There’s a super cute song and video on this French blog:

http://lachutedumur.wordpress.com/

towards the end…

April 4, 2008 @ 4:56 am | Comment

Don’t know if it will be a landmark moment. There have been way too many landmark moments in the Chinese history. A few years later, I don’t even know this will still be a moment.

Hu is more or less a career activist — he takes up causes of all kinds, e.g. environment, AIDS, 6/4/89, anti-Japanese, etc. His trouble didn’t start until he went to the Square a few years ago to commemorate 6/4/89. So from that, the line in the sand is, environmental/AIDS/anti-Japanese activism, ok; 6/4 activism, no.

April 4, 2008 @ 7:47 am | Comment

when i see stories like this one, it makes me glad i am getting out of this place.

so much for freedom of speech guaranteed in the chinese “constitution.”

April 4, 2008 @ 7:59 am | Comment

China’s shame. And in this case they are being mild – innocent people have been sent away to prison for decades simply for discussing the benefits of democracy online. Once again China succeeds in its goal of showing the world just how crazed and tyrannical they can be, even during a time when it is trying so hard to show the world its best face. I ask again, as I ask every day, how can they possibly be so stupid?

April 4, 2008 @ 11:32 am | Comment

A famous quotation is that a lie repeated a thousand times becomes truth. But I prefer “a lie that can no longer be challenged becomes a form of madness.” And that’s what we’re seeing here. The Chinese government has feigned “normalcy” for all of these years, and has been led to believe that it can get away with it so long it is an economic powerhouse. Everyone in the government is pissing their pants about the Olympics now, and they’re using the only means that they know how to face the “challenges” to presenting their vision of China: lying and suppression. Of course, this can’t continue forever, I would imagine, but I don’t see any cause for optimism.

April 4, 2008 @ 12:21 pm | Comment

Ya know Richard, I’m starting to like your newly realistic stance on China.

China currently represents the worst of ourselves, its like looking in the mirror and seeing only your worst qualities looking back at you.

And its only going to get worse…

April 4, 2008 @ 1:26 pm | Comment

i just read in the financial times that china is interviewing different wester pr firms to imrpove china’s image abroad.

unless beijing changes its behavior, is marketing really going change people’s minds? i hope not, but i guess you can fool some of the people…

April 4, 2008 @ 2:17 pm | Comment

hujia again?
I’d really sympothize with him if he wasnt on the payrol of US government.
http://www.ned.org/grants/06programs/grants-asia06.html#china

Beijing Zhiaixing Information Counseling Center
$179,113*
To operate a diverse program promoting accountability and human rights. The work of the Institute will include legal aid, investigative reporting, activist training, and human rights documentation related to HIV/AIDS and other public health threats.

1.4Million RMB per year, that’s a lot.

why do all these democracy activists in China
have to sell their souls to the Us government?

April 4, 2008 @ 2:41 pm | Comment

By the way, NED mistakenly wrote Aizhixing as Zhiaixing.

http://www.aizhi.net/

This is the Chinese website of Aizhixing where Hujia works at, look at left hand corner. Mei Guo Min Zhu Ji Jin Hui—–NED

April 4, 2008 @ 2:49 pm | Comment

His sentence is not just about what he did but also what other people did.

I guess Tibetan riots didn’t help him here.

A warning to potential trouble makers that the government won’t concede under foreign pressures before Olympics?

April 4, 2008 @ 5:06 pm | Comment

nanhe, I think you seriously misunderstand my feelings about China. I still look at the government the way I look at all tyrannies, with critical loathing. I also am willing to say that under their rule many people’s lives have improved (as they did under Hitler), but not because of anything the CCP did. In fact, the big difference under Deng was that the CCP simply got out of the way – at least to some degree – from the inherently capitalistic Chinese people. Leave the Chinese to their own devices and they will succeed, the way they do everywhere in the world they go.

The main change in my perception of China is in regard to foreign policy (I think Hu is quite good at it, as much as I may detest him) and business. During my first brief stay in China the first time I had a very limited perspective of China’s economics and truly believed the country’s success was built on sand, a house of cards, etc. This time I actually went into the countryside and other cities and saw that at least some Chinese companies really can compete with those in the West, and are implementing six sigma programs and operating under ISO9000 standards. That was probably my turning point, when I saw that there’s actually substance to China’s growth, not just foreign investment and cheap labor. (And there are lots of very shitty companies here as well; the ones I saw were almost entirely joint ventures with Western companies, and I know what a difference that makes.) Most impressive to me was the dynamism and optimism of the people working n these companies. I love them, I admire them, I am amazed at their determination and want them to continue their road to a better life. This has nothing to do with the CCP. I give them no credit, I don’t admire them for it, and when I say “China is shaking the world” those aren’t words of praise but acknowledgment of the impact China is having by the mere fact that so many more people are now consumers affecting the world’s markets and resources.

If you look over this bog, nanhe, you will see very little actual change in my attitude toward the CCP’s sins when it comes to atrocities like its treatment of Hu Jia. What you call “panda licking” (an odious term, by the way) is simply acknowledging that many people’s lives have improved and China’s economy is a force to be reckoned with, period. I hate all abuses of power, whether it’s George Bush or the thugs who arrest people like Hu Jia. I always condemn them. I also learned this time around that there are some splendid people who are party members who really want to improve the country, and they are helping (I saw how they are bringing broadband to poor farmers and helping them get pricing information on the Internet to help them make more money – just one example I saw for myself). Unfortunately, these good people don’t seem to have any clout when it comes to the sickening abuses – the censorship, human slavery, corruption, merciless elimination of opposing voices, etc. Just like the good civil servants I know in America have little influence over my country’s policy on torture. So I’ll keep criticizing the excesses and the aberrations as I see them. But I will also point out what I see as good things, because my big lesson, my enlightenment so to speak, was that the CCP is not monolithic and it is much more similar to other governments, in which various forces push and pull against one another, than I previously believed. The CCP has many sides to it, but as long as they continue committing crimes against humanity as described above, the word “evil” will have to be one of the adjectives I employ in my description of them. One, but not the only one.

Sorry for the speech, but I’ve been wanting to express this for a long time because I am amazed when people fail to see the whole picture I am painting of China, not as good or evil but as complex and full of glaring contradictions that defy simplistic generalities. It’s why I cringe at the name of your own blog, because there is a lot of bad and some good as well. The hubris and stupidity of the party never fail to amaze me (why would these birdbrains even think of carrying the torch into Tibet, for example?), but again, that stupidity is not all that China is. There’s a lot here to admire, and plenty to hate. And as I’ve said many times, living in the “green zone” of Beijing I know how distorted our picture of life in China can be, which is why I try to see what’s happening elsewhere and keep perspective.

Okay, I think I’ve made my point. Back to Hu Jia….

April 4, 2008 @ 9:19 pm | Comment

Bing: A warning to potential trouble makers that the government won’t concede under foreign pressures before Olympics?

Yes, precisely. Nothing like the threat of a reign of terror to shut the people up and show how harmonious they are.

April 4, 2008 @ 9:20 pm | Comment

Hu Jia sonsored by US, I donno??

”””’To operate a diverse program promoting accountability and human rights. The work of the Institute will include legal aid, investigative reporting, activist training, and human rights documentation related to HIV/AIDS and other public health threats.

1.4Million RMB per year, that’s a lot.

why do all these democracy activists in China
have to sell their souls to the Us government?””””””””

HA HA BUT, thats the first time I ever heard promoting accountability and human rights being equated with selling your soul, Rediculous!

April 5, 2008 @ 2:03 am | Comment

@Richard

Chinese generally do well outside of China, but not in China. But so do other immigrant groups.

“I am amazed when people fail to see the whole picture I am painting of China, not as good or evil but as complex and full of glaring contradictions that defy simplistic generalities.”

This “lifting of boats” has come with huge costs. So is it worth it for people to have shiny new trinkets if the bill is the exhaustive list of social, economic and environmental problems?

China’s “shaking of the world” is due to the dysentery that is China in the world’s bowels.

And don’t forget Richard, most of the commenters in the China blogosphere also have alot of China experience themselves.

It’s not like you are talking to the US Congress or anything.

April 5, 2008 @ 2:32 am | Comment

@wk

“I’d really sympothize with him if he wasnt on the payrol of US government. ”

What makes you think that Hu Jia is on the payroll of the US government? Do you have anything to back up your allegations? Do you care to share it with us?

“why do all these democracy activists in China
have to sell their souls to the Us government?”

Why do all those CCP apologists always post their comments from English speaking democracies, enjoying all those civil rights they (the CCP apologists) claim are not suitable for the Chinese people, the same Chinese people they (the CCP apologists) claim to love oh sooo much.

April 5, 2008 @ 8:53 am | Comment

“What makes you think that Hu Jia is on the payroll of the US government? Do you have anything to back up your allegations? Do you care to share it with us?”

Hu Jia got a huge amount of money from NED.
(Nationa endowment of democracy).

http://www.aizhi.net/, the first sponsor for Hu Jia is NED. I guess NED has a reputation of sponsor color revolution.

What happened if a US citizen get a money from an organization with overthrowing capitalism as ultimate objective?

http://www.ned.org/grants/06programs/grants-asia06.html#china Zhiaixing Information Counseling Center
$179,113*
To operate a diverse program promoting accountability and human rights. The
work of the Institute will include legal aid, investigative reporting,
activist training, and human rights documentation related to HIV/AIDS and
other public health threats.

April 5, 2008 @ 7:57 pm | Comment

“””””What happened if a US citizen get a money from an organization with overthrowing capitalism as ultimate objective?”””””

They are welcome to do so. Having different ‘politcal’ opinions in the US is not against the law. In the US they have democracy and leaders naturally come and go so they dont have that all pervading fear of losing power that the CCP rules China with

April 5, 2008 @ 11:56 pm | Comment

“hey are welcome to do so. Having different ‘politcal’ opinions in the US is not against the law. In the US they have democracy and leaders naturally come and go so they dont have that all pervading fear of losing power that the CCP rules China with”

Snow, I was amused by your statement. It is simply BS. No country will allow foreigh influence to fund domestic organization to overthrow the government.

You should go back to learn a little bit US history on how FBI protect US national interest. You should learn to appreciate their effort.

April 6, 2008 @ 12:11 am | Comment

richard

how can they possibly be so stupid?

Because:

a) to an extent they have been able to buy silence/co-operation with money from other countries

b) they believe their own propaganda; and

c) they don’t care.

April 6, 2008 @ 3:04 am | Comment

“No country will allow foreigh influence to fund domestic organization to overthrow the government.”

@ Steve

Apparently you’ve never heard of “K street” in Washington DC. Even China pays a lobbying firm to do some more dirty work that its embassy can’t do.
There is no need to overthrown open governments when they can be manipulated with gifts, girlies and re-election support.

April 6, 2008 @ 8:38 am | Comment

Raj,

I would have to disagree that they believe their own propaganda. I think they are actively and knowingly lying because they feel its the safest option.

This is the point you are missing (and thats how they want it to stay!) if the CCP backs down off the lies and restrictions, force, terrorism in any way, the truth will come spilling out. People will talk. Did you watch the video in the Happy Tibetan section that I put up? The people dont talk cause they are terrified, hence the party needs them to stay absolutely terrified or else the truth will all come out. They say the truth prevails though and it will come out either way, but I guess they are juts buying a bit more time until the poop totally hits the fan.

About the Hu Jia thing. Yeah, in America, supporting AIDS people and helping the environment is not synonymous with overthrowing the government, thats Chinas major problem.

April 6, 2008 @ 11:11 am | Comment

“Apparently you’ve never heard of “K street” in Washington DC.”

K street is the wrong comparison. In cold war, when communist countries exported revolution, whoever dared to accept money from commie and participate in anti-government movement will end up in FBI hand.

NED has a track record of sponsoring “color revolution”. The action of Hu Jia’s recieving a huge amount of money from NED shows that he is either a total political amature, or willingly participate in color revolution.

Also, Hu Jia certainly damage himself dramatically by writing to German government to condemn China and support Dalai.

April 6, 2008 @ 11:22 am | Comment

Steve, there is a qualitative difference between communist revolutions and democratic revolutions. Take a look at China and Taiwan.

April 6, 2008 @ 2:35 pm | Comment

“”””””Also, Hu Jia certainly damage himself dramatically by writing to German government to condemn China and support Dalai.”””””

Hm, strange, I wouldnt say it that way. I would say that he did the opposite of damaging himself… And I would say that he is not the type of person to condemn China. If he condemned China, why would he do all this dangerous stuff for the sake of improving the situation? Think about it. Dont you think he is caring a lot about China to make these dangerous efforts? I think its the people who take the easy way who condemn China and damage themselves, cause in this situation, the so called easy way involves colluding with a lying and murdering regime …

April 7, 2008 @ 12:32 am | Comment

To Steve:
In the US you can write articles, give speeches, and/or create organizations devoted to criticizing the government. There are some mosques with foreign funding and they are absolutely far from supporting the US government policies. Even some US churches are critical to the government’s policies; one example is the Jeramiah Wright’s church. But they are all protected under the law, specifically the free speech, and the most importance, in my opinion, is the intellectual ability of the vast American public who value, and have the deep understanding, of the importance of individual right, the corruptive nature of power, and the sense of right and wrong. This is often called the national IQ. To compare China’s current climate with the US is like comparing your Yuen Shi Kai (I think that is the spelling of the general who wanted to be an emperor of China after it became a republic) versus Deng Xiao Ping.
You and your comrades’ nationalistic attitudes are endangering the world; I don’t want the world to go through another Nazi period. You need to understand that the free world doesn’t have any interest to stop your country from growing; we are too busy enjoying what life has to offer, from vast culture to sports to music to cathedrals to fashion to science to foods; the diversity has offered enormous values to life. The West offered scholarships, opportunities for people to migrate, opportunities to expand your businesses, talents, etc, and the most importance, again, is the opportunity to be “oneself”, ie. free will.
I am not saying the West is perfect. I think human journey is still very much far from perfection. But going to the direction of having a group of people having the absolute authorities to “brain-wash,” to distort histories, to do propaganda, and to fire nationalistic sentiments is no longer acceptable, and we should all grow above it.
Don’t just instinctively argue, but think first!

Arbutus

April 7, 2008 @ 12:39 am | Comment

“You and your comrades’ nationalistic attitudes are endangering the world; I don’t want the world to go through another Nazi period.”

That is your understanding where China is heading??? Ask anyone with a little intelligence. Is China becoming more like US or more like Nazi? You are beyond being funny.

“Don’t just instinctively argue, but think first!”

Indeed.

April 7, 2008 @ 1:33 am | Comment

@Steve,

I am afraid that you are wasting time with these people. No amount of reasoning or logic will sway the ideologically inclined whether Red Guards or self-righteous forum poster pricks.

There was a time when I sincerely believed that all conflicts could be resolved through more dialogue and understanding.

I was “too simple, sometimes naive”. Sir Churchill might be right that jaw-jaw is better than war-war. But we are not really faced with a binary choice of either “jaw-jaw” or “war-war”.

It’s far better build up China’s position in a geopolitical sense that one day the impact of these misguided Westerners has on China will be as relevant as the influence of Chinese fengqing on actions of Washington today.

btw, I disagree with handling of Hu Jia. Most Chinese on the streets never heard of the guy. Even if he was politically naive and was cynically employed by NED, his impact is minimal.

April 7, 2008 @ 9:17 am | Comment

@mor
Do you know what NED is? You dont think it’s like Gates Foundation, do you?
Read the “Logan Act”
§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
1 Stat. 613, January 30, 1799, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 953 (2004).

April 7, 2008 @ 10:59 am | Comment

“btw, I disagree with handling of Hu Jia. ”

I agree with you on this. It pains me to see a lot of people who push for social change fall fall for western crap. By taking western country’s position, CCP eventually marginalized those guys.

Anyone who wants to be successful in rallying people to push for social change has be to a patriot.

April 7, 2008 @ 11:46 am | Comment

To Steve:
China might look becoming like the US in the economic direction, but is not. The Chinese government’s direct and indirect intervention in the economy makes it clearly distinctive; the Chinese government itself also states that it is a Chinese style of socialist system. But in the polical aspect, there is nothing similar to the US; it is in many aspects very similar to Nazi in the early 30’s. Read the history, which is apparent that you haven’t done so.

To Cao:
The westerners are not misguided. Most of them simply have wider and deeper knowledge than obviously you are. The interconnectivities of history, economy, politic, human evolution, plus wider perspectives make the difference. You are living in a country where government’s propaganda is a norm. Your education system is not to educate a person to seek the truth; rather, to blindly follow the official lines.

Let me ask this simple question to you, as well as other excessive nationalistic Chinese. If you are so nationalistic on China, why are you holding a western passport or permanent residence status? You should put your words on your mouth, ie have faith in China and take the consequences of your choice. When and if there were problems with China, as was in the past, the Chinese claimed they were prosecuted or mistreated by the Chinese government (as often those claims were absolute lies) to get asylum from western countries. How many of you flatly lie during the personal interview on the questions of personal value and political tendencies to gain admission for Harvard, Cornell, and other US universities, with subsequent scholarships?
I don’t like this “double face”, and I am open about it. We believe in democracy, human right, and individual right. We work hard to make sure our governments are implementing the constitutions. If you don’t believe in those values, or your cultural affinities overwhelmed your sense of right and wrong, you should have the courage to take a firm stand. Otherwise, one day should there be any direct conflict between China and Western power, many overseas Chinese who truely share the same values of human right and democracy will suffer because of your cowardice. That is truely unfair to them. I suppose one day the suggestion from Cox report to the Congress will be implemented, obliging the US government to monitor Chinese from China (for the record, I am not fully aware of the details). But don’t blame it to Cox or other racial issue. It is your lack of sensibility to assume that Western countries are staging to upset China in many areas. The true is China doesn’t play a fair game; China wants to export but creates many “innovative” import restriction rules; China wants to attract foreign investment but creates enormous hassle for foreign firms to close their operations in China; etc.
You can continue to propagate the official line of “building a powerful China to be respected in the world.” The reason that China only gains limited respectability is because it plays “tricks” on its commitment to world trade, it doesn’t value human life as much, and many others. China has an excellent constitution, like many other developing countries, but doesn’t implement it. China continues to “imagine” that western powers are bullying it, and you stupidly believe it.
In western countries, the basic tenet is a government is accountable to its people, proven from election and one party comes and goes. Can you hold your government accountable now?
You can argue that China is in the process of doing it. That simply equates that at the current stage it is not. That is the reason why western intellectuals and think tanks are worried, especially with the misguided nationalistic attitudes.

Arbutus

April 7, 2008 @ 12:34 pm | Comment

“it is in many aspects very similar to Nazi in the early 30’s. ”

The initial meaning of Nazi is national socialist party member. However, the notoriety of Nazi is not due to the national socialism. Instead, it is due to the aggressive invasion of neighbouring country and holocaust.

Unlike 30’s Germany, the liberty in China has increased over the years and citizen’s right is getting more protection, not less. The government role in economy is shrinking, even less than many other capitalist country.

Arbutus, do not win argument by labeling others Nazi. It is at best, an intellectual sloppiness. Think first, then argue.

April 7, 2008 @ 2:16 pm | Comment

Steve,

Not everyone needs to be a patriot. I don’t pretend to know the inner workings of our security apparatus. But like JXie pointed out, the government appeared to be selectively targeting activists based on agendas. My point is that people like Hu Jia do not constitute as a threat to the Power that be (YET).

NED sponsored “color” revolutions have only worked in countries where credible opposition exists. Such is not the case in China right now.

Recent Western press coverage of Tibet has done more than years of CCTV to unify the Chinese people. People like Wang Lixiong will always exists but they are being increasingly marginalized by their perceived association with the Western interests.

I am for allowing a little breathing space for harmless dissent such as Hu Jia’s. It’s better to gradually increase the channels for airing out discontent than bottling up everything only to release in a great flood of destruction.

I believe that one of the genius of American system in preserving status quo is that when everybody is given a chance to voice their opinion, any meaningful dissenting voice is often lost among a sea of chatters. Sure Noam Chomsky might make lot of sense, but he presents no serious challenge at all to the establishment.

Of course, the tricky part is always the transition from A to B. Organizations like NED undoubtably would like to act as spoilers to advance whatever their perceived interests. But if people who work for NED think like some of the posters here (on the other side), I am seriously not worried.

April 7, 2008 @ 2:51 pm | Comment

I believe that one of the genius of American system in preserving status quo is that when everybody is given a chance to voice their opinion, any meaningful dissenting voice is often lost among a sea of chatters. Sure Noam Chomsky might make lot of sense, but he presents no serious challenge at all to the establishment.

Yep. It’s one of the things that surprises me about the current Chinese leadership, that they don’t get this principle. I’m sure some of them do, but not enough, apparently.

I’ve been watching the HBO miniseries about John Adams, and it fascinates me because of the importance of ideas and their relationship to power. There’s a line in there spoken by Benjamin Franklin, and I can’t remember the set-up – it’s a famous quote of his. The original goes like this:

“Well, Doctor, what have we got – a Republic or a Monarchy?”
“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

Lately I’ve been feeling more and more that we have slowly failed in our great national experiment. We haven’t kept our republic. It’s in the hands of huge, impersonal forces controlled by the few for the benefit of the few. I look at China and I see much the same situation. Except I can complain about it.

April 7, 2008 @ 3:08 pm | Comment

“It’s in the hands of huge, impersonal forces controlled by the few for the benefit of the few.”

Nothing wrong with that.

Both in America and China today, if you are ambitious and driven enough, you can still make it to the “few”.

The vast majority are just either too apathetic or too ignorant to seize the opportunity. I certainty do not indent to share my pie with someone who don’t know and don’t care.

April 7, 2008 @ 3:22 pm | Comment

Cao Meng De, it depends on what is important to you. I really don’t care about making a pile of money. I’m not an entrepreneur, I have very little interest in business. I’m a creative person, and I’ve always tried to live creatively. This is getting harder and harder to do. I could point to so many areas where this concentration of wealth and power has become detrimental to the health of society as a whole, in my opinion. One is newspapers. Of course they must adapt to new technology, but what’s happened is that the news gathering apparatus keeps getting cut and cut and cut. Assuming that we do value some form of a republic – and I do – how are people supposed to make informed decisions without information?

I’m a writer in my spare time and have recently gotten an agent to sell my book and am learning far more than I wanted to about the concentration of media ownership and how that affects both what gets published (and publicized) and how authors are treated. It’s very very difficult for most writers to receive any kind of living wage for the work they do. Obviously the publishing industry is in need of a great deal of restructuring, but what’s going on makes it increasingly difficult for writers to get paid for their work. It used to be that you had mid-list authors who might not be getting rich but who could support themselves with their writing. Now you have a few superstars making millions and many many people at the bottom who receive very little money for their efforts, and not much in the middle.

This is what our modern global economy seems to be about, from my perspective. It generates a great deal of wealth for the few, less so for workers and for the middle class.

Granted, I have seen the rise in wealth in China, for a great many people. There’s an urban middle class where there wasn’t one before.

Here in the US we’ve seen wealth siphoned from the middle class and given to the wealthy in this new global economy. I suppose in a way what’s happening is that the winners and losers are playing in a much larger field than before. Before, the US was a wealthy nation where most people enjoyed a decent standard of living. Now, we are the same sort of class-stratified society that you find in Brazil or in China. In the case of the US, we are masking this reality by living on credit, but that is just about to come to an end.

I find it really strange and disconcerting that I’ve seen this change in my lifetime – I’m not that old. I saw China in 1979, when you could not possibly imagine the China of today. I celebrate many of these changes. But not all of them.

April 7, 2008 @ 3:50 pm | Comment

Otherlisa,

You have a valid point that I have no answer for. You seem to know a great deal about the publishing industry. I just don’t know enough to form my opinion on that.

Regarding newspapers as source of information though, I believe that the impact of consolidation in the industry is lessened by the emergence of new media.

In this age of blogs and youtube, newspaper is no longer my primary source of information. I got a sense of what happened in Tibet recently through Youtube postings and travelers’ and even journalists’ blogs before I read anything in the papers.

Good journalism is short supply anyways. I have long since given up on reading NY Times or South China Morning Post. I only read Wall Street Journals and Financial Times nowadays. Aside from their asinine editorial pages, they provide me with solid reporting with minimal “guided thinking”.

I tend to agree with you that while most benefited somewhat with the lifting of the tide from the globalization, the group that reap the most is the super-wealthy. George Soros admitted as much.

Historically speaking, the rise of middle class in America is a rather recent phenomenon. Is this phase about to pass? It’s probably too early to tell. Only thing certain is that nothing last forever and this too will pass.

April 7, 2008 @ 4:40 pm | Comment

Cao Meng De, I would love to continue the conversation, but I have to get some sleep so I can show up for my job tomorrow. I’ve enjoyed talking to you. More later, I hope.

April 7, 2008 @ 4:50 pm | Comment

Ah, discussing economics and ignoring politics. Exactly what the CCP (and Washington and corporations) want.

Buying products made in China helped contribute to
Hu Jia’s imprisonment. Working in China, doing anything to support the Chinese gov’t, helped put Hu Jia in jail.

There is not too much blame to go around.

April 8, 2008 @ 1:01 am | Comment

Does buying American goods make us all complicit in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib? Nanhe, you have set yourself up as judge and jury using a very questionable litmus test. Buy a nation’s goods, be responsible for the crimes committed by that nation. Under that philosophy, nearly all world trade would grind to a halt, and the monsters in charge would dig their heels in deeper. You have incriminated just about everyone in the Western world, and billions who live elsewhere. This is why where your arguments, which are often very intelligent, lose all credibility and marginalize you as someone with a strange chip on his shoulder.

April 8, 2008 @ 10:06 am | Comment

Richard,

Plenty of economists, social scientists and government officials around the world are taking a very jaded second look at “globalization” which has hurt many and benefited few. And even the many Chinese that have new toys also must breathe the poisoned air and water needed to produce that stuff.

If you want to stick it to W over Abu Ghraib, trying donating to Red Crescent. And buying a nation’s goods simply because they are cheap and plentiful, so you can feel better about yourself by “consuming” and counting the thread count in your sheets, does make you responsible for the suffering you support in the nation that manufactured that stuff.

Burn it all! It’s time to start over!

April 8, 2008 @ 2:58 pm | Comment

nanhe, I have serious issues with globalization as well and agree that its benefits are questionable. Meanwhile, I am still not sure what good effect would come of a boycott of China-made goods. I want to see the people of China do well in spite of their government.

April 8, 2008 @ 3:48 pm | Comment

To Richard:
I also want to see the people of China do well. But often I have a second thought. Is it possible to have the people do well with that kind of government, a government that distorts the truth, creates false propaganda, breeds excessive nationalism that clearly is heading to a dangerous path. The danger may not be in the immediate future, as China, by all measurements, is currently still a poor country and lacks the military strength, plus the US is still the dominant power to ensure the security in Asia Pacific. Don’t forget that China, despite its military weakness, didn’t hesitate to have a military conflict with Vietnam in late 70’s, but didn’t go well for them. If China were to have the military might, how will China resolve its conflicts with Philippine, Vietnam, Japan, and Taiwan, considering the ongoing generations of propaganda and perceived humiliation? Even in the US, with the balance of power as the main tenet of government, how far has it gone wrong in Iraq? In China, with nothing else to balance the power domestically, the government would have the tendency to direct its power to the wrong side of the equations, especially when there are policy failures that create domestic discontent, ie. blaming game.
I think China has a sad history. Obviously no country had offered assistance during its transition from the feudal system to a new republic. But the communist’s nationalistic propaganda, and its sheer shrewdness, makes many people uncomfortable. That is the reason why I have the second doubt; I doubt if the people do well, the country will be acting more responsibly, because it is a communist country. In my opinion, a communist party is the same as any extremist party, whether an extreme Islamic party or a far-right extreme party; they won’t hesitate to use power to propagate what they believe in; they don’t believe in any political solution. Now, what should we all do?

To Steve:
I recommend you to visit the Jewish Holocaust Museum, and read more books to get the understanding of the early development of the Nazi Party. I agree with you that China is not invading any country… yes, that is now. China doesn’t have the power, do you know that? It is still struggling to create jobs for its people, and to maintain social stability. But the nationalism that it breeds and propagates is unmistakenly similar to Nazi, and how the reaction of the people in general too are strikingly similar. That is what I meant of China is similar to Nazi in early 30’s. Don’t get into narcissism of intellectual discussion.

Arbutus

Arbuts

April 11, 2008 @ 11:05 pm | Comment