Thought provoking, but hardly wise. It is what I would expect from an anti-democratic CCP shill like ESWN though.

The analysis of Germany and Poland aren’t even up to Condi’s level of analysis. You might as well say GMA and the Philippines are a success, since she is the latest product of the revolution that toppled Marcos with minimal bloodshed.

The condemnation of de-Baathification in Iraq as the cause of all failures is oversimplification at its finest. The Iraqis have started on a process of re-integrating Baath party members and it isn’t changing a damn thing. I’d contend that even if the CPA never proceeded with de-Baathification but did proceed with massive international privitisation as per the Heritage Foundation white papers, Iraq would still be a bloody mess now. The weapons caches would still be unprotected. Foreigners and ex-pats would be leaving only crumbs for the average Iraqi. And you’d still have a hardcore resistance to their loss of power and prestige fighting a guerilla war.

The sophistry about whether Deng was corrupt is “mahvelous”. And the invocation of the chaos of the GPCR as a bulwark against mass violence as a path to change is hacktackular.

By ESWN’s analysis the CCP itself could never have been successful in ruling China. Read the orders for the extermination of landlords and their collaborators handed down in the 20s for the rural uprisisngs in the south of China. Read the violence in the late 40s/early 50s against the businessmen and the KMT. Yet the trains still ran and the government still functioned after the purges of China.

Guess what, ESWN? The one thing that the Philippines, Indonesia, South Africa, Germany and Poland all have in common is DEMOCRACY.

If you want thought provoking, try to think about what made revolutions in Eastern Europe and South Africa, and the Philippines inevitable. Ask yourself what parallels exist to China and the CCP today. You might understand why the CCP actively crushes independent AIDS orphanages and Falun Gong and a Rome-led Catholic Church. Then ask yourself, what other possible ways can the inevitable be fostered. That’s what ESWN wants to ensure doesn’t happen.

January 27, 2005 @ 7:16 pm | Comment

Tom, I look up to you and to ESWN — and I mean, like a lot. I disagree with him about certain issues, but I find he’s always perceptive and, as I said, thought provoking. I’ve read him criticize the CCP more than once, and I’m not sure he can be slotted as easily as you think when it comes to being “a shill” for the CCP. I suspect I’m not going to get too far defending him, as I you’ve probably made up your mind. I’ll just close by saying that in a world full of pompous, masturbatory blogs I really enjoy reading his blog and your own. You’re both fearsomely smart. Can I do anything to foster a rapprochement?

January 27, 2005 @ 8:06 pm | Comment

Thank you Richard for re-posting the link; otherwise I missed that eswn response.

January 27, 2005 @ 10:37 pm | Comment

Here is the question: Am I a shill for the CCP?

That is for my readers to decide, because people shouldn’t take my word for it.

If you are not familiar with the ESWN blog, here is a short list. This post lists the top 20 ESWN blog posts in year 2004:
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/02228.htm
7 of the 20 are about China.

Read them for yourselves, and see if this is consistent with your understanding of the word ‘shill.’

January 27, 2005 @ 10:57 pm | Comment

Here is the next question: Do I hate the CCP?

My answer is: I don’t hate the CCP.

People tend to get emotional about this issue, so I am going to couch my explanation in a different way and context.

Suppose I said: I hate the Japanese. To be more precise, I hate every Japanese person and I hate everything they do.

You will be right to think that I am on the looney fringe.

In fact, I don’t hate the Japanese. in the above precise sense. I believe that the Japanese consists of unique individuals. I believe that they are neither always right nor always wrong. I am willing to deal with the Japanese people and events, one at a time.

In like manner, I don’t hate the CCP in the sense of believing that every CCP member is a monster and that everything that they do is evil. I believe the CCP consists of unique individuals. I believe they are neither always right nor always wrong. I am willing to deal with the CCP people and events one at a time.

When they are wrong, I will point them out as those ESWN posts in the preceding comments show. I will take the trouble of translating the Chinese original texts into English so that the English-only readers will see how they are wrong.

I also believe that they sometimes do right. For example, I went to Lijiang earlier this month, see:
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/02246.htm
Well, those CCP fat cats could have just sat on their butts and and done nothing about this dirt poor place without any fear of retribution. The people there would still be planting potatoes and make 200 RMB per year. But the government decided to invest a ton of national funds to built the place up into a tourist spot and lifted tens of thousands of peasants (including many minority ethnic groups) into living decently. I give the CCP credit and I would encourage them to do something for all the other Chinese peasants.

I object to what I don’t like and I praise what I like. This is my way, but you don’t have to like it.

January 27, 2005 @ 11:22 pm | Comment

My answer is: I don’t hate the CCP.

It’s morally akin to say: I don’t hate Nazi.

Thank you for making that clear. Of course, you can only represent yourself, no anyone else.

January 27, 2005 @ 11:37 pm | Comment

Bellevue my dear,

why are you in Nazi China??? why don’t you get the hell out of Naziland and go back to Bellevue. They have the straight jacket ready.

January 28, 2005 @ 12:31 am | Comment

Richard:

If the rapprochement you proposed can be such an easy reality, then we won’t have the blue/red devide.

One side always has a noble idea, and the other side is always more clear on how to make that nobel idea at least survive. Maybe we have to go on with the pain.

I don’t quite believe eswn is actually doing what he was called, but, let me say that, CCP would just love to see there are always sensible people who would like to give them another chance to deceive.

January 28, 2005 @ 5:46 am | Comment

Power maintains control, money buys peace. Take care of the poor – no uprising – gov’t. is applauded. The West sees reforms – lifts bans, more businesses come, etc. Do they ‘really’ care or is there an underlying motive behind their actions. I guess time will tell.

January 28, 2005 @ 9:39 am | Comment

Deng and Mao were both critical of the CCP, when it suited their purposes. They both were CCP shills.

ESWN calls for a more benevolent dictatorship of the proletariat, but I’ve never read a challenge to the monopoly of power by the CCP. I agree that if the CCP wants to maintain control, they need to be more benevolent. But the long term interests of China are not served by a single party with an authoritarian monopoly of power.

It all comes down to a system that produces the accountability and results that ESWN professes to desire. Fundamentally the CCP cannot produce the desired results in China anymore than the DAB can produce the desired results in Hong Kong. Neither party favours accountability to anybody but themselves which means that the people in ESWN’s world will never achieve their goals as the people cannot hold officials accountable.

January 28, 2005 @ 7:18 pm | Comment

This is certainly not new to me. For many Chinese, even if they are living outside China – in Taiwan and Hong Kong, their ideal is benevolent dictatorship, not democracy. And they are even ready to endorse not-so-benevolent dictatorship such as Beijing regime, as long as it can provide stability. I realize that if we stop talking to these people, then we probably have no one to talk with.

January 29, 2005 @ 3:42 am | Comment