As
Ban Ki-moon finalized his preparations for his visit this week to Beijing, one
of his top advisors, Sha Zukang, traveled to China to present an award
to a retired Chinese general who had authority over troops that fired on
unarmed civilians during the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown.
Sha, the U.N.
Undersecretary General for Economic and Social Affairs, presented the World
Harmony Award -- a glass plaque cut in the shape of a dove -- to former Chinese
Defense Minister, Gen. Chi Haotian, in honor of his unspecified
contributions to world peace, according to a report
in Chinese state media. The World Harmony Foundation,
a private charity headed by a Chinese businessman named Frank Liu,
established the award.
It was
unclear whether Sha appearance at the award ceremony was a gesture aimed at
showing understanding for China's troubled human rights legacy. China has faced
more intense scrutiny of its human rights record since Liu Xiobao, a
jailed pro-democracy advocate who participated in the Tiananmen Square
protests, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. But Ban responded to the Nobel
announcement by issuing a statement that implicitly questioned the wisdom of
the Nobel committee's selection for the prize, and he has been reluctant to
publicly raise concerns about the house detention of Liu's wife. In a meeting Monday with Chinese President Hu
Jintao, Ban didn't even mention human rights.
Some
officials said that Sha, a fervent Chinese nationalist, may have been engaging
in a bit of pro-Chinese freelancing, or simply doing a personal favor for a
wealthy businessman who has provided financial support to U.N. causes. Sha's
office declined to comment, referring calls to the organizers of the award
ceremony, The World Harmony Foundation, which did not respond to requests for
comment. Officials in Ban's office said they were unaware of Sha's
participation in the event. "This is the first we've heard of this," Martin
Nesirky, the chief spokesman told Turtle Bay. "I don't have further
comment for now."
U.N.
officials said there is no specific rule prohibiting U.N. staff from presenting
an award on behalf of a private charity. Staff rules, however, require
employees "uphold and respect the principles set out in the Charter, including
faith in fundamental human rights." They prohibit U.N. employees from accepting
instructions from any government or from any other source external to the
organization." The rules also require staff "avoid any action and, in
particular, any kind of public pronouncement that may adversely reflect on
their status, or on the integrity, independence and impartiality that are
required by that status."
Still, the
award ceremony amounted to another awkward incident for Sha, who has struggled
to make the adjustment to life as an international civil servant. It also
reflects poorly on Ban. Last month, Sha garnered international notoriety after
criticizing the U.N. secretary general under the influence of alcohol at a U.N.
retreat. The story was first reported by Turtle
Bay.
Gen. Chi, a
recipient of China's People's Hero award, served as the Chief of the General
Staff of the People's Liberation Army during the Tiananmen crackdown, which led
to the killing of as many as 3,000 civilians. Chi has publicly defended the
military operation, but has denied giving the order to open fire on unarmed
protesters.
"As PLA chief
of staff he was present at a series of key meetings on the crackdown but he
isn't recorded as saying anything," Andrew J. Nathan, a professor of
Chinese politics at Columbia University. "He evidently was one of the
key officers implementing the crackdown orders but I can't distinguish from
these materials what specific role he played within that small group."
"I have no
idea who the World Harmony Foundation is, but I suppose they represent the deft
hand of the Propaganda Department in extending China's soft power," Nathan
said. "I suppose this is a response to the Nobel Peace Prize."
The World
Harmony Foundation was established in 2004 to "promote the ideals and
principles of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration,"
according to a statement on the group's web site. It is "dedicated to building
Cultures of Peace and Sustainable Environments for all people."
Since 2005, the group has periodically organized ceremonies
to ring the Harmony Bell for Peace, which was fashioned out of ammunition
donated by the Chinese government and scrap metal collected by Chinese school
children. It is trying to raise funding to build more bells.
Top U.N. officials,
including former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and Deputy U.N.
Secretary General Asha-Rose Migiro, have rung the Harmony Bell of Peace
in ceremonies. In 2008, the
group claimed that its founder Frank Liu was selected by an aide to Sha,
Guido Bertucci, selected by a top aide to be a spokesperson for the U.N. Global Forum, a unit that promotes better
public administration. There is no reference to Liu at the forum's website.
The
organization has contributed money to previous U.N. causes, including a
commitment to fund a 2009 U.N. concert organized by the U.N.'s public affairs
and peacekeeping departments and a private group, the CultureProject. In a July
2009 letter to Liu, published by Inner
City Press, the U.N. Undersecretary General for Peacekeeping Alain Le Roy,
thanked Liu.
"Your support
is of enormous importance to us," Le Roy wrote. "We are pleased to invite you
to our Departmental Conference Room, where you will be given a complete
situational briefing on the activities carried out by our peacekeeping missions
around the globe. In addition, we would be pleased to offer you a tour of the
Department's situation center where our staff monitors developments on the
ground 24 hours a days, seven days a week."
No one should question the personal integrity of President Barrack Obama. However, to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for things he said he will do and yet he has not done so far is a mockery of the Nobel Peace Prize committee's decision. If Obama is deserved to be awarded the Peace Prize, Gen. Chi Haotian is sure to deserve such an award, if not any better one.
Even though I think the decision to give Obama the Peace Prize was an incorrect and clearly political one, there is a pretty clear and substantive difference firing on unarmed students and Obama's actions. Both awards are pretty absurd, but one more than the other I think.
It's been realistically calculated that upwards of 60 million Chinese died as the direct consequence of Mao's "Cultural Revolution," to include its destruction of agricultural productivity.
It's unhealthy to get into an comparative argument of how many millions died or would have died as the result of some event, especially when it is predicated on one's attitude and beliefs towards one particular system of political economy over another.
But as Mao himself said, "A revolution is not a tea party." Masses of Chinese die or suffer in either event. So we should have the revolution that smashes the fascist dictatorial, in name only Communist Party of China that rules from Beijing. Get it over with once and for all.
The fall of the communists in the Eastern Bloc and well as Russia was relatively peaceful, millions did not die as a result. Why would China be any different? Chances are it would have ended in a similar fashion.
With that said, considering the existing ethnic tensions, I would not go so far as to say China would not have splintered as a result like the USSR did and that would have been a major set back for China to say the least. It certainly wouldn't become the major player it is today.
As for the Nobel prize, as much as I like Obama, he hadn't done anything to deserve it yet but that doesn't mean that a man responsible for the slaughter of his own countrymen should receive an award that is supposed to be about peace and human rights.
Your analogous reasoning is understood, however, I'm reasonably confident, if not certain, you are susceptible to underestimating the cutthroat determination of the CCP to remain in power and control of the bucks, which in China have never been greater than they are now.
The CCP will never surrender without a fight to the finish and it confidently has the army in its control and on its side, as clearly indicated by a principal butcher of 1989 Beijing, Gen Chi Haotian (Ret). There isn't any question the CCP will mass murder and slaughter as many Chinese as it considers necessary to preserve itself in power. In actuality and reality, the Russians as the USSR were relatively and far more reasonable dictators than the rulers of China ever have been past or present especially.
We recall that citizens of Beijing were shot and killed too, not only the youths in Tianamen. While I recently lived and worked in the PRC/CCP, a number of the Chinese friends and associates I'd met and who disagree significantly against the CCP, asked me to help sponsor them in the USA as political refugees "WHEN" the Second Revolution
(against the CCP) does break out. I'd initially said to them that I should think the CCP would be pleased to allow their like to escape the PRC to be rid of them, but each assured me the CCP would never allow them to escape the PRC were the revolution to be crushed by the Peoples 'Liberation' Army. The absolute certainty of the Chinese who discussed this with me is that CCP Chinese would have to make absolutely clear their point against rebellion from within by killing everyone involved, to the last one. We further recall that the PRC/CCP billed the parents of the demonstrators and supporting Beijing citizens who also were ruthlessly killed by the army in Tiananmen in 1989 for the bullets used to massacre the democracy advocates who'd held the Square for more than a month. As cruel and repressive as Stalin and the USSR was, they never wanted a WW III and cooperated during the most dangerous of all Cold War moments, the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 to prevent nuclear holocaust. In contrast, other PRC/CCP Chinese I'd met actually think and believe they can win a war against he United States by waging it high tech in inner space, in cyberspace and on the seas.
We should be wary of underestimating the absolute meanness and the absolute cruelty of the control freak CCP political elites in preserving their controlling power, authority and 5000 year old traditions of the elite directing the mass of the Chinese sheeple to serve their will.
We need to learn, know and recognize that the Chinese mean the most serious and ultimate business in these matters. The Russian USSR, while harsh and extreme against its own citizens, at the least had limitations to their brutality that the Chinese would never conceive of or restrain themselves from doing. The cultural revolution, Tiananmen Square, the merciless crushing of public resistance against Beijing in Tibet and in the far western Muslim Turkic speaking province of XinJiang is more proof of the reality.
Finally for the moment, I can say I don't trust dictators of any sort. However, the Chinese I spent time with on the mainland, because they themselves are Chinese, know the nature and character of their CCP leaders who, in reality, are the present Chinese dynasty in business suits. I certain yield to their inherent knowledge of both themselves, their long history of emperors and dynasties of emperors and of the present dynasty of rulers, the CCP.
Perhaps 90% of us share the view that the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize is a political decision, among a few insignificant considerations as well.
The awarding of the Peace Prize to Pres Obama and then to Liu Xiaobo is consistent. Moreover, fascists have put one in prison for his advocacy of freedom in his country while other sorts of fascists would like to imprison the other but cannot.
On the current 11 day trip to Asia Pres Obama is re-enforcing the confidence of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee as he remakes the geopolitical landscape of the region and the world.
Two years into his presidency Barak Obama is now hitting his full stride and beginning to show his natural dazzle for all to see.
When Obama and Hu Jin Tao sit privately on the sidelines of the G-20 meeting in S Korea, each will be a different man and leader.
You have nailed it. What do we call it: "the oldest profession" Will do anything to keep that UNSG seat .....difference between a has-been politician and someone who really cares about the objectives of the UN @ its inception.
This is an early instance of the awful impact and influence on the world the dictators in Beijing want to have and exercise. This fascist general who was centrally involved in slaughtering the young student citizens of his own country, and who has made menacing statements of war being the "midwife" of the "Chinese century" should be in prison, not the 2010 Nobel Peace Laureate Liu Xiaobo.
The CCP/PRC as a rising power offers nothing of value to the world. It is a fascist dictatorship which manipulates the UN and other organizations, other countries such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea to try to extend its fascist systems and will upon them and against democracy and freedom.
While the United States can be criticized by any of us for conducting wars in foreign lands, one thing the US cannot be criticized for is the repeated occurance of its shooting its domestic population - its own citizens - as in Tianamen Square, Tibet, XinJiang and elsewhere over a period of many decades.
It's also clear and obvious that the habitual and bigoted drunk Sha Zukang needs to be fired forthwith.
There is no need to be panicking. Chinese are peace loving people who had built "The Great Wall" instead of large numbers of horse drawn carts and spear to conquer the world. From what had happened to Russia and Chechenya, China should not suffer what Russia had been through for 10 years after the dissolution of The Soviet. When Russia needed help the most, which nations stand behind the Russia? Russia does not believe that democracy crab from USA any more. China should find its own way to democracy and at its own speed, not what the Western world wants it to be. Look at Afghanistan and the jihadists the USA had trained, this kind of policy is only election driven. And eventually, it is no good for every one. Look at it another side, too early for China to become a democratic country may not be all good for the world. There are too many old scores to be settled. From the Opium War, the Eight Nation League which invaded China, the Japanese War to the forced boarding of the Galaxy Ship by the USA Navy, the bombing of Belgrade Chinese Embassy, most Chinese citizenship feel pain when so many of these "incidents" happened not too long ago. Look at the Iraqi people, they had suffered greatly and more so from the USA than from Saddam Husein. And if human right is above national sovereignty, then Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney shall be executed by the United Nations Court of Justice for genocide of another country. Did they find any weapon of mass destruction, the answer is "no". I guess this is one of the reason why USA did not recognize the UN Court of Justice.
Chinese people are generous people toward the world. Look at what had happened in the China - India war. China had occupied that piece of disputed land and China withdrew unilaterally without permanently staying. China also released all the prisoners of war unharmed. That is generous. If it was the USA, they would have put all those prisoners of war into Guantanamo prison and would have tortured them without any clothes on. Chinese government was treating too good of foreigner.
But behold, things are changing. Even now, China is not a dictatorship because there is no one with such authority. Then very soon it may be responding to electors and then a lot of Chinese wish to settle those old scores.
Who said during an interview that China should be colonized by the British for 300 years so it would be more like Hong Kong?
Sure, he said this a long ago in the late 80s, but TianAnMen happened a long time ago as well. If Liu's past as a pro-colonizing advocate gets whitewashed then why can't this general's? One squashed a student rebellion, one hoped that foreign powers would come, colonize, and enslave his own people. One wins the Nobel Peace Prize, and one gets some sort of UN award. Is there is outrage over one then why not the other?
Considering that Hong Kong is one of the most developed region in the country, not only economically but socially and politically can you blame him? He was also a considerably younger man back then
Though the colonial Era is certainly a blemish on Human history, it also brought new technology, new ideas, and more effective means of government to many of the places that was affected by it. Rapid development was one of the few good things that came out of such horrible era and I think that's what he was referring to.
Imagine if All of China was as developed as Hong Kong, it would be far more powerful but also far more westernized and if that means closer to being more open and democratic then I don't see that as being such a bad deal.
Using your logic it was fantastic that native Indians were wiped out. Considering how well America turned out they should have been wiped out earlier. In fact, America should colonize the whole world because it is the most powerful country in the world and the whole world should be more like America.
"There are too many old scores to be settled. From the Opium War, the Eight Nation League which invaded China, the Japanese War to the forced boarding of the Galaxy Ship by the USA Navy, the bombing of Belgrade Chinese Embassy, most Chinese citizenship feel pain when so many of these "incidents" happened not too long ago."
For whatever reason BILL888, you omitted the two US aircraft carrier battle groups in the Strait of Taiwan that in 1996 forced the Chinese military to stop firing missiles into the waters surrounding Taiwan 24/7 for seven days in the leadup to an election Beijing didn't like (Beijing hasn't ever met a democratic election it likes).
In the same post above, you again write:
"Then very soon it may be responding to electors and then a lot of Chinese wish to settle those old scores."
You have written previously at other FP threads to express this grudge mentality and of "settling old scores." It seems to me this mainland mentality and attitude of revenge and even a vengance is a prime motivator of the CCP in everything it does. The PRC/CCP has its super-Chinese who in their delusions want their 5000 year old culture to 'resume' its rightful place as the Middle Kingdom of the world. The USA has its super patriots, however, I found the super-Chinese to be (far) more hard core about their place and history (into the future) than any super patriot of the United States. The super patriot of the US hasn't the absolute and irreversibly rooted delusion of an only recently interrupted 5000 year old supremacy over the world that the super Chinese have.
You need to explain the consistent and repeated statements in which you expose your grudge mentality and attitude, which I would add strongly implies a view toward revenge, if not vengance. This is a serious syndrome and you are not the only Chinese who suffers from it. in fact, the CCP teaches all that you say and more in the schools.
1.)
Like I had said, the Chinese are peace loving people. As stated in earlier comments, the Old culture of Chinese believed in the "Great of China", that to say, they believed war can be averted just by building up defenses and never hit their enemy with spears. However, that belief is vanished when it did not stop the Manchurian from defeating the Ming Dynasty. And during the invasion of the Mongolian on the Qing Dynasty, some suggested to build up the "Great Wall of China" again. However, the Qing Emperor told them "If it did not stop us from crossing the Great Wall, why would it stop the Mongolian?" So the Qing Emperor led a campaign against the Mongolian and killed the Mongolian Khan. (At the same time, it made her daughter a widow.) Consequently, administration of Tibet and Xinjiang were passed to the Qing Dynasty. So the new China, therefore, does not believe in being peaceful without the back up of a strong military. It has nothing to do with resumption of 5000 years of "rightful place". The Chinese just want to live in peace/ prosperous and go their own way at their own speed.
2.)
I really think you need to get your money back from your professor regarding this translation of "Middle Kingdom" stuff. I already explained elsewhere to you.
3.)
Two aircraft carriers cruised through the Taiwan Straight? That's no big deal. It is the situation that the Russia had its AN-160 strategic bomber plane flew by the USA coast few months ago. No one mentioned any "revenge of old scores". No, don't be crazy. It is same thing that Chinese ships travel to the India Ocean and the India is not worried. No problem.
4.)
I said that old Chinese folks will go to war again for a penny. It means if they are being oppressed again, they will not hesitate to go to war with those countries. That has nothing to do with revenge. Also, I am going to tell the same little secret again: I have nothing to do with the fake Chinese Communist Party. Another thing, it seems the India is in good memory of the India-China war in 1962. With you so keen to comment on the Chinese cultures and people, did one of your relative involved in the 1962 war?
1.)
Like I had said, the Chinese are peace loving people. As stated in earlier comments, the Old culture of Chinese believed in the "Great Wall of China", that to say...
If your professor taught you to call P R C as "Jung Gwo" instead of China in English, then you should ask for your money back from the professor. Obviously he did not know too much about English, so he taught you the wrong thing. Your "Jung Gwo" is direct sound translation of a short form which stands for a longer form with different meaning. So it cannot be translated directly into "middle kingdom". For example, Taiwan is the name of the Island. However, it can be translated into "Platform Bay". Then if you call Taiwan as "Platform Bay" in English, people think you are crazy. Because it is a name for a place, it can only be translated into sound name. And sometimes custom prevails like China in English with no sound translation. Another example, India in Chinese will be translated into "Copy Degree". If you start calling India as "Copy Degree" in English, people think you are a nutcase. So, you have to ask your money back from your Professor, who taught you the wrong thing.
So don't reply to my post and the points I make about grudges, revenge, a vengance. Instead write historical cross-eyed mumbo-jumbo about Mings, Qings and Mongols that Chinese themselves younger than 25 couldn't care less about.
Or just simply go off on a cockeyed tangent, as you do in the post above. In it you state:
"If your professor taught you to call P R C as "Jung Gwo" instead of China in English, then you should ask for your money back from the professor. Obviously he did not know too much about English, so he taught you the wrong thing."
The professor of Chinese History I studied under, and I myself are native born US citizens and native speakers of English, respectively. The professor is literate (speak, read, write, listen) in several Chinese tongues, to include the classic Chinese used on Taiwan and the dumbed down "simplified" (vulgarized) Chinese popularized by the PRC/CCP,; Mandarin also (Putonghua, aka Beijinghua). The prof lived and worked eight years on Taiwan because the mainland was experiencing the cultural revolution at the time.
Fear not BILL888 because the prof calls China by its English name, i.e., China. He always points out to his classes the English transliteration "Jung Gwo" as being the Romanized (Latin language) word the Chinese call the place, country, where they live. We native speakers of English can use "Jung Gwo" interchangably with the word China because each term refers to the identical place on the map. However, the usual and routine reference to the place is simply 'China'.
More properly of course, nowadays it's the People's Republic of China ruled by the Chinese Communist Party, wherein lies the rub. I want to be careful not to confuse you too much here, but you also need to know the PRC/CCP some time ago morphed into a fascist state and society.
The PRC/CCP uses its preferred transliteration into English "Zhong Gwo" (i.e., China) on its currency and in everyday life. 'Zhong Gwo' in Chinglish, 'Jung Gwo' in English. Either way, it remains the identical place on the map, China.
So whatever you are on about, put a lid on it for your own good. This handing you rope and more rope is getting boring.
"If your professor taught you to call P R C as "Jung Gwo" instead of China in English, then you should ask for your money back from the professor. Obviously he did not know too much about English, so he taught you the wrong thing."
I've said it before but here I need to say it once again, one last time:
BILL888, try to get it through your skull and into your brain that I am not from India, or of India, that I have no Indian ancestry, I've never been to India, haven't any family or relatives who are in or of India, that I haven't any Indian nationality or ethnicity, don't know a word of Hindi, my family background is strictly Caucasian European, I think Indians are fine people but I'm not Indian as in the subcontinent.
BILL888, I AM NOT INDIAN. I DO NOT HAVE ANY (KNOWN) INDIAN NATIONALITY OR ETHNICITY. MY CITIZENSHIP IS NATURAL BORN CITIZEN OF THE USA, I HAVE A USA PASSPORT, MY NATIVE LANGUAGE IS ENGLISH, MY FAMILY BACKGROUND PATERNALLY AND MATERNALLY IS STRICTY EUROPEAN. MY FAMILY NAME IS EUROPEAN AND CANNOT POSSIBLY BE MISTAKEN AS BEING INDIAN AS IN INDIA THE COUNTRY.
"If your professor taught you to call P R C as "Jung Gwo" instead of China in English, then you should ask for your money back from the professor. Obviously he did not know too much about English, so he taught you the wrong thing."
I've said it before but here I need to say it once again, one last time:
BILL888, try to get it through your skull and into your brain that I am not from India, or of India, that I have no Indian ancestry, I've never been to India, haven't any family or relatives who are in or of India, that I haven't any Indian nationality or ethnicity, don't know a word of Hindi, my family background is strictly Caucasian European, I think Indians are fine people but I'm not Indian as in the subcontinent.
BILL888, I AM NOT INDIAN. I DO NOT HAVE ANY (KNOWN) INDIAN NATIONALITY OR ETHNICITY. MY CITIZENSHIP IS NATURAL BORN CITIZEN OF THE USA, I HAVE A USA PASSPORT, MY NATIVE LANGUAGE IS ENGLISH, MY FAMILY BACKGROUND PATERNALLY AND MATERNALLY IS STRICTY EUROPEAN. MY FAMILY NAME IS EUROPEAN AND CANNOT POSSIBLY BE MISTAKEN AS BEING INDIAN AS IN INDIA THE COUNTRY.
1.)
The name "Zhong Guo" or "Jung Gwo" is an abreviation of Chinese to represent China in full name "ZHONG Hua Ren Min Gong He GUO". And "Jung Gwo" is the transliteration from Chinese abreviated form. "Middle Kingdom" is the translation of the transliteration from the abreviation. "Central Country" is the extrapolation of the translation of the transliteration from the abreviation. The original "Zhong Hua" is referencing the Chinese cultures. The "Jung Gwo" you had refered to as "Central Country" among the world's countries for the Chinese is wrong. Whether you want to ger your money back is your own decision.
2.)
It is my apology to implyly assume you are from the Cultures of India. That is because you had mentioned India or events relating to India in almost every one of your comments in FP. Althought I did not explicitly say so, one may come to the same conclusion that I had implied it. I have not intended any insult on you for your defence of India.
I had just proved to you that crime can be committed by a democratic country. For example: the Opium War by British; the Iraq invasion by USA; the War in Vietnam; The Eight Nation League in looting of Beijing and the YuenMing Garden, etc. Just because there is a change of president or premier, crimes do not vanish as you think they will. Don't hide behind the democracy screen.
As I wrote earlier, Chinese are peace loving people who had built the "Great Wall" rather than many aircraft carriers. One thing these countries that committed crime should do is to admit their wrong doing, and to correct their wrong doing. However, if this crime or hegemonic stance continues, as a result, war may be the eventual outcome. Then the fault is not on the Chinese people but on the other country that has committed crime or being hegemonic in their actions.
Yes, you have written a great deal about how the supposedly peaceful China (under pretext) presents itself to be. You write this theme in English that varies from spastic to perfectly coherent. Your latest installment of this theme is again stated above, and I quote you:
*** "As I wrote earlier, Chinese are peace loving people who had built the "Great Wall" rather than many aircraft carriers. One thing these countries that committed crime should do is to admit their wrong doing, and to correct their wrong doing."
However, you then state in Gen Chi's most "poetic" warmongering tones, to wit:
*** "However, if this crime or hegemonic stance continues, as a result, war may be the eventual outcome. Then the fault is not on the Chinese people but on the other country that has committed crime or being hegemonic in their actions."
Do you refer to the Chinese initiating a war against the United States alone? Or do you also include Japan? (Of course you include Japan!) What about the West and the Eight Nation League you repeatedly reference and cite?
You also wrote above, and I quote:
*** "There are too many old scores to be settled. From the Opium War, the Eight Nation League which invaded China, the Japanese War to the forced boarding of the Galaxy Ship by the USA Navy, the bombing of Belgrade Chinese Embassy, most Chinese citizenship feel pain when so many of these "incidents" happened not too long ago."
To which you add:
*** Then very soon it [the PRC] may be responding to electors and then a lot of Chinese wish to settle those old scores."
The thing about "old scores" BILL888 is that they are old scores. "Settling old scores" offers nothing constructive or positive towards the future, but this is your agenda and the agenda of your like minded 5000 year old backward thinking, PRC/CCP vengeful Chinese.
As I wrote above in response to your "settle old scores" mentality and PRC/CCP syndrome:
*** "You [BILL888] have written previously at other FP threads to express this grudge mentality and of "settling old scores." It seems to me this mainland mentality and attitude of revenge and even a vengance is a prime motivator of the CCP in everything it does. The PRC/CCP has its super-Chinese who in their psychological and emotional delusions want their 5000 year old culture to 'resume' its rightful place as the Middle Kingdom of the world. The USA has its super patriots, however, I found the super-Chinese to be (far) more hard core about their place and history (and into the future) than any super patriot of the United States. The super patriot of the US hasn't the absolute and irreversibly rooted delusion of an only recently interrupted 5000 year old supremacy over the world that the super Chinese have.
(My quote from my above post continues:)
*** You [BILL888] need to explain the consistent and repeated statements in which you expose your grudge mentality and attitude, which I would add strongly implies a view toward revenge, if not vengance. This is a serious syndrome and you are not the only Chinese who suffers from it. in fact, the CCP teaches all that you say and more in the schools.
(End of my quoting of myself above in response to you, BILL888 as to your "settling of old scores" grudge and revenge - a vengance indeed - psyche and emotional composition.)
You continue to ignore my request that you discuss, indeed explain, your grudge and vengance mentality, state of mind and emotions towards the modern world which, to the point of view of the Jung Gwo, has only "disturbed" the 5000 years of China's delusional self perceived position as the Middle Kingdom of the world.
I have said to you many times that I haven't any family or any other personal contact with India, to include nationality or ancestry. So it's good to know that I finally got through your skull to you brain (as it is) effectively to make this point to you.
Indeed, I'd stated that my interest in India is predicated on the fact that India is a (remarkable) democracy and that as a native born citizen of the United States I am a democrat. Democracy and democrats are the shared basis of my advocacy of India vs the fascist dictatorship of the People's Republic of China.
Additionally, because the PRC/CCP teaches in its schools that India is an evil place - meaning with its 1 000 000 000 plus population India is a democracy - I cheerfully point out the obvious contradiction, i.e., the cynical assertions of the PRC/CCP to its sheeple population that, because China has 1 400 000 000 people it therefore cannot have democracy. Then there is also the racist reality that the Han don't like - to state it mildly - dark skinned peoples as are the peoples of India.
So, now finally at last, you reveal the long term plan and designs of the PRC/CCP when you state, as first clearly stated by Gen Chi with whom you agree, and as I quoted you above, but which absolutely deserves requoting:
*** "However, if this crime or hegemonic stance continues, as a result, war may be the eventual outcome. Then the fault is not on the Chinese people but on the other country that has committed crime or being hegemonic in their actions."
To which I continue to point out that the PRC/CCP has always had a plan to have a war against the United States (and Japan), a war which as Gen Chi has clearly and openly stated, would be the "midwife" of the "Chinese century."
You and your mad compatriots are 5000 years old in your psychology and emotional compositions. Your psyches and emotions make you 5000 year olds. As such, your are playing with the worst of fires.
All those pastings and repastings of what I had wrote, going through all you had want to say. I did not sense there is any significant argument to negate what I had said. However, you keep asking whether vengeance or revenge is in my mind. That is exactly the mind set of a hegemonic country: the victim or the oppressed need to explain whether vengeance or revenge are in their mind. If they don't explain or possibly even to repent such thought, then the victim must be evil and devious. That is exactly what hegemonic countries do: the oppressed needs to follow the instructions of the oppressors.
The 'arguments' of the Jung Gwo are so predictable.
As Vince Lombardi famously said (not originally of course), "The best defense is a good offense."
You do finally recognize and address my highlighting of your mentality of grudge and revenge, perhaps even vengance, and of your passion to "settle old scores," and your assertions that there are "too many old scores to settle" in respect to the world vs China - or, more accurately, China vs the World. That is, you're entirely 'them and us.'
200 years ago Western peoples considered the Chinese to be, in terms we now know to be offensive, "inscrutable." But that's only because global socialization and even the global economy were inherently limited, thus limiting contact and intercultural exchanges. Knowledge of the other was necessarily limited. However, in the contemporary world, China is much better known and understood. The same should be true in China via a vis the West, but it is not - this is true because the mind of the Jung Gwo continues to be fixed in the peasant traditions, ways, cultures of the remote tribal past.
It is therefore so predictable that your Jung Gwo 'argument' is to go on the offense, i.e., to accuse the West of being the oppressor and to try to portray the Jung Gwo as the oppressed victims. The fact is that as the world of the European Enlightenment developed and progressed, the Jung Gwo remained smug, self contented and self satisfied within themselves as the self isolated Middle Kingdom.
You refused to recognize that the world around you had changed radically, from the time of the Industrial Revolution especially.
So now here we are.
I say again:
The PRC/CCP political economy is corrupt and secretive through and through. China is an Old World country and society absent the rule of law and where dictators, elitism, nepotism, cronyism and corruption remain the norm and deeply entrenched. Consequently, the reactionary PRC/CCP offers nothing to the modern or future world.
Except the menacing syndrome of settling old scores.
1. You wrote "China is an Old World country and society absent the rule of law and where dictators, elitism, nepotism, cronyism and corruption remain the norm..." , so conversely, the USA must be an utopia which has the best rule of law and thus there are no crime, no cheating, no corruption and no drugs. Do you know when the USA will initiate to disband all its redundant police forces? Please let us know, I may want to take some pictures of a crimeless society with the best rule of law.
2. You wrote "However, in the contemporary world, China is much better known and understood." I did not sense that you know a lot about Chinese history, Chinese languages, Chinese geography, and China's development. Don't pretend you know a lot.
3. You wrote " Consequently, the reactionary PRC/CCP offers nothing to the modern or future world." I am going to let you in for a little secret what China can offer to the world. China can offer to the world a MULTI-POLAR WORLD SYSTEM and not the UNI-POLAR WORLD that the USA wants. About 10 years ago, Condolizza Rice wrote about this Unipolar world the Bush administration promoted, look where it gets the world into: one 9-11 event and two wars with no ending in sight.
4. You wrote "... refused to recognize that the world around you had changed radically, from the time of the Industrial Revolution especially." From this previous sentence, it shows you know very little about China. Did you know China had just opened up for last 30 years? As a result, there are developments in all areas. Where have you been?
5. You wrote "...in respect to the world vs China - or, more accurately, China vs the World. That is, you're entirely 'them and us...". You had invented the notion that China is against the world. I will tell you: China has very good relationship with Israel, Palestinian, Russia, Ukraine, Pakistan, Brazil, South Africa, Canada, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Greek, all the Central Asia countries, Liberia, Libya, France, Turkey etc. etc. How can it be "them or us"?
6. You wrote "...of grudge and revenge, perhaps even vengance, and of your passion to "settle old scores," and your assertions that there are "too many old scores to settle". I quote what I had wrote earlier "I said that old Chinese folks will go to war again for a penny. It means if they are being oppressed again, they will not hesitate to go to war with those countries. That has nothing to do with revenge.". The oppressor needs to recognized what they had do is wrong and apologize for it. However, it seems none of that has been done well if they had been done. Can you enlighten us: why the oppressed people need to explain whether vengeance is in their mind? Can you explain :why will Iraq, Palestinians, Libya shall not settle their old scores with USA?
7. I had read of many people and many books, such as Frank Sinatra, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Cicero, Che, Winston Churchill, Julius Caesar, Plato, Homer, Charles Dicken, Bram Stoker, Deng, Jiang, Einstein, Newton, Carl Sagan, Buddhism Sutras, the Bible, Mao, Lenin, Gorky, Karma Sutra, Fourier, Elliot Trudeau..etc...etc..
Mass sports and athletics are an integral part of the culture and society of the United States, so try to expand your Beijing restricted horizons to learn the fact, to acquire a fuller knowledge of the country you so dislike and against which you are keeping and tallying up the score.
Your post above is chaotic. You long ago ran out of self revealing things to say about the PRC/CCP, so why don't you give it up. There's an old rule that when you find yourself in a hole the first thing is to stop digging. Frankly I'm bored by this and by you.
Your Item #1 is an undisciplined slash through the thin air occupied by the anti-USA line of the CCP to its people. Item #2 is the tired old tactic of overstating what I said, then trying to mischaracterize me but we know the reality of that one. In Item #3 you make the absurd claim that a country led by dictators in a one party state could contribute to a multi polar world, or to a multi anything.
Your Item #4 is the killer haha. Talk about stating the obvious (a definite no-no in Western culture). Ninty-nine percent of readers of FP well know that 30 years ago Deng Xiao Peng opened the PRC to ECONOMIC development. But you caught me there, BILL888 because now I have to change my reckoning to say the Jung Gwo have been unrealistic for 4,970 years instead of the 5000. And, oh, yes - culturally the PRC remains as barren as does the CCP itself.
Then you press on to continue flapping away about your menacing syndrome of 'settling old scores.' Really, you need to give it up but you just can't get that, can you?
In Item #1 of your post above (4:38 am, November 7th) you self righteously demand. arbitrarily and summarily, that the United States dissolve its system of state and local police in favor of a national police force. This is exactly what the people of the US do not want and never have wanted, i.e., a centralized national enforcement authority.
The PRC/CCP has a national police force as do most countries of the world, but in the PRC there virtually is a cop on every corner watching everyone 24/7.
Why have the people of the United States never wanted a national police force? Look to the PRC where, as I state, there is a Beijing controlled cop on virtually every block 24/7.
Look to the disorder in Thailand where the endemically corrupt national police force supports the overthrow of the government, and to Ecuador (in South America) where the national police force recently tried violently to overthrow the democratically elected government.
A national police force is either a national enforcer of dictators and their dictatorship or is a crazy disruptive nationwide gang of criminals who are a direct and real threat to democratically elected governments.
You and your 4,970 year old (! haha !) traditions, customs, mores of the enforced control of the PRC sheeple from the central capital do have your national police force, but the people of the United States would never stand for a national police force. That's another cultural difference you fail to be aware of or are capable of recognizing. Your failure is directly the consequence of your growing up under the 24/7 lies and censorship of the PRC/CCP
The CCP who have been in control of the PRC are 24/7 liars, and you eat their lies
Your Item #1 above not only is garble, but it is the garbled CCP party line against the United States directly from Beijing. Again, your fail to know, recognize or respect differing cultural realities, multicultural values and international diversity - instead militating for global compliance to the PRC/CCP notions and systems of a dictatorial and hegemonic one dimensional one party state reality.
You and your PRC/CCP are the unreal ones, reactionary against the contemporary and modern world; and against the advance of any exceptionalism which stands in contrast to the past history of emperors, dictators and absolute rule by elites that Jung Gwo have only known.
So your limitations are well known and understood - and are dismissed as exactly that, i.e., severe limitation of intellect and culture. Your world is a censored world controlled from the center, Beijing, to the sole benefit of the CCP in Beijing.
1. Oh you quoted someone in sports. I have high regard for those learned scholars. Try quoting some of your relatives who are good standing citizens of the world and see if I can guess it right.
2. I was talking about police in general. Anyway, let me remind you: you do have a central police force that have certain centralized or inter-state functions. And it is called Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It is not whether you want one but you have one. I am sure you will deny it or say it has different functions.
3. So many facts or arguments you will deny by relying on the "line of the CCP". I told you I am not part of the CCP. It's really boring that you repeated in most of the comments.
4. I think you are pastings and repastings. It is absolutely boring. It is more boring to watch football with use of hands in USA.
Hands with the oppositive thumb distinctly separate the thinking higher animals (humans) from the lower animals in the jungle (or zoos) that have only paws or hoofs and which are incapable of thought, reasoning, reflection etc.
Sports that use the higher order oppositive thumb include basketball, American football, baseball, ice and field hockey, tennis, badminton, table tennis and others.
What, real men play soccer/world football and eat quiche haha?!?
The distinctly human oppositive thumb also enables writing.
By the way, you don't need to remind me about much of anything as it was predictable that you would bring up the FBI - entirely predictable - and that you would spout the well known stale doctrine about it. That's really all I need say about that.
Cricket, I overlooked mentioning cricket as a sport that utilizes the distinctly human oppositive thumb.
I wouldn't want to slight our old friends in Britain or our new friends and allies in India by omitting cricket from any listings. (Well, mention goes to Pakistan too.)
Congratulations to Pres Obama, Sec Clinton and the Washington foreign policy team to include at the UN for finally waking up India and bringing that long lumbering elephant into the world of nations which have shared values and priorities.
As with Socrates my life, tho less so, is still a reasonably self examined life, as was the case with Bertram Russell, a Nobel Literature Laureate (1971) and considerably before that a British Lord.
Russell long ago left England to live in China to compare and contrast his society, culture, civilization to that of the land known as the Jung Gwo (China), clearly an opposite society, culture, civilization.
What aspects of your society, culture and civilization can you critique and criticize? Constructively?
What are you allowed, permitted to criticise of your inbred, inborn, ingrown, long isolated and therefore long ignorant place of dictators and their historical, up to the present institutions, ways and means? What are you yourself intellectually and culturally capable of critiquing or criticizing of your own place, values, norms, mores, traditions?
Zilch, zero, oogats.
When was the last time you yourself considered hubris, or agreed to discuss hubris with anyone who has some/any knowledge of hubris?
Never!
When could you bring yourself to do so?
Never.
You and your kind of Jung Gwo are incapable.
Take a walk sometime with Russell, myself and others like us through history, to include your own. My hope against hope is that you could learn something other than the reactionary thousands year old culture of elites and dictators.
Give us at least three (3) self criticisms of contemporary China, i.e,. the PRC/CCP China. Nevermind your advocacy of your reactionary thousands year old predicate of dictatorship and rule by oligarchy and self serving autocracy. Do you have any perspective (as in the European Renaissance) towards your own place and people in relation to the world at large?
Give us three (3) of your strengths and three (3) of your weaknesses.
Show us some self examination, some self reflection, some self analysis.
Of course, constructive self criticism is predicated on the notion/reality that one and one's society, culture, civilization is not perfect.
Are you perfect or can you self critique and self criticize to improve yourselves first and foremost?
Longtime Washington Post correspondent Colum Lynch reports on all things United Nations for Turtle Bay.
Read More
(36)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE