In almost four years in China, I was never stopped by the police looking to check my visa. I heard plenty of warnings about carrying my passport at all times, and I rarely did. With my luck I’d probably get stopped in Arizona.

April 30, 2010 @ 11:30 pm | Comment

I was never stopped, either. Very unusual, as Fallows says, and is nearly always preceded by some incident (real or imagined), like taking a photo of demonstrators or being someplace they think you shouldn’t be.

April 30, 2010 @ 11:38 pm | Comment

In almost four years in China, I was never stopped by the police looking to check my visa.

I assume you are Caucasian? It maybe a different type of racial profiling at work. The typical colonial mentality. No fault of anyone. The Chinese police is likely to assume “white” people as tourists rather than illegal immigrants. You get what i mean? I am not being racist but it is likely to be the work of heuristics.

May 1, 2010 @ 1:42 am | Comment

Last time I checked I was a white guy with brown eyes. Not sure if your heuristics formula applies to Chinese police behavior or not, but it did raise an interesting question: do they treat black and Middle Eastern foreigners the way they do the white ones? Of course, that kind of question opens up a totally new can of worms.

May 1, 2010 @ 2:03 am | Comment

According to Middle Easterners, no. Blacks? Don’t hear many complaints from them either, unless they’re stuart’s imaginary friends. Then again compared to stuart’s imaginary Tibetan friends, his imaginary black friends are pretty reasonable.

May 1, 2010 @ 2:07 am | Comment

Have to admit that I don’t know that much about Arizona. Oh, I worked for a while with a former Sun Devil, and a former Arizona State Trooper (he turned down a job as a prison guard in one of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Maricopa county farms to go to China), but I really don’t know that much about the place except that real estate around Phoenix was crazy for a while (still now? I don’t know).

That said, my own home country is right now in the grips of a debate on immigration. One party is banking on an amnesty, another on a permanent cap, and the one in power is banking on what seems to me like BS. On top of all that, I actually really don’t carea bout immigration. At least, I don’t see a way out without it.

May 1, 2010 @ 2:09 am | Comment

The real estate crash in Phoenix was the worst in the country along with Las Vegas. Luckily I bought my house way back during the bust of the late 80s, so even if its value fell 40 percent in 2008 I still tripled my investment, one of the few smart financial moves I made.

I usually don’t care that much about immigration, either. But when you see the Minutemen in my state and other white supremacist whackos influencing the legislation and embedding the law with requirements that demand racial profiling, we all have reason to worry.

May 1, 2010 @ 2:30 am | Comment

And Sheriff Joe?

May 1, 2010 @ 3:05 am | Comment

Hate him with every fiber of my being. Corrupt, evil, sleazy, racist, narcissistic and power-drunk.

May 1, 2010 @ 3:23 am | Comment

Let’s hear it for Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, Pima’s top cop — he will refuse to enforce SB 1070 – http://bit.ly/dyOSWX

Regarding China, I do think there is a double-standard based on race — European-looking versus African-looking, but I may be making generalizations based on anecdotes.

May 1, 2010 @ 3:33 am | Comment

James Farrow’s comparison of Arizona and China makes no sense. You don’t even need ID to get a beer in China.

May 1, 2010 @ 4:12 am | Comment

He did point out that he’d never seen this happen without some kind of incident that made the police suspicious, like his taking photos of a demonstration at Tiananmen Square. He was very clear that this is not the norm.

May 1, 2010 @ 4:29 am | Comment

In other fun Arizona nativism news, they have just acted to ban:

– the teaching of “ethnic studies”
– the teaching of English by anyone with an accent (which I suppose means that any Scots currently employed in Arizona public schools will be on the next plane back to Prestwick).

May 1, 2010 @ 4:53 am | Comment

It’s apples and oranges for Fallows to compare middle-aged professional white guys in Beijing or Shanghai with Arizona border issues. Africans had a tough time ahead of the Olympics. More interesting to learn the experience of Tibetans coming in from Nepal or India, Uighurs or their fellow Central Asians who cross from the ‘stans, Mongolians, Vietnamese highlanders or North Koreans. At times, North Koreans have had what amounts to a bounty (2-3,000 RMB) on their heads.

May 1, 2010 @ 5:06 am | Comment

Vaara, if you think that’s bad take a look at this. And I chose to live in this state?

May 1, 2010 @ 5:47 am | Comment

@Richard – I’m not entirely sure it’s fair to pick on Arizona, given how much of the rest of the country is also on the tea-nut (or is it wing-bagger?) express. Lawmakers in Utah and Texas have proposed similar legislation aimed at the newly-created crime of EWB (Existing While Brown), and I’m sure they won’t be the only ones.

May 1, 2010 @ 6:19 am | Comment

Africans had a tough time ahead of the Olympics.

No, they didn’t.

May 1, 2010 @ 6:19 am | Comment

Agreed, Vaara. But I live here.

May 1, 2010 @ 6:33 am | Comment

How can you compare it to China? Being stopped for papers in Arizona is democratic stoppage, being stopped for papers in China is dictatorship stoppage. One is just a minor thing, at least the media reports it. The other is another blot on the dictatorship. Being stopped for papers in a democracy is much more pleasurable than being stopped for papers in a dictatorship, much more pleasurable.

Totally different, don’t try to compare them.

May 1, 2010 @ 6:54 am | Comment

figured I’d chime in on the topic as an African-American (Chicago) here in Sichuan. Been around 5 years now, police have never so much as looked at me twice. However the citizens rarely pass up an opportunity slap a fat nasty remark about my complexion,or cover their noses when I walk by. By and large they believe all brothers are from Africa and thus we are ABSOLUTELY inferior to them. They will tell you that they evolved from monkeys but we evolved from gorillas. I love asking them the question what if you shave the hair from a gorilla, what color will you see. I then follow up by asking “Now, whom is the gorilla?

May 1, 2010 @ 2:43 pm | Comment

You guys are lucky to be foreigners in China and won’t be harassed by the Chinese police, simply because you are not a Chinese citizen and deserve better treatment (so you praise Chinese police).

Imagine you are a N. Korean refugee, escaping to China for nothing but some food to eat in order to survive. The Chinese police know how to spot you among the Chinese people, because you look malnourished, scared and poorly clothed. They will not hesitate to send you back to N. Korea, while being fully aware that you could be put to death for betraying your motherland.

May 1, 2010 @ 4:23 pm | Comment

1. I understand that your bromance with J. Fallows is an objective fact. But could you spare us the “America’s smartest pundit” bit?

2. The idea of the Chinese providing Arizona police with sensitivity training is too ludicrous to take seriously. While I’ve not heard of any white foreign residents of Beijing being asked to show their passports, I have heard of immigration raids targeting black Africans. (see “Big trouble in China’s ‘Chocolate City'” at http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/674969) Worse, on more than one occasion, I’ve seen police here in Beijing approach Beijing-bound Chinese at the train station (and some of the more politically sensitive areas of Beijing) and requested to see their documents. For anyone (including Fallows) who believes that the Chinese police have anything particularly enlightened to say on the subject of sensitivity training, I encourage you to consider that the Chinese police treat white foreigners better than they treat Chinese citizens. (I’m quite sure you recall all the ugly stories we’ve heard these past few years regarding petitioners and Beijing’s “black jails.”) While I’m not a fan of Arizona’s new legislation, the sky is not falling. Take a chill pill and see how things play out. It could be that the Arizona law gives rise to a much needed national debate on the subject of comprehensive immigration reform. As the saying goes, “Democracies are good at exposing their problems; autocracies are good at hiding theirs.”

3. I’ve also wondered why I suffer worse jetlag on the way back to North America. Very strange, since a number of friends experience the opposite problem.

May 1, 2010 @ 8:44 pm | Comment

For more on the struggles of African immigrants in China, read

“Out of Africa and into China, emigres struggle” (Aug. 2009)

http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-08-24-out-of-africa-and-into-china-emigres-struggle

What is there to say about a nation (i.e., China) that still refuses to recognize dual citizenship, lacks a pathway to citizenship for foreign nationals, and treats white visitors better than both black visitors and its own citizens? Simply put, Fallows is wrong – China has nothing postitive to offer the U.S. on the subject. Absolutely nothing.

May 1, 2010 @ 8:54 pm | Comment

Gan Lu, I think he is the smartest pundit. I’ve met him, and he is ferociously smart.

El Chino, I am not praising (or knocking) China’s police. They’ve never stopped me or harassed me. I make it very clear that there is a reason for this and their motivation for not bothering foreigners isn’t one of love or kindness; more likely an order from on high to avoid annoying foreigners because it could lead to unwanted publicity.

This post isn’t about how good or bad China is, but about the power of their police to ask people for papers and how that might compare to the powers invested in Arizona’s police.

May 1, 2010 @ 9:19 pm | Comment

@ Gan Lu :
Everybody knows the China efforts to curb the increase of its population (i.e., one child policy) so it is obvious that China refuses to recognize dual citizenship and have no pathway to citizenship for foreign nationals. Just for hypothesis if China allows dual citizenship and granted citizenship to foreigners so China population would reach 2 billion (or more)!

And about the bad treatment China gives to african immigrants: unfortunatelly they face the same prejudices they experience in countries formed mostly by white people.

May 1, 2010 @ 11:22 pm | Comment

Richard: It seems to me that the phrase “smartest pundit” may be an underhanded compliment – like calling someone “the world’s smartest termite.” In the end, Fallows may be, as you say, the smartest pundit. In the end, however, he is a mere “China hand.” Like you, I read his blog and his essays on China when they appear in The Atlantic, but they don’t impress me the way they do you. I once recommended that you add a bit of scholarship to your China reading list. It’s still a good idea. Fallows compares poorly to the best China scholars. Very poorly.

Marco: Your numbers simply don’t add up. How on Earth would allowing dual citizenship and a path to naturalized citizenship add 700 million people to China’s current population of 1.3 billion? (Consider: China’s family planning policy is thought to have reduced China’s population by around 300 million. Ever heard the expression “错批一人,误增三亿”? The 人 in question was 马寅初, economist and former president of Peking University who warned Mao during the mid 50s about the growing danger of overpopulation. He was purged, of course.)There are now approximately 40 million overseas Chinese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overseas_Chinese) and fewer than one million foreign residents in China. In fact, many overseas Chinese are former citizens of the P.R.C. now living, and thriving, in countries like the U.S., Canada, the U.K., and Australia. Contrary to your baseless assertion, Marco, China’s current policy has absolutely nothing to do with fear of overpopulation.

May 2, 2010 @ 12:42 am | Comment

@ Gan Lu,
Maybe the number I estimated is a bit exaggerated, but on the other hand, your appraisal of about 41 million people (Wikipedia is a useful web research tool but highly doubtful about its data accuracy) is also far from the real figure. I was surprised you are just considering as potential individuals who would request citizenship former citizens of the P.R.C. living in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., and Australia. You are underestimating Chinese second- and third-generation descendants (not only from Chinese mainland descendant but from Taiwanese descendant) living in many other countries beyond those few western countries you cited before (i.e., for sure there is a lot of Chinese descendants living in another Asian countries).
And about foreigners who don´t have any Chinese origin you just took in consideration those who currently live in China. I suppose it didn´t occur to you consider foreigners that never went to China but applicant to go to China – for sure it is not necessary to be fluent in mandarin as the same as not to be needed to be fluent in English to go to US or UK.
So Gan Lu, lets blend my figure and your figure and we can clinch that it is certainly higher than 40 million but fewer than 700 million!
为什么你算很少中國人在世界?
我們很多了!!!!!!

May 2, 2010 @ 10:11 am | Comment

The comparison is wrong. Chinese police do not harass Americans or Europeans because neither Europeans nor Americans want to settle illegaly in China. When Americans or Europeans will try to settle in China illegally then we can compare behaviour of Chinese police to Americans with behaviour of American police to Latino people.
Nevertheless I do like the idea of sensitivity training. In fact for this kind of training I would specifically advise to bring in Chinese police stationing in Xinjiang, and ask them to give tips on their treatment of law-breakers, too. I am sure this kind of training would be an all around eye-opener.

May 2, 2010 @ 3:25 pm | Comment

@Gan Lu – It’s also worth pointing out that of the roughly 700,000-1,000,000 foreigners resident in China, roughly 350,000 are refugees from Vietnam, Laos, and North Korea. The foreign-born population of Nanjing, a city of six million people, was less than 10,000 in 2005, this figure including people from Hong Kong and Taiwan, and the total number of Britons in the entirety of China was estimated at less than 8,000 by the British Embassy in the same year. Put simply, Marco is just a little bit crazy.

May 2, 2010 @ 3:35 pm | Comment

Africans in Guangzhou not only had a hard time in the runup to the Olympics, but continue to have a hard time. Here’s a story from last summer where one “illegal” was chased to his death, and of course promptly swept under the rug:
http://tinyurl.com/n5oxnu

I do, however, find the idea of sensitivity training from Chinese police officers highly amusing and thus support this proposal. I think it would make an unforgettable reality TV show.
Maybe they could also get some of the soldiers from ’89 to provide advice on dealing with protestors?

May 2, 2010 @ 3:49 pm | Comment

Americans talking about Africans having a “hard time” in a country? You are too humorous, too humorous.

May 3, 2010 @ 5:54 am | Comment

It is logically possible for the same group of people to face difficult situations in two different settings. Unfortunately, discrimination in America does not mean that discrimination does not exist in China.

May 3, 2010 @ 10:01 am | Comment

To Kev:
well put once again. In some quarters, there is an overarching tendency to compare, compare, and compare some more. Often, the fruit of such comparisons is the notion that “so and so did such and such, therefore it’s okay for China to do whatever she’s doing”. Racial discrimination is but one of the examples of “such and such”.

May 3, 2010 @ 11:20 am | Comment

@HongXing

Americans talking about Africans having a “hard time” in a country? You are too humorous, too humorous.

So by your logic, no Germans can possibly criticize others for making anti-Semitic remarks?

As usual, you have nothing intelligent to offer except for brainless ad hominems.

May 3, 2010 @ 11:24 am | Comment

I have heard of immigration raids targeting black Africans.

Probably because they’re the ones overstaying. They need to crack down on whites in China, sure, but that’s beside the point.

May 3, 2010 @ 11:51 am | Comment

Racial discrimination is but one of the examples of “such and such”.

Riiiight.

When’s the last time blacks were attacked in a hate crime in China?

And don’t bring up the so-called Nanjing Riots, those specific students deserved what they got for abusing their hosts’ hospitality.

May 3, 2010 @ 11:52 am | Comment

Here’s a story from last summer where one “illegal” was chased to his death, and of course promptly swept under the rug:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/04/05/2008-04-05_popular_columbia_student_battled_attacke.html

The difference is that Yu Minghui was a student legally in America minding his own business when a bunch of thugs attacked him for no reason other than his race.

The man you mention was illegally overstaying. Yet who did you forget about entirely?

Whoops… because blacks can’t be racist.

http://gothamist.com/2010/04/09/cops_investigate_attacks_targeting.php

Oh wait… they can.

The NYPD’s Hate Crimes Task Force is investigating five different attacks on Asian women in the Lower East Side. The victims are ages 50-71 and WCBS 2 reports, “Police say the five assaults on Asian women took place over the last ten days within a nine-block area right near the Williamsburg Bridge.”

http://www.hyphenmagazine.com/blog/2010/04/racial-undercurrent-recent-attacks-asian-americans

The death of Tian Sheng Yu after a senseless beating on an Oakland, CA, street has brought up the issue of racial tensions between Asian Americans and African Americans (the suspects in the attack are black).

Yu died Tuesday after he was knocked to the ground Friday and never regained consciousness.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nation/bullying-attacks-on-asian-students-roil-a-melting-pot-high-school-in-south-philadelphia-82299087.html

Inside is a cauldron of cultural discontent that erupted in violence last month — off-campus and lunchroom attacks on about 50 Asian students, injuring 30, primarily at the hands of blacks. The Asian students, who boycotted classes for more than a week afterward, say they’ve endured relentless bullying by black students while school officials turned a blind eye to their complaints.

Your narrative of what racism is (anything bad done to black people) vs. the reality is very typically white liberal. Blacks are more racist against “Asians” than the other way around- BY FAR.

White liberals never acknowledge this truth, and simply bury racial attacks against “Asians” in their media.

May 3, 2010 @ 11:59 am | Comment

The problem with the Nigerans in Guangdong is there there are alot of criminals who overstayed their welcome and became criminals.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010-01/28/content_9388252.htm

I fail to see what’s the big deal with the Chinese Police going after criminals who overstayed their welcome.

May 3, 2010 @ 1:16 pm | Comment

The problem with the Nigerans in Guangdong is there there are alot of criminals who overstayed their welcome and became criminals.

A rather baffling sentence, I must say. Even if it made sense, the article you link to has nothing to do with your point, pug. All it says is two Nigerians asked Chinese girls to carry drugs into the country for them. And remember the source. China Daily has a long history of distorting criminality, making the Chinese the victims of the foreigner criminals.

May 3, 2010 @ 1:30 pm | Comment

The Chinese media also “distorts criminality” by covering up crimes committed by foreigners against Chinese nationals inside of China, which is something whites take for granted- after all, they are that special.

May 3, 2010 @ 2:17 pm | Comment

To 36:
I spoke of “racial discrimination” as an example. You’re talking “hate crime”. One is a tiny subset of the other. Who knows…you might want to argue that there’s no discrimination in China. I wouldn’t put it past you, except that you don’t like to talk about China…as evidenced (yet again) by #37.

May 3, 2010 @ 3:29 pm | Comment

Hong Xing, Merp and pug_ster really are tards. (With apologies to tards, there’s no other way to view them.)

May 4, 2010 @ 1:30 am | Comment

slim really is a super tard. with apologies to the severely mentally retarded and uneducated, there’s no other way to view him. Let me guess, “fair and balanced” Richard will delete this message, while letting slim’s ad hominems stand, even though slim is a tard that has never actually tried arguing with anyone, and simply jumps on anyone that deviates from his corporate line.

I spoke of “racial discrimination” as an example. You’re talking “hate crime”. One is a tiny subset of the other. Who knows…you might want to argue that there’s no discrimination in China. I wouldn’t put it past you, except that you don’t like to talk about China…as evidenced (yet again) by #37.

One “tiny” subset of the other? No, discrimination culminates in hate crimes. China’s depth of discrimination is much less than nearly all other nations in the world, which is evidenced by their lack of hate crimes.

Even in South Africa, Zimbabweans are attacked viciously simply for being from another country.

May 4, 2010 @ 6:26 am | Comment

Unless of course you mean Uighur hate crimes against Hui and Han, which is really just a continuation of their bigotry since they first invaded the Han Commanderies in 700 AD, 750 years after they were established.

May 4, 2010 @ 6:28 am | Comment

So by your logic, no Germans can possibly criticize others for making anti-Semitic remarks?

As usual, you have nothing intelligent to offer except for brainless ad hominems.

Can Nazis talk about anti-semetic about others?

You first made a personal attack on your post, and your personal attack is about me personally attacking. Please, go buy some IQ points from the grocery store.

May 4, 2010 @ 6:50 am | Comment

“discrimination culminates in hate crimes”
—yes, it can so culminate. But only a small percentage does…hence a “tiny subset”. Which is a good thing, btw, at least as opposed to the alternative.

“China’s depth of discrimination is much less than nearly all other nations in the world”
—I must congratulate you since you are actually referring to China. Is that a first? As for your assertion, I’ll take that with the usual grain of salt, in this case for several reasons: (a) you don’t live there; (b) even if you did, you belong to the vast majority, and thus would not know of what you speak when it comes to discrimination.

“evidenced by their lack of hate crimes.”
—even assuming that your “evidence” is in fact correct, you cannot extrapolate that back to the incidence of discrimination, unless you suggest that there is a fixed ratio of hate crimes to discrimination the world over. Then again, I wouldn’t put that past you.

To Red Dwarf:
I don’t personally invoke Germans/Nazis. But given the point SPZ made, and your subsequent question in #45, it appears you’ve completely missed it.

To draw out the intestines for you, in #31 you insinuated that the way past generations of “Americans” treated “Africans” means that present-day Americans are in no position to criticize how “Africans” are treated now. To which SPZ in #34, using your “logic”, suggested by extension that, based on the way past generations of “Germans” treated Jews, present-day Germans would be unable to criticize anti-Jewish remarks…which is a ridiculous assertion (or did you not realize that?)

All of which makes your response (“Can Nazis talk about anti-semetic about others? “) pretty far out there in left field. I’m not even sure it’s a sentence. Good job with that one.

May 4, 2010 @ 10:19 am | Comment

Uighur hate crimes against Hui and Han,……since they first invaded the Han
Merp, yes, of course. The crimes committed half a millennium ago excuse crimes which Han people are committing now against Uighurs.
Your logic is superb!!

May 4, 2010 @ 12:12 pm | Comment

btw

I’ve read comments regarding Arizona and the new law. I do not understand the fuss. The illegal immigrants are illegally in USA so they break the US law. On the other hand you call the rule that allow checking people papers racist As I see it police will be checking papers of people who they suspect of being illegal immigrants. These people just happen to be latinos. This is not racist. The law would have been racist if the police started to check papers of latinos just because they are latinos and not because they suspect them of breaking US laws. Going further with the “racist thing” it seems to me that checking papers of people disembarking off the plane coming from – say – Rwanda should also be called racist because majority of passengers are blacks. Therefore checking their papers is racist even if immigration officers are checking to see whether passengers come to US legally or not.
Right?
BTW. In Europe (West and East), in Middle East, in Asia, in Africa and in Latin America police can check anybody’s paper anytime they want. It is only in USA and in Canada that one can live for long time without his/her papers being checked. Of course what is racist in USA might not be racist elsewhere. I really wouldn’t know.

May 4, 2010 @ 5:03 pm | Comment

How is calling merp and fellow fascist fan boys repeatedly on poor logic, intellectual dishonesty and factual error a “corporatist line”?

I regret the ad hominem, but honestly cannot even in the archives find a single merp post that was not based on one logical fallacy or another. This thread has at least 5 fallacy-rich posts.* Wikipedia has a long list of common logical fallacies, which can be usefully studied by anyone who wants to avoid such errors.

*
1) And don’t bring up the so-called Nanjing Riots, those specific students deserved what they got for abusing their hosts’ hospitality.
2) The man you mention was illegally overstaying. Yet who did you forget about entirely? Whoops… because blacks can’t be racist.
3) Your narrative of what racism is (anything bad done to black people) vs
4) White liberals never acknowledge this truth, and simply bury racial attacks against “Asians” in their media.
5) Unless of course you mean Uighur hate crimes against Hui and Han, which is really just a continuation of their bigotry since they first invaded the Han Commanderies in 700 AD, 750 years after they were established.

May 4, 2010 @ 11:51 pm | Comment

Watch out slim, if you keep commenting on how Merp is wrong, he’ll claim that he has “won” an “argument” (I didn’t know there was a scorekeeper, must be in his mind?)
A further account of Merp’s victories:
http://tinyurl.com/2vs7x2a

May 5, 2010 @ 12:47 am | Comment

unless you suggest that there is a fixed ratio of hate crimes to discrimination the world over

Strong correlation- considering your lofty and specious arguments about “the people”, this stands.

even if you did, you belong to the vast majority, and thus would not know of what you speak when it comes to discrimination.

This is a real gem. You tell HongXing he’s wrongheaded for saying whites talking about racism against Africans is a joke, then claim that Chinese people can’t even judge discrimination in their own societies. Are you on crack? So you’re invalidating your laughable claim that white Americans “ended racism” 50 years ago. Either that or you’re simply terrible at reading, which is why you implied HongXing was talking about the past, and not the present.

means that present-day Americans are in no position to criticize how “Africans” are treated now.

Oh yes, America ended racism 50 years ago! No, SK Cheung, racism against Africans is still rampant in America.

@slim
1) And don’t bring up the so-called Nanjing Riots, those specific students deserved what they got for abusing their hosts’ hospitality.

I disagree with it, therefore it’s a logical fallacy!

2) The man you mention was illegally overstaying. Yet who did you forget about entirely? Whoops… because blacks can’t be racist.

I don’t like the poster, therefore it’s a logical fallacy!

3) Your narrative of what racism is (anything bad done to black people) vs

This hurts my feelings… fallacy.

4) White liberals never acknowledge this truth, and simply bury racial attacks against “Asians” in their media.

I don’t like this. Another fallacy!

5) Unless of course you mean Uighur hate crimes against Hui and Han, which is really just a continuation of their bigotry since they first invaded the Han Commanderies in 700 AD, 750 years after they were established.

Socrates taught me about this one, bro.

May 5, 2010 @ 11:18 am | Comment

“Strong correlation”
—huh? You contend that there are few hate crimes in China. I have no basis for agreeing or disagreeing with you. But how do you claim a “strong correlation” between hate crimes and racial discrimination in China unless you’ve also shown that minimal discrimination exists in China? And how would you attest to that, since, as I said, (a) you’re not in CHina and (b) even if you were, you wouldn’t be the subject of racial discrimination? Not sure what you’re correlating to, but it’s certainly not to the point of the discussion.

“You tell HongXing he’s wrongheaded for saying whites talking about racism against Africans is a joke”
—ummm, this is what I actually said in #46 (“insinuated that the way past generations of “Americans” treated “Africans” means that present-day Americans are in no position to criticize how “Africans” are treated now…which is a ridiculous assertion”)—
—to which you said: “claim that Chinese people can’t even judge discrimination in their own societies”
—see, here’s the thing. YOU can’t judge discrimination in China, because it’s NOT YOUR society. IF you were in China, and you saw or became aware of discrimination against someone else, you can then certainly speak to its PRESENCE. But your experiences can in no way attest to the ABSENCE of discrimination, because you’re simply not in the target demographic for experiencing it. Yet you try to claim there is little or no discrimination in China. Similarly, Americans (presumably white ones) are in no position to claim an ABSENCE of discrimination against blacks; but they can certainly speak out against discrimination when they see it. I realize the logic might be a bit complex for you. Hope this helps. I think what you need to do is read a little more carefully, think a little more about what you read, then just go and reach for the stars, and some day you might catch a clue.

Perhaps you can be so kind as to show me where I said Americans “ended racism”. I mean, it’s in quotes, so I must have said it, right? Cuz we all know you wouldn’t make up something, just to argue against something that you hoped I had said, given your repeated inability to argue against what I actually say. Or would you?…You are certainly one special dude…but if the helmet fits, as they say…

May 5, 2010 @ 1:15 pm | Comment

http://tarbaby.wordpress.com/2007/09/22/tales-of-the-holohoax/

Here’s a good example of SK Cheung’s non-discriminatory, color-blind, post-racial society:

Every shred of evidence points at China being less racist than most nations.

For starters:

1) Chinese people do not rabidly assault Zimbabweans, like South Africans did
2) Lou Jing herself claims she faced no racism whatsoever growing up
3) China is in fact comprised of three or more distinct biologically discernible “races”, which is more or less taken for granted
4) No one, even the Western snoops with a chip on the shoulder, have found evidence of hate crimes targeting blacks or whites. Ever. How do we know this? Because if one of these snakes did find evidence of such a crime, it would be ALL OVER INTERNATIONAL NEWS FOR MONTHS ON END. “Here’s proof all Chinese people are evil and racist!” Whites would gobble it up.

Again, you’re welcome to try to prove that China is “more racist” than America- as many whites are wont to do.

May 5, 2010 @ 1:32 pm | Comment

Well, at least you’ve shown the requisite good judgment to forget about responding directly to my 3 points in #52, since you didn’t have a leg to stand on. So in rare instances, when the stars are aligned just right, it can happen…good to know.

Not sure what your link is supposed to help you say. Are you?

“Every shred of evidence points at China being less racist than most nations.”
—if you review what Kevin said in #32 and what I said in #33, the point is that it’s not about comparing. That being said, I realize you can’t get out of bed in the morning without comparing whether you had done so more quickly the day before, your proclivities being what they are. So in case you’re wondering, you’re the only one worrying about whether China is “less racist” or more racist than anyone else; I’m certainly not.

As for “every shred”, it seems “every” = 4. Interesting.
Point 1 is interesting. I wonder if there are peoples that Chinese have assaulted, or invaded, that South Africans have not. Any guesses?
I’m happy for Lou Jing in Point 2. Sadly, she’s made up for some of the racism she managed to avoid as a kid by putting up with a bunch of it after being a contestant on that talent show.
Not sure what point 3 has to do with anything. Most people say China has 56 ethnicities…1 dominant one, and 55 minorities. If you wanna say it’s 3, be my guest. Just so you know, you can have “racial discrimination” every time you have more than 1. So point 3 seems rather pointless.
Point 4 is “hate crimes” again. You’re free to talk about that if you like. I’m referring to discrimination, of which (in case you’ve already forgotten) hate crimes only constitutes a “tiny subset”.

I have no interest in establishing that China is “more racist”. That “compare, compare, and compare some more” gig is all yours, remember? You seem to forget more than you remember these days.

Well, you did say “for starters”. Gee, I wonder if there’s more where that came from. You’re right about one thing, however: your “evidence” is certainly in shreds.

May 6, 2010 @ 2:39 pm | Comment

We’re not talking logic here, my nerd friend. To normal human beings, 32 and 33 would be construed as “deflection” or “projection” or “diminishing”.

To compare China’s “racism against blacks” to America’s… now that is a joke. China’s “racism against blacks” pales in comparison to even black racism against other blacks… who are the exact same ethnic group, only separated by imaginary lines.

May 6, 2010 @ 10:59 pm | Comment

“We’re not talking logic here”
—dude, clearly you’re not. But it’s never too late to start, if you’re ever considering it.

“To compare…”
—you are certainly a contemporary manifestation of a one-trick pony.

Hey, I thought there were more “shreds” where that came from. Guess not.

May 7, 2010 @ 6:07 am | Comment

“We’re not talking logic here,”
Gotta love that comment! Perhaps the first sensible thing I’ve seen Ferin say here.
After that confession, it just goes downhill.

May 7, 2010 @ 10:23 am | Comment

dude, clearly you’re not. But it’s never too late to start, if you’re ever considering it.

Clearly, because the sum of all human experience can be boiled down to bean-counting and 9th grade “logical debate”.

Talk about defective.

May 9, 2010 @ 7:51 am | Comment

That’s a good one. I certainly can’t speak of all human experience, but if you ever possessed a ninth-grader’s capacity for logic, that would be a huge and welcome upgrade. You should put a man on that.

I see you’ve given up all hope of responding to #55. So the judgment might be improving. Can the logic be far behind? Well, quite possibly.

May 9, 2010 @ 11:55 am | Comment

Oops, my mistake…it was #54.

May 9, 2010 @ 11:56 am | Comment

I was going to say it was too stupid to dignify a response, but it turns out I just overlooked it.

I realize you can’t get out of bed in the morning without comparing whether you had done so more quickly the day before, your proclivities being what they are.

That’s your pathology. Constantly comparing China’s system to your flawless, post-racial, color-blind West (led by America) is the gist of 99% of your posts.

<Point 1 is interesting. I wonder if there are peoples that Chinese have assaulted, or invaded, that South Africans have not. Any guesses?

Try me. Tibet was considered part of China by everyone by at least the late Qing but a select few de facto vassal Kingdoms in Central Tibet.

Han Chinese are the third people to arrive in Xinjiang, the Uighur or their earlier inceptions the fourth or fifth.

Hunan was steadily acculturated through contact with Northern States- they entered on the regional stage as an equal, and simply lost to Qin.

Sichuan, Ba or Shu take your pick, somewhat similar to the above- only the people here were “ethnically” very similar to Northern Chinese.

Wu area, same as above- acculturation.

Nanyue, the only thing that could remotely be considered “imperialism” in Chinese history. However the truth is that one general was sent to disorganized tribal area, and he turned it into a state.

Goguryeo-Sui Wars- as result of Goguryeo back-stabbing China by establishing military/political alliances with the Gokturks, for perpetually raiding Chinese posts, and launching a preemptive strike on China. This was a punitive campaign against Goguryeo on the half-Xianbei Sui court’s part, that failed- however the Tang follow-up ensured that Korea remained more or less aligned with China for the next thousand and some years.

I’m happy for Lou Jing in Point 2. Sadly, she’s made up for some of the racism she managed to avoid as a kid by putting up with a bunch of it after being a contestant on that talent show.

If by “putting up with a bunch of it” you mean cherry-picked comments on an anonymous internet board, sure. By that vein we can establish that all Westerners are stormfronters, and I win again.

Not sure what point 3 has to do with anything. Most people say China has 56 ethnicities…1 dominant one, and 55 minorities.

They’re also wrong- China has closer to 65ish minorities (non-East Asians don’t count), some of them simply are not recognized. The truth of the matter is, is that some Han Chinese in the far South are less related to the North Chinese than Tibetans are- in fact, the difference is so great that according to population geneticists, “pure” Chinese and some far Southern Han are more different from each other than “Subsaharans” and “Whites”. That was the point I was getting at- the obvious racial difference is more or less overlooked, especially by all the rabid “CHINA IS RACIST” expats.

Point 4 is “hate crimes” again. You’re free to talk about that if you like. I’m referring to discrimination, of which (in case you’ve already forgotten) hate crimes only constitutes a “tiny subset”.

Hate crimes are not a “tiny subset” of discrimination. Hate crimes are the culmination of decades if not centuries of the transmission of ideas and culture. Other forms of discrimination ultimately move forward and manifest themselves in hate crimes. It’s merely the most obvious symptom of a societal disease- a tip of the iceberg. You can’t claim there are no underlying factors driving individuals in a society to kill someone for their race, that’s just dumb.

I have no interest in establishing that China is “more racist”. That “compare, compare, and compare some more” gig is all yours, remember? You seem to forget more than you remember these days.

See above about how this “compare compare compare” nonsense has been the obsession of the messianic-al West, for which you are serving as a mouthpiece.

Well, you did say “for starters”. Gee, I wonder if there’s more where that came from. You’re right about one thing, however: your “evidence” is certainly in shreds.

Even in shreds, they have more truth and sense in them than all of your bean-counting, we-can-quantify-all-human-experience arguments.

May 10, 2010 @ 1:54 am | Comment

“Constantly comparing China’s system to your…”
—huh? Are you kidding me? When have I EVER compared China’s system to mine, or any other? My point has always been that Chinese people deserve a system of their own choosing. You’re again forgetting that “comparing” (often of apples and oranges) is your gig. And you’re again arguing against something I haven’t said, rather than against what I have said. Though I must say you are remarkably consistent in what you do, even if it is done poorly.

“Tibet was considered part of China by everyone by at least the late Qing but a select few de facto vassal Kingdoms in Central Tibet.”
—Oh?!? So…Tibet was considered a part of China by “everyone” except the people who actually lived in Tibet. Again, interesting…even more interesting that this “exception” was probably in effect in 1959 when the PLA decided to march in.

“cherry-picked comments on an anonymous internet board”
—ummm, “anonymous” perhaps, since the people spewing the vitriol probably didn’t know her, and she didn’t know them. Interesting how a person not on the receiving end of racism can characterize such remarks as “cherry-picking”. Again goes to show how you are woefully unqualified for evaluating the presence of racial discrimination in China..among other things.

“That was the point I was getting at- the obvious racial difference is more or less overlooked”
—if you say so, pal. But how does that in any way support an assertion than China has “less racial discrimination”? You’ve made an assertion which is in no way supported by your subsequent statements. As I’ve already said, whether China has 3, 56, 65, or however many ethnicities as you care to claim, all you need for racial discrimination to exist is 2. And I’m comfortable with the 56 number, not only because it’s often quoted (because an error can also be repeated), but because…well…they’re a heckuva lot more reliable than you. But that’s just me…you go with whatever number you like. As long as that number is 2 or more, your point is pointless, as I’ve said.

“It’s merely the most obvious symptom of a societal disease- a tip of the iceberg.”
—I’m really not sure from what impediment you suffer. Yes, discrimination can culminate in hate crime. And sure, hate crime can be the tip of the iceberg of discrimination in society. But an absence of hate crime does not mean an absence of discrimination…which is what i’ve been saying all along. It appears you fail to comprehend what I write. If you comprehend what you write, you’d see that what you wrote actually makes my point…so thanks, I guess…

““compare compare compare” nonsense has been the obsession of the messianic-al West”
—ummm, the only thing in evidence is your penchant to compare (often of things that aren’t comparable…but that’s another story).

Yes, I think we can both agree that your evidence is indeed in shreds. As for the worth of these shreds…let’s just say you can have them back, for I have no use for them.

May 10, 2010 @ 4:28 am | Comment

has always been that Chinese people deserve a system of their own choosing.

They already chose. You’ll say “then let them choose again”. That’s a pipe dream.

You’re again forgetting that “comparing”

Is your pathology. You have yet to offer one decent argument for “democracy”, except for “oh yes, clearly 2>1! I learned that in 2nd grade! That means it’s true for everything, even politics! Lets just assume that everyone is equally qualified for everything!”

Oh?!? So…Tibet was considered a part of China by “everyone” except the people who actually lived in Tibet. Again, interesting…even more interesting that this “exception” was probably in effect in 1959 when the PLA decided to march in.

Too bad. China would have been content to let “the Tibetans” be “independent”… whoops until that little “democratic” European terrorism came along, making it impossible for China NOT to station soldiers there. Unless you think allowing Russia and Britain toe breath down China’s neck from the heartlands is sound policy.

Interesting how a person not on the receiving end of racism can characterize such remarks as “cherry-picking”.

Do you have problems with reading comprehension? They’re “cherry-picked” comments, not “cherry-picking” comments. I.e the Western, obsessed, disgusting media picked out a handful of offensive comments out of thousands and acted like they represented every single Chinese person on the planet. This is typical white behavior.

In that case, all whites are stormfronters. China has no stormfront, another win for me.

if you say so, pal. But how does that in any way support an assertion than China has “less racial discrimination”?

LOL. Because they discriminate less based on race? Isn’t that pretty obvious?

all you need for racial discrimination to exist is 2

What is this? No one claimed there is no discrimination in China. There is FAR LESS than in other countries is what I was saying, if you can remember that much.

But an absence of hate crime does not mean an absence of discrimination…

Learn how to read. See above statement as well.

ummm, the only thing in evidence is your penchant to compare (

Clearly, because the Western media is flawless and perfect and serves only to inform the public! “Only thing in evidence”… according to you and other bean-counting one trick ponies.

for I have no use for them.

Not being able to find use for sense, reason and truth doesn’t mean sense, reason and truth are useless. It just means you have a deficiency.

May 10, 2010 @ 10:07 am | Comment

“They already chose”
—oh good grief. Once. 61 years ago. Among other things, you sure are stingy about giving other people choice. I wonder if you restrict your own choices as much as you would of others. I ask this because you think China is the best yet you don’t live there, so I’m wondering if in general what’s good enough for others is good enough for you.

“Lets just assume that everyone is equally qualified for everything!”
—we can file this away yet again as an exhibit of you arguing against what you hoped I had said, rather than what I actually say. I imagine it’s a fun game since you can’t seem to stop playing it. Better you than me. In any event, John Q may not be qualified to run the country. But John Q is probably a better judge of what’s in John Q’s best interests than you are. Which is why I say let John Q speak for himself. You, on the other hand, are extremely keen to speak for him. Why is that, exactly?

“Too bad.”
—yes, it is too bad. I just wanted to clear up any misconception about China not having invaded anybody when you were busy with your South Africa/Zimbabwe business.

“picked out a handful of offensive comments out of thousands”
—dude, all you had to do was look around to find many Chinese commenters who were aghast at things being said about Lou Jing. It’s called the internet. Was that supposed to be news? So of course, I’m not suggesting that EVERYONE is China is racist. But some people clearly are. I could get into the responder and selection bias of internet comments only being a sample of people who go to message boards and leave comments, so they are not a scientific reflection of the pervasiveness of racial discrimination in China. But I figure that’s beyond your pay-grade.

BTW, feel free to celebrate your hollow “victories”. That seems to be really important to you. Wouldn’t want to deprive you of such simple and simplistic pleasures. But make sure to strap on your helmet extra-tight in case you fall down all of a sudden.

“Because they discriminate less based on race? Isn’t that pretty obvious?”
—oh that’s a good one. Coming from a person who lives in China as a minority, no doubt. What, you don’t live in China? And what, even if you did, you wouldn’t be a minority? Hmmmm….

“There is FAR LESS than in other countries is what I was saying”
—how do you establish that there is LESS (or MORE) racism in a country simply based on the number of minorities present (whether it’s 3, 56, 65)? You know, continued recycling of a pointless point does not alter its pointlessness.

“But an absence of hate crime does not mean an absence of discrimination…

Learn how to read. See above statement as well.”
—you know, that’s my bad. In dealing with someone with the challenges that you obviously have, one needs to be more precise. I’ll try to do better now and in the future. An absence of hate crime does not correlate with the presence or absence of discrimination, nor to the extent of any such presence. Remember your “tip of iceberg”? If you don’t see it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. For reference, check with the Titanic.

As yet another example of the need for precision, I have no use for your “shreds” not because I have no use for sense, reason, and truth, but simply because your “shreds” so clearly lacked them. I thought that was pretty obvious, but if you need me to draw out the intestines for you, well, anything I can do to help. Consider it my Good Samaritan deed for the day.

May 10, 2010 @ 1:13 pm | Comment

John Q may not be qualified to run the country. But John Q is probably a better judge of what’s in John Q’s best interests than you are.

Are John Q and John P a better judge of what’s in John R’s interests than John R?

I just wanted to clear up any misconception about China not having invaded anybody when you were busy with your South Africa/Zimbabwe business.

Well yeah if you mean “China” as in every ethnic group that’s ever been there, sure. But the “evil Han Chinese” you and others scream about, no, they have never really invaded another sovereign country.

Was that supposed to be news? So of course, I’m not suggesting that EVERYONE is China is racist.

Talk to the Western media, which crapped out hundreds of Lou Jing articles trying to say all Chinese people are racist. Even the wikipedia article on Lou Jing calls all Chinese people racist.

Coming from a person who lives in China as a minority, no doubt. What, you don’t live in China? And what, even if you did, you wouldn’t be a minority?

I wouldn’t be a minority BECAUSE Chinese people wouldn’t SEE me as one. Talk to me in 20,000 years when Canadians and Americans don’t see whites, “Hispanics” and blacks as different races.

how do you establish that there is LESS (or MORE) racism in a country simply based on the number of minorities present (whether it’s 3, 56, 65)? You know, continued recycling of a pointless point does not alter its pointlessness.

we can file this away yet again as an exhibit of you arguing against what you hoped I had said, rather than what I actually say.

My point is this: far South Han Chinese = different race from Northern Han Chinese. Whites and blacks are more genetically and physically similar to each other. However the Chinese don’t see it or care about it. See Luigi Cavalli-Sforza’s work if you don’t get what I’m talking about.

I’ll try to do better now and in the future. An absence of hate crime does not correlate with the presence or absence of discrimination

Wow, are you really this handicapped? Nation with hate crimes = more racist than nation without hate crimes.

Pretty easy to understand. I guess this is your idea of non-racist, post-racial, color-blind American society

White Guy: DOOP DOOP DOOP DEE DOO
Black Guy: BLERP BLERP BLERP DOODA
White Guy: Hey were like the best friends ever!
Black Guy: We always get along!
White Guy: No conflicts of interest!
Black Guy: Yeah really!
White Guy: I’m gonna lynch you now!
Black Guy: YEAH-! Wait, what the fuck?

Obviously you need build up to get to that point.

I have no use for your “shreds” because I have no use for sense, reason, and truth

Fixed.

May 11, 2010 @ 12:49 am | Comment

With a hat tip to K.E. David over at China Geeks, I have to apologize for calling certain commenters here “愤青”. Clearly the correct term is 粪青: “people who are generally gullible. They have a lack of knowledge; they don’t apply enough logic and common sense to problems. They are easily provoked. They’re impetuous, and they’re hot-headed, and they sometimes don’t just speak up but they actually take action…they sometimes have trouble separating patriotism from nationalism, and they sometimes not only want China to win, they may want some other countries to lose”

I feel better having cleared this up and I hope it helps others understanding.

May 14, 2010 @ 5:05 am | Comment

“Talk to me in 20,000 years when Canadians and Americans don’t see whites, “Hispanics” and blacks as different races.”

Merpingtroid, old sport – you forgot to add the Chinese to your little melting pot of homogeneity. No need to exclude yourself, dear boy.

One world; one dream.

May 14, 2010 @ 12:10 pm | Comment

“Are John Q and John P a better judge of what’s in John R’s interests than John R?”
—of course not, silly. Haven’t we been through this before? Gosh you’re slow. John R isn’t going to get his wish all of the time; but he has a chance to get his wish some of the time, which is better than his odds in China.

““evil Han Chinese” you and others scream about”
—jeez buddy. When have I ever screamed that? You and your creative reading are a sight to behold.

“trying to say all Chinese people are racist.”
—oh brother. Well, then it might be time to engage your brain to determine if that’s really possible, or even plausible. Do that much?

“I wouldn’t be a minority BECAUSE Chinese people wouldn’t SEE me as one.”
—rolling on the floor over here. So in the past you’ve tried to tell us that you know how Chinese people think, and what Chinese people want. Now you’re trying to tell us you know what Chinese people see. You have interesting delusions. BTW, for your assertion, even on its face, to make any sense at all, you’d have to be something other than Han. Do you know why??

“My point is this: far South Han Chinese = different race from Northern Han Chinese. Whites and blacks are more genetically and physically similar to each other. However the Chinese don’t see it or care about it.”
—huh? You have a point? In those 3 random sentences? I like the second one best, however…quite funny. You’re also exhibiting an alarming lack of originality. Something to add to the list of things you need to work on.

“Nation with hate crimes = more racist than nation without hate crimes.”
—oh brother. It’s as though I need to lead you by the hand. (a) though it may surprise you, I’m not comparing. I’m not talking about which nation is more racist. I stated that many points (and days ago); (b) nation without hate crimes does NOT equal nation without racism. Do I need to draw the intestines out any more clearly for you? I was talking about China; not China vs whomever.

Your little song and dance needs a helmet as much as you evidently do. Simple strokes for simple folks, I suppose. Oh, and if you’re going to quote me, then quote me. You seem to have forgotten the “not”…that’s pretty weak stuff. Although it shows a capacity to quote selectively, and that’s worth something, I guess. With you, one does have to celebrate the small stuff.

May 14, 2010 @ 12:13 pm | Comment

@merp

But the “evil Han Chinese” you and others scream about, no, they have never really invaded another sovereign country.

Haha, i guess the Vietnamese wouldn’t agree with this fatuous statement of yours.
Never invade another sovereign country? In your own wet dreams.
Chinese invasions of Vietnam have occurred throughout Vietnam’s 5000-year history:

* 1988: Johnson South Reef Skirmish
* 1979-90: Sino-Vietnamese conflicts 1979-1990
* 1979: Sino-Vietnamese War
* 1974: Battle of the Paracel Islands
* 1945: August Revolution#Proclamation of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam
* 1865: Haw wars
* 1789: Tây Sơn Dynasty#Defeat of the Qing
* 1788: Ten Great Campaigns#The Campaign in Vietnam
* 1537: Trịnh Lords#The Trịnh-Nguyễn Alliance
* 1427: Battle of Chi Lăng
* 1407: Fourth Chinese domination (History of Vietnam)
* 1287: Battle of Bach Dang (1288)
* 1284: Trần Hưng Đạo#The second Mongol invasion
* 1257: Tran Thai Tong
* 1075: Lý Dynasty#War against the Song
* 981: Battle of Bach Dang (981)
* 938: Battle of Bach Dang River (938)
* 602: Third Chinese domination (History of Vietnam)
* 544: Lý Nam Đế
* 43 AD: Second Chinese domination (History of Vietnam)
* 111 BC: First Chinese domination (History of Vietnam)
* 208 BC: Triệu Dynasty
* 218 BC: Trieu Da
* 221 BC: An Dương Vương
* 258 BC: Văn Lang
* Approximately between 22nd–21st century BC: Hồng Bàng Dynasty

May 14, 2010 @ 12:53 pm | Comment

Of course, there does not even seem to be the “need” to mention the most obvious cases of Tibet and so-called Xinjiang (hmmm… literally translates as “new border/boundary”?). If Tibet “belongs to China,” I’m not really sure why China doesn’t “belong to Japan” or “Mongolia” or “Manchuria” for that sake.
Merp might draw upon some purportedly distant historical examples, but oddly there don’t seem to be any historical examples that violate a total Han hegemony. Hmmm…. wonder why? This furthermore disregards the fact, of course, that the notion of “the Han” is a very recent development, and an illusory one at that.
This all boils down to the simple fact, noted so many times by so many commenters, that Ferin is simply mentally incompetent. Cue facetious arguments and personal attacks.

May 14, 2010 @ 3:37 pm | Comment

“in fact, the difference is so great that according to population geneticists, “pure” Chinese and some far Southern Han are more different from each other than “Subsaharans” and “Whites”. That was the point I was getting at- the obvious racial difference is more or less overlooked, especially by all the rabid “CHINA IS RACIST” expats.”

First of all, one should not feel suprised that there is no supposed biological basis for “Han.” News flash from many decades ago ago: there is no biological basis for any race.

You of course overlook the fact that this largely invalidates the entire idea of a “China” composed of 56 cheery nationalities with the Han taking the lead and resisting “Western imperialism.”

Second, anyone who cites “population geneticists” in discussing “race” is a little bit behind the times, sort of like someone who cites the Bible in a discussion of evolution (I again suggest that Merp may have been home-schooled by Li Peng or someone along those lines?). Everyone is quite aware that races are not actually existing realities, and that any racial argument is based upon unsustainable assumptions.

The supposed “internal” racial difference within the Han is “overlooked” because people are trained to believe that these actually non-existent categories supposedly exist. People supposedly “are” “Han.” The fact that people overlook the inherent falsity of a nationality does not mean that they are not racist. In fact, it might provide them with a foundation for being racist, obsessed with a totalizing majority. For example, if people overlook an internal difference, but believe strongly in an external difference, does this mean that they are racially sensitive? Not in any sensible person’s mind! Quite a few people believe that being “white” gives them a special privilege or supremancy in the world: yet the fact that whiteness is not an actually existing reality but rather a social construct simply cannot change the fact that people who support white supremacist views are racists. Therefore, the inherently illusory nature of being Han does not mean that Han can never be racist; it simply means that they are almost as dumb about it as “whites.” Congrats!

May 14, 2010 @ 3:55 pm | Comment

You of course overlook the fact that this largely invalidates the entire idea of a “China” composed of 56 cheery nationalities with the Han taking the lead and resisting “Western imperialism.”

Except that wasn’t the idea. Only someone who doesn’t know anything would think so. The idea was that there’s a whole bunch of ethnic groups. And all of them are cooperating to resist you.

Second, anyone who cites “population geneticists” in discussing “race” is a little bit behind the times, sort of like someone who cites the Bible in a discussion of evolution

No it’d be like citing evolutionary biologists in a discussion of evolution. The idea that race is a social construct is idiotic, a stone-age throwback, a red herring used by whites who exploit their “multicultural world” for their personal benefit.

For example, if people overlook an internal difference, but believe strongly in an external difference, does this mean that they are racially sensitive?

No- it means they don’t have the “you look different so I hate you and want to kill you” instinct that most other groups people have. They might be socially conditioned to feel more affinity with non-racials who also happen to be Han, but that doesn’t mean anything other than that they’re willing to cooperate with non-racials.

yet the fact that whiteness is not an actually existing reality but rather a social construct simply cannot change the fact that people who support white supremacist views are racists.

“Whiteness”, “blackness”, etc might be a social construct or it might correspond with the reality which is that different populations are different. The fact that the common moron has less grasp of what race really is as opposed to what race is marketed as by white media, doesn’t mean that Europeans aren’t essentially one group of people separate from others; just like East Asians, Africans, Southeast Asians, etc.

hey are almost as dumb about it as “whites.”

I’m glad you finally admit that white people are more racist than “Han”.

May 15, 2010 @ 3:16 pm | Comment

@sp
Haha, i guess the Vietnamese wouldn’t agree with this fatuous statement of yours.
Never invade another sovereign country? In your own wet dreams.
Chinese invasions of Vietnam have occurred throughout Vietnam’s 5000-year history:

Vietnamese history before their written records is largely mythological, and after 1980s it’s been littered with pure nonsense and lies. The simple fact is, one single general took Vietnam- it wasn’t entirely a state action. Then again, Vietnam didn’t really even exist back then. It was just a mess of disorganized tribes.

As for the 1979 war, that was a punitive campaign against Vietnam for its genocide against Chinese peoples as well as its attacks against its neighbors.

@SK Cheung
John R isn’t going to get his wish all of the time

I was baiting you there. Yes, people should just accept that they’re not going to get their wish all of the time. No different from the CCP.

BTW, for your assertion, even on its face, to make any sense at all, you’d have to be something other than Han. Do you know why??

Clearly, because Han has a genetic basis! No, smart guy, some Han people from one place are a completely different race than some Han in another. Racism is one thing- if you want to scream anti-whitey discrimination and cry about it then say it- don’t act like you understand anything about the Han.

nation without hate crimes does NOT equal nation without racism. Do I need to draw the intestines out any more clearly for you?

Except no one was even arguing that in the first place, congratulations.

With you, one does have to celebrate the small stuff.

Yes, like you not spilling your drool cup. That’s a rare and wonderful event.

May 15, 2010 @ 3:24 pm | Comment

“Yes, people should just accept that they’re not going to get their wish all of the time. No different from the CCP.”
—quite different, in fact. In a democracy, most people get what they wish for at least some of the time. In the CCP, all people are forced to accept the CCP’s wishes all of the time, which only on occasion they may find coincides with their own…but it’s fairly random, and it’s the play of chance when it does. And they can’t affect it one way or another. It’s a far more powerless position to be in…one that I certainly wouldn’t choose to be in; and neither would you, as it turns out. Funny how that is.

“Clearly, because Han has a genetic basis!”
—earth to Merp: you were talking about “minorities”, remember? We’re not talking genetics. If you want to say that Chinese people are capable of discriminating against others based on something other than race, I’d actually agree. For example, northerners vs southerners; urbanites vs rural folk; rich vs poor.

“Except no one was even arguing that in the first place”
—excellent. So there is in fact racism in China. Well, this must be a first…we agree on something. Mark the date and time. And note that no comparisons were required to establish that fact. Hopefully that’s educational for you.

BTW, what’s a “drool cup”? I’m not sure what that is, since I’ve never needed one. Figured I’d ask you since you’re probably an expert on that sort of thing.

May 16, 2010 @ 1:06 am | Comment

@merp
Vietnamese history before their written records is largely mythological, and after 1980s it’s been littered with pure nonsense and lies. The simple fact is, one single general took Vietnam- it wasn’t entirely a state action. Then again, Vietnam didn’t really even exist back then. It was just a mess of disorganized tribes.

As for the 1979 war, that was a punitive campaign against Vietnam for its genocide against Chinese peoples as well as its attacks against its neighbors.

A typical speech by a classic imperialist. Period. By the way, didn’t Mao shake Kissinger’s and Nixon’s bloody hands as they bombed the shit out of Vietnam?

May 16, 2010 @ 1:58 am | Comment

@merp
As for the 1979 war, that was a punitive campaign against Vietnam for its genocide against Chinese peoples as well as its attacks against its neighbors.

Substitute “1979” for “2003”, “Vietnam” for “Iraq”, “Chinese” for “Shiites and Kurds”, “neighbours” for “Kuwait”.

Geez, when did merp sound so much like Dubya and Rumsfeld?

May 16, 2010 @ 2:04 am | Comment

Then again, Vietnam didn’t really even exist back then. It was just a mess of disorganized tribes.

Haha. What can be more racist by calling a nation of people ” just a mess of disorganized tribes”?

The skinheads and KKK should have recruited you long time ago for your talents.

May 16, 2010 @ 2:08 am | Comment

@sp
What can be more racist by calling a nation of people ” just a mess of disorganized tribes”?

So? China was a mess of disorganized Yellow River tribes in 7,000 BC too. Europeans still remain a mess of disorganized tribes.

A typical speech by a classic imperialist. Period. By the way, didn’t Mao shake Kissinger’s and Nixon’s bloody hands as they bombed the shit out of Vietnam?

Not that he knew they were doing it, not even Americans knew it was happening. So much for free speech!

May 16, 2010 @ 2:28 am | Comment

quite different, in fact. In a democracy, most people get what they wish for at least some of the time.

That’s not really true. Most eligible voters get what they wish for some of the time, and then it bites them in the ass. There are so many examples to list, Iraq War is a big one. But what about the children, babies and unborn that are inheriting this mess, and the tax burden?

In the CCP, all people are forced to accept the CCP’s wishes all of the time, which only on occasion they may find coincides with their own…but it’s fairly random, and it’s the play of chance when it does.

The CCP has a higher approval rating than Obama and Bush. Some of the things they have done- like keep the country intact, move people out of poverty, high growth, etc are things most people will want. The CCP is not completely immune to bowing to public opinion. There are many examples of this- like the woman who killed a dirty rapist and stabbed his buddy and was acquitted.

And they can’t affect it one way or another.

Money still talks, aside from the example above.

It’s a far more powerless position to be in…one that I certainly wouldn’t choose to be in; and neither would you, as it turns out. Funny how that is.

Far more powerless? If I’m far more powerless, the two idiots down the street is also far more powerless. That’s where I see equivalency. Mind you I’m not saying the Chinese are idiots- far from it- but most people are.

you were talking about “minorities”, remember? We’re not talking genetics. If you want to say that Chinese people are capable of discriminating against others based on something other than race, I’d actually agree. For example, northerners vs southerners; urbanites vs rural folk; rich vs poor.

Nope, we’re talking about race- which is genetics. And yes, Chinese people can discriminate based on region, socioeconomic status, etc. Just like everyone else. That still isn’t racism.

So there is in fact racism in China. Well, this must be a first…we agree on something. Mark the date and time. And note that no comparisons were required to establish that fact. Hopefully that’s educational for you.

Obviously. Just LESS than in most other countries, lol. Blacks and whites (and Southeast Asians and Latinos and Arabs) are treated better in China than they are in their own countries, and that’s a fact.

BTW, what’s a “drool cup”? I’m not sure what that is, since I’ve never needed one. Figured I’d ask you since you’re probably an expert on that sort of thing.

Yes I volunteered to work with the mentally challenged in middle school. That’s why I appreciate your specialness and continue talking to you.

May 16, 2010 @ 2:34 am | Comment

@merp

Not that he knew they were doing it, not even Americans knew it was happening. So much for free speech!

Lets not kid ourselves. Mao and Zhou were more interested in selling out Vietnam to collude with US imperialists and war mongers to counter the Soviets. Wait, didn’t Zhou already did that before by pressuring Hanoi to accept the partition of Vietnam at Geneva way back in 1954?

Mao and Zhou were no more than opportunistic revisionists who had no flirting with US imperialists when it suited them. While Lê Ðức Thọ refused to accept the Nobel Peace Prize with Kissinger, the CCP actually called this butcher an “old friend” of China. It certainly hurts to know that your “socialist” leaders had once been bedfellows with the US war criminals.

punitive campaign against Vietnam for its genocide against Chinese peoples

Oh by the way, where were the PLA troops when thousands of ethnic Chinese were slaughtered during the coup of 1965 in Indonesia? Sleeping in the barracks in China? Talk about hypocrites? hahaha.

May 18, 2010 @ 1:20 am | Comment

The CCP has a higher approval rating than Obama and Bush.

Yup. Just like Kim Jong Il getting a much higher percentage of votes of 100% in 2009 compared to Obama’s 52.9% in 2008.

May 18, 2010 @ 1:26 am | Comment

Yes I volunteered to work with the mentally challenged in middle school.

I pray for those under your “care”. Amen.

There are many examples of this- like the woman who killed a dirty rapist and stabbed his buddy and was acquitted

Yup. Too bad the dirty rapist was a typical lawless CCP official. Try harder, old fart.

May 18, 2010 @ 1:41 am | Comment

Europeans still remain a mess of disorganized tribes.

Yup. And these “disorganized tribes” from Europe were once capable of forcing their way into the Forbidden City of the Celestial Empire which thought it was the centre of the world surrounded by “barbaric” lesser states.

May 18, 2010 @ 2:03 am | Comment

Yup. Just like Kim Jong Il getting a much higher percentage of votes of 100% in 2009 compared to Obama’s 52.9% in 2008.

It’s funny that you’re implying Taiwanese and Hong Kongers are controlled by the CCP. Taiwanese: 60% approval of Hu Jintao. Hong Kongers: 94% approval of Hu Jintao.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/views_on_countriesregions_bt/618.php

Yup. And these “disorganized tribes” from Europe were once capable of forcing their way into the Forbidden City of the Celestial Empire which thought it was the centre of the world surrounded by “barbaric” lesser states.

Yes, these barbarians with their amoral cunning, were able to attack the Manchu-led empire while it was embroiled in two civil wars. Too bad none of them could individually make such an audacious violation of sovereignty and human rights.

Lets not kid ourselves. Mao and Zhou were more interested in selling out Vietnam to collude with US imperialists and war mongers to counter the Soviets. Wait, didn’t Zhou already did that before by pressuring Hanoi to accept the partition of Vietnam at Geneva way back in 1954?

Mao and Zhou were no more than opportunistic revisionists who had no flirting with US imperialists when it suited them. While Lê Ðức Thọ refused to accept the Nobel Peace Prize with Kissinger, the CCP actually called this butcher an “old friend” of China. It certainly hurts to know that your “socialist” leaders had once been bedfellows with the US war criminals.

I don’t care for Mao- never did. I used to hate him deeply, but now it’s just disapproval. That said, given your history of dishonesty and outright lies, I will take that with a grain of salt- sources please?

Oh by the way, where were the PLA troops when thousands of ethnic Chinese were slaughtered during the coup of 1965 in Indonesia? Sleeping in the barracks in China? Talk about hypocrites? hahaha.

We will find justice one way or another- this is one thing the ROC and PRC as well as all of humanity has in common.

May 18, 2010 @ 5:50 am | Comment

It’s common knowledge that Suharto and his evil regime was supported by the U.S- as a result, the US has the blood of hundreds of thousands of Chinese Indonesians and East Timorese on its hands

May 18, 2010 @ 11:32 am | Comment

We will find justice one way or another- this is one thing the ROC and PRC as well as all of humanity has in common.

It’s common knowledge that Suharto and his evil regime was supported by the U.S- as a result, the US has the blood of hundreds of thousands of Chinese Indonesians and East Timorese on its hands

Obviously, the CCP government did not seem to agree with your assessment of Suharto.

Q: Do you have any comment on the death of former Indonesian President Suharto?

PRC Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Jiang Yu: Mr. Suharto contributed to the resumption of diplomatic ties between China and Indonesia and the development of bilateral relations. China expresses condolence to his death.

Premier Li Peng visited Indonesia on invitation in August 6, 1990. In his talks with President Suharto, the two sides expressed their willingness to improve relations between the two countries on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-Existence and the Ten Principles of the Bandung Conference. On 8 August, Foreign Ministers of China and Indonesia on behalf of their respective governments, signed the Memorandum of Understanding on the Resumption of Diplomatic Relations. The two sides declared the formal resumption of the diplomatic relations between China and Indonesia on that day.

There was NEVER a demand from the CCP leaders in these talks for Suharto to account for the Chinese slaughtering in 1965. Find justice? Stop daydreaming. The CCP is simply not deterred by Suharto’s evil deeds when it comes to business.

When Vietnam conducted its “genocide” against ethnic Chinese in the 70s, Deng invaded. But how come when Suharto and his regime slaughtered more Chinese back in 1965, the CCP just cowardly sat on its hands wand watch from the spectators’ stand? Hahaha.

May 18, 2010 @ 12:56 pm | Comment

Too bad none of them could individually make such an audacious violation of sovereignty and human rights.

Haha true. Despite their “disorganization”, they made the Dowager run haplessly to Xi’an and successfully extorted 400million taels of silver from the “Celestial Empire”.

sources please?

Today, Kissinger is often called by Chinese leaders “the old friend of the Chinese people.”
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/coldwarfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=people.details&thisunit=0&peopleid=122

In 1973 the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to US National Security Adviser and Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger and North Vietnamese leader and negotiator Le Duc Tho for the 1973 Paris agreement intended to bring about a cease-fire in the Vietnam war and a withdrawal of the American forces. This award is definitely the most controversial one in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize. Le Duc Tho declined the Peace Prize, the only person to have done so, since there was still no peace agreement.
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/articles/lundestad-review/index.html

It was revealed that in 1969 Kissinger had won Nixon’s approval to expand the war into Cambodia, a neutral country, with bombings and subsequent ground incursions by U.S. troops. Eventually critics blamed Kissinger and Nixon for the destruction of Cambodia after the country fell to Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot, whose forces systematically murdered millions of Cambodians. On the political left, some commentators branded the president and his secretary of state war criminals.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:EDnOfzxtogEJ:www.mexicodiplomatico.org/lecturas/Henry%2520%2520Kissinger/Henry%2520Alfred%2520Kissinger.doc+kissinger+%22war+crimes%22+AND+%22old+friend+of+the+chinese%22+AND+Cambodia&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=sg&client=firefox-a

Yet the CCP had no problem till this day calling Kissinger, the notorious war criminal, an “old Friend”.

“At the war’s end in 1954, after the French were badly defeated at the battle of Dien Bien Phu, Mr. Dong was chosen to head the Viet Minh delegation to the Geneva conference. It should have been a moment of complete triumph for Mr. Dong, but he felt betrayed by Zhou, the Chinese premier, who headed China’s delegation to the talks and seemed more interested in avoiding further war with the Americans after the Korean War and agreed to divide Vietnam between a Communist north and a non-Communist south. ”
http://www.mishalov.com/Pham_Van_Dong.html

Tonnes of evidence of CCP’s opportunistic revisionist caught in bed with the US imperialists and war criminals.

May 18, 2010 @ 1:14 pm | Comment

@merp

It’s funny that you have the cheek to cite such a lousy poll as source for “approval rates” when it ranked an inept Ban Ki Moon so high on its list.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/views_on_countriesregions_bt/618.php
“UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon receives the second-highest rating behind Obama. On average his ratings lean positive (40% to 35%) and 11 nations express confidence, seven do not, and two are divided. Views are especially positive in Asia and Africa. Only in the US and in some nations in the Middle East (Egypt, the Palestinian territories, and Turkey) does a majority express low confidence.”

BUT read this:
“His (Ban Ki Moon) work on SriLankan ethnic issue is strongly criticized by NGOs and Medias. The eye witness to the final war between Srilankan armed force and LTTE, Damilvany Gnanakumar who is an UK citizen describes about Ban’s visit to Refugee Camp in Srilanka as,“I was there when the UN secretary Ban Ki-moon came in; He stayed there for about 10 minutes and just went. Why didn’t he go into the camp and talk to the people and spend some time asking them what their problems were? I thought he has a responsibility and people were expecting something from him. They expected much from him and he just spent 10 minutes and that’s it.”

Stop farting around with this kind of crap poll, old sport.

May 18, 2010 @ 1:37 pm | Comment

“Most eligible voters get what they wish for some of the time, and then it bites them in the ass.”
—you once again conflate apples and oranges. You’re quite good at it. At the adage goes, you must be careful what you wish for. Democracy gives you a chance to get your wish…but the onus is still on you to be careful for what you wish. I guess the CCP simplifies your life by simply not giving you the chance to wish…again, how fatherly of them.

“The CCP has a higher approval rating than Obama and Bush.”
—fantastic. Say, on those “polls”, any idea if a respondent could’ve given their approval to anyone else? Cuz it’s one thing to enjoy high approval in the presence of alternatives; but it doesn’t say much when you’re the only game in town. Besides, if the CCP is so universally loved, they should have no trouble winning a free vote. Is that happening soon? BTW, if “not completely immune to responding to public opinion” is the best you can say for the CCP, that’s not exactly high praise.

“Money still talks,”
—are the CCP offering bribes to people? I thought it was the job of CCP officials to TAKE bribes, not give them.

“If I’m far more powerless, the two idiots down the street is also far more powerless.”
—what exactly is your reading impediment? Being trapped in China’s CCP system is the “far more powerless position to be in”. As has been pointed out to you many times, you haven’t put yourself in such an undesirable position. You merely insist that Chinese people so remain. How nice of you.

“And yes, Chinese people can discriminate based on region, socioeconomic status, etc. Just like everyone else.”
—don’t forget race. And discrimination based on race is racism. I’m certainly not suggesting that Chinese are unique in this way. I’m not comparing. It is what it is.

“Obviously. Just LESS than in most other countries”
—like I said, you can’t get your pants on without having to compare. And as per usual, how would you know China has less since you’re not there (funny how that is), and you wouldn’t be the object of racial discrimination even if you were.

“treated better in China than they are in their own countries, and that’s a fact.”
—LOL. Forgive me as I take such proclamations from a “foreign expert” with a large grain of salt. BUt if nothing else, you do bring a smile to one’s face.

“Yes I volunteered to work with the mentally challenged in middle school.”
—fantastic. When do you graduate?

May 18, 2010 @ 3:53 pm | Comment

@sp
Haha true. Despite their “disorganization”, they made the Dowager run haplessly to Xi’an and successfully extorted 400million taels of silver from the “Celestial Empire”.

A horde of retarded, violent chimps could probably take you in hand to hand combat in a surprise attack. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t dirty, ugly, inferior and stupid.

@SK Cheung
Democracy gives you a chance to get your wish

And it also gives someone else a chance to not only destroy your wish, but to force nonsense upon you and other nations.

I guess the CCP simplifies your life by simply not giving you the chance to wish…again, how fatherly of them.

Clearly because we’re all children who need to “wish” for change.

Besides, if the CCP is so universally loved, they should have no trouble winning a free vote.

Since we agree that they would not be voted out of power, we should agree that an election is a pointless waste of time. We’re all very bored of this idiotic, ridiculous argument.

Being trapped in China’s CCP system is the “far more powerless position to be in”.

Nope. Take racial minorities- Tibetans are thriving, Native Americans are dying off. China’s future is bright, America’s future generations are fucked. This is because democracy does not take into account anything but the majority’s warm fuzzy “feelings”- minorities and future generations are screwed. This is why no “true” democracy is older than a few decades- they die early.

And as per usual, how would you know China has less since you’re not there (funny how that is), and you wouldn’t be the object of racial discrimination even if you were.

I would know because apparently, since white media knows what China is like without ever setting foot there or doing half a second of research, I will more clearly know what China is like because I spend years there.

So who is a “proper judge” of “racism” in China? Whiny, lying expats? I don’t think so. Whites are not a proper judge of racism anywhere.

fantastic. When do you graduate?

I will have graduated from my “care for the mentally retarded” course once I have learned how to steer you away from nonsensical, childish idealism.

May 20, 2010 @ 4:32 am | Comment

rather, ethnic minorities in the case of Tibet- it’s the Native Americans who are contending with arrogant, racist foreigners (white people) in their ancestral lands.

May 20, 2010 @ 4:34 am | Comment

“to not only destroy your wish, but to force nonsense upon you”
—fair enough. You have a point. At its worse, “democracy” is no better than the CCP.

“Clearly because we’re all children”
—well I see your thinking is certainly in lock-step with the CCP. You should really go there and try it out for yourself.

“Since we agree that they would not be voted out of power…”
—dude, if you’re gonna read, might as well read the entire sentence. In this case, you seem to have missed the “if” part. That’s the part that tells you it’s not a statement, but a supposition. Hope that helps. Next, you can move onto learning about the application of if/then. Baby steps, my friend.

“This is why no “true” democracy is older than a few decades- they die early.”
—well, the first part might be true. BUt they’re only a few decades old cuz most of them became so only a few decades ago. Quite different from your purported explanation. BTW, you might want to refresh your memory on how long the CCP has been around, if compare you must.

“I will more clearly know what China is like because I spend years there.”
—fabulous. You might know what China WAS like when you were there. How long ago was that? Think things could have changed in the interim? And still doesn’t change the fact that you’re not going to perceive racial discrimination since you wouldn’t be subjected to it, then, or now.

“So who is a “proper judge” of “racism” in China?”
—minorities in China.

I knew it…you didn’t strike me as someone who’s made it through middle school yet. Hey, but good luck with that.

May 20, 2010 @ 5:10 am | Comment

Can we please end this thread? If you must, you can continue it in the post above on China blogs.

May 20, 2010 @ 6:03 am | Comment