You would sell out the democratic people of Taiwan to the murderers in Beijing. You would allow to happen to Taiwan the same thing that happens in Tibet.
Cultures are different from each other. Some cultures are better than others. Those aspects of cultures that are desirable should be incorporated into all cultures. For example, there are aspects of native American culture that I would like to see integrated into mainstream US culture; mostly those concerning independence of mind and spirit.
However, traditional Chinese culture is based upon leaders taking advantage of the weak. If you cannot see that, then I hope you never enter any position of importance.
You are by far a person who has spent too much time in a college classroom. And isn't it odd for a racist person to be marrying someone of the race to which they are supposedly racist?
Instead, perhaps you should read the words I have written, and look for the fact that they make sense, rather than make a kneejerk reaction.
Chinese culture is fundamentally flawed. If you can argue otherwise, please try and do so.
I am not speaking about the way that the Chinese treat foreigners. I am speaking of the way Chinese treat each other. I am not talking about Chinese paranoia of the west, I am talking about Chinese paranoia of Chinese.
It's time to quit spouting the multicultural BS and start thinking about the way things really are. If you've spent 15 years in China, then you would know of what it is I speak.
Pure Chinese culture is just something I'm tossing out there as an idea that Taiwan and Mainland China have now two seperate cultures. But, at the same time, they also come from the same culture and they have that in common. It's that initial culture to which I refer. I would also point out that the actions of those mainland China is more influenced by the older Chinese ideology. (But, I maintain a glimmer of hope for the 4th generation. Even if it is dying quickly.)
I'm not really concerned with Chinese Communism. I think of it really as an extension of Imperial Chinese behavior. The differences between Jiang Zemin and a Han emperor are less than the differences between Jiang Zemin and Chen Shui-bian.
The idea of Western culture as being more benevolent is one that is so taken for granted, that it is hard to see how it is so. The Chinese in 1867 would never have acknowledged that a person has the right to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. Remember, they are still castrating little boys at a time when all white Americans (heck, all male Americans over 21, in theory) are voting. Entire families are punished routinely by the government for the transgressions of one.
The Chinese mainland government still does not acknowledge these are basic human rights. People are routinely locked up for talking to the wrong person. People are disappeared for saying the wrong things. The Taiwanese government used to be the same way. But, the Taiwanese government has really improved in the past 20 years. It's better than some Western countries now.
The individual has the right to freedom and life in Western culture. This is benevolence of man to government and government to man. This is something that Chinese culture simply doesn't acknowledge. Confucius may have said that some sort of noblese oblige was necessary, but no one cared. All they cared for was filiopiety at best; endless sacrifice of self and family was the norm.
Furthermore, when you look at how Chinese view their religion as compared to Westerners, you'll quickly discover that Westerners take their religion and their "self-rightesousness" much more seriously. Now, that's not to say that there are not some spiritual Chinese. But by and large, the Chinese culture is one that is unconcerned with spirituality. This also means (once again, not always) that they tend to take a less active role in the welfare of their fellow man than someone from a Abrahamic (Western) religion (culture).
The bit about Chinese Imperial size is just in there because people seem to have this impression that China was monolithic. It wasn't. It only controlled Taiwan and Tibet for a few decades. Now, the Communists impose their will on those people as a result of a false historical claim. Heck, they provoked a war in Vietnam and India for the same reason. (I think they've been at war at some point with most of their neighbors in the past 50 years). I want to point out that the Chinese empire is not Roman in length and strength.
As for Chinese culture teaching only cowardice and bullying, this is true. Look at how many Chinese conduct themselves in debates. It's not unusual to see a fight break out in legislative assemblies in China. Furthermore, Chinese leaders have, for more than a millenia, taught their peasants to always back down. There is no human drive for satisifaction of self happiness, or in extreme cases, self preservation. It's better to follow authority. One extreme example is of the Japanese Massacre at Nanking. Try and image a Westerner (especially an American) tolerate what happened. A Westerner would sooner die that wait slowly while 30 people before him were decapiated.
Chinese culture has almost nothing to redeem it. (Although I am fond of some of the artwork of countrysides and the minimalists, I will admit.) It simply isn't as good as Western culture.
This is NOT to say that Chinese are bad people. This has nothing to do wit
You may take exception to it, but you would be wrong.
Bo Yang is a Taiwanese liberal who says that most of Chinese culture should be gutted. He wrote a book call "The Ugly Chinaman" and wound up in jail for eight years for his troubles. He writes about aspects of Chinese culture that must change, if China is to improve itself.
First, China must give up it's unwillingness to examine its own culture in a self critical light. The Chinese have a very bad habit of this. What is learned from the master must be taught to the student, and the student may make no alterations to what he has learned.
Second, China must give up it's intolerance. Chinese are, for the most part, far more racist than Europeans or even modern Japanese.
Chinese must also remove the idea that everyone is an enemy. Although Chinese work together very well, there is a cultural paranioa about being taken advantage of. To this end, most Chinese work to screw the other guy before he can screw you.
Chinese must develop more independent thoughts and not be afraid to take risks. Only the person who stands out can accomplish new things. Group think leadership leads, almost inevitably, to destruction. Furthermore, this leads to a destruction of human rights. If it is a Chinese tradition to castrate a boy, no one will ever say no, and if they do, they'll be killed. China was the only culture to use eunichs so extensively and for so long.
Finally, Chinese must question themselves as to why they do things. It's easy not to do this, but the rewards for introspection are greater. This would also involve moving to a phoenician script (romanji).
BTW. I'm not racist. I am however, in favor of Western culture as the most benevolent culture. I'm engaged to a very beautiful girl from a town on the Yellow River. I won't, for obvious reason, say which one. We'll be married in December. I love her and my future family very much, but I will have relatives who were killed by the Chinese communists. I'm not a fan.
I read the Taipei times daily. It is a fair and liberal newspaper. It is opposed to the pan-blue camp. It also has an agenda of Taiwanese Independence.
In other words, better than anything Rupert Murdoch ever put out.
Carter was an officer for several years on a submarine. He helped establish a nuclear propulsion training program for enlisted personal. He was a fine officer and served for over seven years.
Taiwan could have nukes in a few years or less. They have three working nuclear power plants and will have a fourth (maybe) up and running by the end of the decade.
Nonsense. Mainland China is only a legitimate heir of the oppression of Mao and Stalin. The future for the Chinese people lies on the island of Taiwan, and not under the communists or the KMT.
China was never a superpower. China was a series of empires based out of similar areas. While China has five thousand years of history, the West was writing well before many Chinese were farming. When China was at its height, the empire lasted for less time than the Roman Empire. It was less well controlled than the Roman Empire as well. China never had the capability or the will to extend beyond its geographical borders.
Almost no innovation has come out of China for the past one thousand years. Pure Chinese culture is, basically, its worthless. It does not teach anything applicable to modern times. It only teaches cowardice and bullying. It teaches that the old ways are best, and anyone trying to change them should be severely punished.
Western ideas are not meaningless notions. They simply mean nothing to corrupt communist officials. Western ideals have been adopted by South Koreans, Japanese and Taiwanese. If these ideas were meaningless, all of these countries would remain dictatorships.
I encourage you to look beyond the lies you have been told by your Red Cadre peers and your drone teachers. Here is a hint: Read Bo Yang, if you aren't afraid of what you might discover.
Everyone should have off-site backups. It's not very expensive (>100 dollars for tapes). It's not very hard (drive tapes to site). It's not difficult to get the backups if you need them (drive to site with tapes). It just makes sense.
This study of Japanese children by a Japanese woman, Ms. Nobuko Ihori. They asked children questions about violence. The children who played the most (the top five percent or higher? It doesn't say) respond to the study in such a manner that it has been interpreted that these children who play the most video games are the most violent.
But wait, this doesn't make sense? The difference in verbal agressiveness was not clear?
So, children who play the most amount of video games are likely to be the most agressive physically, but they won't swear at you any more than the next person?
Nonsense. I can think of several different, and equally valid interpretations of the data:
1. The children that were most likely to respond honestly were the children who spent the most amount of time playing video games. 2. Or the children who spent the most amount of time playing video games are the ones who concentrate best, and thus are the most likely to be irriated at interruptions. 3. Or, children who have been allowed to play several hours of video games a day have their family completely cowed, and have been known to use violence to get their way previously. 4. Or, perhaps the children who play the most video games are the ones (for a variety of reasons) who are most osterized at school, and they are the ones most likely to be violent.
This is a case of Ms. Nobuko Ihori jumping to conclusions when getting some research. She needs to come up with different conclusions, test those out against the idea of children playing videos games, and then come back to us. Instead, the little grad student wanted to make a name for herself and published a study condemning video game violence.
The real question is, when are they going to create such a thing for China? China has their Great Firewall.
Or is China just too large of a trading partner, even if they have the world's largest oppressed population and a navy designed to defeat the United States.
I would expect that the problem is not with the network administrators. The problem probably lies with the CIO, who has no idea about computers or firewalls. Trying to save money is what will really screw you.
Network Administrator: We should get an outsourced firewall and a managed virus system. It will cost 45000 a year, but it will be worth it. We also need to start putting on patches on the servers.
CIO: Too much money. Just buy something from Best Buy. As for the servers, we cannot pay you overtime to put patches on them. Besides, Microsoft is a big company. There shouldn't be any real problems.
Network Administrator: But sir....
CIO: Just do it. I've got an MBA. I know what I'm talking about. If there is a problem, we'll just blame you.
First, chances are you are not going to get different answers when you ask Vietnam or WW2 veterans who did real fighting about their war. We lost face in Vietnam, so it is a taboo subject among non-veterans. Furthemore, more Americans who were drafted (a relative percentage) did fighting in Vietnam than in World War II, so the answer is likely to be skewed there as well. Also, the critics of the Vietnam War were more likely to include drafties than the critics of World War II.
Next, whether or not the US should have gotten involved in Vietnam is a question that is still up for debate. Regardless of how the war was fought or not fought, the war did accomplish both good and bad. And for your information, the conflict in Vietnam led to millions of deaths, not thousands. The moral ambiguity is clear to someone who has objectively studied or fought in the war.
Third, Asians refers to a wide variety of people. Orientals refers to people or objects specifically from East Asia, such as Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Thailanders and Vietnamese. The only Orientals I know who object to the term are second or more generation East-Asian Americans who object to being called anything but Chinese (Japanese, Korean, etc) - Americans. This is similar to Polish-Americans who object to being called Poles or Polacks. Please leave poorly factual political incorrectness in the classroom.
Finally, if you do want to be politically correct in a correct manner, please learn to tell East-Asians apart from one another. It is not difficult.
"'but, but, but think of the children!' is fairly commonly used phrase to attack anything you don't happen to like personally for whatever real reason. maybe you feel that your sunday reading circle is offended by games or something similar and get twisted in your mind to defend it.."
True without a doubt. Someone should ask Socrates what he thinks about that phrase.
If there are Mario poems, there should be slashdot poems.
There was a place called/.
It had a great many crack pots.
They all visited sights,
Which had many frights,
Because the equipment there wasn't ubber hot.
Commander Taco
Leader of those at Slashdot
He slashdotted you
Cowboyneal option
Keeps us laughing and happy
The polls are funny
There once was a troll post
It sprang to life on this host
It was very rude
Something very lew
Then due to modding it was toast.
Oscar Wilde is definitely one of the wittiest men ever to put a pen to paper. The one-liner response from the AIML format should work great. I'll be checking this out in the morning.
Hope it doesn't cost any money.
They left out the first RPGs. What about the first time characters improved as the game progressed? Or the first game you could save a game? When was the first time stats were used in a game? What about the first time an influencable plot was added to a game?
Slashdot Mirror
You would sell out the democratic people of Taiwan to the murderers in Beijing. You would allow to happen to Taiwan the same thing that happens in Tibet.
However, traditional Chinese culture is based upon leaders taking advantage of the weak. If you cannot see that, then I hope you never enter any position of importance.
Instead, perhaps you should read the words I have written, and look for the fact that they make sense, rather than make a kneejerk reaction.
Chinese culture is fundamentally flawed. If you can argue otherwise, please try and do so.
I am not speaking about the way that the Chinese treat foreigners. I am speaking of the way Chinese treat each other. I am not talking about Chinese paranoia of the west, I am talking about Chinese paranoia of Chinese.
It's time to quit spouting the multicultural BS and start thinking about the way things really are. If you've spent 15 years in China, then you would know of what it is I speak.
Hmmm. From last to first.
Pure Chinese culture is just something I'm tossing out there as an idea that Taiwan and Mainland China have now two seperate cultures. But, at the same time, they also come from the same culture and they have that in common. It's that initial culture to which I refer. I would also point out that the actions of those mainland China is more influenced by the older Chinese ideology. (But, I maintain a glimmer of hope for the 4th generation. Even if it is dying quickly.)
I'm not really concerned with Chinese Communism. I think of it really as an extension of Imperial Chinese behavior. The differences between Jiang Zemin and a Han emperor are less than the differences between Jiang Zemin and Chen Shui-bian.
The idea of Western culture as being more benevolent is one that is so taken for granted, that it is hard to see how it is so. The Chinese in 1867 would never have acknowledged that a person has the right to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. Remember, they are still castrating little boys at a time when all white Americans (heck, all male Americans over 21, in theory) are voting. Entire families are punished routinely by the government for the transgressions of one.
The Chinese mainland government still does not acknowledge these are basic human rights. People are routinely locked up for talking to the wrong person. People are disappeared for saying the wrong things. The Taiwanese government used to be the same way. But, the Taiwanese government has really improved in the past 20 years. It's better than some Western countries now.
The individual has the right to freedom and life in Western culture. This is benevolence of man to government and government to man. This is something that Chinese culture simply doesn't acknowledge. Confucius may have said that some sort of noblese oblige was necessary, but no one cared. All they cared for was filiopiety at best; endless sacrifice of self and family was the norm.
Furthermore, when you look at how Chinese view their religion as compared to Westerners, you'll quickly discover that Westerners take their religion and their "self-rightesousness" much more seriously. Now, that's not to say that there are not some spiritual Chinese. But by and large, the Chinese culture is one that is unconcerned with spirituality. This also means (once again, not always) that they tend to take a less active role in the welfare of their fellow man than someone from a Abrahamic (Western) religion (culture).
The bit about Chinese Imperial size is just in there because people seem to have this impression that China was monolithic. It wasn't. It only controlled Taiwan and Tibet for a few decades. Now, the Communists impose their will on those people as a result of a false historical claim. Heck, they provoked a war in Vietnam and India for the same reason. (I think they've been at war at some point with most of their neighbors in the past 50 years). I want to point out that the Chinese empire is not Roman in length and strength.
As for Chinese culture teaching only cowardice and bullying, this is true. Look at how many Chinese conduct themselves in debates. It's not unusual to see a fight break out in legislative assemblies in China. Furthermore, Chinese leaders have, for more than a millenia, taught their peasants to always back down. There is no human drive for satisifaction of self happiness, or in extreme cases, self preservation. It's better to follow authority. One extreme example is of the Japanese Massacre at Nanking. Try and image a Westerner (especially an American) tolerate what happened. A Westerner would sooner die that wait slowly while 30 people before him were decapiated.
Chinese culture has almost nothing to redeem it. (Although I am fond of some of the artwork of countrysides and the minimalists, I will admit.) It simply isn't as good as Western culture.
This is NOT to say that Chinese are bad people. This has nothing to do wit
Bo Yang is a Taiwanese liberal who says that most of Chinese culture should be gutted. He wrote a book call "The Ugly Chinaman" and wound up in jail for eight years for his troubles. He writes about aspects of Chinese culture that must change, if China is to improve itself.
First, China must give up it's unwillingness to examine its own culture in a self critical light. The Chinese have a very bad habit of this. What is learned from the master must be taught to the student, and the student may make no alterations to what he has learned.
Second, China must give up it's intolerance. Chinese are, for the most part, far more racist than Europeans or even modern Japanese.
Chinese must also remove the idea that everyone is an enemy. Although Chinese work together very well, there is a cultural paranioa about being taken advantage of. To this end, most Chinese work to screw the other guy before he can screw you.
Chinese must develop more independent thoughts and not be afraid to take risks. Only the person who stands out can accomplish new things. Group think leadership leads, almost inevitably, to destruction. Furthermore, this leads to a destruction of human rights. If it is a Chinese tradition to castrate a boy, no one will ever say no, and if they do, they'll be killed. China was the only culture to use eunichs so extensively and for so long.
Finally, Chinese must question themselves as to why they do things. It's easy not to do this, but the rewards for introspection are greater. This would also involve moving to a phoenician script (romanji).
BTW. I'm not racist. I am however, in favor of Western culture as the most benevolent culture. I'm engaged to a very beautiful girl from a town on the Yellow River. I won't, for obvious reason, say which one. We'll be married in December. I love her and my future family very much, but I will have relatives who were killed by the Chinese communists. I'm not a fan.
In other words, better than anything Rupert Murdoch ever put out.
Carter was an officer for several years on a submarine. He helped establish a nuclear propulsion training program for enlisted personal. He was a fine officer and served for over seven years.
Taiwan could have nukes in a few years or less. They have three working nuclear power plants and will have a fourth (maybe) up and running by the end of the decade.
China was never a superpower. China was a series of empires based out of similar areas. While China has five thousand years of history, the West was writing well before many Chinese were farming. When China was at its height, the empire lasted for less time than the Roman Empire. It was less well controlled than the Roman Empire as well. China never had the capability or the will to extend beyond its geographical borders.
Almost no innovation has come out of China for the past one thousand years. Pure Chinese culture is, basically, its worthless. It does not teach anything applicable to modern times. It only teaches cowardice and bullying. It teaches that the old ways are best, and anyone trying to change them should be severely punished.
Western ideas are not meaningless notions. They simply mean nothing to corrupt communist officials. Western ideals have been adopted by South Koreans, Japanese and Taiwanese. If these ideas were meaningless, all of these countries would remain dictatorships.
I encourage you to look beyond the lies you have been told by your Red Cadre peers and your drone teachers. Here is a hint: Read Bo Yang, if you aren't afraid of what you might discover.
Everyone should have off-site backups. It's not very expensive (>100 dollars for tapes). It's not very hard (drive tapes to site). It's not difficult to get the backups if you need them (drive to site with tapes). It just makes sense.
They make pills that can enlarge my penis? Tell me where to sign up!!
This study of Japanese children by a Japanese woman, Ms. Nobuko Ihori. They asked children questions about violence. The children who played the most (the top five percent or higher? It doesn't say) respond to the study in such a manner that it has been interpreted that these children who play the most video games are the most violent.
But wait, this doesn't make sense? The difference in verbal agressiveness was not clear?
So, children who play the most amount of video games are likely to be the most agressive physically, but they won't swear at you any more than the next person?
Nonsense. I can think of several different, and equally valid interpretations of the data:
1. The children that were most likely to respond honestly were the children who spent the most amount of time playing video games.
2. Or the children who spent the most amount of time playing video games are the ones who concentrate best, and thus are the most likely to be irriated at interruptions.
3. Or, children who have been allowed to play several hours of video games a day have their family completely cowed, and have been known to use violence to get their way previously.
4. Or, perhaps the children who play the most video games are the ones (for a variety of reasons) who are most osterized at school, and they are the ones most likely to be violent.
This is a case of Ms. Nobuko Ihori jumping to conclusions when getting some research. She needs to come up with different conclusions, test those out against the idea of children playing videos games, and then come back to us. Instead, the little grad student wanted to make a name for herself and published a study condemning video game violence.
Or is China just too large of a trading partner, even if they have the world's largest oppressed population and a navy designed to defeat the United States.
You also shut the hell up, corporate ho.
I knew I should have waited two more years before getting engaged!
In Soviet Russia, Science Makes Fiction of You!!
Network Administrator: We should get an outsourced firewall and a managed virus system. It will cost 45000 a year, but it will be worth it. We also need to start putting on patches on the servers.
CIO: Too much money. Just buy something from Best Buy. As for the servers, we cannot pay you overtime to put patches on them. Besides, Microsoft is a big company. There shouldn't be any real problems.
Network Administrator: But sir....
CIO: Just do it. I've got an MBA. I know what I'm talking about. If there is a problem, we'll just blame you.
Next, whether or not the US should have gotten involved in Vietnam is a question that is still up for debate. Regardless of how the war was fought or not fought, the war did accomplish both good and bad. And for your information, the conflict in Vietnam led to millions of deaths, not thousands. The moral ambiguity is clear to someone who has objectively studied or fought in the war.
Third, Asians refers to a wide variety of people. Orientals refers to people or objects specifically from East Asia, such as Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Thailanders and Vietnamese. The only Orientals I know who object to the term are second or more generation East-Asian Americans who object to being called anything but Chinese (Japanese, Korean, etc) - Americans. This is similar to Polish-Americans who object to being called Poles or Polacks. Please leave poorly factual political incorrectness in the classroom.
Finally, if you do want to be politically correct in a correct manner, please learn to tell East-Asians apart from one another. It is not difficult.
"'but, but, but think of the children!' is fairly commonly used phrase to attack anything you don't happen to like personally for whatever real reason. maybe you feel that your sunday reading circle is offended by games or something similar and get twisted in your mind to defend it.." True without a doubt. Someone should ask Socrates what he thinks about that phrase.
The Canyonero Song
There was a place called /.
It had a great many crack pots.
They all visited sights,
Which had many frights,
Because the equipment there wasn't ubber hot.
Commander Taco
Leader of those at Slashdot
He slashdotted you
Cowboyneal option
Keeps us laughing and happy
The polls are funny
There once was a troll post
It sprang to life on this host
It was very rude
Something very lew
Then due to modding it was toast.
As a player, if I want a realistic game, I won't be playing one with vampires. As it is, this sounds like a pretty cool game.
Oscar Wilde is definitely one of the wittiest men ever to put a pen to paper. The one-liner response from the AIML format should work great. I'll be checking this out in the morning. Hope it doesn't cost any money.
They left out the first RPGs. What about the first time characters improved as the game progressed? Or the first game you could save a game? When was the first time stats were used in a game? What about the first time an influencable plot was added to a game?