Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
China Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Beware an angry China
DragonReborn    4/8/2008 4:32:15 PM
h!!p://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/08/opinion/edbowring.php Here's a pretty good article on why China should not be goaded too harshly about Tibet and Darfur etc, what does everyone think!? P.s Im no PRC Troll! "Tibetans have a strong case against Beijing. But mixing it in with the Olympics and Darfur is a red rag to a wounded young bull. Nationalism is more often aroused by setbacks than success, so the Tibet problems and the possible threats to a triumphal Olympics are stirring it in China. On the horizon is the possibility that these will combine with high inflation, stagnating exports and trade tensions with the United States to create a perfect nationalistic storm. The Chinese leadership faces a difficult balancing act. As its legitimacy is now based on national achievement, not communist ideology, it must appear in step with popular feeling. Yet stability at home and good relations abroad require keeping nationalist emotions in check. The paranoia about evil foreign designs that thrived under Mao and was discarded by Deng Xiaoping is still close to the surface. Almost all of China is offended that foreigners are so keen to lecture them and to encourage the petty boycotts that could spoil the Olympic party. It genuinely infuriates the Chinese that they are blamed for Darfur while their Western critics occupy Iraq. Beijing is happy to let such nationalist resentments vent in the sometimes violent language of Internet blogs and chat rooms. The anger, in turn, makes it easier for the government to pin the Tibetan problems on foreigners and Tibetan exiles headed by the Dalai Lama, to arrest human-rights advocates and crack down on foreign media. Beijing plays up the foreign threat - much like the U.S. government used the Al Qaeda threat as a justification for invading Iraq. For example, Beijing has raised the specter of Tibetan suicide squads organized by the "Dalai Lama clique" attacking the Olympics. Such acts cannot be ruled out. But a cooler government would quietly strengthen defenses rather than raise the temperature - and raise fears that terrorist outrages might be staged to discredit the Tibetans. Under pressure, officials have fallen back on Cultural Revolution language and lies. The Communist Party secretary in Tibet described the Dalai Lama as a "monster with a human face." Less dramatically, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said that the channel for dialogue with the Dalai Lama was open so long as he "abandoned claims for Tibet independence" and used his influence to "stop the violence in Tibet." In fact the Dalai Lama long ago accepted the principle of autonomy within China, so long as it was real autonomy. And he is at odds with many Tibetans who oppose his advocacy of peaceful means. Equally important is the way official Chinese media has depicted the violence in Tibet as attacks on Han Chinese. This predictably arouses the hackles of the Han, who comprise 90 percent of China's population, and who tend to view Tibet as a backwater they improve by their modernizing drive. They see no reason why Tibetans should be unhappy with Han migration and dominance of trade, and they resent that Tibetans do not feel grateful for the money poured in by the government. "The Communist Party is like a parent to the Tibetan people and is always considerate about what the children need," declared the Tibet party secretary. The party, he said, was the "real Buddha" for Tibetans. This racial/cultural aspect not only makes it even more difficult for China to resolve minority issues, it also raises the Han identity issue in a wider, international context. Racial mythology as well as cultural identity run strong, whether vis-à-vis immediate "barbarian" neighbors - be they Japanese, Mongol or Russian - or toward the Westerners who long lorded it over the Middle Kingdom. How will the Chinese react if the Olympics really do become noted more for demonstrations and boycotts by Tibetan-inspired foreigners than for the achievements of China's athletes and organizers? At whom will popular anger then be directed? If the party is spoiled, whether by Tibet or air pollution, the demand for top level scapegoats may be irresistible. Worse still is if this coincides with heightened trade tensions with the United States, which could arise as the U.S. economy enters a recession. If the Chinese come to perceive that the benefits of globalization have peaked, will the leadership retreat from 30 years of Deng-ist engagement? None of this has to happen. But ethnic pride and thwarted ambitions are powerful forces. It is worth recalling that foreign economic pressures, patriotic fervor and rising military power made a once liberal Japan into the expansionist, militarist and hyper-nationalist Japan of the 1930s. Tibetans have a strong case against Beijing. But mixing it in with the Olympics and Darfur is a red rag to a wounded young bull."
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT
Photon       4/14/2008 5:17:46 AM


The burning of the Forbidden City and the Mao tomb will be a glorious event.


Not enouogh.  Sino-centric ideologies and habits must be eradicated.  Those Chinese who are 'true believers' should have bullets penetrate the rear of their heads.
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/14/2008 7:54:40 AM

The true fact is that the Tibetan Chinese don't have to pay tax as the Han Chinese do. They enjoy the priority in entering college,  birth controls and all kinds of social benefits beyond the Han Chinese. Unlike the evil US government, China never in history has the presence of racial discrimination and separation.


1. There shouldn't be One Child Policy  in the first place.

2. What social benefit? All the jobs goes to Chinese speaking people. Affirmative action is a just another form of assimilation/discrimination. How about having universities that teach in Tibetan?

3. Chinese history shows no racial discrimination and segregation? You have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Quote    Reply

Softwar       4/14/2008 8:19:56 AM



I could be wrong but didn't China get permanent MFN status in 1999 under Clinton (with the whole-hearted approval of a Republican congress)?  I thought that the PRC needed permanent MFN to get into the WTO.

 



Not that Bush would have opposed this.



With the current and the near-future crop of elites within the States, I am not sure if there is going to be much of a difference between Republican and Democrat White Houses.  A Republican someone instead of Bill Clinton would have signed the permanent MFN for China.  Offloading jobs overseas have been carried out quite constantly throughout the last decade.  After all, average Joes and Janes have never been their key constituents in the first place.

Just wanted to keep the facts straight - Permanent MFN was signed off by Bill Clinton not by Bush.
 
Quote    Reply

Photon       4/14/2008 12:04:20 PM


Just wanted to keep the facts straight - Permanent MFN was signed off by Bill Clinton not by Bush.

So it happened to be Clinton who signed it.  What I was trying to suggest in the last post was that it does not make a whole lot of difference who runs the White House within the context of what we have available within the ranks of American ruling elite.  Soft on China?  Not exclusively the domain of the Democrats.  Have the Republicans shown a whiff of difference from the Democrats in regards to US-China policy?  Nope.
 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    Surprise PHOTON - we agree!   4/14/2008 1:24:28 PM




Just wanted to keep the facts straight - Permanent MFN was signed off by Bill Clinton not by Bush.


So it happened to be Clinton who signed it.  What I was trying to suggest in the last post was that it does not make a whole lot of difference who runs the White House within the context of what we have available within the ranks of American ruling elite.  Soft on China?  Not exclusively the domain of the Democrats.  Have the Republicans shown a whiff of difference from the Democrats in regards to US-China policy?  Nope.

I posted:
Softwar   4/11/2008 9:05:28 AM

I could be wrong but didn't China get permanent MFN status in 1999 under Clinton (with the whole-hearted approval of a Republican congress)?  I thought that the PRC needed permanent MFN to get into the WTO.
 
Not that Bush would have opposed this.

Which means we see the same thing (e.g. its not a party issue as much as a policy issue).
 
I have encapsulated this before - there are two factions - the Appeasers... er Engagement crowd - who follow the wishes of big business and place our relationship with China purely on monetary terms.  Thus, all decisions - national security, human rights, economic, labor rights - are made inside the corporate boardroom and delivered to various mouthpieces to implement.
 
The other faction is a combination of national security wonks, labor unions, humanitarians, and human rights advocates who voice dissent but have little buying power when it comes to obtaining members of Congress.  Thus, the only changes in policy are forced by uncovering corruption (e.g. China-Gate and ban on satellite sales to the PRC).  There are a few in Congress - on both sides of the isle - that adhere to this rational choice but they are greatly outnumbered by the Appeasers who can be bought.
 
Quote    Reply

l144527z       4/17/2008 12:22:44 AM
1. One child policy is not a happy policy, but it is the best policy to save the crowded China and the world.
2. Affirmative action is a just another form of assimilation/discrimination? This is ridiculous! US government setup special scholarship to the female, the black, and local Indians. Do you mean they're being discriminated in such form? If a Tibetan is jobless because he doesn't know Chinese, it's just like local Indian in north America will not get jobs because they can't speak English. No one set any restriction on race issue in the job market. What's more, the US government had massacred 95% of local Indian, seized their land and many descendants of the survivors today could not even speak their own language. This is the true genocide!
3. US is most well-known for writing race discrimination and separation into laws and acts. Han Chinese did have conflicts and wars with other races in history, just like mid-age Europeans. But for thousands of years, Chinese people never have the idea of looking down on other people simply because of the color of their skins. 600 yrs ago, when a few dozen of black slaves were sent to a Chinese harbor as a gift from an African kingdom, they were set free because Chinese people could not understand why the some human being have to be treated like animals. This was hundreds yrs before Abraham Lincoln was born.
4. Your user name is just telling others you are a racist.


The true fact is that the Tibetan Chinese don't have to pay tax as the Han Chinese do. They enjoy the priority in entering college,  birth controls and all kinds of social benefits beyond the Han Chinese. Unlike the evil US government, China never in history has the presence of racial discrimination and separation.



1. There shouldn't be One Child Policy  in the first place.

2. What social benefit? All the jobs goes to Chinese speaking people. Affirmative action is a just another form of assimilation/discrimination. How about having universities that teach in Tibetan?

3. Chinese history shows no racial discrimination and segregation? You have no idea what you're talking about.


 
Quote    Reply

Softwar       4/17/2008 8:40:17 AM
4. Your user name is just telling others you are a racist.


I think Yelli is Chinese - so much for the racist.

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       4/17/2008 11:09:35 AM

1. One child policy is not a happy policy, but it is the best policy to save the crowded China and the world.
Its stupid scientifically, and economically.  One boy and one girl  per family you might barely rationally justify .

2. Affirmative action is a just another form of assimilation/discrimination? This is ridiculous! US government setup special scholarship to the female, the black, and local Indians. Do you mean they're being discriminated in such form?

There was/is discrimination. Legal remedies, poorly thought out ones, but still remedies were democratically decided, not imposed, bandit. 

 If a Tibetan is jobless because he doesn't know Chinese, it's just like local Indian in north America will not get jobs because they can't speak English.

We teach English. You won't find that many  Native Americans who aren't bilingual or at least fluent in English. The reason many Native Americans have no jobs at present is because of American past racist bigotry  and present Native American economic  dis-location. Incidentally, the term Indian for many Native  Americans is a term of racist bigotry. This does not excuse past  US immorality on this issue but we are not discussing the US past, we are discussing the  PRC bandit  PRESENT, bandit.

No one set any restriction on race issue in the job market.

Lie. Competition is not merit based among you, bandits, bandit. rural Chinese do not have the same chance as the politically connected urban CCP  power elites. The Tibetans are even further down the political pecking order. Discrimination and racism is a party control tool the PRC bandits use to divide and conquer the social classes in PRCdom.

What's more, the US government had massacred 95% of local Indian, seized their land and many descendants of the survivors today could not even speak their own language. This is the true genocide!

What massacre? There are 5 million Native Americans in America, almost 2.5 x the number there were when Christopher Columbus found Hispanolia. How many Han did Chairman Mao murder during his thuggish rule? 53 million of you, bandit?

3. US is most well-known for writing race discrimination and separation into laws and acts.
Name one current law, bandit.

Han Chinese did have conflicts and wars with other races in history, just like mid-age Europeans. But for thousands of years, Chinese people never have the idea of looking down on other people simply because of the color of their skins.

No. You historically used the shape of the eyes and face to define your racist bigotry, you liar. You waited until the Xirong showed up to adopt skin color as your primary current criterion-even though you still look down upon the Dongyi and would openly the Beidi; if we didn't have a nuclear gun pointed at your heads..

 600 yrs ago, when a few dozen of black slaves were sent to a Chinese harbor as a gift from an African kingdom, they were set free because Chinese people could not understand why the some human being have to be treated like animals. This was hundreds yrs before Abraham Lincoln was born

Explain all those slave corpses buried in the Great Wall, bandit.
4. Your user name is just telling others you are a racist.

I think you can't read and that you don't know your own history very well, bandit.





The true fact is that the Tibetan Chinese don't have to pay tax as the Han Chinese do. They enjoy the priority in entering college,  birth controls and all kinds of social benefits beyond the Han Chinese. Unlike the evil US government, China never in history has the presence of racial discrimination and separation.




1. There shouldn't be One Child Policy  in the first place.

2. What social benefit? All the jobs goes to Chinese speaking people. Affirmative action is a just another form of assimilation/discrimination. How about having universities that teach in Tibetan?

3. Chinese history shows no racial discrimination and segregation? You have no idea what you're talking about.



Have a nice day.

Herald

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/17/2008 1:02:21 PM

1. One child policy is not a happy policy, but it is the best policy to save the crowded China and the world.
2. Affirmative action is a just another form of assimilation/discrimination? This is ridiculous! US government setup special scholarship to the female, the black, and local Indians. Do you mean they're being discriminated in such form? If a Tibetan is jobless because he doesn't know Chinese, it's just like local Indian in north America will not get jobs because they can't speak English. No one set any restriction on race issue in the job market. What's more, the US government had massacred 95% of local Indian, seized their land and many descendants of the survivors today could not even speak their own language. This is the true genocide!
3. US is most well-known for writing race discrimination and separation into laws and acts. Han Chinese did have conflicts and wars with other races in history, just like mid-age Europeans. But for thousands of years, Chinese people never have the idea of looking down on other people simply because of the color of their skins. 600 yrs ago, when a few dozen of black slaves were sent to a Chinese harbor as a gift from an African kingdom, they were set free because Chinese people could not understand why the some human being have to be treated like animals. This was hundreds yrs before Abraham Lincoln was born.
4. Your user name is just telling others you are a racist.


YelliChink is a name that I used, am using and will continue to use in describing and identify MYSELF on this forum. If you are offended by somebody else's name, it's your problem. I don't have inferiority complex.

Han Chinese never look down on other race? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Since the formation of Han race in 2BCE, it was all about how Han race and Han culture. The evidence is all over Chinese chronicles, and I sometimes read them for leisure. Unlike European history, we Han race pretty much owned everybody else in the region since ancient times, to the degree that prominent jerks in Chinese history mostly killed other prominent Chinese jerks to get unchallenged power. Huns were beaten so bad that they had to go way way West to kick Roman Empire's butt if they didn't want to submit to Han Dynasty. Turks were the same. All the characters used to describe ancient tribes around Han people come with "dog-character side." The leading character used to describe Jews also come with a dog side, until recently the Israeli government asked for a change. Heck, I still use to old one anyway. Tell me that is not "looking down on other race." It no longer applies today? Then consider that Cantonese term "Guelau," which means "Ghostees," that is used mainly to describe Caucasian male. Most of my relatives got so disappointed when their American-born, raised-in-America sons married other races.

The real traitors of Han race are the ones who cling to commies. One of the core ideological differences between KMT and commies is how they see traditional culture. KMT thinks it's good to be Chinese and appreciate the culture, while admitting that there's something needed to be fixed. This idea is not very popular in early part of 20th century among Chinese intellectuals, which I think most are a bunch of ego-maniac elitist smartasses except a few. The major cultural movement at the time was the abandonment of Literary Chinese in favor of Vernacular Chinese, which I think was total bullshit. As a result, young intellectuals ditched Chinese culture in favor of western ideology, not knowing Western ideology has hidden fault and limitation, while Chinese thinkings, though not as complete and thorough as Western Philosophy, still offer solution and insight into real-life problems. The installment of commie dictatorship thus is betrayal of the Han nation, Chinese culture, Chinese belief and everything Chinese, because they regard it as feudal, backward and barbaric.Heck, people don't even use traditional Chinese characters and are forced to use commie character set, which further pulls them away from the culture, and created such a cultural gap that recovery will take generations. If you choose to side yourself with commies, you are just declaring yourself a traitor to Han nation. There is nothing Chinese about commies, and they always work to destroy Han identity and replace it with recognition to commies.

Affirmative action is a form of discrimination. It works in the US since black people also speak English, and they create maybe half of US culture, but it is only a policy aimed at destroying minority culture in places like China. The right way of doing this in China is to let minorities build their own schools, teach in their own language and manage their own affairs without Han interference, just like how Malaysia's ethnic policy towards ethnic Chinese. What Tibetans and Uighurs a
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Thanks, YC.    4/17/2008 1:19:52 PM
In ripping this bandit a new one, you dropped a lot of information that taught me a lot of new things. I have enough new things learned now to carry me into next week.

I knew about "dog" and "ghost", but  now I understand a little better, the resentment among many Chinese about the PRC bandit adoption of a failed Western ideology [fascism] to replace another failed Western ideology [communism].

How does Chinese culture address "capitalism" which is the third Western ideology?

Herald

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics