|
MothraAttack posted:Except, you know, in sheer number of victims and countries invaded in every objectively measurable way. What the hell? In terms of the ratio of deaths to people under his control, I'm pretty sure Pol Pot was the worst. In that sense, not invading other countries essentially counts against him.
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
Silver2195 posted:In terms of the ratio of deaths to people under his control, I'm pretty sure Pol Pot was the worst. In that sense, not invading other countries essentially counts against him. Maybe in the 20th century, even though Herero and Namaqua populations of German Southwest Africa under von Trotha evaporated much quicker than the Cambodians. Regardless, Pol Pot could not have been worse than Hitler in "every way."
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 03:06
|
|
|
MothraAttack posted:what is the probable future of Xinjiang? Perpetual Han dominance and neutralization of any Uighur political parity? If it's possible to take a guess, probably not all that bad. If his politics are anything like daddy's, Xi is a damned good leader.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 03:19
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:The second anyone gets some education and makes any money, the first thing they do is pass it on to the family and then start figuring out how to use family members, servants and other methods to hide their wealth from the local population. Living here a while I can understand it, but from a Western perspective it's 0_o when you first see it all going down. At some level it's not too different from folks hiding money in the Caymans, but the difference I've observed is how pervasive it is. It's not like something just the ultra-wealthy do, like it is in America, it's something the entire Chinese diaspora does as soon as they can afford to. It almost feels like they're constantly planning for the moment that the tide turns and someone swoops in to steal all their poo poo. Also, who gave you that lovely custom title and why? hah. Modus Operandi fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Sep 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 04:38
|
|
|
Although not a priority, the island dispute could be turned into a positive if handled meticulously. Run another couple of months of "look how far we're willing to go to protect our poo poo, world - take heed!" stuff, without actually doing much. Appeases the populace and affirms the importance of the party to defense, and sends a message to the world about China's willingness to defend itself (including Taiwan, Tibet, etc). The thing is, no side really cares about the rock itself as oppose to the seas around it and rights to such, but ordinary people are conversely much more likely to get emotional over a rock than a random block of water. Take the rock out the equation, and politicians can safely negotiate the splitting up of the rights of the oceans without being under constant public supervision. Begin to return the rhetoric to how China is all about a peaceful rise and can negotiate like gents, unlike gun-toting country-invading USA. Take the rock out of the picture by downplaying it's size or significance, ignoring it completely in the media, or putting it down as a symbol of Chinese-Japanese friendship. Ok this last one might be hard to pull off, but along the lines of sticking a plaque on it and having such a complicated set of jurisdiction rules over it that no-one will really understand what it means, and the Chinese media can portray it as still being theirs and they've not made concessions. Forget about flags and stuff because it'll complicate the Taiwan issue. Then everyone goes home and has a nice cup of tea. ------------------- The hip new swinging government is about to come into power where they will likely have 10 years to change China for the good, in potentially very difficult circumstances. If you were in charge what would be your priorities and how would you go about realizing them? chird fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Sep 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 05:17
|
|
|
Okay, FSAD, I apologize for taking what you said the wrong way. But relax a little.Fall Sick and Die posted:No one has ever suggested that these discussions don't happen. You are indeed getting the wrong impression. I dunno why you said it like this in your post, "Yeah its "typical"." with typical in quotation marks which I'm going to have to take as though you don't feel it is actually typical? I dunno how else to read that. There is indeed a world of difference between the lives of typical people and those who actually discuss topics like this regularly. In my own family dinner table growing up in the US we were never discussing the failure of the US government to uphold treaties with native people, I'd say we were typical in that regard, though that doesn't mean no one talked about it. Okay, my family growing up in the US always talked about that stuff. We were also a typical family. Or is my family not typical because we discussed current events? I'm trying to word this in a way that is not insulting, because I really really don't mean it to be. But people who think it's not typical for people in China to discuss social issues or politics are usually ones who don't have a strong grasp of Chinese, or just don't really go out and look at stuff. Again, FSAD I have no idea of your Chinese level, or if you do go out and read blogs, weibo, etc., so I apologize if I've offended you. I'm really bad with words and expressing myself. But the main idea I'm trying to say is that "typical" isn't the best word to use here. quote:Many Chinese people care deeply and passionately about social issues, LGBT stuff, ethnic minority rights. But you've got to be kidding yourself if you really believe that these are large percentages of the population. Bring up LGBT issues with 100 Chinese people and I would guess the response from 95% of them would be a giggle or 'ick'. You're just handwaving away the differences. Can I get something to back up these numbers? You are just throwing out numbers to support your argument and try to minimize the amount of discussion that goes on. I mean I can do that too: out of the people I know 90% support or feel indifferent about homosexuals. Guess that means that most people do. Personal anecdotes used to try to paint a picture an entire population isn't the best way to go about things. quote:"Oh if you're going to say large numbers of people don't give a poo poo sure that's true everywhere." That's a really useless argument to make, because you're ignoring the fact that there's a large difference between even 1% of the population giving a poo poo about X and 10% giving a poo poo about X. Again, please state where you get these numbers. Your answer was just as useless as you say my argument is. quote:Chinese people are on average, far less informed about the state of the world, and even if they don't believe the media, it affects them in a subconscious manner because it's the only media they have. Okay, at the same time don't try to make up stats about how many people care about or discuss X based on your experience with college students. Also, my family would not identify as intellectuals and would probably laugh if you said they were. I never said there was freedom of speech or that everything got discussed on open platforms all over the country. The point I'm trying to make is that there is a lot of discussion that goes on about many different problems, and I got the impression in your past posts that you were trying to minimize that. Apparently I got the wrong impression, but I feel like in the above quotes you are still trying to minimize it. quote:Also Wonton that's really disgusting to suggest that foreign men are only interested in Chinese girls for sex and thus we won't find these hidden magical not-hot thinking girls who can't speak English according to your incomprehensible statement. I think he was (in a very sarcastic/joking matter) stating that a lot of intellectual discussion isn't going to be going on in English, and that so much exists beneath the surface that foreigners who don't speak Chinese and go looking for it aren't going to find it, because you know, haha, Laowai bar culture.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 14:03
|
|
|
DaiJiaTeng posted:Okay, FSAD, I apologize for taking what you said the wrong way. But relax a little. You need to calm down, stop freaking out on me dude! Your posts are just full of angst and it's clear you're really personally invested in making sure that people don't think Chinese folk are 'ignorant' even though no one said that at all. So just take a few deep breaths, relax, step away from the keyboard and try to drink some green tea and do some calligraphy to soothe your upset qi. Haha wow see, anyone can suggest another person is upset on the internet even though it's not true. Care much?? Look at all those words! Don't do that stupid poo poo, this is a debate and discussion forum, if you're uncomfortable with people posting responses to your statements that aren't properly harmonious, I dunno what to say. Anyway... quote:I'm trying to word this in a way that is not insulting, because I really really don't mean it to be. But people who think it's not typical for people in China to discuss social issues or politics are usually ones who don't have a strong grasp of Chinese, or just don't really go out and look at stuff. Again, FSAD I have no idea of your Chinese level, or if you do go out and read blogs, weibo, etc., so I apologize if I've offended you. Sorry but I'm just an ignorant ocean devil ghost, can you show us these amazing blogs and weibo feeds you're on where people really cut to the heart of the matter and freely criticize the government, openly discuss matters like Tibetan independence, government repression of Uighurs, control of religion and a host of other matters that apparently Chinese people love to discuss? I know weibo has a ton of really deep conversation going on, love that 140 character limit, it's really conducive to getting to the heart of the matter when confronting imperialism. quote:I'm really bad with words and expressing myself. But the main idea I'm trying to say is that "typical" isn't the best word to use here. What is the argument you're trying to make? You're admitting that Chinese people aren't as tuned in as westerners, aren't as aware of historical issues, can't bring them up in public, and aren't taught about them, yet despite all that you're still arguing for what? No one said Chinese people are dumb, no one used words like 'all' or 'every' when referring to Chinese people. quote:Can I get something to back up these numbers? You are just throwing out numbers to support your argument and try to minimize the amount of discussion that goes on. I mean I can do that too: out of the people I know 90% support or feel indifferent about homosexuals. Guess that means that most people do. Personal anecdotes used to try to paint a picture an entire population isn't the best way to go about things. I already addressed this with flatbut but as I said, we're all operating on our personal experiences, yourself included, you're right, I have no exact numbers to back these things up (hey maybe I should start a polling firm in China to randomly call people and ask them their opinions about these things, how long do you think that would last eh?). Your personal experiences with family, friends and forums, do you think that's not just as likely to have confirmation bias rear its ugly head? According to my experiences on the forum I frequently read, 99% of Americans are socialists who frequently discuss topics ranging from ethnic violence in the Caucasus to fighting for land rights for Australian Aborigines. Do you really not understand that this poo poo isn't the "typical" stuff people choose to talk about in their spare time? Do you understand that, "Me and my friends (who I've chosen) and family (again, chosen) and people I choose to hang out with online" is honestly not as good of a random cross-section of society as several thousand university students? Does that make sense to you? quote:I never said there was freedom of speech or that everything got discussed on open platforms all over the country. The point I'm trying to make is that there is a lot of discussion that goes on about many different problems, and I got the impression in your past posts that you were trying to minimize that. Apparently I got the wrong impression, but I feel like in the above quotes you are still trying to minimize it. You keep talking about this discussion. You have to understand that the only discussion that goes on is discussion the government allows to go on. If the discussion gets out of hand, it will get shut down or deleted entirely. Of course they can't do that to people in real life, and I've also had plenty of intelligent discussions with people about issues, but there's always the joking nervousness in the background, and maybe an added, "Don't tell anyone I said that" at the end of the conversation. You've barely got any idea what you yourself are arguing, and you're putting words in my mouth. Again, no one said these discussions don't happen, we were making a comparison to the general political and social consciousness level of the average Chinese person and we generally stated that typically it's pretty low. Does that offend your wife or your friends you spent so much time learning to speak Chinese so you could communicate with them about the plight of the Dalai Lama? Honestly when discussing social issues with Chinese people I've generally found that more than anything they don't want to be condescended to or told their perceptions are 'wrong' just like anyone else, so I try not to do that. quote:I think he was (in a very sarcastic/joking matter) stating that a lot of intellectual discussion isn't going to be going on in English, and that so much exists beneath the surface that foreigners who don't speak Chinese and go looking for it aren't going to find it, because you know, haha, Laowai bar culture. Son, I've been hearing jokes and humors since before you were born
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 15:42
|
|
|
a bad enough dude posted:Japan has opened fire on Taiwanese ships near the islands... with water cannons. I have a dumb question here. What can you get away with firing at the other side before it's considered war? Water cannons are nonlethal, but with the right set of coincidences, maybe if you knock someone accidentally into a bulkhead and they suffer a head injury or something, or if they go overboard after being injured or something, I can imagine a lethal incident. I feel if anything fatal happens the other side will probably back down and dismiss it (after protests) like when DPRK shelled those islands. But the image at the top of this article on Japan firing on Taiwanese ships with water cannons caught eye. I don't know much about ships, but aren't those two really close? As in, if someone makes a mistake they could potentially scrape each other. What would that cause? Also, Article posted:Japanese patrol boats only fired at fishing vessels, said Hideaki Takase, a coast guard official. That's what got me thinking on what counts as war. I know if the countries want to keep their cool they can de-escalate from almost anything, even deaths of uniformed servicemen, but is any sort of aggressive action legitimate justification for war, even firing water cannons? Charlz Guybon posted:Neoconservatism has existed for 20 years and killed a few hundred thousand people. Now that's a lot obviously, but it can't hold a candle to the Chinese tribute system which existed for centuries and killed millions over that time scale. You'll need to back this up. I've never heard either. As far as I'm aware, sanctions, food price speculation, capitalist foreign policy, government overthrows, and all the rest that goes with neoconservatism has a much higher death toll than a few hundred thousand people. I'll admit I'm not familiar with the Chinese tribute system, but I assume whatever deaths it caused came from second-order ramifications of foreign policy (which you didn't include as part of neoconservatism for some reason), not because they were engaging in human sacrifice. e: Fall Sick and Die posted:I already addressed this with flatbut  Fall Sick and Die posted:American movies aren't pro-USA because we want to show France what's up, nor because of some imperialist agenda to improve the image of America around the world. When there is a need to, as during the Cold War, the American government isn't above funding things like Radio Free Europe to improve its image in Warsaw Pact countries, and as MaterialConceptual mentioned, Hollywood gets in bed with the Pentagon quite often to produce joint ventures, especially ones where military equipment is needed. I'm not saying every single American cultural artifact is made with an imperialist cultural agenda in mind, but there are definitely some that are made and exported for that purpose. The same also applies to China. In terms of sheer volume, American cultural exports outweigh China's. Hell, Japan's cultural exports outweigh China's. Manga is pretty popular in the world, even in China, and puts Japan on the map quite nicely. I don't think Japanese manga or Chinese... I dunno (hard-pressed to name a US-consumed Chinese cultural product right now) want to impose the standards of their culture on us, which is what imperialism would mean. However, there is a definite commercial interest for something like Levi's to impose a part of our culture and also their main product, American blue jeans, on other cultures. Commercial, non-state imperialist interests like that dominate the majority of American cultural imperialism. It seems to me that China isn't so much interested in shoving mandarin and Chinese culture down other cultures' throats as it is in gathering the respect of the international community as a Great Power populated with humans who are viewed on equal 'humanness' as first-world country citizens. flatbus fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Sep 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 15:59
|
|
|
flatbus posted:I have a dumb question here. What can you get away with firing at the other side before it's considered war? Water cannons are nonlethal, but with the right set of coincidences, maybe if you knock someone accidentally into a bulkhead and they suffer a head injury or something, or if they go overboard after being injured or something, I can imagine a lethal incident. I feel if anything fatal happens the other side will probably back down and dismiss it (after protests) like when DPRK shelled those islands. But the image at the top of this article on Japan firing on Taiwanese ships with water cannons caught eye. <Taiwanese angst> I just find it amusing that pretty much every foreign press article I've read on the whole water pistol fight basically files the whole issue of Taiwan's participation as a subset of the Japan-China dispute. And the expert being interviewed on Al Jazzera is from Hong Kong (who, BTW, basically subsumes Taiwan's postion into China's position). Sad... asking someone in Hong Kong what Taiwan's position is. Ah well... we're used to being ignored, even if we're the party with a capital closest to the islands. </Taiwanese angst> Anyhow, I made a post in the Taiwan thread about the whole political background on this in Taiwan. Despite the water cannon fight, there really isn't a general sense of outrage on the streets in Taiwan. Most people are like "What's the big deal with some rocks", or "Well, glad the Coast Guard is actually doing something for once, rather than getting abducted by Chinese fishermen." My personal reading of this (for what its worth), is President Ma attempting to look strong in protecting Taiwanese rights (something he's often been accused of failing to do when it comes to China), while posturing for talks on fishing rights. Japan is not going to alienate Taiwan, seeing as we're generally on good terms, both officially and in terms of public opinion. For all the official bluster, Taiwan is not going to alienate Japan either. The fishermen are more interested in the right to fish in what they consider to be their traditional fishing grounds rather than anything regarding Chinese nationalism. And few here want to see a PRC outpost that close to mainland Taiwan. Did make for some interesting pictures in the papers though:  Also, note the banner on the fishing boat: "Diaoyutai is part of Taiwan". This is not something that can be subsumed under the banner of Chinese nationalism. skysedge fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Sep 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 16:56
|
|
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:You need to calm down, stop freaking out on me dude! Your posts are just full of angst and it's clear you're really personally invested in making sure that people don't think Chinese folk are 'ignorant' even though no one said that at all. So just take a few deep breaths, relax, step away from the keyboard and try to drink some green tea and do some calligraphy to soothe your upset qi. Haha wow see, anyone can suggest another person is upset on the internet even though it's not true. Care much?? Look at all those words! Don't do that stupid poo poo, this is a debate and discussion forum, if you're uncomfortable with people posting responses to your statements that aren't properly harmonious, I dunno what to say. Anyway... Okay... quote:Sorry but I'm just an ignorant ocean devil ghost, can you show us these amazing blogs and weibo feeds you're on where people really cut to the heart of the matter and freely criticize the government, openly discuss matters like Tibetan independence, government repression of Uighurs, control of religion and a host of other matters that apparently Chinese people love to discuss? I know weibo has a ton of really deep conversation going on, love that 140 character limit, it's really conducive to getting to the heart of the matter when confronting imperialism. Since when are those the only social issues in China? How about food safety? The wealth gap? Housing prices? Corruption? Social issues that don't have anything to do with what you mentioned above? quote:What is the argument you're trying to make? You're admitting that Chinese people aren't as tuned in as westerners, aren't as aware of historical issues, can't bring them up in public, and aren't taught about them, yet despite all that you're still arguing for what? No one said Chinese people are dumb, no one used words like 'all' or 'every' when referring to Chinese people. Wait sorry I'm confused. Where did I admit (or say) they weren't in tune as westerners or aren't aware or issues? The point I was trying to make is that they are more knowledgeable and discuss a lot more than the impression I had gotten form your past posts. Can you please tell me where I said all of that? I had stated a lot of people don't know things, and then mentioned that that is true anywhere you go. You then said that my argument was dumb and made up some numbers. quote:I already addressed this with flatbut but as I said, we're all operating on our personal experiences, yourself included, you're right, I have no exact numbers to back these things up (hey maybe I should start a polling firm in China to randomly call people and ask them their opinions about these things, how long do you think that would last eh?). Your personal experiences with family, friends and forums, do you think that's not just as likely to have confirmation bias rear its ugly head? According to my experiences on the forum I frequently read, 99% of Americans are socialists who frequently discuss topics ranging from ethnic violence in the Caucasus to fighting for land rights for Australian Aborigines. Do you really not understand that this poo poo isn't the "typical" stuff people choose to talk about in their spare time? Do you understand that, "Me and my friends (who I've chosen) and family (again, chosen) and people I choose to hang out with online" is honestly not as good of a random cross-section of society as several thousand university students? Does that make sense to you? I taught large numbers of students in the past as well and I found very diverse opinions. Of course there are students with undeveloped world-views, there are others who have really developed ones. On top of that, when someone asked what Chinese people thought about things, you made the post of what your wife said and I thought it was interesting and just brought up my own stuff. quote:You keep talking about this discussion. You have to understand that the only discussion that goes on is discussion the government allows to go on. If the discussion gets out of hand, it will get shut down or deleted entirely. Of course they can't do that to people in real life, and I've also had plenty of intelligent discussions with people about issues, but there's always the joking nervousness in the background, and maybe an added, "Don't tell anyone I said that" at the end of the conversation. You've barely got any idea what you yourself are arguing, and you're putting words in my mouth. Again, no one said these discussions don't happen, we were making a comparison to the general political and social consciousness level of the average Chinese person and we generally stated that typically it's pretty low. Does that offend your wife or your friends you spent so much time learning to speak Chinese so you could communicate with them about the plight of the Dalai Lama? Honestly when discussing social issues with Chinese people I've generally found that more than anything they don't want to be condescended to or told their perceptions are 'wrong' just like anyone else, so I try not to do that. Okay first, I had stated that the impression I had gotten from your posts were that discussions didn't happen (because of your replies and past posts) I got the wrong impression, and I corrected myself, but then saw from one of your following statement that I got the feeling you were trying to minimize how much goes on. (the 10% to 1% thing) Second: When I say social issues, the range is large. Cultural preservation, income gap, pollution, food safety, corruption, whatever. Yeah they also don't get offended because we just have normal conversations about current events. The point that I was trying to make is that lots of people discuss a multitude of things going on in China. More than the 1% statement that you made earlier. The whole point that I have been trying to make is that a lot of people are really knowledgeable and up-to-date about a multitude of topics and discuss them regularly. I had gotten the impression from some of your past posts that you just wanted to bitch about how people just didn't understand X or weren't aware of Y because of your experiences with college students that you said yourself is a random cross-section of society. I wanted to argue that there is a strong awareness and discussion among large amounts of people of many different issues. I had gotten on this point, again, because of you talking about your experience as a teacher (you had stated ignorance of a large number of students) and quote about ethnic minorities by some Chinese guy. I will read your posts again. Like I said, I got the wrong impression and have tried to correct that. I try to not put words in other people's mouths, and since I apparently have, again, I apologize for doing that and I've tried to explain what led me to do doing that. We both agree that discussions happen. Our difference is just in how many people we think take part or how prevalent it is in daily life. Is that correct? quote:Son, I've been hearing jokes and humors since before you were born That's cool?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 17:06
|
|
|
flatbus posted:I have a dumb question here. What can you get away with firing at the other side before it's considered war? Water cannons are nonlethal, but with the right set of coincidences, maybe if you knock someone accidentally into a bulkhead and they suffer a head injury or something, or if they go overboard after being injured or something, I can imagine a lethal incident. I feel if anything fatal happens the other side will probably back down and dismiss it (after protests) like when DPRK shelled those islands. But the image at the top of this article on Japan firing on Taiwanese ships with water cannons caught eye. It really boils down to how belligerent the different parties choose to be. There is no criteria where "thing that happens" results in guaranteed military mobilization. As you noted, North Korea hasn't managed to reignite the Korean War despite literally shelling a South Korean island and torpedoing a ship. Conversely, even trivial actions can be used as justification for war if an involved party wants a war. For reference sake: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbot_War
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
Pro-PRC Laowai posted:If it's possible to take a guess, probably not all that bad. If his politics are anything like daddy's, Xi is a damned good leader. That's really the question of the day. I'm worried that even if he does take after his father, though, it'll take a lot more than a passive belief in reform to actually bear fruit- he's going to have to really WANT to fight the entrenched interests in the Party that are lined up against meaningful reform. If it's true that the standing committee is going back to 7, with the propaganda and PSB chiefs getting kicked out, that might offer a bit more of an opening. But ultimately it's going to come down to whether or not he and the other new leaders have the commitment to actually fight for this stuff. Maybe its just 10 years of Hu and Wen talking, but I'm starting from a point of skepticism here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 22:41
|
|
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:You need to calm down, stop freaking out on me dude! Your posts are just full of angst and it's clear you're really personally invested in making sure that people don't think Chinese folk are 'ignorant' even though no one said that at all. So just take a few deep breaths, relax, step away from the keyboard and try to drink some green tea and do some calligraphy to soothe your upset qi. Haha wow see, anyone can suggest another person is upset on the internet even though it's not true. Care much?? Look at all those words! Don't do that stupid poo poo, this is a debate and discussion forum, if you're uncomfortable with people posting responses to your statements that aren't properly harmonious, I dunno what to say. Anyway... You know, I think you're trying to make solid and rational points in this thread, but everything you're spewing out right now is pretty much a torrent of cum-stained poo poo. You're loving obnoxious and hypocritical, spazzing the gently caress out just because this one poster mildly disagrees with you and back peddling all over the loving place when people are asking you to back up your experiences with hard statistics instead of your lovey-dovey gut feelings. No one gives a poo poo about your anecdotes and the obvious confirmation bias you have going on here, and it's doubly ridiculous that you should hold the validity of your own experiences above that of others when you're both just slinging around anecdotes. So calm the gently caress down and start backing up what you're saying. Fall Sick and Die posted:Son, I've been hearing jokes and humors since before you were born How did you post this and not feel embarrassed for yourself? chokeandstroke fucked around with this message at 05:54 on Sep 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 05:49
|
|
|
I don't know, it does seem like DJT's experiences are pretty atypical. I mean he's using examples of his Chinese family (who lives in America) and his wife and friends from Hangzhou and Shanghai (both pretty rich cities). Really though half of China's population is still living in or around farms in the countryside. It's pretty laughable to think after a back breaking 14 hour day of labor barely making enough money to feed his family some farmer is going to hop on weibo and discuss politics. When you're hosed as much as poor people here, you don't have the time or luxury to sit around and discuss the social problems that hosed you in the first place.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 08:03
|
|
|
In times like these it's helpful to remember that there are 1.37 billion people in China and they are all individuals. I have to remind myself of that when I start talking about "the Chinese" and what they think and do, and occasionally I even remind my Chinese friends for the same reason.Electro-Boogie Jack posted:That's really the question of the day. I'm worried that even if he does take after his father, though, it'll take a lot more than a passive belief in reform to actually bear fruit- he's going to have to really WANT to fight the entrenched interests in the Party that are lined up against meaningful reform. If it's true that the standing committee is going back to 7, with the propaganda and PSB chiefs getting kicked out, that might offer a bit more of an opening. But ultimately it's going to come down to whether or not he and the other new leaders have the commitment to actually fight for this stuff. This is what's really interesting about the power transfer. I remember when Hu and Wen came in, and they said it would take a few years to start reforms because they needed to harden up their power base. And then nothing happen. Let's hope Xi can buck that trend. China has so many long-term problems that the standard strategy of using propaganda to make it look smaller and short-term fixes to hold off the inevitable is not going to be viable forever. The system has to show its ability to change or it will fail someday. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 09:08 on Sep 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 08:54
|
|
|
Arakan posted:I don't know, it does seem like DJT's experiences are pretty atypical. I mean he's using examples of his Chinese family (who lives in America) and his wife and friends from Hangzhou and Shanghai (both pretty rich cities). Ah sorry I think I should clarify. When I said Chinese family I meant my wife's side. My in-laws. I should have clarified better. They are all here in Hangzhou as well. I agree with your statement about the countryside completely. I think poverty is a huge obstacle to (among alot of things) discussion. Like you said, you aren't going to be discussing much when you are barely able to survive and put food on the table. Although, current food prices are getting crazy and that in itself might start sparking something. I think the part of the conversation above that I took issue with was this: quote:"Oh if you're going to say large numbers of people don't give a poo poo sure that's true everywhere." That's a really useless argument to make, because you're ignoring the fact that there's a large difference between even 1% of the population giving a poo poo about X and 10% giving a poo poo about X. I felt that discussions about society and current events was a part of life for more people than numbers presented here, for example. Also I wanted to ask anyone who is knowledgable about Taiwan stuff: Does the GMD still say that it is the rightful ruler of China? I was curious if they have stances on Tibet and Xinjiang (is it an integral part of China, or do they support autonomy, or something else)?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 11:23
|
|
|
DaiJiaTeng posted:
The KMT isn't even in complete control of Taiwan anymore so I'm pretty sure they claim nothing from the 大陆。Also I'm not too sure the KMT wouldn't have gone in and taken those old Qing lands back themselves if they'd ended up on top, anyway. I dunno anything about their opinions on Tibet and stuff. My Taiwanese friends seem to have roughly the same stance as most westerners: Tibet situation is bad.... uh... what is in Xinjiang again? On the whole discussion thing, my professors here constantly talk about the three T's in class pretty candidly, and most of what they say isn't CCP approved doublespeak. A(nother laowai) friend's prof told them all about his experiences being a protestor at Tiananmen on the first day of class. My econ professor just went on a rant about Mao's economic plans and ended it by saying, "therefore we can tell Mao never studied economics“ which got a laugh out of the whole class, of which I'm the only non-Chinese. Again, academia, but I mean this stuff happens enough for it not to be a fluke.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 11:56
|
|
|
From what I've read the KMT still officially claims China because of pride/face/whatever but no one seriously believes they will ever control more than Taiwan again. They also seem willing to build a relationship with the PRC so they'll stop threatening to nuke them and such. Pragmatic, basically.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 12:04
|
|
|
Officially, the government of the Republic of China, once synonymous with the Kuomintang but no longer, claims everything that once was Qing China and the Republic of China. That means they actually claim MORE than the CCP. Because it includes all of Mongolia and even Tuva, which is today a Russian republic. Of course, they haven't pressed any of those claims in like a billion years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 12:15
|
|
|
DaiJiaTeng posted:I agree with your statement about the countryside completely. Can I just throw something into the mix: I am pretty sure that the majority of civil disturbances in China happen in rural areas and small towns. They may be about local disputes, but land reform is as political as it gets in China. And even though the government "contains" dissent by ensuring that it is vented against local officials, it still counts as dissent. Just because it isn't the kind of political discussion which gets posted on weibo doesn't mean it isn't political discussion. On balance, I don't disagree with your argument. But discounting a large chunk of the population out of hand because the revolution has always come from the bourgeoisie seems a little black and white. Especially given that China's middle class isn't exactly an engine of radical political change. GuestBob fucked around with this message at 12:20 on Sep 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 12:17
|
|
|
DaiJiaTeng posted:Ah sorry I think I should clarify. When I said Chinese family I meant my wife's side. My in-laws. I should have clarified better. They are all here in Hangzhou as well. Fall Sick and Die posted:Here's an example of a Chinese map...
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 13:00
|
|
|
GuestBob posted:Can I just throw something into the mix: I am pretty sure that the majority of civil disturbances in China happen in rural areas and small towns. They may be about local disputes, but land reform is as political as it gets in China. And even though the government "contains" dissent by ensuring that it is vented against local officials, it still counts as dissent. Just because it isn't the kind of political discussion which gets posted on weibo doesn't mean it isn't political discussion. Good point. I don't disagree with yours either. People in rural areas face alot problems, land disputes being a huge one. There was also the whole Hukou reform thing a few years ago. A large amount of dissent comes from the countryside. You're right that discounting a large chunk of population was too black and white, and my own statement on the matter conflicted what I had been trying to argue in the first place, so thanks for the point. quote:Officially, the government of the Republic of China, once synonymous with the Kuomintang but no longer, claims everything that once was Qing China and the Republic of China. That means they actually claim MORE than the CCP. Because it includes all of Mongolia and even Tuva, which is today a Russian republic. Of course, they haven't pressed any of those claims in like a billion years. I thought that the RoC eventually removed claims on Mongolia and Tuva? I'll go do my homework, I need to read up on things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 13:28
|
|
|
The RoC relinquishing those claims though would be an admission that is the government of an independent Taiwan. We all know this has been the reality for 60 years, but admitting it would upset the fragile balance of both the RoC and PRC agreeing that Taiwan is part of China. If the PRC perceives an "independence" movement in Taiwan that actually has political traction they might act. Since the status quo is working okay it's easier for everyone to just pretend. Both sides are culturally Chinese, and the Chinese have a talent for pretending everything is fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 14:43
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The RoC relinquishing those claims though would be an admission that is the government of an independent Taiwan. We all know this has been the reality for 60 years, but admitting it would upset the fragile balance of both the RoC and PRC agreeing that Taiwan is part of China. If the PRC perceives an "independence" movement in Taiwan that actually has political traction they might act. Since the status quo is working okay it's easier for everyone to just pretend. Both sides are culturally Chinese, and the Chinese have a talent for pretending everything is fine. This whole thing might seriously be the most bizarre international situation in the world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 22:42
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:This whole thing might seriously be the most bizarre international situation in the world. Nah, I'm pretty sure that this tops it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
Bo was expelled from the Communist Party today Well that was interesting and surprising. I thought he would have just been demoted and put somewhere quiet. What did he do that was dangerous enough to warrant expulsion? flatbus fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Sep 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 14:00
|
|
|
flatbus posted:Bo was expelled from the Communist Party today This was an internet comment, and thus solid reasoning for his political destruction: If Wang Lijun had not run to the US embassy, Bo Xilai and his wife would have literally gotten away with murder. I wish they were punishing Bo for his actual crimes, rather than his political clout. A man who threw people in jail to grab their money, who had people arrested, executed and their organs used for organ harvesting, and who off-shored ill-gotten billions (and his son), is guilty of plenty. They've killed the chicken to frighten the monkeys.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 16:09
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:This was an internet comment, and thus solid reasoning for his political destruction: This is what I'm interested in, along with the sordid details of his actual crimes. Why didn't the other Politburo members like him? Also, I didn't know about the organ harvesting and off-shoring part. I just thought he was guilty of bribery and other mundane things, not eat-babies villainy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 16:26
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 17:05
|
|
flatbus posted:Why didn't the other Politburo members like him? A lot of his supporters were part of a growing pro communism movement, not like the "communism" of today's government, but actual red guard, Mao era type poo poo. Nothing would be worse for the CCP than if a movement like that gained traction, because how are they supposed to stop it while still keeping up their own facade of communism?
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 03:08
|
|
|
flatbus posted:Bo was expelled from the Communist Party today In the post-Mao era, the CCP has developed a fairly normalised system for promoting leaders and cadres through the party, and for channeling criticism within the party (ages ago I did a brief post on promotion of judges in the PRC, there is something similar for CCP cadres). However, this doesn't really apply at the very highest levels, where succession is governed by balance-of-power relationships. As such, the higher-level cadres have good reason to be suspicious of anyone who tries to set themselves apart. Bo was seen by other high-level leaders as too outspoken and not willing to play by the rules. He played into all the anxieties about a high-profile, charismatic leader wanting to upset the apple cart. So he was banished to Chongqing to keep him quiet, which he used as a platform to start developing a personal following and developed the 'Chongqing model'. Wang Lijun was the final straw, but he was disliked intensely within the CCP long before that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
Do attitudes towards the West play any role in this maneuvering? Would Chairman Xilai have had a different foreign policy than Chairman Xinjing? Or is the political struggle more about different domestic plans?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 04:08
|
|
|
flatbus posted:Why didn't the other Politburo members like him? Arakan and Readman have gotten the gist of it, but here's a more cogent explanation from Peter Chovanec's analysis of Bo's downfall: quote:First, they were offended by his courting of the media and his vigorous self-promotion, which showed a lack of appropriate deference and humility to established power channels and ways of resolving competition. Second, they felt threatened, because few of them were equipped to compete on this basis, if that’s what it took. Third, they were alarmed by Bo’s tactic of “mobilizing the masses” in ways that explicitly invoked the Cultural Revolution, which called up deep-seated fears that populist fervor could be used as a weapon against rival leaders within the Party — as indeed happened during the Cultural Revolution, to horrific results. The bolding is his, not mine. I am of the belief his dabbling in neo-Maoist and populist talk got him into the most trouble. You can argue that everything China has pursued since opening up and beginning its reforms is tied to a rejection of the Cultural Revolution and a fear of its revival. When the policies of the "Chongqing model" inevitably lose their effectiveness, it seems likely to me that a populist politician like Bo Xilai would start targeting "corrupt elites" within the party and government as a way of maintaining his political power. There's certainly popular resentment against corruption in government and Bo Xilai's media savvy and cronyism shows that he isn't above demagoguery. Maybe it wouldn't be as bad as the Cultural Revolution, but it certainly would be a reversal of 30 years of policy and a huge blow to the more market-oriented members of the CCP that seem to be in power at the moment. McDowell posted:Do attitudes towards the West play any role in this maneuvering? Would Chairman Xilai have had a different foreign policy than Chairman Xinjing? Or is the political struggle more about different domestic plans? I never heard that his foreign policies or attitudes to foreign countries was a factor in his downfall. His time in Chongqing seems dedicated to the whole "Smash Black Sing Red" thing, so he didn't speak much about China's foreign policy. His time in Liaoning had him applauding greater trade and foreign investment, but that shouldn't be surprising for an official of a costal province. Nor have I heard of his international perception being a factor as well. He certainly courted foreign press with his charisma and frankness, but that plays into the general hatred of his media savvy as opposed to a foreign media savvy. The struggle doesn't seem to be over the domestic plans of China so much as the future of the Communist Party and the stability of China. Bo threatened to overtake his political rivals with his popularity and he threatened China's stability with populist sentiment similar to the Cultural revolution.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 10:01
|
|
|
McDowell posted:Do attitudes towards the West play any role in this maneuvering? Would Chairman Xilai have had a different foreign policy than Chairman Xinjing? Or is the political struggle more about different domestic plans? Just as a heads up-- In Chinese names, the last name is first. So Mao Zedong's last name is Mao, Bo Xilai's last name is Bo, etc. Nobody would call him just Xilai unless they were BFFs.  I've seen people make this mistake even at very high level (like, calling an Ambassador by his first name level) occasions, so be glad you did it on an inconsequential forum and not there, haha. Also it's "Xi Jinping", a name we will get to hear reporters butcher for many years to come. I don't think Bo ever had any chance of being President(Chairman), but he appeared to be a shoo-in for the Politburo Standing Committee (the group of 5-10 guys that make all the major decisions) before this event. I am definitely warming up to the theory that he was never going to make it there and that the assignment to Chongqing was more like a banishment, though. Wonder what happened to his son? Last I heard, Bo Guagua was applying to law schools in the US-- so if so, he should have enrolled by now... hitension fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Sep 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 20:18
|
|
|
hitension posted:Just as a heads up-- In Chinese names, the last name is first. So Mao Zedong's last name is Mao, Bo Xilai's last name is Bo, etc. Nobody would call him just Xilai unless they were BFFs. I should have known that. Whoops.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
After Wang walked into the American embassy, Bo and his Poliburo standing committee alliance Zhou YongKang (head of military police) still tried to catch Wang by circling the embassy with local police and Zhou's people. And when Wang walked away with the central security agents, Bo still tried to pull something by visiting military generals in southwest, supposedly his father's old people. This was a big no-no and the biggest sin Bo committed to the eyes of the standing committee. That and he allegedly spied on the top officials who visit Chongqing, he used spy gears to listen to direct line between the visiting officials and Hu Jintao. These two crimes far out weight the other stuff he did. Of course these were not list in the trail. I thought they were going to make his downfall official after the 18th congress. They put it ahead of the congress maybe to signal the standing committee has reach a consensus on Bo and maybe to put a stop to the unsettled elements who still want to rally behind Bo. It's not cleared whether Zhou Yongkang cut his tie loose with Bo to save himself. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Sep 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 02:44
|
|
|
I remember there were articles in the Economist about Bo before his downfall. That's never happened for any other provincial leader or pretty much anyone who isn't on the politburo standing commitee. That's a pretty good sign that he was getting to big for his britches.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 10:42
|
|
|
hitension posted:Wonder what happened to his son? Last I heard, Bo Guagua was applying to law schools in the US-- so if so, he should have enrolled by now... http://guaguabostatement.tumblr.com/
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 13:43
|
|
|
Eagerly awaiting the moment when Tumblr is sourced in the New York Times and the Economist
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 14:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
hitension posted:Eagerly awaiting the moment when Tumblr is sourced in the New York Times and the Economist Well... http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/01/world/asia/bo-xilais-son-defends-him-as-upright-and-devoted.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2012 00:46
|
|