>Raj has put up a post on a related theme above – we can resume the calm rational dialogue over there.

>calm rational dialogue over there

>calm rational

lol

April 20, 2008 @ 4:03 pm | Comment

What was it exactly she said to cause people to turn against her?

April 20, 2008 @ 4:04 pm | Comment

Jin Jing truly is a national hero and role model. This very moving story further convinces me that any claims that she is a CCP plant and her assault choreographed for PR purposes are obscenely stupid. Maybe she truly is saint material. Of course, the very same quality that causes me to say this – her courageous spirit and willingness to express her thoughts without fear or favor – are the very qualities the fenqing are condemning as traitorous.

As stated in the thread below, we all know there is more to Chinese society than fenqing. However, thanks to their shrillness and vocalness, they are sometimes all the world sees. And their influence is real. My cool, urbane, London-educated friend who drives a sports car and works for the UN is giddy about boycotting Carrefoure and has been delighted with the fenqing rhetoric. One day I’ll post what he says about Japan Yikes. Just what the UN needs.

April 20, 2008 @ 4:05 pm | Comment

Peanut Butter, she said she didn’t think the boycott of Carrefoure was in China’s best interest. Vile traitor.

April 20, 2008 @ 4:08 pm | Comment

Mods, can either of you close the italics tag? Thanks!

April 20, 2008 @ 4:18 pm | Comment

@ecodelta
“his very moving story further convinces me that any claims that she is a CCP plant and her assault choreographed for PR purposes are obscenely stupid.”

One should not confuse basic stupidity with conspiracy. It was just plain stupid to assault her.
About the fenqings, some people believe what the louder talkers say, I prefer not to make that mistake.
The PR guys in CH do really have a good asset in Ms Jin Jing and Ms Weng. Hope they use them well.

April 20, 2008 @ 4:23 pm | Comment

“Who is Jin Jing? Is she famous or something? If she does not want to join the boycott, she does not have to. But why come out and speak? Does she want to be cursed out?”

Honor those of dragon heart,
In thought and favor,
In word and deed.

😉

April 20, 2008 @ 4:30 pm | Comment

Ooops. My first post should have been @richard not me

April 20, 2008 @ 4:31 pm | Comment

Again, I do think we should take internet comments into context, that they are well, anonymous comments on the internet. In any case however, it is a rather unpleasant development. I do think that since the CCP be it that it tacitly supports nationalism for its uses or simply doesn’t want to be caught on the wrong side of nationalism means that nationalists, even the extreme kind are thus given much freer rein to express themselves, making their voice even louder then what their shrillness would have originally accounted for. As for the support of the urban middle class for the CCP, I don’t really find that unusual, since its obvious that despite the CCP’s socialist-communist rhetoric, that they, the urban middle class has gained the most from CCP policy. However, given this, by placing most of its eggs in the urban bourgeoisie basket, might and I underline might, prove to be undoing of the CCP as it is today. Not because, the urban bourgeoisie are chafing under CCP rule or anything like that, but simply it is generally in the interest of of powerful business to pear down arbitrary government power as to protect their assets from arbitrary seizure. Certainly, the example of an authoritarian government dependent almost exclusively on the urban bourgeoisie for support did eventually result in the undermining of the authoritarian governments in S Korea and Taiwan. Whether or not something similar will occur on the mainland though, is not totally clear to me.

April 20, 2008 @ 5:02 pm | Comment

I also doubt, the extreme nationalists would have enough pull to really effect the current political structure as it is. Given all their bluster, most of their fellow Chinese are still more then happy to do business with foreign countries, and millions of Chinese are currently learning English on other foreign languages. Stuff like the Carrefour boycott have an uncanny ability of sputtering out without anything much actually happening. I mean what resulted in the Anti-Japanese boycotts of a few years ago? Taking a look at the streets of Beijing or Shanghai one probably finds more Honda or Toyota vehicles then ever before.

April 20, 2008 @ 5:17 pm | Comment

That’s not to say that nationalism isn’t a problem for modern China, indeed few places in the world has really solved xenophobia. I would agree with most people that nationalism in its extreme forms is an important issue for China, but I also do not think another “cultural revolution” is upon us.

April 20, 2008 @ 5:23 pm | Comment

I dont see the public letter Grace Wang wrote to “my fellow Chinese” being translated here, From her letter and the vid on youtube, my impression she’s probably a little obnoxious nerd, can be very arrogant/ambitious.

Nevertheless, she doesnt deserve to be treated like this. But nothing will happen to her, she will do well in the states and her parents is probably under communist cops’ protection by now. What’s funny is ppl showed little sympathy for JinJing now acting like their dog just died. Actually JinJing has recently denounced boycotting french goods therefore been under verbal attack by the angry youngs too, can she cease to be a tool and officially become a hero now?

April 20, 2008 @ 6:03 pm | Comment

As one anon put it re: Jin Jing, “China, where you’re a national hero one day and threatened to have your “body in more than one piece” the next.”

April 20, 2008 @ 6:10 pm | Comment

just curious, when was the last time the Post or the Times actually pretty something that was…. favorable to the Chinese ?

Excercise: grab the last 20 major articles from the NY Times or the Post on China, and count how many were actually favorable.

Its called “manufacturing consent”- not my theory, its Chomsky’s. You manufacture consent when you confine the “free press” to 3-4 “authorative sources.” These “authoratative sources” then frame the entire debate- anything outside the debate is never even mentioned.

Chomsky’s example (among many) was when the US election debate was framed around “who you would rather have a beer with.” Well, if you actually let people talk about real issues like Iraq, Palestine, campaign donations, the economy and inflation, then all hell would have broken loose. That’s exactly how you “manufacture consent”

Back to the “free press”, you think one paper is too conservative like the Post, you flee to a more liberal one (e.g the Times) for the “truth” and then you claim because you have choice, you have a monopoly on truth versus, say, the Chinese.

Well, no matter how conservative or a liberal a paper is in the US, all US papers represent US interests, just like all Chinese papers represent Chinese interests. Its not rocket science. And there’s a big difference between US interests, Chinese interests, and the truth.

One major difference I find between the Americans and the Chinese- the Chinese don’t take their press at face value, while the Americans do take their press at face value.

Though everyone is brainwashed and biased to a degree, I would claim the Chinese are LESS brainwashed in at least one crucial sense: they don’t have this ideology behind them regarding the “free press” and how it gives them a monopoly on “the truth.”

I am glad though, for one thing- there were actually some Chinese who actually believed in the US press- CNN, The Times, the Post made them wake up and realize no power system is immune to corruption, bias and lies.

April 20, 2008 @ 6:37 pm | Comment

Peanut Butter, are you really surprised that the internet thugs would have a hard time following normal logic? I mean c’mon their past time is threatening people over a message board. What did you expect them to do? Most normal Chinese folks are probably not as prone to absurd mood swings.

April 20, 2008 @ 6:39 pm | Comment

But nothing will happen to her, she will do well in the states and her parents is probably under communist cops’ protection by now.

1. What if Ms Wang wants to go back to China to work? I can’t remember her saying she wants to stay in the US.

2. Her parents shouldn’t have to be in hiding/given Police protection. How would you like to live in such a way?

3. If the Police care so much, as Ms Wang asked how did the online thugs get her parents confidential details? Aren’t those held by the authorities?

What’s funny is ppl showed little sympathy for JinJing

Who was that? I sympathised with her, even if I didn’t beat my chest about it.

—-

Given all their bluster, most of their fellow Chinese are still more then happy to do business with foreign countries, and millions of Chinese are currently learning English on other foreign languages.

Boycotts aren’t the problem. Chinese “thought Police” are, where people are attacked for not thinking with the majority.

I didn’t say this was a new Cultural Revolution, merely that the attitudes floating around were similar from then. Also I’m thinking about the future, not the present.

April 20, 2008 @ 6:40 pm | Comment

Raj, attacking others for not taking one’s view isn’t really a new development and I just want to say that I agree with you when you say that this is indeed a problem. However, what I’m trying to point out is that the people on the internet threatening others over message boards (which is a rather ridiculous action in itself) is but one part of the much wider Chinese society as a whole. An ugly part at that, but nonetheless only a part. Occurring concurrently with the internet thug phenomenon is in my view a much greater portion of Chinese society eager to engage and learn from others at a much greater level then perhaps ever before.

April 20, 2008 @ 6:56 pm | Comment

Occurring concurrently with the internet thug phenomenon is in my view a much greater portion of Chinese society eager to engage and learn from others at a much greater level then perhaps ever before.

I understand where you are coming from, but that is where we are arguably at the moment. It’s difficult to say that will be the same in perhaps 5-10 years.

One thing I have trouble with is that these “internet thugs” seem to have the run of the roost. If you go onto any Chinese-orientated forum you will not see many, if any, Chinese posters take issue with them. Generally they are supported – you might see a few quick comments about needing to “calm down”. I can’t remember much vitriol if any being served on such people by other Chinese, only foreigners who might venture on to some forums and BBS.

Even if these fenqing et al only formed a minority, if Chinese people don’t stand up to racism and ultra-nationalism the effect may be very similar to if they openly supported it. If these angry people can influence the direction of Chinese politics or even discussion on politics, the media, etc then it will be very bad for China. The only way to stop that is if the “silent majority” stand up against them. Trying to avoid tangling with them does nothing.

April 20, 2008 @ 8:04 pm | Comment

@will
“Excercise: grab the last 20 major articles from the NY Times or the Post on China, and count how many were actually favorable.”

Well, I do not need to read the NY Times, but most news media in EU have not many positive news about CH, no matter the language.

The perception of CH in many EU minds is tainted by its past recent history. What comes faster to our minds are things like the great leap forward, the cultural revolution and Tia-square.
Although CH has changed much in the recent year, most of us are blind to internal dynamics of CH society, even those of us who are curious about CH are not always aware of the evolution of its society.

We react faster to conflicts like TB and HR activist jailing, put all CH in the same box, and tend to forget about other CH people opinions. The newspapers here reflect also that mindset. Besides bad and conflictive news are more eye catching than not so flashy good ones. Just open any newspaper no matter where you are.

Do we have a knee jerk attitude? Maybe. But I put more blame on CH government than on us. They have not addressed to perception of CH in many EU countries, its PR abilities has been almost inexistent. They failed to address their case well in advance in front of the public opinion here, and some of their actions, like jailing HR activists, rabid internet fenquins, demonizing nobel laurates like DL and Desmond Tutu, and the closure to the media of Tibet, had confirmed many people on their bad thinking about CH and CH people.

The backlash we can see it know in the hurt reaction of CH people against torch demonstrations in major EU cities, foreign media news coverage and foreign companies in CH.

I have no idea who is in charge of the PR department in CH, but either they need to better hear their hired PR-Consultants or find new ones quick.

Are we in the EU at fault too? Maybe, but it is not us who is on the spotlight right now. It is CH who is organizing the OG after all.

Should we try harder to understand modern CH? Of course, but a little help from CH side would be very much welcome.

April 20, 2008 @ 8:33 pm | Comment

@will
regarding the “free press” and how it gives them a monopoly on “the truth.”

You can find the most variate opinions in our “free press”. You can find a lot of “different” truths, which ones is the real one? None, there is a grain of truth it on each one of them.

By having such disparate, uncensored number of opinions and being free to openly discussed any issue, I think it is easier for us to get closer to reality. It takes some time and work though.

I thinks it is easier to get a patchy vision of reality in CH not because people there believe with eyes close what they are told in the news there, but by the very restrictions in the flow of information and open public discussion.

April 20, 2008 @ 8:54 pm | Comment

Raj, personally, I believe government media censorship is a lot more dangerous and important in terms of influencing the direction of Chinese politics etc. then the internet nationalists can ever hope to be. As for the forums themselves, many of them are basically self-feeding in the terms of the “ultra-nationalists”, and given the anonymity attracts certain types of people in much larger numbers then normal. (This phenomena is hardly unique to China). Thus I think among politically conscious Chinese concerned with media the issue of government media control acquires a much higher prominence then dealing with what is essentially a small number of extremists hiding behind the internet. In any case all I’m trying to say is that we should view this issue in its context. First of all it is a problem that seems to be common wherever the internet has developed into a major anonymous outlet (the extent of the problem may differ from place to place), secondly, this is a strand that is dwarfed by the much larger trend of Chinese engagement with the rest of the world, and thirdly other major problems mainly economic, in this still overwhelmingly poor country dominates the Chinese political consciousness meaning many may find the whole issue of “internet thugs” to be quite minor or irrelevant. I agree with you in that I do view this development as very negative, however, I do think given its context we should not read more to this issue then what it actually is.

April 20, 2008 @ 9:18 pm | Comment

@will

More to the PR problem with CH.
Taken from here http://tinyurl.com/552mak

“On the other hand, the Chinese government has yet to understand the international language of diplomacy. Their choice of words, their sternness in tones and postures and repetitiveness turn Westerners away. We are blinded by our prejudice.””

April 20, 2008 @ 9:20 pm | Comment

I Believe Hostile Forces are Still Trying to Westernize and Disunite China

The Chinese Communist Party recently passed a decision called “The Decision to Enhance The Governing Abilities of Our Party”. In the first paragraph of that document, it said “Hostile forces’ attempts to Westernize and disunite our country have not changed”.

But, how are the hostile forces trying to Westernize and disunite China? One common technique is to use the banner of “Reform” to change the color of China’s Socialist System.

Let me first comment on Deng Xiaoping to illustrate the importance of sometimes not “reforming”. Deng Xiaoping, in 1989, resisted great pressure from Rightists to “reform”, and we all know what he did that year. I believe what he did in 1989 takes a lot more courage and determination than any type of “reform”.

We know that in the early days of China’s economic opening up, Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang were the right and left hands of Deng Xiaoping. Looking back today, those two hands were not very effective, and Deng Xiaoping were dissatisfied with them. But those two were supported by many overseas rightists and domestic intellectuals. But Deng Xiaoping still fired those two people despite so much popular support they receive. This again takes extreme courage.

Then Li Peng and Jiang Zemin took over. I believe those two did a great job in implementing Deng Xiaoping’s policy, which was basically: “Both hands have to be hard, and cannot be even a little soft”. I was a rightist and pro-West liberal back then, and did not like those two people. I thought those two people were too conservative, and not “reformist” enough.

Note how I put quotes around the word reform. Some reforms are necessary, such as tighter supervision among party cadres and tighter media controls. But to rightists, they have a different view on reform. They believe that a “reform” is any activity that goes against China’s Constitution. For example, China’s Constitution clearly says that government officials are elected indirectly through representatives. But rightists insist on promoting “direct elections”, trying to break the Constitution. The Chinese Constitution says Tibet is a part of China, yet the Rightists want to “free” Tibet. The Constitution clearly says that the Chinese Communist Party is the core leadership of the Chinese people, but the rightists insist that this is a dictatorship and not democracy. Rightists often sing praises of the importance of Constitutions, so why do they not respect China’s Constitution?

Anyway, then came the collapse of the USSR. I was very naive back then, and I thought that: “This is such good news for the people of USSR. They captured that opportunity. China unfortunately missed that opportunity, USSR people will start to enjoy happier and better lives”.

What happened afterwards to the USSR completely changed my viewpoints.

In the early days of the economic reform, many of China’s reforms were modeled exactly after certain aspects of West’s system. But today, we can see that the West’s capitalist system is already almost collapsing, and so now China’s future reform direction is totally unclear. Can China continue to model itself after the West’s system? I do not believe so. The West is burning Chinese stores, adding tariffs for Chinese steel and shoe imports, subsidizing agricultures, and most recently protesting against the Olympics and supporting terrorist activities sponsored by the Dalai Lama.

In other words, there’s no much left that’s valuable to learn from the West’s system.

Therefore, a lot of times resisting reforms is more important than carrying out reforms and takes more courage. I was in Shenzhen a few months ago, and I saw a Deng Xiaoping quote displayed as a slogan on the street: “We will not change our fundamental path for 100 years”. Therefore, anyone who wants to challenge the Chinese Constitution, to change the leadership position of the Chinese Communist Party, to change the dominance of state-owned enterprises, to change China’s dicatorship of Tibet, I think they should wait for another 100 years.

Rightists always yell “If China does not reform this and that, it’ll……”. Well, they’ve been yelling for decades, and China is still doing pretty well, but many of those Rightists have died out, many pro-Tibet activists have died, even the Dalai Lama himself was recently diagnosed with terminal cancer and will not live for too many years.

April 20, 2008 @ 10:40 pm | Comment

@Will

Well, no matter how conservative or a liberal a paper is in the US, all US papers represent US interests, just like all Chinese papers represent Chinese interests. Its not rocket science. And there’s a big difference between US interests, Chinese interests, and the truth.

It cracks me up every time PRC apologists try to explain away the difference between Chinese and US media, they always quote an American source to prove their point! The US cleans its dirty laundry in public view and you don’t even need to come to the US find the most basic facts of the ugly side of US society. When a bunch of fenqing wrote the virulently xenophobic book “China can say no” back in 1996, they relied on US sources to smear the US.

One major difference I find between the Americans and the Chinese- the Chinese don’t take their press at face value, while the Americans do take their press at face value.

So that is why “pro-Chinese” demonstrators repeat the official PRC version of the Tibet issue almost verbatim?

And where on earth did you get the idea that Americans take their own media at face value. There is plenty of evidence to suggest the opposite, especially after For more reading, take a look at James Fallows’s article “Why Americans Hate the Media”

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/199602/americans-media

April 20, 2008 @ 11:20 pm | Comment

@Will

Well, no matter how conservative or a liberal a paper is in the US, all US papers represent US interests, just like all Chinese papers represent Chinese interests. Its not rocket science. And there’s a big difference between US interests, Chinese interests, and the truth.

It cracks me up every time PRC apologists try to explain away the difference between Chinese and US media, they always quote an American source to prove their point! The US cleans its dirty laundry in public view and you don’t even need to come to the US find the most basic facts of the ugly side of US society. When a bunch of fenqing wrote the virulently xenophobic book “China can say no” back in 1996, they relied on US sources to smear the US.

One major difference I find between the Americans and the Chinese- the Chinese don’t take their press at face value, while the Americans do take their press at face value.

So that is why “pro-Chinese” demonstrators repeat the official PRC version of the Tibet issue almost verbatim?

And where on earth did you get the idea that Americans take their own media at face value. There is plenty of evidence to suggest the opposite. For more reading, take a look at James Fallows’s article “Why Americans Hate the Media”

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/199602/americans-media

April 20, 2008 @ 11:22 pm | Comment

@math
“…, I think they should wait for another 100 years.”

Old Arab proverb
“Wait long enough and you will see the funeral of your enemy pass in front of your door”

There is one problem with that strategy though… You may also be too old then, you may wait until your problems die out, but the world will not wait for you, it will keep moving forward, even faster.

That was happened to China until end of 80s, then they decided to act, but still in many areas CH is way behind, technology, access to energy resources, scientific research, etc. A lot of catchup had and still has to be done. Could you imagine what CH would be today if old ways were still in place?

Procrastination is not a good counselor.

April 20, 2008 @ 11:24 pm | Comment

We should all learn what “harmony” means in Chinese from this. Grace Wang just need to be harmonized with the rest of Chinese students. She wasn’t. So she has to go through a harmonizing exercise, and re-education later.

April 20, 2008 @ 11:42 pm | Comment

It’s sad that Jin Jing the hero is being now called the “traitor” by some on the internet. I believe those are a minority and the vast majority won’t agree.
But think about the reaction to Rev. Wight in the US. This is a man who served in the marine.
And how the media and some voter are obsessed with the lapel flag pin that Obama doesn’t wear everyday. People are saying all kinds of nasty things on internet just because of this.
And the fact that “Swift boating” worked so well against Kerry 4 years ago.
Also “Hanoi Jane” as in Jane Fonda, which wasn’t exactly parallel to the Grace Wang situation, but the reactions… and remeber there was no internet and youtube in 1972.
Human nature is pretty much the same everywhere.

April 21, 2008 @ 12:17 am | Comment

” It cracks me up every time PRC apologists try to explain away the difference between Chinese and US media, they always quote an American source to prove their point! ”

What does American, or Chinese, or French, or whatever, have to do with truth ? Could nationality, or race, and truth possibly be, separate issues ?

I quote Chomsky and his theories- doesn’t matter that he’s an American, doesn’t matter that he’s a Jew. If he was Chinese or French, I’d still quote his ideas. I mainly care about ideas and attempting to seek truths, and I think Chomsky is a critical thinker who’s spent a while time formulating his opinions.

April 21, 2008 @ 12:34 am | Comment

Wang Qianyuan continues her obvious skills as a politician, crafting her message specifically for the audience.

I’m trying to figure out why Wang is a “national hero”, and in what way she’s contributed. I’ve probably read 100 posts in the last two weeks that are far more compelling and comprehensive from other Chinese, often those who’ve lived/worked in Tibet, explaining the need for understanding and compromise with Tibetan *needs*. (Not necessarily with the Dalai Lama, but certainly preservation of religion/culture.) That’s something I’ve personally been sympathetic to since day one.

Wang could arguably be described as someone fighting for the right to have a dissenting opinion, without facing personal abuse. If that’s the best that comes out of her personal experience, great for China.

April 21, 2008 @ 1:11 am | Comment

@Will

What does American, or Chinese, or French, or whatever, have to do with truth ?

Yeah, I was wondering just that when you said:

Well, no matter how conservative or a liberal a paper is in the US, all US papers represent US interests, just like all Chinese papers represent Chinese interests.

April 21, 2008 @ 1:28 am | Comment

“So that is why “pro-Chinese” demonstrators repeat the official PRC version of the Tibet issue almost verbatim? ”

So if there are a 100 Xinhua stories coming out every day and one is on Tibet, and the Chinese people agree with the gov’t verbatim on Tibet but disagree with the other 99 stories because they know these are all govt cover-ups on corruption, everything is whitewashed, etc. does this still mean they are still brainwashed by “the party” ?

April 21, 2008 @ 2:06 am | Comment

We are finaly united.

http://tinyurl.com/5bqbfs

(One country, two systems?) 🙂

April 21, 2008 @ 2:29 am | Comment

@Will

So if there are a 100 Xinhua stories coming out every day and one is on Tibet, and the Chinese people agree with the gov’t verbatim on Tibet but disagree with the other 99 stories because they know these are all govt cover-ups on corruption, everything is whitewashed, etc. does this still mean they are still brainwashed by “the party” ?

Well, unlike the other 99 stories that lie about just anything, such as the environment, corruption or the vitues of Hu Jintao, the Xinhua version of Tibetan history resonate exactly with what people have been taught in school. So, if people are ready to act on the belief that they have taught in school and take to the streets to show support that version of history, that is a pretty good indication of indoctrination.

April 21, 2008 @ 3:10 am | Comment

You manufacture consent when you confine the “free press” to 3-4 “authorative sources.”

Chomsky wrote that prior to the rise of the Internet. Even China is not restricted to “3-4 authorative sources.”

So if there are a 100 Xinhua stories coming out every day and one is on Tibet, and the Chinese people agree with the gov’t verbatim on Tibet but disagree with the other 99 stories because they know these are all govt cover-ups on corruption, everything is whitewashed, etc. does this still mean they are still brainwashed by “the party” ?

Your wild percentage estimates are off the mark and miss the point. Chinese people don’t agree with 1% and disagree with 99% of media stories. Rather, it depends on the type of story. Coverage of domestic incidents and issues are treated with far more skepticism than international ones.

April 21, 2008 @ 3:18 am | Comment

http://tinyurl.com/4jyp4b

Fukuda’s cranking up the criticism a bit now too. The CCP is really between a rock and a hard place, isn’t it?

@Raj
Thanks for posting Wang’s article. It was good to hear her version of what happened.

April 21, 2008 @ 3:26 am | Comment

@Sonagi

The figures come from an earlier post I was responding to. The bottom line is that if you are not only ready to take to the streets to defend the version of Tibetan history you were taught in school, but you also think that alternative versions of Tibetan history should be suppressed, then your behavior pretty much much conform with the text book definition of an indoctrinated person.

April 21, 2008 @ 3:38 am | Comment

I just want to mention that just because the majority of Chinese may vaguely agree with the government on one particular issue should not be taken as widespread support for every single thing the CCP does. If that were the case I doubt there would be tens of thousands of protests in a year (a figure the CCP freely admits). There is little understanding of the other side pretty much because most people make a conclusion then seek to dismiss any other views, and I mean this for both sides. One claims the other to be a conspiracy against it, the other charges “indoctrination” for just about anything the other says. The way I see it, the Free-Tibet movement is pretty much a non-starter, not that I think its illegitimate or anything like that, but because it has so far been unable to even convince the Western democracies from which many of the activists came from to do anything concrete for the movement. The Olympic non-boycott (I call it that because not coming to an opening ceremony where most world leaders weren’t even suppose to come is hardly a boycott) is about the only thing most of the Western governments has done. On the other hand, while giving lip-service to the Tibet movement, countries like France are busy trying to sell nuclear power plants and lift the arms embargo. If the activists cannot even manage to convince the democracies that they live in to recognize an independent Tibet or even to stop selling potential technology for military use or those trains to Tibet (Bombardier from Canada), I doubt they would have any effect on an autocratic country on the other side of the world.

April 21, 2008 @ 4:23 am | Comment

You know whenever a Tibetan (I mean the real Tibetan who lives in Tibet, not those who live in exile) tells a Westerner that his/her live had been greatly improved since 1951, the Westerner immediately goes into what I call “automatic denial.” And almost every Westerner I met assumes that all Tibetans are not happy and they all want independence, at least that’s the impression I got. I’ve always wondered why that is. Now I think I’ve found the answer:

http://tinyurl.com/5eugdz

Now if they do that a thousand times…..

If you want to know how the Western reporters write their China reports, here is an interesting article:

http://tinyurl.com/6ycdp7

You live in China, and yet you rely on these reporters to explain to you what you are seeing with your own eyes. Anything wrong with this picture?

April 21, 2008 @ 4:54 am | Comment

So, foreigners don’t know Tibet because, well, they are foreigners.
Chinese don’t know Tibet because they only meet the minority.

So all the people here are just some idiots arguing with something that no one really knows what’s going on.

April 21, 2008 @ 5:23 am | Comment

hualian, I think we differ in that you’re focusing more on the current situation, whereas I’m concerned about the future. But you are reasoned in your analysis and I thank you for that.

As for censorship, I do find that more problematic. In many respects the government is responsible for unhealthy nationalism as it censors almost all political discussion apart from ultra-nationalism which is normally geared up towards foreigners.

Egypt is finding that if sensible, centre-orientated, secular political organisations are suppressed apart from puppet groups, all that will flourish as the Opposition are pro-Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. The government fears them but won’t do the clever thing which is to tolerate moderate thinking because they see that as a threat to their power-base even more. Similarly the CCP bans moderate and thoughtful Opposition to their rule, which only leaves nationalism as a way of people venting frustration.

April 21, 2008 @ 5:24 am | Comment

http://tinyurl.com/3jm7dw

Graffiti spray-painted on Zenkoji temple

Graffiti were found on the main building of Zenkoji temple in Nagano on Sunday morning, two days after the temple decided not to serve as the starting point of the Beijing Olympic torch relay, which starts Saturday.

The police, who suspect somebody targeted Zenkoji due to the temple’s recent high profile as a result of the torch relay issue, are investigating the case on suspicion of damaging buildings and a violation of the Cultural Properties Protection Law.

A temple official found the graffiti on pillars and doors of the main building, which is a designated national treasure, at about 5:40 a.m., and reported the incident to police.

Six white ellipses up to 80 centimeters in diameter were found on a door and five pillars standing along the corridors running on the northern and western sides of the main building, and a 1.3-meter-long, 5-centimeter-wide line was found on another door on the building’s north side, according to the temple. All the graffiti apparently were done with spray paint. Though the front and the northeast side of the main building are illuminated at night, there is no such lighting on the northwest side.

Smooth. I’m sure that will really win the Japanese over to China’s POV. And, yes, it was almost certainly one/a few angry people. But the same can be said about Jin Jing. China will just have to hope that Japan will be more reasonable in its reaction.

April 21, 2008 @ 5:28 am | Comment

Breaking news!

4/20/2008, Ann Arbor, Michigan

The Dalai Lama was greeted with a “sea of red” (as promised) this afternoon in the Chrisler Arena in UM Ann Arbor, Michigan. The number of the Chinese protesters is in the thousands, including students, elderly and kids. There was a Tibetan lady in Tibetan costume, singing and dancing at the gate of the arena. No, if you are wondering, she is not there for “Free Tibet”, she is for a united China. The “Free Tibet” clowns were no where to be found. A plane was circling over the arena with a banner “Dalai stop attacking the Olympic flames” and the crowds were cheering.

I will try to find some pictures when they are available.

Dalai Lama has pushed the wrong button this time, he will be followed by protests everywhere he goes from now on. I think he’d better stay in India.

April 21, 2008 @ 5:37 am | Comment

@AC

http://tinyurl.com/5rtmfu

Just wait for the counter protest. It is going to be interesting.

Do not forget to take photos too. 😉

April 21, 2008 @ 7:01 am | Comment

Ultranationalists are all big hypocrite morons who skew and distort universal principles to suit their agendas.

Good on Jin Jing for making all the Free Tibet and fenqing retards look like the brainless thugs they are.

April 21, 2008 @ 7:11 am | Comment

Some pictures:

http://tinyurl.com/3hvz4n
http://tinyurl.com/3pfzkf
http://tinyurl.com/45o7qu

April 21, 2008 @ 7:14 am | Comment

ecodelta,

The events are already over. Who is going to counter protest and what are they going to protest about?

April 21, 2008 @ 7:18 am | Comment

Tried to post some links, but it was blocked. Here is one:

http://tinyurl.com/3hvz4n

April 21, 2008 @ 7:26 am | Comment

@AC

The tour is not yet over. It will be interesting to see one side facing the other.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not a FreeTB activist.

I think the CH student latch their hurt national pride to the DL because he is prominent figure, but he is the wrong target to blame for the violence. Rather, when he disappears and the conflict remains unsolved, CH will find increasingly difficult to control the situation in TB without recursing to more violent methods. What further consequences it may arise in other areas is hard to see.

Your are lousing an opportunity to solve a conflict in a reasonable way, but because of your denominization of the DL you are unable to see it.

April 21, 2008 @ 7:34 am | Comment

ecodelta,

“DL because he is prominent figure”

He is prominent in the West. Do I need to tell you why?

“Rather, when he disappears and the conflict remains unsolved, CH will find increasingly difficult to control the situation in TB without recursing to more violent methods.”

The CCP can’t hardly wait for the TYC to use more violent methods. The TI movement will be dead if they use violence, because they will lose sympathy from the international communities. Do you think the Indian government can keep them if they use terrorism? The CCP is very close to label the TYC a terrorist organization.

“Human rights” can be used to fool clueless Westerners like you, violence can’t. TYC is useless to the West, but DL can be used because he has followers inside Tibet, especially the monks. When the current DL is gone, the TI movement will lose it’s speaker. And Beijing will pick the 15th DL who will be pro Beijing. Even if the TGIE picks their own DL, there will be at least a 20-year vacuum. Not to mention China will be much stronger by the time, few government will dare to support them. Now you know why they are desperate? Instead of letting it expire, why not use it one last time?

April 21, 2008 @ 8:15 am | Comment

What Jin Jing has done is to follow the official CCP policy (against boycotting Carrefour).

As to Grace Wang, she reminded me somebody in 1989 who tried to persuade students not to go on streets but was shouted down.

Blaming Fenqing on Beijing is easy, but it does not explain some why some oversea Chinese (who have never been brainwashed by the CCP) also felt indignant over recent events.

April 21, 2008 @ 8:17 am | Comment

@AC

The “Free Tibet” clowns were no where to be found.

According to reports, 8000 filled the arena to listen to DL. I guess that’s where your clowns went. Why would they bother to stand outside arguing with a crowd of 100 or so who wanted hijack a religious event to disseminate their political views?

April 21, 2008 @ 8:22 am | Comment

1. The most dangerous thing about China is CCPs control of information flow. Situation in China is like this:
The majority of chinese + educated youth know that news r being censored. For them especially the youth, the internet is THE SOURCE of information they see as true&unfiltered by CCP. While newagencys do check the reliability of their news, the internet doesnt. So ppl can post anything, unchecked & distorted, and viewers take this as the truth. The case of Grace Wang is the perfect example for this. Most viewers only know the pics and depiction of her being with Free- Tibet protesters. Of course they will be too lazy to check the neutrality of the reports.

Also, the CCPs media only allows one voice and one direction of thinking. So, after 50 years, the Chinese simply forgot how to accept or deal with views different from their own. Thats because they themselves dont hear anyother voices too often, they r not being confronted with different views. The westeners on the other side, r being confronted with different views on a daily basis. Thanks to free press they have a wide range of left/middle/right media institutions.

2. Most Chinese think Grace Wang pulled the whole thing to get the green card . They think she will ask for political asylum soon so that she can stay in the US. They think she did that with a selfish purpose and not because she really cared about China or Tibet. Lets wait and see what this Lady is gonna do next.

3. Jing Jing is still being regarded as a hero and many ppl do agree with her.

April 21, 2008 @ 8:32 am | Comment

Amban,

100? That was yesterday, it’s a two-day event. You are not going to find the news in the mainstream media. They will never report that because it’s self-defeating. Go to YouTube or the Chinese media, you will find clips and information about the mass protests in London, Paris, Berlin and LA yesterday.

We have no problem with DL’s religion, we only have problems with his politics. As a matter of fact, DL has many Chinese followers in China like the 8000 people you mentioned. That doesn’t mean they are all “Free Tibet” clowns. I am sure you are intelligent enough to tell the difference, are you?

He should stay in India and practice his religion. I don’t think he will ever set foot in Tibet again. So Buddhism is his best medicine, he is really going to need it.

April 21, 2008 @ 9:34 am | Comment

@CLC
“He is prominent in the West. Do I need to tell you why?”
Not only in the “west”, whatever you understand for that, but also in your neighbor countries and also inside TB.
Why? You are going to tell me one of your conspiracy theories, right?

“Human rights” can be used to fool clueless
Westerners like you,”
Thanks for the compliment ;-P

“When the current DL is gone, the TI movement will lose it’s speaker”
Should I make you aware that sometimes it is more difficult to get rid of someone dead than alive? You are risking to make a martyr of him. And then what?

“Not to mention China will be much stronger by the time, few government will dare to support them.”
Promoting tensions inside your own country? Keep dreaming. Your strategic position is not, and never will be so strong like you think. CH has a major mismatch between population and available resource, you need the world more than the world need you. Besides CH is surrounded by countries that will respond to any major change in power.

“Now you know why they are desperate?”
You sound quite desperate yourself to me.

April 21, 2008 @ 9:53 am | Comment

According to Naomi Klein’s book “The Shock Doctrine”, the CIA’s interest in brain washing began in the 1950s after observing behavioral changes in US POWS returning from the Korean War.

What’s interesting about the Chinese students is their apparent “regression”, i.e., the immaturity. Many observers have commented on this phenomenon, which is not reflected in Chinese from other regions, countries. Apparently, one objective of brain washing is to regress the subject to a childlike state to make the subject more easily influenced and controllable. It may also have the effect of heightening childlike feelings towards parental authority. If the parent can meet the child’s basic material and psychic needs (for food, “face”, etc.) then the child would have a strong emotional, irrational, unquestioning bond towards the parental authority.

The CIA’s experiments often ended in failure. The CIA attempted to induce regression by electro-shocks to the brain and harsh chemicals, like LSD. In some cases, the subjects were reduced to vegetables. The Chinese, it seems, have had much greater success.

April 21, 2008 @ 9:54 am | Comment

@ecodelta

Who are you talking to?

April 21, 2008 @ 10:14 am | Comment

According to Naomi Klein’s book “The Shock Doctrine” the CIA’s interest in brain washing began in the 1950s after observing behavioral changes in US POWS returning from the Korean War.

What’s interesting about the Chinese students is their apparent “regression”, i.e., the immaturity. Many observers have commented on this phenomenon, which is not reflected in Chinese from other regions, countries. Apparently, one objective of brain washing is to regress the subject to a childlike state to make the subject more easily influenced and controllable. It may also have the effect of heightening childlike feelings towards parental authority. If the parent can meet the child’s basic material and psychic needs (for food, “face” etc.) then the child would have a strong emotional, irrational, unquestioning bond towards the parental authority.

The CIA’s experiments often ended in failure. The CIA attempted to induce regression by electro-shocks to the brain and harsh chemicals, like LSD. In some cases, the subjects were reduced to vegetables. The Chinese, it seems, have had much greater success.

April 21, 2008 @ 10:25 am | Comment

ecodelta,

“Should I make you aware that sometimes it is more difficult to get rid of someone dead than alive? You are risking to make a martyr of him. And then what?”

See, was I wrong to say you are clueless? 🙂

Tibetan Buddhism believes in REINCARNATION. Westerners usually don’t have any clues in Buddhism, I don’t blame you.

“Promoting tensions inside your own country? Keep dreaming. Your strategic position is not, and never will be so strong like you think. CH has a major mismatch between population and available resource, you need the world more than the world need you. Besides CH is surrounded by countries that will respond to any major change in power. ”

We have 5000 years of experience in dealing with that. We survived, didn’t we?

“You sound quite desperate yourself to me.”

Me? Hardly.

April 21, 2008 @ 10:35 am | Comment

For someone who is at Duke, Grace Wong should know Communism is based on the materialism while Capitalism is based on the idealism. I know most people will think the opposite. So you can’t be a capitalist and materialist at the same time…

Today’s China is walking a very thin line again on to populism and nationalism. Last time this happened, culture revolution happened.

I still don’t get how China government could spin the anti-western propaganda so well since Communism, its flag, and its founding philosophy are all from the West :P! Yes, it is time for all Chinese to renounce communism and burn its five star flags, since they are of Western influence.

April 21, 2008 @ 10:52 am | Comment

This is slick information manipulation at its finest. For one thing, angry anonymous rantings posted on the internet are just that, angry anonymous rantings. Specific comments made by separate individuals from separate forums are highlighted to perpetuate the reification of random data into a singular Chinese gestalt consciousness thereby projecting the image of contradiction and illogic upon all Chinese in totality. It only really works because it relies on the observers per-conceived notions and more importantly the cartelization of communication that language differences impose.

In other words, I could cherry pick post X by individual Y from forum Z saying that the Pope’s visit blessed America and invigors the faithful while contrasting it to post A by individual B at forum C denouncing him as the Anti-Christ and damning all the Papists to hell and claim that America and by extension Americans were incoherent psychotics. This would be made “true” if my audience did not speak English and most importantly were already pre-disposed to think of America(ns) as incoherent psychotics.

April 21, 2008 @ 10:59 am | Comment

Arty,

Communism and Capitalism are both materialist, i.e., Marx accepted the premise of Capitalism that material conditions determine peoples’ thinking—proft motive. Communist and Capitalism are both anti-spiritualist. If taken to its logical conclusion, materialism would lead to…. They’re opposite sides of the same coin, i.e., materialism.

April 21, 2008 @ 10:59 am | Comment

Arty,

Did you see the ROC flag in the LA protest? That’s the result of Chinese government spin?

April 21, 2008 @ 11:08 am | Comment

@AC

Tibetan Buddhism believes in REINCARNATION.

Thank you for educating us. This must be the first time most of us learn this basic fact.

And Beijing will pick the 15th DL who will be pro Beijing.

So, I assume that the CCP has gone Tibetan Buddhist. How and when did that happen?

April 21, 2008 @ 11:25 am | Comment

What amused me about the demonstrations in LA were not the ROC flags. I saw a photo of someone flying a pair of late Qing Imperial standards. That really put a smile on my face

April 21, 2008 @ 11:27 am | Comment

@Amban,

You didn’t know the BASIC FACT that the DL has always been picked by Beijing for centuries?

@Jing,

Take a look at this link
http://tinyurl.com/5bqbfs

I posted earlier, it’s pretty funny.

April 21, 2008 @ 11:44 am | Comment

Most Chinese think Grace Wang pulled the whole thing to get the green card . They think she will ask for political asylum soon so that she can stay in the US. They think she did that with a selfish purpose and not because she really cared about China or Tibet. Lets wait and see what this Lady is gonna do next.

Well, I guess if most Chinese people think that’s the story, then it must be true. What is their source for this information? Is there one shred of evidence?

April 21, 2008 @ 11:49 am | Comment

@AC

You didn’t know the BASIC FACT that the DL has always been picked by Beijing for centuries?

Well, the ideological foundation of that arrangement was the fact that the Manchu imperial house was Tibetan Buddhist and that the Qing emperor was revered by the Tibetans as Jampeyang Gongma, or an incarnation of Manjushri. Is there anyone in Tibet or elsewhere how reveres Hu Jintao as a boddhisattva or did I miss anything?

It would be interesting to hear your profound insights on this matter, but many people feel it is a bit of a stretch to assume that the avowedly atheist CCP could claim to have a say in the appointment of the DL based on the Qing arrangement. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that a CCP-appointed DL would have some credibility problems with Tibetan Buddhists.

April 21, 2008 @ 12:03 pm | Comment

Hi,

Need to give some perspective on the “brainwashed” PRC people. I grew up in Singapore in the 80s and it was a time where everywhere it was evident that people were living better lives than 1 generation back. People were just too grateful to want to protest against the system and who could blame them. It was the classic example of the golden straitjacket.

In Singapore we are discovering that the system is not so perfect and it will not so for eternity but under the legacy of our 80s mindset it will take a long time before we start embracing democracy. It irks me a little to see China going down a similar path but it is not really irrational.

The other point relates to peoples’ perceptions of China’s CCP which is that it is based on “western values”. Confucian values of sacrifice for the common good and loyalty to nation have been around for thousands of years and communism would never have taken root in China if it didn’t resonate sufficiently with these age old traditions.

As for the debate on Tibet it is bogged down with plenty of bogey issues like independence and “what really is buddhism about” and other very interesting ideas. We even have people talking about obscure events that have taken place hundreds of years ago.

I think it would be more useful to talk about concrete issues like the rights of Tibetians in their own homeland vis a vis the Han Chinese, and seeing if their grievances are real. I would say that even if the Chinese government can show that Tibetian independence is not feasible considering the close economic ties between Tibet and the rest of China, it needs to assure the rest of the world that the regime in Tibet is not a racist one which discriminates against Tibetians.

April 21, 2008 @ 1:23 pm | Comment

Regardless of Ms. Wang’s intentions, I love how the Chinese are always ripping into their own the most viciously.

Must be why after 5,000 years of “culture” and history, they’re still “developing” and don’t have that teamwork drive ethic like the Japanese…

April 21, 2008 @ 3:41 pm | Comment

Yeah that had nothing to do with Japan attacking China, killing 20 million people, destroying almost all of its infrastructure, and routing the Nationalist army.

Moron.

April 21, 2008 @ 4:04 pm | Comment

How real Chinese police handle protesters as seen on Youtube

April 21, 2008 @ 4:46 pm | Comment

Shortlove:

Be that as it may if I want to watch white ppl kill each other for fun any history book on any European theatre of WWI or WWII would do. “Dr Strangelove” is also kinda fun.

April 21, 2008 @ 4:53 pm | Comment

@ Ferin:

And what exactly does that have to do with the Chinese ripping into their own?

April 21, 2008 @ 6:45 pm | Comment

Don’t mind ferin! He’s just talking to himself.

April 21, 2008 @ 6:50 pm | Comment

@AC

Nothing to say? Didn’t expect you to!

April 21, 2008 @ 9:03 pm | Comment

I am a white American living in Shanghai who doesn’t support Tibet Independence. I wanted to add this anecdote to broaden out the picture of the much touted activist urban upper class youth who are up in arms of late. My experiences with these folks has been pretty depressing.

I met up with a friend who is also a CCP member here and she brought up the MSN Heart China trend and proudly showed it off. I asked why everyone was pissed off with France rather than Germany or Britain whose heads of state have already said they won’t attend the opening ceremony. She said that was because she heard their CEO had donated to Tibet Independence groups. When pressed she went on google and searched the Chinese langauge sources and was unable to find any supporting evidence, only that Chinese felt betrayed by France, who had formally had good relations with China. I was underwhelmed since she didn’t even know why she was protesting in the first place.

She then started talking about the East Turkestan movement and how it was led by the Dalai Lama. I said that I thought that was in Xinjiang and was unrelated. She then said, wait, where is Tibet and had to look it up on a map. She then said since they were both independence movements they must be in cahoots. And Taiwan too. She was also unable to figure out which religion the various ethnic groups were. She also said that the people there were “wild” and had been under the tutelage of China for centuries, and that it was good that China could be civilizing them. When I asked if that wasn’t the devinition of Imperialism, as some of the protestors claim, she said “China has never had imperialism.” Can’t argue with that, I suppose.

The point of this is to illustrate that there are people involved in this wave of outcry who don’t know a thing about it and yet are very outraged. While this is only a story of one person, I have talked to many others who also have only a very loose grasp of who the players are and what the stakes are. So I would venture that many if not most of the people up in arms are fairly ill informed. Instead, the response reminds me of the American reponse to French criticism of the Iraq invasion: We’re Right, You’re Wrong! How dare you question us!

April 21, 2008 @ 10:38 pm | Comment

Amban,

Unlike you, I need to sleep and I have work to do.

Can you show me where in the rules does it say the central government has to be Buddhist or the emperor has to be a reincarnation?

April 21, 2008 @ 10:46 pm | Comment

@AC:

100? That was yesterday, it’s a two-day event. You are not going to find the news in the mainstream media. They will never report that because it’s self-defeating.

You are completely right. The news blackout has been complete. Only the student fanzine Detroit Free Press had the guts to cover the pro-PRC protests:

http://tinyurl.com/3hkwl3

Can you show me where in the rules does it say the central government has to be Buddhist or the emperor has to be a reincarnation?

Are you kidding?

April 21, 2008 @ 10:52 pm | Comment

Amban,

When did Detroit Free Press become mainstream media? Oh, it was so nice of them to mention the protest, we are so greatful that our voice has been heard around the world.

No, I wasn’t kidding. Where in rules does it say the emperor has to be a reincarnation?

April 21, 2008 @ 11:07 pm | Comment

@AC

When did Detroit Free Press become mainstream media?

Detroit Free Press is owned by Gannett Company, which reportedly “is the largest U.S. newspaper publisher as measured by total daily circulation.”

Where in rules does it say the emperor has to be a reincarnation?

“Where in the rules…?” This was a document written in 1792 under a special set of circumstances. DLs have been appointed both before and after 1792 without the approval of “Beijing”, including the current DL. You got to be kidding me. What authority does the atheist CCP have to appoint a religious figure?

April 21, 2008 @ 11:17 pm | Comment

@Lin Zexu

Chinese are angry at the french because the Paris city officials including the mayor tried to humiliate China, it was a set up. The city government building was one of the stops. They hung Tibetan flags in front of the building and inside the windows. And then there was the story of Jin Jing.

Do a search on YouTube, you will find out how the torch was extinguished. It was the Chinese torch guard who extinguished the flame when he saw the flags. In the clip, you can hear a french woman laughing. The Paris mayor was left on the stage dumbfounded.

April 21, 2008 @ 11:23 pm | Comment

Amban,

I don’t need your explanations, I want to see the exact text of the rules.

April 21, 2008 @ 11:27 pm | Comment

@AC

I want to see the exact text of the rules.

You’re the one who brought up the appointment of DL from Beijing, so you be the one to show us the exact text of the rules. I don’t want any of those shoddy putonghua renderings that are bandied about on the Internet, give us the real thing.

Oh, by the way, are you referring to the Manchu, Tibetan or Chinese version of the rules? As you are well aware of, Chinese was not the language of communication between Qing emperor and the empires outer dependencies.

April 21, 2008 @ 11:43 pm | Comment

Amban,

I am not going to waste any more time argueing with you if you can’t show me the text. Let’s just call it quits.

April 21, 2008 @ 11:57 pm | Comment

@AC

I am not going to waste any more time argueing with you if you can’t show me the text.

Well, the burden of proof is on you, since you are the one who claims that the “DL has always been picked by Beijing for centuries.”

And quite apart from you utter failure to provide us with any proofs, to say that “DL has always been picked by Beijing for centuries” kind of ignores the fact that the DL is an institution that is 250 years older than the Qing dynasty.

And I don’t even think that the CCP claims that Ming emperors were involved in appointing DLs.

So you have been caught with your pants down.

April 22, 2008 @ 12:06 am | Comment

@AC/Amban,

I personally don’t see the relevance of how the Qing emperors did things with the Dalai Lama. I personally don’t care whether the Qing emperor is Buddhist, and whether the Chinese president today is Buddhist. What matters is China 2008, and how we want to build our country.

I don’t believe the Chinese government should be involved in selecting future lamas. But I also firmly believe that lamas must be separated from all political powers and influence; these two issues must go together. If religious obedience is matched up with political campaigns, then the Chinese government has the right to be involved in managing religious faith.

As far as Grace Wang, I’ll repeat she doesn’t deserve being attacked by the internet mob, and I personally can’t wait until shimingzhi is implemented and the internet mob curbed.

I also appreciate Grace Wang’s Chinese patriotism and her efforts to find a way of defeating Tibetan independence. (She didn’t talk about that in much detail in her Washington Post article, did she? But she did in her letter to the Chinese student association.)

April 22, 2008 @ 1:42 am | Comment

I agree with AC way back at the top… The CCP wants this to blow over for sure/ I dont think anyone on the commie side wants any kind of talks or resolution, cause they do not want to comprimise on their anti human rights stance. The CCP cares what the Chinese peoples minds contain. They demonize the Dalai Lama because they do not want people thinking that it is real people thinking stuff, they want their to be an anitchina force at work so as to make out a force that all Chinese people can unite against without giving it any thought. This is a big mess of propaganda and it is totally unfair to the Chinese people. It is not fair that they think some of what the CCP says is true and some is false but they have no idea which is which, how can they?

It is only logical that as long as the CCP is a violent anti freedom tyranny, we will never know the true thoughts of Chinese people only the allowed thoght process instilled through terrorism and controlled contrived info. Ms. Wang was brave enough to stand up even with her parents still in China. Most cannot bear that threat. But it seems she did not know what the “nationalists” act like.
Some say she did it to get a grren card. SO SHE threw poop on her parents house? SHE arranged for her high school to take back her diploma? SHE made Chinese peopel animals so that she could have a force of threat that would necessitate her staying in America? What the heck?

April 22, 2008 @ 1:51 am | Comment

its so humiliating for the Chinese people, it is unbearable to watch and listen to AC….

AC you are gloating that an airplane flew by accusing Dalai Lama of attacking a torch????? EVEN IF HE DID attack a torch so what , its a torch???? Its just a bloody stick on fire. I know some Chinese people want it to represent the glory of their country, but the CCP has highjacked it and it has been made by the propaganda regime to represent the false glory of the CCP.

I really have to ask… Do Chinese people want to take responsibility for the CCPs crimes? The cultural revolution is not over, its just that it has basically worked and the people have adapted to the accepted thought process to keep themselves from been literally eaten alive and having poop thrown on their home etc etc….. Do Chinese people want to take responsibility for the mass organ harvesting of Falun Gong people and other “human rights” crimes of killing and gross injustice, lying and gulags, all that stuff?

I hate to see the people not being able to love their country without blindly loving the party. All the Chinese people would have to say to the CCN types is ” hey, watch what you say, please make it clear who you are criticising, the CCP regime, or the good hearted Chinese people”

If the people cannot make this distinction they they will have to be prepared to stand judged for the CCP crimes. And that will be really really ungly and sooooo terrible…..

You say Chinese people do not trust the CCP media, so then why does it seem like they trust their own opinions on the CCP itself when they have been fed the CCPs take on its-self? Its like if the CCP says Mao was 70% good and 30% bad, the Chinese will accept it because it sounds as if the CCP is admitting its not perfect. Just enough to sound believable….

I just dont get the backward values system of thinking it is glorious and brave to stand up for a stick on fire which represents a corrupt regime of money but at the same time it is the greatest sin to say that the regime is wrong for killing. So killing is ok, but torch grabbing is evil? Throwing poop is good because its on Ms. wang but torch grabbing is bad cause its grabbed from a commie? So murdering falun Gong people is ok because you buy into media that you know is lying to you, but setting France flags on fire and boycotting Carrefour is heroic because the mayor of Paris supports human rights. What the heck ?

April 22, 2008 @ 2:07 am | Comment

@CCT

I personally don’t see the relevance of how the Qing emperors did things with the Dalai Lama.

I agree.

I don’t believe the Chinese government should be involved in selecting future lamas.

I agree.

But I also firmly believe that lamas must be separated from all political powers and influence; these two issues must go together.

If lamas are elected to political positions, I don’t think there is much to object on a purely procedural level. Probably that is what could happen if Tibet had some kind of representative government. Tibet is China’s Ireland, the more you try to push religion out of politics, the more it comes back.

The problem is that the current government of China is not democratic and that the CCP cannot tolerate any real or perceived threats to its rule, which is a sign of fundamental weakness.

April 22, 2008 @ 2:17 am | Comment

Amban,

No, I don’t think lamas “elected to political positions” is automatically separation of church and state. Looking at the Tibet government-in-exile:

http://www.tibet.com/dholgyal/CTA-book/chapter-3-1.html

… stuff like this tells me how little separation between church/state exists in the Dalai Lama’s own administration, even with the “democratic” reforms they’ve already implemented.

The only “compromise” solution I can possibly imagine for Tibet, which I’ve spoken of before, is the Vatican solution. Give the Dalai Lama and his religious monks completely autonomy in Old Lhasa, in exchange for a firm declaration that the religious class must absolutely separate itself from political affairs.

April 22, 2008 @ 2:38 am | Comment

@CCT

To be quite frank, I do not know the solution to this problem, but the first step to any solution has to be that Beijing drops its colonial and condescending attitude towards the Tibetans and their religious beliefs.

I don’t like when religion and politics are mixed up any more than you do, but this is not an ordinary problem and the Tibetan Buddhist church is not nearly as powerful as the Catholic church is or was.

April 22, 2008 @ 3:00 am | Comment

This girl (and her family) ought to be offered political asylum in the US. The family’s troubles will never end and if she goes back she faces severe physical danger and probably few if any career or even marriage opportunities.

April 22, 2008 @ 3:16 am | Comment

@Amban,

Seems to me the Tibetan Buddhist theocracy is more powerful than the Catholic Church, not less. The Catholic Church always co-existed with the European nobility, with varying degrees of competition and mutual support. I don’t see any contest for the Dalai Lama’s political power, in contrast.

And as far as “dropping the colonial and condescending attitude”… what bothers you the most right now is that the Chinese government is being rude? Anything specific on policies?

April 22, 2008 @ 3:29 am | Comment

@CCT & Amban
I really like the ideal of separation of church and state in my own society, but to play devil’s advocate here, what if the majority of Tibetans don’t like it; what if they want their theocracy back? What justifies us, as PRC Chinese or Westerners (in this case defined as anyone who is neither PRC Chinese nor Tibetan) in telling them they need to get ‘progressive’ and accept our political and social ideals as their own?

This is especially important, I think, if you accept that Tibet and the Tibetans are part of the PRC ‘nation’ rather than just a colony of it. The whole idea of a nation is a cooperative, willing partnership between different people and communities for mutual benefit. (At least this is how I interpreted it. Do you disagree?). So if the PRC government dismisses the interests and desires of the Tibetans as primitive or just the result of foolish ignorance (presuming in this argument that the Tibetans do want their theocracy back), how is that reconcilable with the idea of the Tibetans being part of the ‘nation’ of the PRC?

April 22, 2008 @ 3:39 am | Comment

Back in 2006, the now defunct business magazine “Business 2.0” did an analysis of a future China based on current trends (circa 2006). They plotted 4 possible futures from very good to very bad (at least from a western perspective). Right now it looks like scenario #3 could be the most likely one. The graphics are a little trite but the analysis is interesting nonetheless.
http://www.gbn.com/GBNDocumentDisplayServlet.srv?aid=38062&url=%2FUploadDocumentDisplayServlet.srv%3Fid%3D36452

April 22, 2008 @ 3:45 am | Comment

@CCT

Anything specific on policies?

Quite specifically, Tibet is not run by Tibetans, but by colonial officers appointed from Beijing whose qualifications are not knowledge of the language and culture of the people they administer. The current strong man, Zhang Qingli, is born in Shandong and his major qualification is the fact that he was the leader of the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, a neo-colonial corporation that effectlively run large parts of Xinjiang.

@Lime

I agree, if Tibetans don’t want to be run by a secular government, there is little we can do about it.

April 22, 2008 @ 3:52 am | Comment

but to play devil’s advocate here, what if the majority of Tibetans don’t like it

Then the majority of Tibetans are wrong, imo. It’s not a good idea to advocate for moral relativism with democratic characteristics here.

Since that would justify the CCP in shirking from reform. The Dalai Lama also rejects theocracy.

how is that reconcilable with the idea of the Tibetans being part of the ‘nation’ of the PRC?

It is technically reconcilable because the CCP dismisses a lot of non-Tibetan people as foolish, childish, etc when all they want is realistic improvements in transparency and rule of law.

@CCT
the Dalai Lama and his religious monks completely autonomy in Old Lhasa

I don’t think the Dalai Lama would accept partial autonomy for even the TAR alone, much less give up Amdo and Kham. I don’t think the government in exile’s leaders would even consider that offer as history has shown.

April 22, 2008 @ 4:06 am | Comment

@Amban
Well the PRC can and does keep enough soldiers in Tibet that it can enforce whatever form of governance it feels like on the Tibetans, but my point is that this should create problems when people try to argue that the CCP has made Tibet and Tibetans part of the PRC as a nation, rather than an empire.

I think that arguing that the Tibetans are full and equal citizens of the People’s Republic of China may be something of a misrepresentation of both the reality and the attitude of the bulk of the Mainland Chinese people.
The pro-PRC crowds in Malaysia chanting “Taiwan and Tibet belong to China” (http://tinyurl.com/3enlu5), implying an ownership of both the people and territory, maybe a much more accurate reflection.

April 22, 2008 @ 4:13 am | Comment

@Lime,

This week, front-page news in the United States was the police raid of a polygamist compound. In this compound, men had multiple wives, and girls were often married off as soon as they reached puberty. (In various areas of the United States, it is actually legal for girls to marry at a young age.)

Why? Why can’t polygamy be legal in the United States if these people desired it? Many people talked about religious brain-washing; about children raised to fear eternal damnation if they wouldn’t listen to the word of their religious leader.

If Tibet is part of China (as I believe it is), then all Chinese have some say in the future of Tibet. There are certainly reasonable limits to whatever form of autonomy (for example: polyandry is still legal in Tibet, and I think it should remain legal)… but I for don’t accept that any part of China should be ruled by a theocracy.

April 22, 2008 @ 4:52 am | Comment

@Lime,

One sign I saw yesterday: “Tibet belongs to China, just as I belong to China.” The concept of property ownership doesn’t fit here.

In any country, democratic or not, the government can not possibly please 100% of its citizenship. Tibetans are Chinese. If they desire a theocracy but the vast majority of Chinese do not accept such a concept, then they’ll have to accommodate. Just like the Mormon polygamists in the United States have to bend to the will of the majority.

Tibetans who want religious freedom and cultural preservation have some hope (my own opinion) of convincing the vast majority of Chinese to support them in such an effort.

My personal interpretation is that the Dalai Lama’s government-in-exile has *tactically* decided since 1988 to place its hope in the international community rather than the Chinese community. I personally think this is a mistake, and it’s not clear to me yet that he quite gets it.

April 22, 2008 @ 4:56 am | Comment

@CCT
The US polygamist comparison is not a grand one for Tibet. For the Falun Gongers it would be good (if you are going to be part of American society, you can’t be a polygamist/if you are going to part of PRC society you can’t be a Falun Gonger).
Polygamists are not a majority anywhere in the US, save about three very small towns. The Tibetans, on the other hand, are geographically concentrated and isolated, and may (do you think ‘probably’ would be too strong?) have expectations of their governances that differ significantly from the rest of the PRC.

Which brings us back to the whole reasoning behind forcing a group of people with divergent ideas about how a society should work into a larger nation (and, in this case, for no material benefit). I understand that your key argument is that the majority of PRC Chinese want this, but that doesn’t make it a really great idea for a nation builder.

As for the Tenzin Gyatso, I’m not convinced whether an appeal to the PRC people for Tibetan independence, under the circumstances, was much of an option. And in the long run, as our cultures and economies become more and more integrated, the PRC is only going to have to become more responsive to the global communities ideas, not less (this is true for every nation, I believe). So whether Mr. Gyatso has made a mistake or not is yet to be seen.

@Ferin
I think what’s become really apparent here is that we all have different ideas about morality, so if we want to discuss this, perhaps unfortunately, forces us into moral relativism. I also think that failure to acknowledge this is why Snow often has such a hard getting positive responses on her comments.

“It is technically reconcilable because the CCP dismisses a lot of non-Tibetan people as foolish, childish, etc when all they want is realistic improvements in transparency and rule of law.”
On this you may have a point. Maybe my definition of a nation does not work with dictatorships.

April 22, 2008 @ 6:03 am | Comment

(and, in this case, for no material benefit).

I want to stress again that Tibet is a major geopolitical asset. The modest estimate puts Tibet’s natural resources at 10-20 trillion yuan.

Then there are the borders, rivers, etc.

I’d say Tibet is part of China as much as China is part of Tibet in a geostrategic sense.

April 22, 2008 @ 7:10 am | Comment

@everybody

For anyone who has any doubt that the PRC wants to hold a firm grip on Tibetan Buddhism, take a look at the following regulations:

http://tinyurl.com/4f9ee8

As of last year, Tibetan Buddhist communities have to apply before they find reincarnations of Living Buddhas. Religious freedom, indeed.

April 22, 2008 @ 7:13 am | Comment

@Lime,

I fail to see why the polygamist argument is a poor one. The state of Utah was forced to ban polygamy first, before it could have any political representation in Washington DC.

I find the comment that there are “3 small towns” which support polygamy a little odd; I’ve been through that part of the United States before. No one introduced themselves to me as a polygamist, but I saw plenty of people living the life of fundamentalist Mormons. Why can’t they have autonomy to live the polygamous life they’d like to have?

As far as Tenzin Gyatso… I think he’s done an excellent, excellent job of playing for Western sympathies. If his purpose was to get Tibetan flags onto Western capitals, and/or find adherents amongst the West, I personally think he’s been wildly successful.

But if his objectives are elsewhere… I can’t figure out how he’s achieved them. Let’s say his purpose is to achieve independence. Is he close to success today? I can’t see how. The direct reaction of Tibetan flags being flown in Western capitals is Tibetan flags being burnt (metaphorically) in Chinese cities. The “action” of foreign pressure translates into direct “reaction” of Chinese defiance on this issue. Saying you support *independence* for Tibet on the Chinese streets today is somewhat similar to saying you support Osama Bin-ladin’s political goals on the streets of New York.

Now, if his purpose was to seek out autonomy for the Tibetan people… he’s also failed. He’s failed to build consensus in the exile community, and he’s failed to impress anyone in China on the issue. The few people who try to speak on his behalf in China don’t have much to work with, because other than his conflicting comments about not “seeking” independence, other than his exaggerated statements about Lhasa 3/14 that almost all Chinese believe to be lies… there’s nothing else to lean on.

April 22, 2008 @ 7:20 am | Comment

@Amban,

Very similar policies apply to the Catholic Church in China, in terms of the selection and recognition of Bishops.

China’s constitution verbally allows freedom of religion, but comes with it (in the constitution itself) a long list of “buts”: not raising hostility amongst different religions; not separating the country; etc, etc.

April 22, 2008 @ 7:25 am | Comment

@CCT

The “action” of foreign pressure translates into direct “reaction” of Chinese defiance on this issue.

So basically, Tibetans are being held hostage by some people in China who don’t like the “West”.

Saying you support *independence* for Tibet on the Chinese streets today is somewhat similar to saying you support Osama Bin-ladin’s political goals on the streets of New York.

Let me get this straight, you are comparing the cause of independence to the cause of a guy who has said it is correct to kill Americans just because they are Americans.

April 22, 2008 @ 7:48 am | Comment

@CCT

Very similar policies apply to the Catholic Church in China, in terms of the selection and recognition of Bishops.

Equally absurd. Sometimes, I wonder if the West shouldn’t respond reciprocally to Chinese-run organizations in the West. Perhaps that would be the right way to apply pressure…

April 22, 2008 @ 7:51 am | Comment

@CCT
@Amban

You guys are going around circles in arguing what SHOULD happen.

The fact is Qing court, since the days of Qiang Long has always interfered (or at least tried to ) in Reincarnations of Dalai and Panchen Lamas whenever it had the chance (I thought an Amban would know the details).

PRC has inherited the practise.

Arguing whether such practise is “RIGHT” is rather pointless.

PRC will continue doing whatever to help it cement controls over Tibet.

At the end of day, West can do very little about Tibet except maybe use it as a cynical leverage to apply pressure on China.

Unless the West is willing to replay this

April 22, 2008 @ 8:38 am | Comment

@Amban,

No, I’m not comparing the cause of independence to the cause of Osama Bin-Ladin. I’m comparing the popular reaction to Tibetan independence in China, and the popular reaction to Osama Bin-Ladin in the United States.

China and the United States are different countries with a different understanding of history. This leads to different reactions to the same events… or similar reactions to different events, in this case.

As far as the West responding reciprocally to “Chinese-run” organizations in the West… I can’t really think of any great analogue groups, can you?

April 22, 2008 @ 8:46 am | Comment

@CCT
Well, if we can trust Wikipedia, the LDS passed the ban on polygamy in 1890, 120 years ago when the US government was still fighting Indian wars. Today, the LDS continues to oppose polygamy, and the polygamists are limited to a handful of small sects. I was only thinking of Warren Jeffs’ FLDS when I said three communities, but according to Wikipedia, which cites the Attorney General of Utah’s Office, there are actually about 20 in the US with a couple in Canada and Mexico (http://tinyurl.com/4brfta). Nonetheless, unless there is a gross deception going on, the vast majority of Mormons are not polygamists, and no where in the United States, save these communities, is there a majority polygamist population. I can’t speak to what you personally observed, save to suggest that most Mormons appear a little on the ‘fundamentalist’ side in my experience. I dated one once, and even though it was only the one ;), it was an interesting experience.

That said, I’m with you. Why shouldn’t people be allowed to live in polygamist relationships if they so desire? (however, I’m not so crazy about the 14 year olds getting married). I also can’t see any good reason for hunting down Falun Gongers in the PRC, but these are separate issues from Tibet. One is about the way individuals want to live, the other is about how a 2 million plus person bloc that is concentrated and isolated from the rest of the nation wants to be governed.
Had US history gone differently, and the LDS defied US Federal Law in 1890, there might be a similar situation where a large part of the US army had to be perpetually stationed in Utah to keep it under control, and the LDS prophet lived in exile in Bountiful, British Columbia, but such is not the case.

And back to Tenzin, do you think that he was any closer to convincing the people of the PRC that Tibet should be either autonomous or independent 20 years ago? He may be no closer, but I doubt he’s any farther in that particular arena. He’s gaining ground with the rest of the world, so at least that’s something.
Besides, I don’t know how much of this we can lay at his feet anyways. I think at most he may have orchestrated some of the monk protests within Tibet at the very beginning. I seriously doubt he planned the Lhasa riots (mainly because, as you imply, they would accomplish nothing). He also wasn’t protesting at the torch relay, nor was he writing for the BBC or CNN. I don’t think he holds much sway over Fukuda or Sarkozy, either. I would bet that this whole comdey of errors has spiraled out of his control as much as it’s spiraled out of the CCP’s.
For interest’s sake though, if you were Tenzin Gyatso, and you wanted an independent Tibet, what would your strategy be?

@Ferin
“I want to stress again that Tibet is a major geopolitical asset. The modest estimate puts Tibet’s natural resources at 10-20 trillion yuan.”
Is that value based on a bird-in-hand estimate, or does it account for all the infrastructure that will have to be built in Tibet and maintained if any of those resources are ever to be extracted? Consider who will be doing the investment and who will receive the profit if Tibet is independent vs Tibet is politically controlled by the PRC. If the latter favours the PRC’s economy, does it compensate for the costs of perpetually occupying and administering the territory to that same economy?

@Amban
“Let me get this straight, you are comparing the cause of independence to the cause of a guy who has said it is correct to kill Americans just because they are Americans.”
This isn’t really fair at all, Amban. I think the comparison he was trying to make was pretty obvious.

April 22, 2008 @ 8:46 am | Comment

@CMD,

I agree with you that we don’t need to look at history, and that China doesn’t need to justify its rule over Tibet. (Although it helps to explain to the uninformed.)

But I do think a discussion of how China can best achieve the goals important to the Chinese is reasonable and constructive.

April 22, 2008 @ 8:48 am | Comment

Quite a lot of infrastructure would have to be set up to extract the resources, including improving the human conditions of the locals for labor. The profits would (ideally) go to the Tibetans.

Aside from that, Tibet can provide a lot of hydroelectric/solar/wind power and cleaner factories running on geothermal energy can be placed there.

Again, making sure no one else controls Tibet’s rivers and borders is reason enough to invest in keeping it under control for the CCP.

April 22, 2008 @ 8:55 am | Comment

@Cao Meng De
“The fact is Qing court, since the days of Qiang Long has always interfered (or at least tried to ) in Reincarnations of Dalai and Panchen Lamas whenever it had the chance (I thought an Amban would know the details).

“PRC has inherited the practise.”

What if the ROC, as another no less legitimate government of China, claims to have inherited this practice too?
3 Dalai Lamas! One of them’ll move Avignon for sure. He’ll be the anti-Lama.

April 22, 2008 @ 8:57 am | Comment

@Lime
haha, you just couldn’t resist a sideswipe at Papist, could you.

Sure the more Lamas, the merrier!

We could have Anti-anti-Lama and anti-Anti-anti-Lama too.

Only side effect of Lama abundance is the inevitable Lama devaluation that cause your Lama today to worth less than your Lama yesterday.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:14 am | Comment

@Cao Meng De
“At the end of day, West can do very little about Tibet except maybe use it as a cynical leverage to apply pressure on China.

“Unless the West is willing to replay this”

Thinking about it though, you’ve identified the very real problem with that approach. If you just keeping pushing without justification, eventually somebody (maybe everybody) will start pushing back. Where does it stop? Should we allow the PRC to annex the ROC? If we allow that, will the PRC be claiming Mongolia next? After that, why stop? The PRC might as well roll on into Kazakstan (it was once the refuge an surrogate homeland of the Khitans, good Chinese lads if there ever were any).
The free world is not going to make a stand over Tibet, it’s true. It can be the PRC’s Czechoslovakia. But what’s next?

April 22, 2008 @ 9:17 am | Comment

@Lime,

And back to Tenzin, do you think that he was any closer to convincing the people of the PRC that Tibet should be either autonomous or independent 20 years ago? He may be no closer, but I doubt he’s any farther in that particular arena. He’s gaining ground with the rest of the world, so at least that’s something.

If his *goal* is to gain ground with the rest of the world, he’s clearly succeeded. But where else is he going with that? He’s had the Nobel Peace prize for 20 years now… and now he’s an honorary citizen of Paris… so if international acclaim is what he’s looking for, he’s got it.

But does he want anything else? He *says* he does want something for Tibet… although I guess we can’t ignore the possibility he doesn’t, and that the Tibetan resistance is really just his raison d’ etre.

I think Tenzin had a chance of charming the Chinese masses over the last decade, much the same way he charmed the West. Many have pointed out there’s a spiritual vacuum amongst the newly rich in China, not to mention great fascination with all things Tibet-related. And with the gradual spread of communication, he could’ve easily become a very influential spiritual leader.

And besides, doesn’t everyone realize that his primary argument (preservation of culture) happens to match what Chinese propaganda has said is value for decades? Many Chinese are sympathetic to the idea, at least as long as it doesn’t imply rejection of learning Chinese as well.

For interest’s sake though, if you were Tenzin Gyatso, and you wanted an independent Tibet, what would your strategy be?

It’s like asking, if I was Osama Bin Ladin, and I wanted to force all crusaders outside of the Middle East … what would my strategy be?

My answer is: figure out something else that I wanted.

If his goal is preservation of Tibetan culture, he should change tactics immediately. If his goal is for an independent Tibet, he should either give up or pray for divine intervention, and know that he’s gambling his ability to influence the preservation of Tibetan culture in the process.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:23 am | Comment

@CCT

As far as the West responding reciprocally to “Chinese-run” organizations in the West… I can’t really think of any great analogue groups, can you?

Well, what about all these student’s unions that have organized pro-PRC rallies all over the world the last week? As the anti-French demonstrations were going wild in China this weekend, I sat down the read Le Monde and a couple of other French newspapers. A lot of people posted a lot of different opinions, but one recurring theme was. “Yeah. These Chinese students can flaunt their nationalism on the streets of Paris, but what would happen if some French did the same in Beijing?”

There has been a lot of talk about the backlash against the “West” in China, but something similar may very well happen in the West. When you go to study in China, you have to sign a pledge to the effect that you won’t participate in political activities. As people see all these pro-PRC demonstration take place in their home towns, many think “Why should Chinese students have more rights in our country than I would have in theirs?”

Tolerance is a two way street, but a lot of Chinese are taking advantage of assymetries in political rights and they hardly reflect on it. We may have a different kind of backlash in the West on our hands if we don’t think about this…

April 22, 2008 @ 9:25 am | Comment

@CCT

“But I do think a discussion of how China can best achieve the goals important to the Chinese is reasonable and constructive”

I agree. I just think talking to the counter-revolutionary feudal Amban is a waste of time.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:27 am | Comment

@Lime,

Should we allow the PRC to annex the ROC? If we allow that, will the PRC be claiming Mongolia next? After that, why stop?

Well, if you ask me, the world should get concerned if the PRC does indeed annex Mongolia or beyond. (This is assuming outer Mongolians aren’t literally begging for reunification.) Because that PRC could potentially represent an aggressive, expansionary empire.

But until then… isn’t the world taking its post-Hitler paranoia a little far?

Take a closer look at the facts. The PRC has never, ever, ever given up its claims to Tibet and Taiwan. The PRC has been fighting wars for both for as long as its existed. And as such, the fact that it’s working to bring both territories into “China” shouldn’t be a surprise or danger sign to anyone.

But the PRC has never, ever claimed Mongolia or any of its other neighbors. If it changes that policy, I don’t blame you for being concerned.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:27 am | Comment

@Limey

It’s time to teach your children Chinese, isn’t it?

April 22, 2008 @ 9:35 am | Comment

@Amban,

Tolerance is a two way street, but a lot of Chinese are taking advantage of assymetries in political rights and they hardly reflect on it. We may have a different kind of backlash in the West on our hands if we don’t think about this…

Frankly, the “danger” of a backlash is something I personally am well aware of, and I believe all Chinese protesters considered when they marched on to the streets. I can say I genuinely intended no offense to my host country, and the same is true of others; we seek to make sure our voice is heard in the same way Free Tibet protesters were heard.

But if that isn’t good enough, if the marketplace of ideas isn’t open to pro-China sentiment, I’d be packed and on the next plane back to China.

And don’t let the Western media mislead you as to the “student unions” that supposedly lead these protests. Look at the pictures; large numbers of older people, non-students at the protests. I was at the SF rally, as were huge numbers of mainland Chinese who’ve been out of school for decades (and my Taiwanese wife). None of us were invited by the embassy, none of us were organized through any sort of organization. The people I went with were part of about 500-1000 people who rallied together through a local social website, where we usually only talk about BBQs and buying houses in Silicon Valley. We even helped pay, spontaneously, for the travel expenses of probably another 50-100 people flying in from out of state. We also paid for one of the planes that flew overhead SF, by the way.

Not everyone in SF was like us, I understand that. I know for a fact that after Paris/London rallies, the Chinese embassy in SF grew concerned and made sure more buses would be *available* for students who wanted to commute. But the sentiment of what’s here is entirely grassroot driven, and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:35 am | Comment

@Cao Meng De et al.
“It’s time to teach your children Chinese, isn’t it?”
By strange coincidence, the particular chore I’m neglecting to talk to you guys happens to be teaching myself Chinese, and I should probably get back to it. Thanks for the chat.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:43 am | Comment

@Limey

Rules of engagement have changed since the glory days of British Empire.

We do not need to conquer Mongolia.

Mongolian economy DEPENDS on exporting resources to China.

We do not need to move into Kazakstan as long as they keep the oil pumping thru the pipelines.

ROC? No need since the last election.

Old chap, Old style colonialism is so 18th century.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:45 am | Comment

@CCT

I have no doubt that some of the demonstrations were grassroots driven and I happy that you have been thinking about the dangers of a backlash.

The problem remains: foreigners in China are not afforded the same means to express their grievances or flaunt their patriotism. What do you think would happen if the Africans in Beijing organized a demo to protest the allegedly racist drug bust in Sanlitun?

That is why may not be a good idea to organize the Olympics in Beijing this summer. 1.5 million foreigners will go, according to some estimates. Materially China has grown, but what about the software? Is China ready? After what I have seen the past month, I don’t think so.

April 22, 2008 @ 9:55 am | Comment

@Cao Meng De
“Old chap, Old style colonialism is so 18th century.”

That’s exactly what’ve I’ve been saying, and why I can’t figure out why the PRC is still in Tibet.
Alright, now I really need to study.

April 22, 2008 @ 10:06 am | Comment

I suppose the ROC government believed in Tibetan Buddhism as well.

http://www.epicbook.com/picture/history/tibet/t2.gif

April 22, 2008 @ 11:01 am | Comment

[allegedly racist drug bust in Sanlitun?]

“Allegedly” is key. Did they recover drugs? I *really* doubt sensationalist, race-baiting stories.

[That’s exactly what’ve I’ve been saying, and why I can’t figure out why the PRC is still in Tibet.]

…

Because it’s valuable. You can’t control rivers and borders through trade, usually. Especially if a pro-U.S puppet is installed.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Americans set up a military base the next day after adding the region to their “missile shield”.

Wouldn’t be surprised if neocons would consider dumping nuclear waste into the Yangtze and Yellow Rivers.

April 22, 2008 @ 11:54 am | Comment

“That’s exactly what’ve I’ve been saying, and why I can’t figure out why the PRC is still in Tibet.”

Because we have it and it cost relatively little to keep it. No compelling reason to give it up.

Did I miss anything?

Oh yeah, we don’t want to wake up with a US airbase next to Sichuan.

Remember Monroe Doctrine? Well Tibet is our little sandbox. Others can butt out.

April 22, 2008 @ 12:12 pm | Comment

@Ferin

“Allegedly” is key. Did they recover drugs? I *really* doubt sensationalist, race-baiting stories.

Exactly. A lot of Chinese took to the street because of *allegedly* biased coverage in Western media, which I have my doubts about. But foreigners in China don’t have any possibility of taking to the streets in any manner to protest real and perceived injuries…

April 22, 2008 @ 12:15 pm | Comment

OMG! You have to watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iK9mg7-lhgo

April 22, 2008 @ 12:47 pm | Comment

Do they think their viewers are stupid???

April 22, 2008 @ 12:49 pm | Comment

“Back to the “free press”, you think one paper is too conservative like the Post, you flee to a more liberal one (e.g the Times) for the “truth” and then you claim because you have choice, you have a monopoly on truth versus, say, the Chinese.”

Wow. So totally CCP. I’d love to know where you flee when you’re dissatisfied with media content in China.

April 22, 2008 @ 2:47 pm | Comment

“Back to the “free press”, you think one paper is too conservative like the Post, you flee to a more liberal one (e.g the Times) for the “truth” and then you claim because you have choice, you have a monopoly on truth versus, say, the Chinese.”

Wow. So totally CCP. I’d love to know where you flee when you’re dissatisfied with media content in China.

April 22, 2008 @ 2:49 pm | Comment

Can’t quite figure out what your point is, amban. The Olympics are coming to Beijing, period. I don’t really see why the fact that Africans aren’t allowed to protest racism in the streets means anything.

China’s right at home in Asia. Thailand’s police arrested and deported anyone with a Tibetan flag, and Nepal’s police threatened to shoot any protesters they saw in the Himalayas as the torch approaches. The Asian and developing countries are the ones who originally supported the Chinese bid for the Olympics, and they’re the ones who at least we will welcome to Beijing.

April 22, 2008 @ 3:14 pm | Comment

It is not so serious. There are lots of people who think the same way as Jinjing did. China has been changing, even though you think it is too slow.

I am an average Chinese, a teacher in a community college. I don’t think I suffer in this country. I have three houses, a car. Every Saturday afternoon I go to attend my Bible class. In holidays, we often travel around. Next Spring Festival, my friends and I are planning to go Thailand.

My father has retired long before. Last year, he was sent to hospital and stayed for one month, which cost over RMB 10,000 yuan. But we only paid 1,000 yuan. I don’t know who paid the rest.

It is about 5 years ago, there were students dropping out of the school because of the expensive tuition. But since last year, I haven’t seen such students. There are favorable loan policies and a great amount of scholarship from all levels of government to help poor students with their education.

As to minority, I really dream to be a member of them. If you are minority, you can have more children, you can have extra points in the important entrance examination. If you are a woman minority, you are blessed. It is too easy to be promoted.

It is the life of my own and the life of the people around me.

Today i told my students democracy means to tolerate the existence of another voice. It will take them some time to digest.

April 22, 2008 @ 3:32 pm | Comment

It is not so serious. There are lots of people who think the same way as Jinjing did. China has been changing, even though you think it is too slow.

I am an average Chinese, a teacher in a community college. I don’t think I suffer in this country. I have three houses, a car. Every Saturday afternoon I go to attend my Bible class. In holidays, we often travel around. Next Spring Festival, my friends and I are planning to go Thailand.

My father has retired long before. Last year, he was sent to hospital and stayed for one month, which cost over RMB 10,000 yuan. But we only paid 1,000 yuan. I don’t know who paid the rest.

It is about 5 years ago, there were students dropping out of the school because of the expensive tuition. But since last year, I haven’t seen such students. There are favorable loan policies and a great amount of scholarship from all levels of government to help poor students with their education.

As to minority, I really dream to be a member of them. If you are minority, you can have more children, you can have extra points in the important entrance examination. If you are a woman minority, you are blessed. It is too easy to be promoted.

It is the life of my own and the life of the people around me.

Today i told my students democracy means to tolerate the existence of another voice. It will take them some time to digest.

April 22, 2008 @ 3:35 pm | Comment

It is not so serious. There are lots of people who think the same way as Jinjing did. China has been changing, even though you think it is too slow.

I am an average Chinese, a teacher in a community college. I don’t think I suffer in this country. I have three houses, a car. Every Saturday afternoon I go to attend my Bible class. In holidays, we often travel around. Next Spring Festival, my friends and I are planning to go Thailand.

My father has retired long before. Last year, he was sent to hospital and stayed for one month, which cost over RMB 10,000 yuan. But we only paid 1,000 yuan. I don’t know who paid the rest.

It is about 5 years ago, there were students dropping out of the school because of the expensive tuition. But since last year, I haven’t seen such students. There are favorable loan policies and a great amount of scholarship from all levels of government to help poor students with their education.

As to minority, I really dream to be a member of them. If you are minority, you can have more children, you can have extra points in the important entrance examination. If you are a woman minority, you are blessed. It is too easy to be promoted.

It is the life of my own and the life of the people around me.

Today i told my students democracy means to tolerate the existence of another voice. It will take them some time to digest.

April 22, 2008 @ 3:37 pm | Comment

“It is not so serious. There are lots of people who think the same way as Jinjing did. China has been changing, even though you think it is too slow.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think her name is written this way: Jin Jing.
It’s amazing how many people here claim to be Chinese, but can’t even write pinyin.

“I am an average Chinese, a teacher in a community college. I don’t think I suffer in this country. I have three houses, a car. Every Saturday afternoon I go to attend my Bible class. In holidays, we often travel around. Next Spring Festival, my friends and I are planning to go Thailand.”

So that’s what the average Chinese lives like. Damn, I spent years in China, but I must have gone to the wrong places, because I got a totally different impression.

“My father has retired long before. Last year, he was sent to hospital and stayed for one month, which cost over RMB 10,000 yuan. But we only paid 1,000 yuan. I don’t know who paid the rest.”

Lucky you! Some kind of angel (maybe the ghost of Lei Feng or the Almighty Chairman in Heaven) even pays your old dad’s medical fees. Not like those people I know who don’t even know what health insurance is and if they get seriously ill, the only option is to go to some cheap quack and hope he can do something about it.

“It is about 5 years ago, there were students dropping out of the school because of the expensive tuition. But since last year, I haven’t seen such students. There are favorable loan policies and a great amount of scholarship from all levels of government to help poor students with their education.”

Can you tell us how to get such a scholarship? I know a lot of people who would be very grateful for that kind of information.

“As to minority, I really dream to be a member of them. If you are minority, you can have more children, you can have extra points in the important entrance examination. If you are a woman minority, you are blessed. It is too easy to be promoted.”

Yeah, sure! I guess, Rabiya Kadeer can confirm everything you just said.

“It is the life of my own and the life of the people around me.”

What’s that supposed to mean?

“Today i told my students democracy means to tolerate the existence of another voice. It will take them some time to digest.”

What about telling your government? I guess that would be even harder to digest – for you.

Vive la France!

April 22, 2008 @ 4:46 pm | Comment

@CCT

Can’t quite figure out what your point is, amban. The Olympics are coming to Beijing, period. I don’t really see why the fact that Africans aren’t allowed to protest racism in the streets means anything.

Probably because you have no idea what it is like to be an African in Beijing. Or a Caucasian in Zhuzhou, Hunan, right now, where an American reportedly was attacked by a mob.

April 22, 2008 @ 10:49 pm | Comment

@Amban

I didn’t know Qing court appointed African to be Amban in Tibet.

Tell me, how it feels to be an African in Beijing?

While you are at it, why don’t you tell me how it feels as a Caucasian in Zhuzhou?

Do you mean you are half-African and half-Caucasian, and your African half hangs aroung Sanlitun in Bejing while your Caucasian half wanders in Zhuzhou?

Wow, the magic is strong in you.

April 23, 2008 @ 2:23 am | Comment

AC,

In the youtube video I do see a bunch of yellow, red and blue balloons. Maybe that’s where the reporter saw the many Tibetan flags.

Come to think of it, the Chinese flag is Tibetans’ flag too! And you have plenty of them in there.

April 23, 2008 @ 2:57 am | Comment

But foreigners in China don’t have any possibility of taking to the streets in any manner to protest real and perceived injuries…

Neither do Chinese. They go to the hospital and suck it up. Why can’t these special, special foreigners do it either?

April 23, 2008 @ 3:28 am | Comment

“Probably because you have no idea what it is like to be an African in Beijing.”

CCT doesn’t even know what it’s like to be a Chinese in Beijing. He spends most of his time in the good old US of A and whenever he goes to China for a short visit he stays in his appartment in Shenzhen.

April 23, 2008 @ 3:31 am | Comment

“Neither do Chinese. They go to the hospital and suck it up. Why can’t these special, special foreigners do it either?”

What do you know about it, yankee?

April 23, 2008 @ 3:33 am | Comment

Hi, I know the subject of indoctrination is like an open sore for some people, but, I find it to be a pretty important discussion topic. Its better to get it out in the open so as to rise above and beyond it…

Beijing’s Obvious Hand at the U.S. Olympic Torch Run:
http://tinyurl.com/6kv8zt

The most potent weapon wielded by the empires of Murdoch and China:
http://tinyurl.com/4mxjqp

April 23, 2008 @ 3:10 pm | Comment

“Can you tell us how to get such a scholarship? I know a lot of people who would be very grateful for that kind of information.”

OK. I know about at least 1/5 of my students have access to the money. If you would like, come and see with your eyes. I live in Maanshan, Anhui. My college is Anhui University of Technology, Vocational College. (安工大职业技术学院）You can interview any of the students, most of them know some English.

What i said is a part of China, but what you said is not complete.

April 23, 2008 @ 10:27 pm | Comment

“Damn, I spent years in China, but I must have gone to the wrong places, because I got a totally different impression.”

How many years ago did you live in China?

“It’s amazing how many people here claim to be Chinese, but can’t even write pinyin.”

Most of the time, I am sure I do better than you. ‘coz I am a Chinese.

“Lucky you! Some kind of angel (maybe the ghost of Lei Feng or the Almighty Chairman in Heaven) even pays your old dad’s medical fees. Not like those people I know who don’t even know what health insurance is and if they get seriously ill, the only option is to go to some cheap quack and hope he can do something about it.”

I see your arrogance. Yes, you are right. There are some people who wait to die when they get seriously ill. But that is just part of China. We see government taking measures to change this. But you ignore it.

To most Chinese, France once was so beautiful, so romantic. And Frenchmen were so nice. But now, I know you hate us. At least, I can’t see any good will from you.

Is this what you want to achieve?

April 23, 2008 @ 10:54 pm | Comment

Probably because you have no idea what it is like to be an African in Beijing. Or a Caucasian in Zhuzhou, Hunan, right now, where an American reportedly was attacked by a mob.

Actually a white farmer in South Africa or racial minority in America probably does know what it’s like.

April 24, 2008 @ 6:57 am | Comment

@wendy

“OK. I know about at least 1/5 of my students have access to the money. If you would like, come and see with your eyes. I live in Maanshan, Anhui. My college is Anhui University of Technology, Vocational College. (安工大职业技术学院）You can interview any of the students, most of them know some English.”

You didn’t really answer my question: How do I get one of those scholarships? What about those 4/5 of your students who don’t get those scholarships? So most of your students know “some” English? What’s that supposed to mean?

“What i said is a part of China, but what you said is not complete.”

I love this sentence, but I’m still trying to work out what it actually means.

“How many years ago did you live in China?”

Many, many years ago. I left China in December 2006. I guess since then China has totally changed and everybody owns at least two houses and a car and gets his medical bills paid by some invisible hand.

“Most of the time, I am sure I do better than you. ‘coz I am a Chinese.”

You are perfectly right. The fact that you are Chinese means that you will outdo me in any Olympic discipline, no matter it be simple arithmetics or common sense.

“I see your arrogance. Yes, you are right. There are some people who wait to die when they get seriously ill. But that is just part of China. We see government taking measures to change this. But you ignore it.”

A man is watching his pregnant wife dying in agony – in the maternity ward of a Chinese hospital. The surrounding doctors stand by and watch. They could do something about it, but they refuse, because that dirty peasant didn’t bring enough cash. You are right, that’s only part of China, but that’s the part that matters for that farmer who did everything he could for his beloved mother country. And I’m not being sarcastic, I meant every word I said.
You are the one who is ignoring your neighbor’s sufferings.

“To most Chinese, France once was so beautiful, so romantic. And Frenchmen were so nice. But now, I know you hate us. At least, I can’t see any good will from you.”

Nobody hates you. It’s you Chinese people who hate us foreigners.

“Is this what you want to achieve?”

Achieve what? Get our noses as deep into your asses as possible? No, we don’t want that! And we don’t need that either! So far, it was you folks taking advantage of us. And now you spit on us. You know what? The day you are able to provide your own people with clean water without the help of European development aid, that day we will respect you.

April 24, 2008 @ 8:04 am | Comment

mor:

You are the one who is ignoring your neighbor’s sufferings.

Well, you don’t know me. So you have no right to judge me this way.

As to the scholarship, it is easy. Students submit application. And teachers make investigation. If they meet the conditions, they have the money. My school offers 2000, 1000,6000. And provincial and national scholarship are about 8000, 5000 etc. I am not in charge of this. This is the rough number. “Students know some
English”, means you can talk with them freely and get some truth.

April 24, 2008 @ 9:25 am | Comment

“My school offers 2000, 1000,6000.”. sorry, should be 600, not 6000.

April 24, 2008 @ 9:26 am | Comment

It’s you Chinese people who hate us foreigners.

Really? Since you once lived in China, you did meet hostility?

And does any foreigner feel hatred here?

“Get our noses as deep into your asses as possible?”

????????

April 24, 2008 @ 9:34 am | Comment

The day you are able to provide your own people with clean water without the help of European development aid, that day we will respect you.

And “mor” wonders why no Chinese posters can put up with the arrogant, condescending white supremacists who post here.

April 24, 2008 @ 10:48 am | Comment

aside from the fact that you repeatedly took the time to take a jab at her English.

arrogant, condescending prick.

April 24, 2008 @ 10:51 am | Comment

Mor has a point. It is a case of biting the hand that feeds you.

April 24, 2008 @ 11:17 am | Comment

It is a case of biting the hand that feeds you.

Like Britain using China’s very own gunpowder to cause social collapse and immense misery?

Or like the first settlers in America killing the Indians that helped feed them?

April 24, 2008 @ 12:21 pm | Comment

>clean water

Are we reading the same thread, Ferin?

April 24, 2008 @ 12:23 pm | Comment

>Like Britain using China’s very own gunpowder to cause social collapse and immense misery?

Oh, do be serious – Britain built China a fantastic world-class financial centre equivalent to 20% of China’s total GDP which China would never have been able to create by itself (hell, just look at how much Shanghai regressed as soon as the International Settlement disappeared).

Oh, and if it weren’t for the US, you’d be speaking Japanese right now. Then again, given what a success Taiwan is compared to the mainland, maybe that wouldn’t have been such a bad thing. 😉 Sorry, China.

April 24, 2008 @ 12:27 pm | Comment

Britain didn’t do shit for Hong Kong, aside from keep away Communism. Singapore had no trouble building up on their own. Likewise, 20% of China’s GDP is approx. 660 billion. Unfortunately Hong Kong is not worth that much.

And if it weren’t for China, you’d be speaking Mongolian.

April 24, 2008 @ 2:10 pm | Comment

@wendy

“Well, you don’t know me. So you have no right to judge me this way.”

I’m not judging you, I’m just replying to your posts. It’s interesting that you think you have the right to call me an ignorant, but not the other way round. Reminds me of certain people who have been a lot on the news recently.

“As to the scholarship, it is easy. Students submit application. And teachers make investigation. If they meet the conditions, they have the money. My school offers 2000, 1000,6000. And provincial and national scholarship are about 8000, 5000 etc. I am not in charge of this. This is the rough number.”

What conditions? Can you give us some concrete information instead of “rough numbers”?

“‘Students know some
English’, means you can talk with them freely and get some truth.”

Yeah, when you talk to Chinese students you will get some Truth. I know that very well, since I’ve worked in China as a teacher for several years.

“‘My school offers 2000, 1000,6000.’. sorry, should be 600, not 6000.”

Yeah, yeah, those “rough numbers”!

“Really? Since you once lived in China, you did meet hostility?

And does any foreigner feel hatred here?”

No, never, Chinese person very friendly and hospitable and always smile. And if you come out of French supermarket, Chinese person give you friendly clap on your shoulder.

“????????”

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask me. Or maybe talk to your students to “get some truth.”

April 24, 2008 @ 7:30 pm | Comment

“And ‘mor’ wonders why no Chinese posters can put up with the arrogant, condescending white supremacists who post here.”

This is actually Ferin’s way of admitting that I’m right. If he didn’t agree with me, he would call me a liar followed by all the curses he can come up with.

“aside from the fact that you repeatedly took the time to take a jab at her English.”

I was talking about her pinyin. She claims to be a Chinese teacher after all.

“arrogant, condescending prick.”

I really would like to be as eloquent as Master Ferin. Gotta work harder to improve my Engrish.

April 24, 2008 @ 7:39 pm | Comment

“Mor has a point. It is a case of biting the hand that feeds you.”

We could also say: it’s a case of pissing on the people whose money helped you to realize that great economic miracle everybody is talking about. And they are still taking the money while they are cursing us.

April 24, 2008 @ 7:45 pm | Comment

“Like Britain using China’s very own gunpowder to cause social collapse and immense misery?”

Ferin is getting better and better. He’s definitely a better comedian than Yang Rui.

“Or like the first settlers in America killing the Indians that helped feed them?”

I’m European so I have nothing to do with that. Ferin, however, is American. I just can’t figure out why he keeps mentioning his own country’s crimes of the past in a discussion about China.

April 24, 2008 @ 7:54 pm | Comment

“Are we reading the same thread, Ferin?”

I’m not sure if Ferin is able to read at all. He himself once claimed that there are more analphabets in the USA than there are in China.

“Oh, do be serious – Britain built China a fantastic world-class financial centre equivalent to 20% of China’s total GDP which China would never have been able to create by itself (hell, just look at how much Shanghai regressed as soon as the International Settlement disappeared).”

Chinese students never learn anything about that. Instead the history lessons in Chinese schools focus on the Opium wars of one and a half centuries ago.

“Oh, and if it weren’t for the US, you’d be speaking Japanese right now. Then again, given what a success Taiwan is compared to the mainland, maybe that wouldn’t have been such a bad thing. 😉 Sorry, China.”

Peanut Butter, don’t you know it was the Chinese Communist guerilla headed by Great Chairman Mao riding on a white horse that defeated the Japanese army and liberated East Asia?

April 24, 2008 @ 8:04 pm | Comment

“Britain didn’t do shit for Hong Kong, aside from keep away Communism. Singapore had no trouble building up on their own. Likewise, 20% of China’s GDP is approx. 660 billion. Unfortunately Hong Kong is not worth that much.”

What does a spoiled ignorant American youngster know about Hongkong’s or Singapore’s history?

“And if it weren’t for China, you’d be speaking Mongolian.”

Now this is an interesting statement. I’ll spend the rest of the day trying to figure out what Master Ferin is actually talking about.

April 24, 2008 @ 8:14 pm | Comment

mor, I told you i am not in charge of scholarship, but this morning I called my colleague, he said about 30% students got money. In 2007, the national scholarship amounted to 300,000 in my college, whose enrollment is around 2,000 students, not mention the money from school.

I don’t know what condition for scholarship, if you are so curious, come and see with your eyes. ( I doubt whether you have the courage to face it.)

As to the money, why not advice your President to return us the 20 billion and display your contempt for China?

I have been here for so long, hoping i am not wasting my time.

You curse as you like, if you have nothing to do.

I love China. It is my home.

April 24, 2008 @ 9:49 pm | Comment

“mor, I told you i am not in charge of scholarship, but this morning I called my colleague, he said about 30% students got money. In 2007, the national scholarship amounted to 300,000 in my college, whose enrollment is around 2,000 students, not mention the money from school.”

Thanks for the information! I admit some changes for the better have been and are taking place in China. I hope, this trend will continue.

“I don’t know what condition for scholarship, if you are so curious, come and see with your eyes. ( I doubt whether you have the courage to face it.)”

Why would that take courage? Do your students belong to the violent anti-foreigner crowd?

“As to the money, why not advice your President to return us the 20 billion and display your contempt for China?”

It’s new to me that the president of my home country ows you 20 billion whatever. Nor did he ever show contempt for China. In fact, my country is doing a lot to help China.

“I have been here for so long, hoping i am not wasting my time.”

I’m not sure if I understand what you are talking about right now.

“You curse as you like, if you have nothing to do.”

Where and when did I curse you or anybody else?

“I love China. It is my home.”

Hard as it might be for you to believe this, I also love China. It is the home of many people I love.

April 24, 2008 @ 11:51 pm | Comment

I understand the “logic” behind their pursuit of extreme capitalism, the human rights abuses connected with dissident supression, the horrible gap between the rich and the poor, the urban and the rural side… even the “One China”, all-expasionist, all-assimilist thing toward minorities, and all. I understand how these things can be necessary evils in modern China, in their tireless run to become a Great Nation that shall “catch up with the US in some years” etc etc.

You know, I get scared at Chinese people. Just because some things can be explained as “necessary evils”, doesn’t mean they are automatically justifiable.. or necessarily condoned. Sometimes I fear that some Chinese people, such as seen on this website, confuse between the two. Fascism is old-fashioned, and those two should no longer be confused. What should be condemned must be condemned so. Besides Great China and all that resolves I hear from my overseas Chinese friend, I see and hear about those who must become sacrificed for the sake of this great objective – namely, just to give a few example, FLG practioners who get their organs extracted, a 9 months pregnant woman forcibly aborted, a naked 8 year old girl begging on the street, people and children being used for labour, people being robbed of their own cultural tradition, and many other cases of such incredible inequality and injustice. I feel bad for this, and I wish CCP would implement something positive to rectify this, or at least deal in a civil manner – that is, not kill/kidnap/torture – with those people who organise themselves to represent this side of the Chinese society, which, as many other modern societies, has multiple facets… but again, I understand why it could be rather natural for many Chinese people to turn a blind eye (at least for the moment) at these facts. I don’t want to criticise them for it and I don’t think it’s entirely their fault, and I believe one day they would see them as they are.

On this position, I also think it’s rather natural that such spectacles staged by Chinese “patriots” these days around the torch relay would give distasteful impression to “westerners”, or people who’s lived in a politically freer side of the world. At times it’s actually reminiscent of some form of fascism madness, especially when collective violence is concerned. You love China, and it’s your home, so what? The behaviour of some of your people is at best immature in our eyes, irrelevant of whether you love your home country or not. I love my home country too, and that’s why I would be embarrassed at immature and fascist behaviours of some of my countrymen and women. Loving your home country and condoning/defending fascism is a different matter and I think more and more Chinese people will realise that sooner or later. At least I hope so.

April 29, 2008 @ 9:03 pm | Comment