) wishes, and what a prick the western powers were back then. You might say it's a distorted view, but these historical incidents explain why the Chinese had this kind of xenophobia, and why they are wary of western powers who want to "open up" China.
( Blaming Afghanistan for the poppies is like, (duh) blaming China for the crap exported.
If so, they are idiots. But I've really not read the same conclusion you have. Seems like somebody made these connections, and I'll note that this comment has fueled much of the recent outrage within Chinese circles. Not all developing nations were engaged in patent and copyright violation on a national scale, nor putting poison in pet food to make it sell for more. If I remember correctly America was _the_ land rampant with "pirated" books, before their domestic IP industry was built up. Don't know whether they sold poisoned pet food though. A lazy google search: http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/pva/pva74.html (see 2nd paragraph) There's an unstated assumption that, whenever people are free to make their own opinions and voice them they will complain. A 100% favorability rating is proof of foul play. Considering the number of times I've heard Chinese over here (there are a lot of them on student visas) say "whatever the government does is for the best", while simulantiously spouting the party line of "opressed China", who believe without consideration that claim by the Chinese media that US media lies and we Americans believe it without consideration, the more I see "indoctorination". I see where you come from. I think I agree generally with your points, but I'd like to point out a few things (which may be wrong). "Whatever the government does is for the best" is sometimes a response to the allegations that the government is somehow evil and takes action due to malice and twisted motives. Most Chinese see/perceive(/hope?) their government as a benevolent dictator (at least those at the top).
As for the "oppressed China" thing, I don't think it's exactly the "media", although they have played a role. Just look on slashdot, and tell me how many discussions vaguely related to China became a flamefest of China's human rights etc., or how many of those comments had to insert a snide remark or two, even if the topic was not related at all. And a lot of misinformation, twisted facts, and flawed logic float around (and of course with some good, reasoned arguments too). I do feel that there has been some kind of "special treatment" -- when the topic India shows up nobody speaks about the poverty nor the discrimination to women there, when topic of UK comes up nobody screams "free Northern Ireland".
I personally don't think it's "oppression", it's more like a kind of engineered misunderstanding and inciting unnecessary sentiments on both sides. To me, a group has individuals when they disagree. I rarely see two (pro-China) Chinese people disagree. I don't know how much of a factor this is, but it's generally considered by Chinese to be shameful to argue in front of "outsiders" on "domestic" matters. I do agree with your conclusion somewhat, though. And in my experience, the only people I've heard say that the west hates China were the Chinese. There are enough people who hates the Chinese Communist party that makes it a half-truth. Interestingly there are probably even more CCP "haters" in my community (Hong Kong)... Well on a more serious note, the "original poster" acknowledges that the west doesn't hate China.
Out of curiosity, how do you (and fellow countrymen) reconcile these facts that your country was founded in these circumstances with national pride/patriotism and conscience?
Strong things *are* a threat.
Not all strong things are threats. They can be powerful allies too.
The major source of opiates, the drug of choice for centuries in China, is your neighbor Afghanistan. Don't blame us for that.
Others have mentioned but I'll repeat out of completeness: Opium War.
No we don't. That's why there aren't petitions to China to change what they charge. We blame our trade agreements with you for costing us jobs and try to change US consumers and leaders.
But the media is quoting the trade deficits with China as a means to inflame the sentiments of Americans against China.
As someone from a country that provided troops and supplies to you during WWII, has never invaded you (minus perhaps a few miles near the Korean border after you attacked us), and that is largely responsible for the rapid growth in your economy thorough our trade (even gave you favored nation status), I'm really confused who you are talking about.
The Americans invaded Beijing in 1900 and pillaged it.
I don't think your economy was related to the free Tibet movement. Was it an invasion? Seems you have a red-herring there.
"When we put the broken pieces back together again" means not having the different regions being controlled by external powers.
That's fair. You hated us for being a republic.
When did that happen? AFAIK people are still condemning China to be "communists" (they're not now), while nobody condemns America for being "republicans".
I'm looking for the "China sucks because it's capatalist" group but I can't find that. You are lying.
I always see members of the "China sucks because earning our money, and now we owe them money (which is typical capitalist behavior)" group.
I'll side with you here. I think the one-clid policy was a good idea and it's wrong for those who criticize it to do so without offering solutions.
Fair enough. I think they could have done it with a bit more tact though...
Both simple lies. Our debts are the fault of our government and our buying. Few people are saying differently.
Look around. I don't think people are directly blaming China for the debts, but many are arguing along these lines:
1. We (Americans) owe China money.
2. ???
3. They're EVIL!!! (See what CNN has to say. [I'll note that this is one of the things that built up the flame])
You are warming the globe, your toothpaste tends to kill people. They are valid complaints.
Valid complaints, but America is dumping more CO2 per capita. A developing nation has to go through a few steps before being able to have the resources and technology to reduce its damaging effect on the environment. Every developed nation went through these stages. China is simply asking for their fair chance. I think that's a valid appeal too.
Are we committing genocide in Iraq? Is putting $80,000,000,000 per year into a country with no real return and loosing thousands of American lives "exploiting"?
Getting a bad deal out of a unjustified war doesn't mean America isn't committing those things in Iraq. It's just that somehow your country has decided to go into a lose-lose situation.
Don't get me wrong, I oppose the invasion of Iraq, but "exploting genocide" would have been continuing to support Saddam, much like China and Sudan.
Duh. Like America had no part to play with Saddam's rise to power.
> Whe
The surprising thing is that Westerners somehow magically "know" what the Tibetans are thinking and feel dignified to speak on their behalf, even though unbiased information is scarce.
You don't even have to imagine. Just look at the freedom fries discussion above. What the French did was simply saying "there are no WMD and so we're not getting ourselves into this mess" (which was true), and the Americans jumped upon them.
It took America 4 frig'n years to realize the obvious. And some of them still hate the French for pointing out their mistake.
Duh.
Can't say about Tibet independence because it has gotten hypersensitive and very few hard facts except from politicized media from both sides.
About Taiwan independence... well not everybody there supports it. Most people just want to get along with their lives instead of debating over what their passport says or by what name they are called.
As for China being expansionist... how about the UK and France who still has colonies lying around, the USA who installs puppet regimes in Middle East and invades them when they get out of control... and in the whole history of China you can only quote Tibet as evidence of "expansionist" behavior?
Ok, that's easy.
How about withdrawing from those states and setting up a separate independent country? FREE THE SOUTHERN STATES!!
What's the difference? That the allegations against the USA are actually TRUE? (instead of some fabricated shit created by the US media-propaganda)
American invaded Iraq who posed no real threat. Where's the "difference" you speak of? If a "threat" to the rest of the world is a reason for invasion, the USA should be the first country to be exterminated from the face of the planet. We all are flawed. But there are things you cannot sanction. We'd like to see Bush and his warmongers sanctioned for their war crimes.
Whose "others" did China push their system on?
No, but just to remind that many of those who think they are somehow "advocating universal human values" are mere hypocrites.
> When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.
Not many US policymakers consider China to be a threat, though China is the closest thing to a threat the US has. Consider it a badge of honor, only two other nations in history ever really were.
Let's start the discussion with a wholehearted "fuck you". Consider it as a badge of honor, since I don't think I've been using this level of profanity since my first comment on slashdot.
> When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.
But forcing Tibet's doors is just fine. I'll freely admit that the US has committed many, many wrongs. Acting like China hasn't does not paint a healthy picture of you.
Nobody said USA "forced them open with drugs and guns". When this began to happen USA didn't even exist. Heh. Or you'd think the USA is the only Western country? Get a perspective. Take a look at the Opium Wars.
> When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!
It was an invasion. No matter how atrociously Tibet's previous leadership treated its people, it's still an invasion. In truth, it would not concern us so much if you did not try to suppress or co-opt belief systems.
The Tibet occupation/invasion was not a religious crusade of any kind. Unlike you Americans and those bible-loving-fundamentalists, the Chinese are at least tolerant with religion as long as they don't involve politics.
> When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.
Ah, yes, I suppose we should have let Japan run free and build the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. How many Nankings do you want?
In 1900, Your troops invaded Beijing, robbed and pillaged the city. The Japanese were resisted in China by the Communists and KMT.
> When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products.
Lead and arsenic in products is, by Western standards, inferior. Your point?
The point is, you don't bother to crank out the money to buy higher quality products. If you pay crap, you get crap. Simple.
> When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.
America has long appreciated peace. Peace is good for business. These past few decades have been an odd spot.
Lol? Tell me which in decade America hasn't been at war invading others. Look at Chinese history in the past 300 (that's BEFORE your country was even established) years and the ONLY instance of so called "invasion" is Tibet?
Yeah right America has long appreciated peace.
> When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts.
Who's blaming -you-? You could always not lend, but that's not an option for you. When two people place themselves into a mutual trap the fault is not the sole fault of one or the other.
Trap????? Tell that to the Bank of America who should to be blamed for lending money to all these people and holding them mortgage. Duh money lending should be criminalized! I mean, a bankrupt person should be able to file suit on his creditors because they entrapped him into borrowing money from them!!
> When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."
No, we said 'the planet is starving', and an American man showed you how to feed a billion people.
Who is this great American man? You?
> When we are NOW silent no more, you say we are merely "Brainwashed".
You have your points, and we have ours. If you are unwilling to look at another side of an issue, you are.
You mean, since you are all knowing, always correct, never wrong, you've investigated all sides of the issues, that if we don't agree with you
Better a hypocrite than a slave to tyrants. It's not like the Chinese people CHOSE to be born in China, CHOSE to live in a place with restricted speech and you're simply being egoistic over the fact that you were born in a (supposedly) better place.
If you were born in China, would you risk your freedom (and maybe life) to criticize the government? How disgusting it is for you to insult the billions of Chinese in China who are too struggling to make a living to be concerned about Bush-chimp jokes and to trivialize all those who have made sacrifices towards a freer and more open China.
Don't think that simply because you're saying the same things as the Tienanmen student protesters you're as righteous as they are. Show me how you've voiced your concerns despite government oppression, show me what you've done to ensure the civil and political rights in your country. Then talk about mocking slaves to tyrants.
No, you're simply making arrogant, asshole comments on slashdot simply because you can.
You might as well have said "Better be a rich asshole than starve on the streets".
Actually 200 years is a really short time in Chinese history (accurate written history dates to almost 3000 years ago). Of course Americans think that's an eternity since their history merely spans around 300...