Home > history, Opinion > The 74th Anniversary of Nanjing Massacre

The 74th Anniversary of Nanjing Massacre

December 13th, 2011 Leave a comment Go to comments

Today marks the 74th anniversary of the Nanjing Massacre, where Japanese soldiers went on a rampage of rape and murder, targeting women and children alike, killing more than 300,000 Chinese during the brief few weeks when they took over Nanjing, then capital city of the nationalist government. The issue that is perhaps the most contentious between Japan and China is Japanese history text books largely having this tragedy swept under the carpet; vastly toned down without admission of guilt or completely ignored altogether. The Japanese impasse with the rest of her Asian neighbors is similarly over prevailing Japanese unrepentant attitudes towards her colonial past. Germany’s attitude and actions towards their WW2 past offer a big contrast.

In the long run, I am confident Japan will reconcile with China and other Asian countries. The current climate in Japan and few decades of whitewashing history will certainly prolong the reconciliation.

To the Chinese government’s credit, she has largely put this difference aside in favor of normalization. I might add this is done so with some anger from many ordinary Chinese citizens given Japan’s attitude.

I think the Japanese strategy is to wait the issue out. They hope in the distant future, when the victims have long gone, the emotion would have subsided. The “cost” then in formally recognizing a more truthful history would be relatively “low.” Perhaps. Perhaps when the relationship between the two countries have become more normalized and friendly, differences will be easier to reconcile.

Until then, I think Japan’s international profile will remain limited. For example, Japan’s bid for a permanent seat in the Security Council will always be thwarted by her Asian neighbors.

Over the years in my travels to Japan, I have had chance to discuss this history with a number of friends there. One even cried as he recounted some of the stories his grandfather told him. The two atomic bombs and Japan’s defeat in WW2 were bitterness the Japanese also had to endure. Rape by American soldiers were a common occurrence during the early years of occupation.

This particular friend knew full well of the Nanjing Massacre too. After I told him my grandparents home was destroyed by Japanese bombers, he apologized profusely as he cried.

One of them lost her best friend from high school (who is Chinese) after they started discussing this past.

A large percentage of the Japanese population view their invasion of Asia was to keep the region for herself and to ‘protect’ it from Western colonialists. This was their propaganda during the invasion and still lingers today.

One thing we all unanimously agreed: war and invasions are bad. We all should be striving to prevent such adventures. Remember, Nanjing Massacre was just but one episode. Cities throughout China were terrorized by Japanese bombers, including my grandparents in Fujian Province in the south. Chinese deaths totaled 10-20 million where the majority were civilian. Japanese accounted for 3 million in WW2.

The Nanjing Massacre was a horrific past and there are still survivors alive today. As humans, we all could use some reminder what brutality we are capable of. Towards that end, I am looking forward to watching a new film by acclaimed director, Zhang Yimou, starring Christian Bale, called, “The Flowers of War” (“金陵十三钗”), where an ordinary American driven by conscience saves a group of Chinese girls from Japanese soldiers during the massacre.


(Youku version)
I often remind my friends in China – forgive does not mean forget. We have to find a way to stop the cycle of violence. We have to think very long term.  The young Japanese of today naturally want to remember their ancestors honorably.

This truth will eventually emerge more strongly in Japan, given time, as China grows stronger economically and the relationship between the two countries normalize.

  1. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 08:45 | #1

    Don’t you think that has to come from the Chinese women themselves?

    Only if you are some brainwashed, post-modern, metrosexual.

    Right throughout history wars have been fought over two things. Land and women.

    Women will go to whoever is the strongest. The strongest does not always have to be the one with the most money. If our culture is strong, the men are staunch and uncompromising, the women will stay. Just look at the Muslims. Do their women behave like sluts in front of white men, like so many of our women do? Of course not. The white man who touches a Muslim woman will find his head separated from his body very quickly, and the woman likely the same. Good for the Muslims.

    As for the various Chinese nationalities, they by and large are all East Mongoloid. So mixing in this respect is fine.

    And leaving aside the genetics of it, look at the numbers game: Do you think we should be encouraging our women to have sex with whites, when we get only 1 in exchange for about 20? Anyone who would agree to such a deal is a sell-out, a running dog, a hanjian.

  2. raffiaflower
    December 29th, 2011 at 10:14 | #2

    `The average Westerner when seeing a Chinese, thinks just ‘Asian’, not China or Japan. ”

    I think those words from Rambo Wayne sort of explains Allen’s lament about Chinese victims in WW2 not held @ par with European/Jewish body count. In the average Westerner’s mind, WW2 is embedded largely as a fratricidal war to save Western civilization and values. Its enemies were ideological (Nazism/fascism) and cultural ( an upstart `honorary’ white eventually nuked into submission and held in Stockholm Syndrome to its captors ever since.)
    The Japanese invasion of China was regarded mainly as a regional conflict; the war went `worldwide’ only after Japan had the temerity to hit out @ the white man @ Pearl Harbour and their empires in Southeast Asia.
    So who cares for Chinese lives? Especially now since Japan has been rehabilitated as a full
    Western ally (gee, even the murderous Hirohito is cuddly and wears a Mickey watch!!), and the Nanjing Massacre has propaganda value – but only for the commies, not the West.
    No match there, then, for that damn Holocaust, apotheosized as the triumph of the progressive West over its own dark side – and useful for Israeli apologists (such as that you-know-who) to silence any criticism against the genocide of Palestinians by Jews.

    Lest we forget: It was China’s resistance that pinned down Imperial Japan’s forces and helped to keep them off Russia’s eastern flank and British India. Without the German failure on the Russian front, it’s arguable, the British might not have held against Hitler’s onslaught.
    How could the West today admit though, that the `peace’ and `democracy’ they so proudly claim as their post-war enlightenment, and exemplar for the whole world, may have been partially won by the sacrifice of millions of worthless/faceless Chinese? Zhang Yimou is really restrained with a line such as “We’ve got virgins up here!’ Only brain-dead Western hacks could claim that’s propagandistic.

    As the Chinese judge Mei @ the Tokyo tribunal noted, China fought the longest – more than 50 years – and suffered the most, from Japanese aggression, while the British turned tail @ every step of the Japanese advance.
    Yet the Anglo-American mafia attempted to relegate China to third seating position at the trials, which Mei resisted. Some of the things that Wayne says are unpleasant and extreme, but there is certainly a case for China, and Chinese people, not to abase themselves before bullies.

  3. December 29th, 2011 at 10:42 | #3

    @Wayne
    I agree in principle on your point about not wanting predatory and imperialistic men with bad intention from marrying women from a marginalized society. However, is there an easy solution to this? Basically, I don’t think anger will solve any problem.

    If you think women from Muslim background or other countries don’t “marry up”, you are not paying attention. Stories abound in the west of Muslim girls wanting to leave their religion being violently treated by their family. I don’t think this a solution.

  4. slim
    December 29th, 2011 at 14:09 | #4

    I’ve seen Wayne’s reasoning before, in the racism at the core of North Korean state ideology that has led to infanticide of Chinese-Korean mixed race babies, but also among immigrant teenagers with no prom dates and no prospects. Usually guys who use the expression “our women” end up with “no women” and we read about them in the paper when they throw acid on some poor woman’s face. I hope it doesn’t come to that for Wayne.

    My question is how would China enforce this romantic apartheid? Laws? Village busybodies? Plainclothed thugs?

  5. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:23 | #5

    Obviously Slim is a white loser who could never get a white woman.

    Your comment on acid throwing is simply racist scaremongering. I have read that it occurs in some rural parts of Pakistan. But among immigrant Chinese in the West? NEVER. A typical white racist motherfucker who makes things up to smear the Chinese people.

    And where have I ever said such a thing should be done?

    You are making it up in your own diseased mind. Perhaps that is what you want to do the white woman, your own kind, who have always rejected you.

    As for how things could be enforced, all we need is to change some of the content of the mass media, films, TV, as well as making it more well-known in East Asia the types of white men who prey on East Asian women are actually losers from their own society. Simply doing these two things would improve the situation immensely – without the need for legislative coercion.

  6. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:27 | #6

    Let’s speak plainly here:

    Is it racism if an Asian guy dates/marries a White woman? NO.

    Why is it such a big deal for some people that a Asian girl dates/marries a White guy?

    Come on, Wayne, Sexual Equality, at least in moral standards.

    Just because you might not have as good as chances as the Asian girls at interracial relationships, Don’t whine about it.

    What is with all this “our women” talk??! You don’t OWN those women!!

  7. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:28 | #7

    @Wayne

    Calm down, and watch your language!

  8. December 29th, 2011 at 16:31 | #8

    Wayne, you make many good points. But on the point of Chinese women and dating and marrying, I think you are being bogged down too much by ideology.

    Most importantly, is there any risk that the vitality of the Chinese people (however you want to define) is becoming endangered by whites dating and marrying Asians? I don’t hear stories that somehow the demographics of China is changing because white males are invading and dating and marrying Chinese women. I don’t see statistics of smarter, more beautiful women marrying whites. There are really no global problems – at least not measurable ones.

    You worry about half Chinese born of white fathers being white washed – I say, if (when) China become strong, they will easily come back to root. You need not worry. They will seek out China when China reoccupy the epitome of world civilization…

    To the extent that a population of Chinese women is / want to be involved with Caucasian males, I therefore say, let them. Even if Asian women marry whites because of messed up social norms, I just don’t see Asian women categorically getting into worse relationships per se (relative to white women), or becoming somehow sort of indentured servants (relative to white women). Even if Asian women become white washed, let them pursue their dream of being white washed. Such women probably wouldn’t have led a good life in China anyways and would probably have been more a burden than anything else to society.

    The ills you pointed out are real. But the key to solving the ills is not to treat the symptoms (messed up social norms), but to rebuild Chinese civilization. That takes true pride. Everything else is just details… Dust that will settle in the wind…

    We live in special times. However much injustice we feel there are in the world, imagine what the generation of Chinese in the early 20th century or late 19th century had to deal with. At least for us, we can witness or if we are really lucky, help to revitalize, Chinese civilization.

  9. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:31 | #9

    Why is it such a big deal for some people that a Asian girl dates/marries a White guy?

    Really, this in itself is not the problem. The problem is the interracial disparity which is huge.

    And as long as this continues, there can never be any sort of national pride or dignity.

    As long as the biggest loser of a white man can step off the boat in China, and get more womem than the average Chinese man, there is no really little national dignity we can speak of.

    The race which loses its women to the men of another race is a conquered race.

  10. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:35 | #10

    I don’t see statistics of smarter, more beautiful women marrying whites.

    Really. If you see any reasonably successful Chinese woman, of any sort of fame, a celebrity, a movie star, then there is about an 80% chance of her fucking a white man.

    Look at our celebrities, our film stars, the list with whites is staggering. And because these famous Chinese women are doing it, what social prohibitions remain to deter all Chinese women from doing it if given half the chance?

    Really we need to adopt some of the attitude of the Muslims, and not be sucked in by this post-modern, everyone does as they want shit, even if to the detriment of national pride.

    The fact is this. Women are a resource. Just like land.

    Even if Asian women marry whites because of messed up social norms, I don’t see that Asian women are somehow getting into bad relationships per se, or becoming somehow sort of indentured servants.

    Really I don’t care how these white men treat these asian sell outs. The welfare of women with white men, the welfare of their children is the last thing on my mind. They are lost causes. We need to act before they sell out.

    And do you know what? One of the reasons why Asians get so much racism from whites, are despised by whites, is precisely because they can get our women so easily. They simply laugh at us and do not consider us to be their competitors in this field. Just google it. There are tons of sites where whites simply laugh at why asian women prefer white guys over asian guys.

    I guarantee if we start to get stronger about this, firmer about this problem, then we will get a lot more respect wherever in the world we go.

  11. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:42 | #11

    @Wayne

    I acknowledge the “disparity”, but I don’t believe an “Affirmative Action” on interracial relationship is a workable solution.

    “disparity” in relationship across many factors. Across races, it’s NOT 1 race’s fault!

    “The race which loses its women to the men of another race is a conquered race.”

    Let’s not get over dramatic. China is not some tiny island like Hawaii, and there is no “rush” of White guys trying to hoard Chinese women.

    You are just being paranoid and rehashing a lot of old racial stereotypes.

  12. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:43 | #12

    @Wayne

    “The fact is this. Women are a resource. Just like land.”

    That’s just sexist over the top generalization. Men are “resources” too. If you can’t utilize your own “resources”, that’s not anyone else’s fault.

  13. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:51 | #13

    but I don’t believe an “Affirmative Action” on interracial relationship is a workable solution.

    I did not suggest ‘affirmative action’.

    In fact it is whites who get ‘affirmative action’ now because all the movies, all the mass media, including now it seems Chinese film makers go and actively promote this type of relationship to white men and Chinese women.

    I am not asking for ‘affirmative action’. I am simply asking that we stop providing ‘affirmative action’ for white men when it comes to our women.

  14. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:58 | #14

    @Wayne

    “I am not asking for ‘affirmative action’. I am simply asking that we stop providing ‘affirmative action’ for white men when it comes to our women.”

    That’s reverse affirmative action, but still affirmative action, because you are trying to limit 1 type of relationship in FAVOR of another, based upon some numerical “parity” that you want to achieve.

    Numerical “parity” on race lines, is EXACTLY “affirmative action”, actually the worst kind.

  15. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 16:59 | #15

    “I am not asking for ‘affirmative action’. I am simply asking that we stop providing ‘affirmative action’ for white men when it comes to our women.”

    Who’s “providing” affirmative action for white men??

    Geez, you make it sound like Asian girls are going for White guys because they feel sorry for them, or something.

  16. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 17:03 | #16

    Reventhorn: I am not talking of quotas here. I am talking of the way the mass media promotes the white man as some sort of heroic figure saving the asian woman.

    I am talking of the mass media, which always shows a white man with an Asian woman, but rarely a white woman with an Asian man. Either not promote these types of relationships at all (the best solution), or if they are portrayed, portray them in a balanced fashion.

  17. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 17:14 | #17

    @Wayne

    Then your problem is not with “our women” selling out, ONLY the “media” selling out, in NOT portraying enough of AM/WF relationship.

    “portraying” interracial relationship is NOT “promotion” of it, any more than portraying white people living in China as “promoting” white migration into China.

    It seems like the root of your problem is, you don’t believe you are being “promoted” enough by the media.

    Well, that you have to lobby the media companies and Zhang, and say, “why aren’t your promoting me”?

    I don’t believe you can “promote” yourself using that kind of hard way.

    Next thing I know, the ugly people will want more realistic “promotion” in movies. NOT going to happen!

    (Sorry, ugly people, that’s fact of life. and I count myself as one of the uglies, because I’m not going to be any movies in any country).

  18. December 29th, 2011 at 17:17 | #18

    Guys, I kow a lot of you don’t like me, and I certainly have major disagreements with many of you. But I also know you are sincere and expressing your true opinions. I think Raventhorn is a little too hostile and pugster a little too trollish, but I want to say I am impressed by both of them in this thread for questioning Wayne.

    Here’s what I want to say, and again, even if you don’t like me I think you know I am not a BSer:

    Wayne is a very dangerous guy and a quintessential troll. Note how he has completely taken over this thread with incredibly aggressive and even violent, radical nationalism. He comments on other sites under the name Mongol Warrior and Mark Lau. When people disagree with him — or rather, when white people disagree with him — he sends them shockingly vicious hate mail. The more you interact with him the more it encourages him, and he is simply here to make trouble. Below is a copy of an actual email he sent me after he learned I was a Jew:

    From: Mark Lau
    Fucking hook nose….fucking oven dodger – you and your fucking family –you need to be skewered on the end of someones bayonet —you fucking flea ridden greasy hook nose!!!!! Fucking juden lice…..go get a delousing!!!!!! hahahahahahahhahaa

    This is who you are dealing with. I actually have to congratulate pugster for calling him on his nonsense. But it’s not nonsense, it’s invective and it’s deranged. His pattern is always the same — he starts by being friendly and reasonable, and then he gets scarier and scarier. Please beware: you are being made fools of by a very disturbed man.

    yinyang, are you reading this? You are a smart and reasonable guy. Do you not see that there is something wrong with Wayne’s contribution to this thread? I say that, believe it or not, as a friend. Thank you for listening.

    Richard

  19. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 17:31 | #19

    Richard. I don’t know who the hell you are talking of. But it certainly is not me.

    Instead of just trying to close off the debate because it is going in a direction you do not like (you can do that on your own website), why not join the debate and tell me, and others, where we are wrong.

    Or does that scare you? Perhaps you know in advance you will lose any sort of polite and fair debate?

    Otherwise I suggest you leave this site….as a ‘friend’.

  20. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 17:36 | #20

    “portraying” interracial relationship is NOT “promotion” of it, any more than portraying white people living in China as “promoting” white migration into China

    raventhorn: Of course it is ‘promoting’ it. Just like the Western media promotes an unbalanced and unfair view of China. Some of what the Western media says about China is based on facts. But tthe problem is these ‘facts’ are not balanced out by other ‘facts’ to give a fair picture of China.

    Hollywood likes to portray white men fucking non-white women, but not non-white men fucking white women. Because they want to ‘create’ a reality that suits themselves, where the white race takes the resources of non-whites.

  21. raventhorn
    December 29th, 2011 at 17:55 | #21

    @Wayne

    No sane people would believe “movies” are “FACTS”, at least not the whole fact.

    “Because they want to ‘create’ a reality that suits themselves, where the white race takes the resources of non-whites.”

    That’s their problem. It’s called they are living in their dream world.

    And you know what, for every loser White guy who packs up to go to China and spends all his money looking for a Chinese girl, MOST are just going to end up wasting their time and money.

    I know plenty of Chinese girls who play loser expats for their money.

    If some loser expat is stupid enough to believe in the fiction, let him. I frankly don’t feel the need to burst his bubbles. (Such stupid people will convince themselves of many delusions, and won’t listen to anyone).

    (Frankly, from what I have seen of the kind of expats that have roamed through HH, I say their chances are good that they will get a “greencard” Chinese wife, who will drop them the divorce papers the minute they land in US).

    *Let’s also say that the Expats are more worried about their own reputation and image, as losers, who can’t find mates back home.

  22. zack
    December 29th, 2011 at 19:03 | #22

    @raventhorn
    the saddest thing is, a LOT of ppl acquire their information about other ppls and cultures from stereotypes which popular media and the internet have amplified a thousandfold.
    about white ppl moving to China to exploit the Chinese Dream, apprently China’s cutting down on foreign expats which i reckon would be awesome for those many, many expats who come to China, take everything their Chinese hosts offer them, and then have the fucking audacity to bitch about the country. Yeah, i know the type well; expats who stuck together in the same groups whenever they went out clubbing, not wishing to intermingle with the dirty dirty natives (despite the fact that most of them might’ve been there on assignment or learn mandarin). So with that in mind, i toast the Chinese Communist Party for having the right frame of mind and perception.

    oh and also, it aint like these expats dont get nothing; they’re covered in terms of healthcare and insurance (courtesy of the state in some cases) so it’s logical to tax the living crap out of them. China’s not America were the 1% are exempt from paying taxes; i should think that they ought to be taxed and heavily, by the gods!

  23. December 29th, 2011 at 22:18 | #23

    @richard #168

    I wouldn’t say we dislike you (how can we, we haven’t even sit down for coffee yet). I would probably say most here probably would not like what you write and how you run your blog (censoring comments with bias and opacity and the like).

    In any case, since we are on the topic of “dangerous writing” (you think Wayne’s writing is dangerous, I gather), I want to push back and ask you to consider your own writing.

    At the very worst, Wayne’s writing is deranged, and impact at most one or two people. But your writing, if taken at face value, foments general hate and misunderstanding – the kind that can lead to war, that result in hundreds of thousands if not millions of suffering humans.

    Now, I would like to say that I do not condone what you present as Wayne’s email. If he writes with that kind of language openly here, I’d edit his comments, warn him, and maybe even kick him out. But I don’t consider him “dangerous”: for example, as you can see from the comments here, rather than igniting a race-based firestorm (of the type you see on Tibetan sites), you see that most commenters disagree with him on what I consider to be a rather orthodox take on racial marriage. Some has even made fun of him in jest (see e.g. this comment).

    In any case, if you really care for hateful writing, please reconsider what you write daily. We all write with a personal motive. We all want to be heard. But beyond that, we eventually need to ask, what is the purpose of our writing. Is it to promote human understanding or hate?

    You need not answer here. It’s ultimately your own call.

    Best,

    Allen

  24. Wayne
    December 29th, 2011 at 23:13 | #24

    Yeah, i know the type well; expats who stuck together in the same groups whenever they went out clubbing, not wishing to intermingle with the dirty dirty natives

    Oh,,,,, don’t you worry they do more than their fair share of intermingling, ….but they don’t have chinese ‘buddies’ or ‘mates’. I get a laugh when I talk to expats in the office here in HK, and they always tell me how many chinese ‘friends’ they have. You know what….they are invariably all female…..hhahahahahahaha.

    Once my cousin (female, westernised) took me around to visit some expat friends of hers (american). The Americans were all whites (male –pink as lab rats), and there were a couple of other chinese females there. Man did they not really want me around, were simply not interested in making small talk, but were only after the chinese sluts (of which my cousin is unfortunately sailing close to that condemnation). hee haaing and giggling and chortling like a flock of turkeys and hens. Incidents like these made me start to see more and more clearly the way whites view Chinese, and by extension the way the West views China.

  25. raventhorn
    December 30th, 2011 at 05:21 | #25

    King Tubby :The Armenians feel particularly aggrieved here, as they have not been mentioned or wiki linked.

    I feel for the Armenians. (I have a few Armenian friends).

    I suggest you go to Turkey (a NATO member) and protest their censorship of Armenian genocide. And I’ll cheer you on when they put you in their jail and later deport you.

  26. raventhorn
    December 30th, 2011 at 05:31 | #26

    @Wayne

    See, we have nothing to worry about.

    If they want to live in their fantasies, but end up with “sluts”, that’s their problem.

    As far as I’m concern, they can waste their money and take all the STD’s they deserve.

    (On that note, I certainly have no desire to make up a “promotion” fantasy for Asian males, so that we can also enjoy a similar make believe world of movies). I’m perfectly happy with my ordinary life.

    *As I said before, Expats who fall for the Hollywood stereotypical fantasies, are really quite stupid. Smart Chinese girls with good morals would not fall for such losers.

    The ones who prostitute themselves to such loser expats? Well, I don’t consider them much of a “loss” for Chinese people.

    Besides, it’s the modern era. Such loser couples often end up in divorce court, because both parties are delusional.

    Bottomline: Good marriages/relationships cannot be based on a movie stereotype.

  27. King Tubby
    December 30th, 2011 at 15:41 | #27

    @raventhorn
    That was an ironical comment directed at the main type of argument utilised on this site, and it also anticipated your reply

  28. pug_ster
    December 30th, 2011 at 17:12 | #28

    @richard

    Richard,

    I find your comment ironic. There’s plenty “Wayne” like trolls in your website like that Loser Slim and King Tubby, yet you allow people like them to comment in your hate site.

    Second, you chose to set up a blog site, have your name public, and make your controversial statements by making your “hate CCP” fill rants, you are going to have these anonymous hate emails. If you can’t stand hate emails, maybe blogging is not the way for you.

  29. raventhorn
    December 30th, 2011 at 18:17 | #29

    @King Tubby

    I guess you don’t understand irony when re-directed back to you? Not surprised.

  30. December 30th, 2011 at 19:33 | #30

    @pug_ster and Rhan
    The previous few comments were done by a troll. I’ve deleted his comments and your response to him. Also banned his IP.

  31. raventhorn
    December 30th, 2011 at 19:54 | #31

    Hey, it’s the Holiday Trolls.

    I guess it’s snowing spam and BS.

    Have fun with the spam filter, boys!

  32. December 31st, 2011 at 17:55 | #32

    Looks like Wayne’s comments about Chinese women and White men inter-racial marriages in this and some other threads were quite a stir.

    To me, what he is observing, as others have characterized is mostly about “marrying up.”

    It’s primal too, much like a lion’s pride. When a bigger and stronger lion comes along, he gets all the girl lions.

    If we fast-forward to some number of generations and China becomes the new super power, who is it to say that White women won’t flock to Chinese men? Obviously I am talking more about economic power, because during the height of Soviet Union, I don’t recall too many women hunting for Soviet men. Replace China with any other nation, that’d be true.

    The “affirmative action” that Wayne speaks of that White men enjoy is very true. This is also because they have the wallets to allow so many movies to cater to their tastes (primal ones I might add). The equalizer is in the economics. When the Chinese men have big wallets, that will level the playing field.

    BUT, this view of races fighting for each others women is a bit wrong-headed in my opinion. I hope we have become better than the lions.

    The Nazis tried to create a pure Aryan race. So the White supremacists would probably criticize these men marrying non-White women as sell-outs.

    In my view, if we look at millenniums ahead, I would hope that all humans mingle. That is the true testament to tolerance and acceptance.

  33. January 1st, 2012 at 14:04 | #33

    I’m also deeply concerned with the level at which Zhang’s films have sunk. He was once perhaps the greatest director in the world and now all he makes it garbage for a pop (western?) audience. This started with his kung fu movies which were still moderately good but not great. He has a great talent for story telling but what is up with him in the last 10 years?

    Anyway, China has just as talented 6th generation directors that are not willing to sell out.

    I also share many of the concerns of Wayne. There is a evil effort to try and denigrate AMs especially in Hollypeckerwood. This goes far beyond the general denigration of Asians in that set of institutions that has been going on for 100 years. It is one of the most virulent and despicable attempts to dehumanize and vitiate a population in the history of Hollywood which says a lot since Hollypeckerwood is one of the most racist institutions in the history of mankind. I don’t think people in general both in the west and in China realize how effective Hollypeckerwood propaganda is in inculcating people’s beliefs and values.

  34. zack
    January 1st, 2012 at 23:40 | #34

    look at it this way, gents; by the end of this decade another 400 million Chinese will have joined the middle class (going by the 5 yr plan which Beijing rarely misses); so you’ll have a consumer class of a near billion in total by 2020 and i assure you, THAT’LL make an impression on greedy hollywood execs. With a market that size and with that sort of buying power, the Chinese film industry could easily own hollywood; it also means hollywood actors who decide to take on the ‘Free Tibet’ cause will have to go into early retirement, or face the humiliation of not getting work.

  35. Wayne
    January 2nd, 2012 at 02:24 | #35

    “so you’ll have a consumer class of a near billion in total by 2020 and i assure you, THAT’LL make an impression on greedy hollywood execs.”

    That will be an incredible achievement. We should remember that in 1949, after a century of imperialism, China was perhaps the poorest place in the world, poorer than India per capita, poorer than Ethiopia, with a primitive industrial base smaller than Belgium’s.

    Yet in the first 30 years of the revolution, life expectancy was almost doubled to 67 years (higher than India today), http://tinyurl.com/7h3omxf, literacy went up to close to 80% (higher than Indias 60% today), and this laid the basis for Deng to work his reforms upon.

    A group of Harvard researchers have made a compelling case that the reason for China economically outperforming India over the past three decades relates to the health achievements of Maoist China.

    “After 1949, China’s Maoist government invested heavily in basic health care, creating communal village and township clinics for its huge rural population. That system produced enormous improvements in health: From 1952 to 1982, infant mortality in China dropped from 200 to 34 deaths per 1,000 live births. Life expectancy rose from 35 years to 68.”
    http://tinyurl.com/2fj2r4z

    So in retrospect China seems to have done a lot right. The first thirty years improved the single two things that all extremely poor countries need to improve upon, life expectancy (health), and literacy. And the second thirty years concentrating on economic growth and gdp to provide the consumer goods and lifestyle of a modern society.

    Never have so many people been raised out of poverty, their well-being improved, in such a short period of time, than has happened in the past 60 years of the Peoples Republic of China. China’s system has clearly outperformed all other comparable developing nations, in fact almost all other developing nations in terms of saving lives, increasing literacy, and increasing the wealth of hundreds of millions of people. Of course while there is still a long way to go to catch up with the advanced Western countries, it is safe to say that China’s system is perhaps the most successful and efficient the world has ever seen in uplifting the living standards of a formerly extremely poor country.

    Another important point to note is this. China pulled herself up by her own efforts, not by invading and exploiting and using and abusing the human and material resouces of other countries, like the US, Britain and other Western European countries. These achievements were made in the teeth of a extremely hostile international environment (China was the first nation in the world to defeat US imperialism), with China bravely maintaining her independence from of course not only the US, but the Soviet Union.

    Of course while a lot of this information can be easily verified by academics, even the statistics of the CIA, the World Bank etc, it is not readily known to the general public of Western nations. All they see are bad things that one would find in any developing country, including the US itself right up until the late 1950s (afterall how many people died building the Hoover dam?). In a country of 1.3 billion, one can always find horror stories, stories of official malfeasance, and injustice, and then paint the blackest picture of that country.

    This demonstrates the extraordinary power of the mass media. China is seen as a despotic hellhole, while India a responsible, trustworthy rising ‘democracy’. The West would like China to take India’s road. Because China is a steadfastly independent country under the leadership of a communist party. China is harder for the West to handle and control, because she still, at least officially hews to Marxism Leninism.

    But India’s ‘democracy’ in terms of all the important criteria, life expectancy, infant mortality, per capita GDP, literacy, lags far behind China. Even though both countries began on a similar footing in the late 1940s.

    Noam Chomsky has pointed out that, India’s system, relative to China’s has killed probably well over 100 million people. And we can see what happened in the former Soviet Union after the collapse of socialism there. Excess deaths that far exceed on a proportional basis even what is claimed for the Great Leap Forward.

    The West does not have good intentions towards China. They do not want the Chinese people to be really free. Because if you can’t read or write, can’t eat, live in a povertous shithole, being able to put an ‘x’ in a box once every four years means absolutely nothing. By building up a huge, well-educated middle class, China is laying the groundwork for further democratisation in the future at a sensible pace.

    Without a large middle class, one man one votes means exactly shit.

    The type of Asian the West is comfortable with is someone like the Dalai Lama. A harmless figure, at least to the West, a blubbering, subservient Asian, who is no threat to them, is no threat when it comes to fucking their women, and will allow narcissistic Westerners to act out their ‘save the world’ fantasies. Of course whites love superstitious, ‘spiritual’ Asians like him. The cultural mindset of people like the Dalai Lama will never have the gumption to throw off imperialist oppressors and build atomic weapons to defend themselves against the white invaders. That is why the West loves these subservient lackey sell-out asians.

    Because the Western media is so powerful, what does China have to be extremely careful about. Of course it is to control the access of the brainwashing potential of this Western media. Western historians write trash history, slandering the Chinese revolution, slandering our leaders, saying the revolution was a disaster. Because their media is so powerful they are a real danger. Because if the Chinese people started believing what is said of them by Westerners, we could end up with a situation where they chuck out all the progress to date, embrace what Western capitalism imperialism desires of them, and in a few years or so, China will be a powerless, poverty stricken shithole that is the playground of rich Westerners (even more than she is now). It will be back to 1930s Shanghai when whites chained coolies to rickshaws to play a form of polo, the horses being Chinese coolies.

    China has to be on guard against Western subversion at all times, and must not be afraid to go a bit too far at times.

  36. January 2nd, 2012 at 04:21 | #36

    It’s too bad this thread has been so blatantly hijacked…

    Regarding all the hot air and hysterical claims here about “The Flowers of War”, who’s actually seen the film? This thread has a whole lot of baseless assumptions about what the film contains or signifies. It would clear the air to get some authentic criticism.

    I thought it was very good. Whatever the controversies, the Chinese movie-going public seems to be agreeing; it’s rated 8.1 (out of 10) on the film consumer review aggregator at Mtime.com. As of around Xmas it’s already grossed more than twice the total BO of the last big film about the Nanjing Massacre, “City of Life and Death” [《南京!南京!》]

    I’m trying to write up a review for my blog; I feel some concrete, informed criticism of the film is urgently needed for the world audience in light of a lot of negative hype and prejudice the movie is confronted with.

  37. raventhorn
    January 3rd, 2012 at 05:50 | #37

    @Sweet & Sour Socialism

    I saw the movie. Not personally impressed by it, but I can see why some might find it interesting. (I’m more personally impressed by original eye-witness accounts of the events, not by some dramatizations).

    Personally, I believe, historical events of significance do not need the embellishment of drama. In a word, it does feel like cheapening of the events, not celebration of them.

  38. January 3rd, 2012 at 21:31 | #38

    @Sweet & Sour Socialism

    Hi Sweet and Sour Socialism: when you get to writing the reviews, please let us know. With your permission, we may want to cross post it here.

    @raventhorn

    Personally, I believe, historical events of significance do not need the embellishment of drama.

    Ahh … a perfectionist. But how much of the public consciousness of the Titanic do you think derive from books and documentaries and how much from that blockbuster movie?

    Movies are an important of the human story telling process in the modern society – for better or worse.

    I myself haven’t watched this latest movie but plan to…

  39. Naqshbandiyya
    January 3rd, 2012 at 22:00 | #39

    @Wayne
    Speaking of the devil (the Dalai Lama), I was watching two videos of speeches given by Rebiya Kadeer, the department store oligarch-turned Xinjiang independence activist. Unlike with the Dalai Lama, whose boring Buddhist Shangri-la cachet is bigger than his political audience, you can be sure that the audiences receiving Rebiya Kadeer are firmly anti-China, and that they import her solely to bring an ethnic anti-China message. To my surprise, along with the usual dubious history, falsified statistics and accusations of genocide that we have come to expect from ethnic China-bashers, Rebiya seemed to put something with ethno-sexual undertones in her speeches. The Chinese government has a policy, she said, of taking young Uyghur girls from their Xinjiang homes to work in eastern China as “slave labor”. Labor didn’t seem to be the issue to her, though: what she repeatedly emphasized was that the girls were “beautiful”, aged 14 to 21, and “unmarried”.

    It’s pretty clear what she was insinuating, at least to her U.S. audiences soaked in a history of paranoia about white women and black men. Modest Muslim maidens from sacred East Turkestan are being shipped away on fuckbuses to the land of the yellow infidels! The girls’ guttural dialect only lubricates their Turkic throats for the Han phalluses of wealth and power. Where Uyghurs stick Hans with hypodermic needles, the Han stick the Uyghur girls somewhere else. The drawing of the Uyghurs’ hymen blood avenges the spilling of the Hans’ blood in the Ürümqi riots. But what of the Han men who would rather not partake in this inter-minzu orgy of Kadeer’s imagination, knowing full well the Uyghurs’ disproportionately high rates of HIV/AIDS?

    Again revealing again her patriarchal race-nationalism, Kadeer denies in the video what everyone knows – that these infections come from Uyghur drug use – instead attributing the disease to “Chinese” prostitutes for her men to use. (Uyghur and Tibet exiles agree: the oldest profession in the world did not exist in their regions until the Chinese Communist Occupation™, and even this new prostitution could never involve Our Women®!) It’s hard to say to what extent Kadeer’s sexual race-baiting moves the audience, but it hasn’t alienated them enough that she has stopped doing it. Perhaps it works because Westerners are fascinated with the idea, heavily promoted by Uyghur separatists, that Uyghurs are somewhat genetically “Caucasian”. They might not be Aryan enough for your taste, Wayne, but some “affirmative action” to portray Han kebabs in Uyghur naans by the Chinese government could kill two birds with one stone.

  40. raventhorn
    January 4th, 2012 at 06:57 | #40

    @Allen

    I personally thought Titanic was a terrible drama. I like the older black/white movie of Titanic a little better, because it was done through multiple person’s point of view, and thus you get a much bigger picture of the events. (The older movie had stories from so many different people, including the Chief Designer of Titanic, the Musicians, the Upper class passengers, the Lower class passengers, the pick pockets, the ship Captains of Titanic, the nearby rescue ships, some couple who got separated from their child, some old couple who found the child, etc. It really gave you a sense of the chaos of the sinking, and the sadness of human tragedy and pride, and the bravery and the humanity of people in distress).

    The new Titanic movie was just too much of the love story from a core small group of people’s point of view.

    Now, I’m not really a perfectionist. But I do prefer a “big picture” view of history. That’s because I think it’s much closer to the broader reflection of historical significance, and less likely to cause any personal biases from narrow set of views.

    Imagine if you will, if the DL got to make his own movie from his own personal view, or a Nazi German soldier got to narrate his view of events in Tibet, (OH wait, Hollywood did both those already).

  41. raventhorn
    January 4th, 2012 at 07:26 | #41

    @Naqshbandiyya

    I wouldn’t call these “race baiting”, but rather the long standing tradition in these “independence” groups of maintaining their “ethnic identity”/”ethnic supremacy”.

    Just look at the TGIE’s recent “election”, it was filled “attacks” questioning the “Tibetan-ness” of Sangay Lobsang, with rumors and innuandos of his “Chinese girlfriend” and his “Nepalese wife”.

    The entire term/issue of “Cultural Genocide” is centered around a dubious claim to some kind of Ethnic identity that is being threatened by “dilution”.

    That is simply Racism and Segregationism. (Racial Segregation in US was partially rationalized based on the same idea to “Keep the races apart” to prevent dilution).

    *
    Now, Gary Locke, now US Embassedor to China, when he was Governor of Washington State, he was attacked for his Chinese “identity”, even though his family has been in US for generations. He was even getting death threats.

    (HH members regularly get SPAM comments questioning their ethnic ties and identity).

    The Pattern of such racism vary, but are essentially the same.

    It’s never really about “Culture”, it’s not about “preserving” anything, because it is fundamentally a paranoia about losing some mystical ideals of “purity”.

    A Tibetan candidate in TGIE with a “Nepalese wife” is somehow “unpure”, instead of being embraced by TGIE.
    A Chinese American Governor is somehow “unpure”.

  42. jxie
    January 4th, 2012 at 11:44 | #42

    Back in 2009, Alessandro translated Kadeer’s interview with an Italian magazine “La Stampa” at Fool’s Mountain:

    While [Kadeer] speaks [to the reporter], she reaches out her thin fingers, jiggles her traditional long graying braids, touches [her] face, “You see? You gesticulate like me, you have the same white skin I have: you’re Indo-European, would you like to be oppressed by a yellow skinned communist?”

    Framing their struggle as “white” vs “yellow”, and the revisionist historical narratives, in my mind make the Uighur Independent movement quite sad. Those historical figures with dubious achievements you rave about, unlikely were your ancestors, and for sure didn’t speak the language you speak now! Kadeer and co. have had a hard time to sell to most Americans/Europeans. Newt Gingrich even penned a piece, “America, meet your new neighbors: the Uighurs.” It was a partisan piece, but “the Uighers” nonetheless caught in the cross-fight.

    A nation in which the cause has not been totally lost is Turkey. It’s a long story about that…

  43. Wayne
    January 5th, 2012 at 06:02 | #43

    @Naqshbandiyya

    Anglo-Saxon men are the most sexually insecure in the world. Early images of the Chinese were racist to the extreme, especially in the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Chinese (and Asian) men were portrayed as out to prey on white women, to overrun ‘white’ countries – all part of the ‘yellow peril’ mindset of the era, and which carries on today albeit in an implicit form. And of course they use to burn black people alive (yes burn them alive and castrate them right up to quite recent history), if they even got a little cheeky to white women.

    Here is a poster from 1899 which showed white attitudes towards the Chinese at the time:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/YellowTerror.jpg

    Obviously Rebiya Kadeer brings in the theme of sexual exploitation by yellow people of half-white/half-yellow people to try and appeal to the grossest racial stereotypes of chinese. The white audience laps it up of course, as this gives them the opportunity to indulge in racism without appearing (at least overtly) racist.

  44. pug_ster
    January 31st, 2012 at 06:55 | #44

    http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012/01/31/flaying-flowers-an-example-of-western-media%E2%80%99s-bias-against-china/

    Must be a weird Tuesday. Yiyi Lu actually wrote a balanced article about Western Propaganda playing a role pertaining how they review the film.

  45. February 1st, 2012 at 13:37 | #45

    @pug_ster

    Thanks for sharing that with us. I have placed that in the recommended readings list.

    So – even as the West debates whether Flower is anti-Japanese propaganda – and even as Japan refuses to own up to its history – here is an interview about the “comfort women” of SE Asia at Asia Times.

  46. Haikun
    February 2nd, 2012 at 21:17 | #46

    @Wayne haha this wayne guy is a totally pathetic and insecure loser! Oh I hate white man with asian girls, whaaa whaaaa whaaa, big whiney BABY! This loser typifies the fenqing phenomena! And does anyone call him out for being a pathetic racist loser losing Chinese face? Well we know the answer tot hat one!

  47. Haikun
    February 2nd, 2012 at 21:33 | #47

    Who can ever take PRC lectures on historical responsibilty when the CCP is itself the greatest historical revisionist??? Sure USA and some European states commited their own horrible acts but I am reading a typical US history book for college students right now; it has every sin from slavery to the pllight of the Indians spelled out clearly. Wanna read a CCP history book? Yes Nanjing was terrible and Japan should be ashamed for not coming out and teaching it in its history books clearly. But PRC lecturing? No way! No legitimacy! And a stain upon the historical events which they often try to propagandize. Common, lets see a movie about the Great Leap Forward, egotist Mao killed far more Chinese than Tojo ever could! Cultural Revolution, thats nice! Anti-Rightist Movement?! Oh yea lets see that! 641989??? Common give me a real Chinese drama! This is such BS, CCP flooding their state controlled media with all this one dimensional Japanese imperialist drama while totally over looking more sensitive parts of the CCPs own large scale killings of Chinese only tarnishes the memory of ALL the victims!

    And the most pathetic part is this socalled website claims to stand up against the one sided media portrayals! But all it succeeds in doing is demonstrating the inherent reactionary and ideological leanings of its contributors who are oh so willing to call out the west, japan, whoever, but dont have the guts to stand up look in the mirror and say “hey CCP running dog media, you are full of S*#$t”. So until that day roles around, keep barking at the moon but dont be surprised when nobody takes you seriously.

  48. Haikun
    February 2nd, 2012 at 21:36 | #48

    Sorry I am not trying to belittle the atrocious behavior of the japanese nor the genuine suffering of the Nanjing victims, but you ALL waltz around much larger and deadlier events in more recent Chinese history and that is complete BS. You all need to stand up and condemn the actions that killed many more Chinese in more recent times at the hands of the CCP. Man up or else dont pretend to care about what happened at Nanjing, cause such two faced talk is BS and a shame to all Chinese.

  49. zack
    February 2nd, 2012 at 22:40 | #49

    @Haikun
    yeah, yeah, “i’m not a racist but…” yada yada yada

    making the claim that xyz massacre is irrelevant in the greater context of history is not just morally depraved, it’s also mentally lazy; it’s an excuse for propagandists and racists to hide behind so they can continue carrying on as they were. Perhaps if the Chinese in the past had used Japanese civilians and non combatants as bioweapons research and sex slaves, you *might* have a point but as it is, you don’t and moreover, you’re simply a racist turd who apparently thinks that xyz thousands of Chinese dead and raped is nothing compared to abc thousands of , after all that is your line of reasoning: that because plenty of Chinese had died in the past, the rape of nanking was irrelevant.

  50. Wayne
    February 3rd, 2012 at 09:10 | #50

    @Haikun

    “You all need to stand up and condemn the actions that killed many more Chinese in more recent times at the hands of the CCP.”

    Haikun is a clown.

    The fact is the Great Leap Forward did not set out to ‘kill’ Chinese. The Great Leap Forward period was the worst period of mortality in the history of the PRC. This was due mainly to the worst climatic conditions in an entire century.

    But the fact is even though the GLF was the worst period in the history of the PRC, the average annual mortality for this period, even according to Mao’s worst detractors, was about typical for most developing countries of the time. And better than the crude mortality in British India just a decade before, and far better than the mortality rate in China before 1949, and certainly better than that of the 1930s and 40s when Japanese imperialism was rampant.

    The facts are clear. Chinese socialism perhaps saved more lives than any other political system in history. And the Maoist era saw the greatest and most rapid increase in life expectancy in documented history.
    http://tinyurl.com/6uua6fb

    In fact China’s life expectancy by 1976, was higher than what India’s is today. Even though both countries started off on more or less the same footing in the late 1940s.

    To compare the excess deaths of the GLF to the Nanjing massacre takes a sick mind, devoid of any sense of moral perspective. That is what Haikun has.

    Now I wait for this dog to prove anything I have said above to be wrong.

  51. Wayne
    February 3rd, 2012 at 09:31 | #51

    CCPs own large scale killings of Chinese only tarnishes the memory of ALL the victims!

    There were large numbers of executions after 1949. But these were not of entirely innocent civilians, of women and children. They were of the worst bandit elements and landlords who had abused and oppressed people in the old society. Of course in the climate of the times many innocent people would have suffered. But this can simply not be compared to raping and killing women for sport, or bayoneting children like what the sick and deviant Japanese did at Nanjing.

    On a proportional basis, the Nationalists on Taiwan killed at least as much as the communists, and the South Koreans even more (ala the Bodo league massacre).

    All governments during times of great insecurity, threat of foreign invasion, and internal instability will commit excesses.

    While people died during the CR –this was more due to inter-factional conflict—-in fact there is absolutely no evidence at all that violence was actually encouraged from the leadership. And it was in fact a revolution within a revolution. Overall however the Cultural Revolution period (if we consider 1966 to 1976) actually was the period of lowest mortality in the whole of Chinese history, up until that point in time. And it was the period which saw the greatest increase in basic literacy in Chinese and perhaps world history.

    The French revolution, on a per-capita basis, was more bloody than the Chinese revolution. Yet do the French then use the excesses of their own revolution to go and justify the German invasion of WWII?

    Of course not!

    Look how proud the Russians are, even today, of their achievements in the Great Patriotic War. Do they go around saying their pride should be diminished because Stalin carried out a few purges before the war?

    Of course not!

    Only a sick and diseased mind would use the excesses of a great social revolution to try and mitigate the completely wanton and gratuitous atrocities of foreign invaders.

  52. February 3rd, 2012 at 09:58 | #52

    @Wayne
    Here’s a brain stormer for you. How come Japan can become the 2nd largest economy (1968) overtaking UK, Germany, France etc in just 23 yrs after WWII?

    Why is mainland China so backward? Why isn’t mainland China industrilized or modernized the way Japan did in 23 short yrs?

    Is China’s modernization on the right track? It has been more than 60 yrs since 1949. I believe this is what the CCP did try to find answer and lead to a 2nd round of reform in late 1970s.

  53. Wahaha
    February 3rd, 2012 at 09:59 | #53

    No point to argue with a Falun, just a reminder.

  54. Wayne
    February 3rd, 2012 at 10:48 | #54

    @Ray

    “Why isn’t mainland China industrilized or modernized the way Japan did in 23 short yrs? ”

    Well quite simple. In spite of the devestation caused by WWII Japan had a massive installed industrial base. And the most educated population in the whole of Asia after WWII.

    Whereas China’s industrial base was smaller than Belgium’s—-a country less than a hundredth the size in population of China.

    Japan’s industrialisation did not take 23 years. That is ridiculous. Japan’s industrialisation began in the mid to late 19th Century – under the Emperor Meiji.

    Look at many of Japan’s huge corporations. When were they founded? Mitsubishi goes back to 1870.

    Japan was a predatory imperialist power since the 19th Century. China was an oppressed nation.

    Japan’s per capita GDP after the war was three times higher than that of China’s:
    http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_per_cap_in_195-economy-gdp-per-capita-1950

    And then of course there was the Korean war which was a massive boon for the Japanese economy. This was simply good luck. Whereas China had to fight in this war and lost hundreds of thousands of men. China underwent an embargo at the hands of the US, and then in 1960s relations with the Soviets deteriorated to an extent that China was effectively isolated from the world.

    China’s life expectancy in 1950 was about 35. Literacy was 20%

    Japan’s was 60 years in 1950. 99% of Japanese children were enrolled in lower secondary schools.
    http://www.unesco.org/education/wef/countryreports/japan/rapport_1.html

    Finally look at this chart:
    http://www.efficientfrontier.com/ef/404/8.GIF

    China underwent a huge decline under Japanese and Western imperialism. The turn around point was not 30 years ago. It was 60 years ago.

    China’s performance relative to Japan over the past 60 years is nothing to be ashamed of. Remember Japan was an imperialist country allied to other imperialist countries. China was an oppressed country.

  55. pug_ster
    February 3rd, 2012 at 10:59 | #55

    @Wahaha

    Agreed, ignore that clown. This guy contradicts himself so much that he makes Newt Gingrich look like a straight shooter.

  56. February 3rd, 2012 at 13:15 | #56

    @Wayne
    Thanks for taking the time to make a proper respond. China didn’t get a fair chance of development until 1949, even then the country has no forex or gold reserve and was under threat of war. The real break didn’t come until 1971 when the PRC got back the seat at UN.

    Yes, Japan started industrialization in the second half of 1800s. Qing China started industrialization around the same time too but much less efficiently due to not being able to run the country effectively. On top of that the mounting indemnities that China was forced to pay foreign powers has destroyed China fiscally.

    Well, the Japanese economy was behind UK, Germany and France before WWII. The European had a rude awakening when Japan become No.2 in 1968. I would say that is a remarkable achievement. Of course one can say that Japan was able to concentrate solely on economy by giving up its political independence. However, I believe that China’s economic development in many ways have to follow the Japanese trend of high efficiency, high saving with low energy usage. The US mass consumption model would not be achievable for China.

    The fact of the matter is China achieved the most remarkable growth for the last two hundred years under the PRC.

  57. February 3rd, 2012 at 13:52 | #57

    There’s something deeply morally defective about people who compare the deaths that resulted from the famine in China between 1959-62 and something like the Japanese invasion.

    Anyone that can’t tell the difference between intentional killing and unintentional famine from poor economic and agricultural planning seem to have a part of their brain missing.

    Morality and the law takes intention seriously. Those who cannot see why that is important are likely cognitively defective in some way.

  58. Wayne
    February 3rd, 2012 at 16:11 | #58

    @melektaus

    Not only deeply moral defective. But deeply stupid and deeply inconsistent.

    Japan simply did not cause just the deaths killed by guns and bayonets. Japan and the other Western imperialists are responsible for ALL excess deaths caused by their presence in China.

    After all those who say Mao ‘killed’ millions because of excess deaths in the GLF. So why not hold excess deaths against imperialism? That then would be compariing apples to apples.

    If we do this then it will be seen that the greatest killer of the 20th and 19th centuries was not socialism (which in fact saved lives), but imperialism.

    After all the average annual mortality during the GLF was 24/1000 people. Just before 1949, annual mortality was 38/1000. Amazingly using the statistics of even Jung Chang and Frank Dikotter, it is clear that during the now claimed 4 years of the GLF fewer people in China died (by a country mile) than at any four year period before 1949.

    Even taking into account new medical innovations (which CHina hardly had the opportunity to benefit from anyway), it is clear that if China could have developed earlier, was free of imperialism earlier, she could have benefitted from the very rapid decline in mortality which happened under the PRC earlier and thus saving even more lives.

    It is clear that true national sovereignty in 1949, when the chinese people stood up, was what saved China, both in terms of the lives of her people, and economic development.

    No independence, and the human rights of the Chinese people are no better than that of Czechs and Russians under Nazi occupation.

  59. Wayne
    February 3rd, 2012 at 16:16 | #59

    After the Soviet Union fell, Russians experienced a massive increase in mortality due to capitalist shock therapy, with “excess deaths since 1989 runs into the millions”, as even this Economist article admits.
    http://www.economist.com/node/12494500

    UNC-Chapel Hill Professor Steve Rosefielde estimates that three million excess deaths were caused in the 1990s due to Yeltsin’s economic program.

    This is equivalent to the unnatural deaths of 27 million! people in a country as large as China.

    Therefore using Haikun’s logic we can also say Yeltsin is a mass murderer right?

  60. February 3rd, 2012 at 16:46 | #60

    @melektaus #207 and @Wayne #201 and @Wayne #209 and @Wayne #208

    Thank you – Agreed wholeheartedly.

    I have read too many times in Western blogs / press that while Japanese have been bad, it is the Chinese leadership that need to apologize most to the Chinese people – for killing more Chinese than all others combined. Something to that effect.

    That’s a very weird type of accounting indeed…

    Also

    @Ray #206

    You wrote:

    The European had a rude awakening when Japan become No.2 in 1968. I would say that is a remarkable achievement. Of course one can say that Japan was able to concentrate solely on economy by giving up its political independence.

    Well – we should not forget the Japanese stagnation of the last decade or so may have been caused by its caving to U.S. pressure for Japan to appreciate the Yen (but see IMF retort). If so, then its rapid rise in the early years must be heavily discounted. Political dependence can give some net benefits in the short term, but not necessarily in the long term. For China, political independece may have some cost today – but over the long term, I am sure it will yield more net benefits.

  61. February 3rd, 2012 at 16:59 | #61

    @Wayne #185

    Independence, health and literacy – these must be the basic pillars of human development and liberation. And Mao brought all those to China…

  62. zack
    February 3rd, 2012 at 17:28 | #62

    it is only because japan is at present an american vassal and slave that the West does not wish to focus too much on japanese war crimes; it’s politically inconvenient in an era where the Americans wish to form a cold war era bloc against them evil chinese communists.

    that’s why you have disgusting individuals like haikun who belittle the suffering of the Chinese victims of Jap war crimes (thankfully a lot of the ww2 Australian veterans i’ve spoken to don’t, they do in fact honour the fighting of the Chinese resistance and hate the japanese like hell) because they are motivated more by the immediate perceived threat of China’s rapid ascendancy.

    the knee jerk reaction amongst the West when they realise China would soon eclipse them economically and politically was predictable: containment. worst, they’ve deluded themselves that containment will ensure the safety of their own rapidly western led world order, whilst Beijing outmaneouvres Washington on the world stage by forming agreements and understanding with the arabs and europeans.

  63. jxie
    February 3rd, 2012 at 19:02 | #63

    Like to make 2 different comments on the GLF and the number of people who were supposed to starve to death between 1959 and 1961. First it’s from page 46 and 47 of a book by Wim f. Wertheim, Third World whence and whither? Protective State versus Aggressive Market. The book is partially available in Google Books. The following is the result of OCR (containing some errors) with my rudimentary corrections to make sure it’s readable:

    In the years 1960-61 serious food shortages occurred, as a result not only of natural disasters — drought and flood — but also of the disequilibrium caused by ill-advised government policies in the previous two years. In the chaos that followed, the euphoria of the ‘Big Leap Forward’ had definitely become a thing of the past. There was famine in parts of the country, an unknown but certainly terrific number, that may have amounted to sonic millions dying from starvation.

    None the less, figures in the tens of millions, now broadcast by both the present Chinese regime and Western media, and adopted by serious scholars such as Brugger and Reglar, and by Friedman and his co-authors, lack any historical basis.’ Calculations, based on comparing the official census figures of the 1950s with those of the 1960s, and showing that ‘between 17 and 29 millions of Chinese’ appeared to be missing, lack any semblance of reliability.

    When planning my first visit to China, in August 1957, I had asked whether I could meet two outstanding Chinese social scientists, Fei Xiao-rung, the sociologist, and Chen ‘Pa, the demographer. I could not meet either of them, because at that time they were both seriously criticized as rightists’; but I was visited by Pang Zenian, a Marxist philosopher who knew about the problems of both scholars. Chen Ta was criticized because he had questioned the figures in the pretended 1953 census. As a past organizer of censuses, he could not accept the official claims of the Chinese authorities that, within a remarkably short period of time, the total population of China bad risen from 450 to 600 million (even if the 17 million inhabitants of Taiwan were included) Chen Ta would himself have liked to organize a scientifically well-founded census, instead of one based on random samples at regional level, as had been the case in 1953, in which year. the methods followed were, in his view, unscientific.

    A recognized Chinese expert on the demography of China, Dr.Ping-ti Ho, Professor of History at the University of Chicago, also noted, in a book entitled Studies on the Population of China, 1368-1953 (Ho 1967). numerous ‘flaws’ in the 1953 census, concluding that in all, therefore, the nationwide enumeration of 1953 was not a census in the technical definition of the term. The figures for the separate provinces indeed show an unbelievable popula-tion increase of some 30% in the period 1947-1953, a period of almost continuous civil strife (Ho 1967:93/94)! John S. And, another well-known expert in this field, in an article published in 1983, argued that both the 1953 and the 1964 censuses had been very unreliable, in contrast with the 1982 census.* Mao himself suggested an interesting explanation for this: before his rime, peasants omitted to list their grown-up sons in the census returns. fearing that they would be called for military service; following the Revolu-tion people tended to list more children than they actually had, because this might increase the share their households would receive from the collective!

    My conclusion: it is useless to argue that in the 196os some 17 to 29 million people were ‘missing’, since there was never any certainty about the figure of 600 million Chinese. Most probably these ‘missing people’ did not starve in the calamity years 196o-61, for the simple reason that they never existed in the first place.

    Moreover, if the famine of the early 19605 was really as terrible as is being argued at present, the surviving rural population would surely have been weakened to such an extent that a rapid restoration of agricultural produc-tion to normal levels could not have been realized. This had been repeatedly the case with the pre-war famines.

  64. jxie
    February 3rd, 2012 at 19:23 | #64

    The prevailing numbers of the GLF starvation deaths nowadays range from 30 million to 45 million. Supposedly some 10 million people died in Sichuan alone, which works out to about 17% of people died (Sichuan was the hardest hit province). This number is so large that a double-take is needed: it’s more than the people, percentage-wise, died in Germany or Soviet Union in World War 2. It was at least 4 times larger than the Chinese deaths (in %) in World War 2. Throughout the World War 2, Soviet Union suffered from wide-spread starvation also, on top of the horrendous war deaths; and the World War 2 lasted more than the GLF starvation period.

    The poignant questions to ask are, why didn’t the people revolt? At the very least, why didn’t a large number of people turn into refuges?

    It is just so that a branch of my family live in some remote mountainous dirt-poor Sichuan region. Over the years, I have spoken to some tens of elderly who had been through those years and asked their first-handed knowledge. None of them had any immediate family members died. A few of them who needed to travel regularly, typically those who needed to work in the towns but lived in the rural areas, did tell me that they had seen dead bodies due to hunger. But the first-handed stories just seem to be so far off from the level of supposed deaths in Sichuan.

    The problem as I see is, the population base was some 600 million. A 10% off in data collection, you have a 60 million discrepancy. As Wertheim alluded to, both the 1953 and 1964 census data was of very quality. We will likely never know how many people died then — but I will be very shocked if in actuality more than 5 million did.

  65. Wahaha
    February 3rd, 2012 at 21:02 | #65

    There’s something deeply morally defective about people who compare the deaths that resulted from the famine in China between 1959-62 and something like the Japanese invasion.

    ***************
    Exactly,

    Why do you guys argue with someone who didn’t even have one ounce of love left in his heart ?

  66. Wayne
    February 3rd, 2012 at 23:32 | #66

    thanks Jxie–excellent posts. Appreciate it.

    Why do you guys argue with someone who didn’t even have one ounce of love left in his heart ?

    You have a good point there.

    But thinking about it a little more it probably is worth it to rebut Haikun’s idiotic comparison. It is frequently brought up by those who wish to defame the Chinese revolution, by those who want regime change in China.

    Consider our rebutals a bit of free target practice against a ‘dummy’!

    Seriously speaking there are three things our enemies bring up which to them seem like the trump cards. And some people on our side do not know how to respond.

    These three ‘trump’ cards of our enemies are as follows:

    1. Mao and the CCP killed more than Japanese (and Western) imperialism.
    2. Compare China to the rest of East Asia (especially Taiwan and Japan)—-surely this proves the Chinese revolution was a disaster?
    3. Why do you live in the West if you are pro-China—-you are a hypocrite!

    All three are of course ridiculous and should be easily disposed of. They expose the intellectual vacuity of the asker —people like Haikun.

    However, there are a few people on our side who seem to wilt under these questions, and instead duck them.

    I say we should welcome these questions. They can be met head on and the person asking them made to look like an absolute idiot and fucktard.

    I’m busy right now…….but I will post more on this in detail a little later.

  67. February 4th, 2012 at 00:32 | #67

    @Wayne
    Really excellent point. You would appreciate this comment from Naqshbandiyya.

    Allen and I were discussing highlighting the great insights you Jxie and others have offered as of late. This blog is much stronger with your contributions.

    Naqshbandiyya recently also suggested Chinese outside China speak up more in front of their personal friends against the unfair narratives thrown against ‘China’ and the ‘Chinese.’ Part of that means many of us will have to learn to spot the bigotry and fucktardedness.

  68. February 4th, 2012 at 07:08 | #68
  69. February 4th, 2012 at 15:32 | #69

    @Ray

    Thank for the link. It’s long but very good.

    Famines were common occurrences in China between the mid-19th century and the mid-20th century. During KMT’s “golden decade” (1928 to 1937) after KMT consolidated its power and before the 2nd Sino-Japanese war, there were 4 wide-spread famines (affecting more than 1 province). During the 8 year Japanese occupation, there were 2 more. Due to the lack of reliable demographic data, the starvation deaths during those famines were mostly guesswork. Typically in a pre-1949 wide-spread famine,

    1. A very large number of refuges spread out to other provinces.
    2. Agricultural productions suffered in the year afterward.

    Yet neither were the case during the 1959-61 famine that according to the prevailing starvation death number, should be more devastating. There are 2 types of “research” in the 30-45 million death camp. One is the likes of Banister, Coale, and Yang — all of their mathematical computations and models were based on faulty demographic data as suggested by Wertheim. The other type is the likes of Dikkoter and Jung Chang, Joseph Goebbels would have been proud of them. By no means I am a Mao’s fan for most of what he had done after 1957, but please, this smear campaign has to stop!

  70. February 4th, 2012 at 16:26 | #70

    @jxie
    Their study also did not take into consideration human behaviour. From 1950-1958, China’s birth rate exploded compare to the last hundred years or so. In 1959-1961, the birth rate would be close to zero due to the famine. All those missing birth was counted as famine death by Banister, Coale, and Yang.

    On top of that if you add in the regular death rate you would easily have a figure of 30-45 million. Frankly, I wouldn’t trust any study that has no exposure to China’s archive. They pretty much do their research from afar. A very unreliable method at best.

    I believe this is how the 1 million death figure on the US’s Iraqi invasion come from. I personally believe the figure to be closer to 200,000. Of course this is still a large figure.

  71. February 4th, 2012 at 19:07 | #71

    @Ray

    Exactly. Virtually all of those “studies” were essentially projections based on the population, birth rate, and death rate data around that period, which was of rather poor quality to begin with. No common sense was ever applied.

    See the US demographic history:

    1900 76,212,168
    1910 92,228,496
    1920 106,021,537
    1930 123,202,624
    1940 132,164,569

    From 1900 to 1930, the annual compound population growth rate was about 1.6%. Based on the same rate there should have been 144.6 million Americans in 1940. Since there was no war (yet), no major natural disaster or pandemic, STOP THE PRESS, we have an even bigger man-made disaster than the 1959-61 Chinese famine in percentage term — 12.4 million Americans were murdered! Down with the Kapitalizm!

  72. Antioxidants
    February 4th, 2012 at 19:29 | #72
  73. Wayne
    February 8th, 2012 at 04:13 | #73

    Dear friends:

    Study this chart carefully:

    http://acminc.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/Untitled7.png

    You are looking at perhaps the world’s greatest ever crime. The plunder of the East (and Africa) by the West. How many excess deaths, mortality resulted from Western imperialism?

    I highly recommend Mike Davis, “Late Victorian Holocausts”. British imperialism engineered famines in India, China and around the globe, which makes the GLF famine pale into insignificance by comparison.

    If we look just at India, the British are responsible for perhaps 1.5 billion excess deaths during their two centuries of rule. Similarly these whites fucked China for well over a century.

    Mortality during the GLF was much lower than before 1949. It was no higher than that of other developing countries of the time.

    Compare China and India after independence.

    Do not be ashamed of China’s socialist revolution. It was the turning point. Because China secured her independence she could start developing again. And it is largely thanks to the extraordinary leadership of Chairman Mao Zedong.

  74. March 3rd, 2012 at 14:42 | #74

    I wonder how many have watched that new Pentagon propaganda movie – Act of Valor?

    I haven’t watched it. But it looks like it’s a real hit!

    Heard that it’s a brainless movie but with some really cool actions and awesome toys.

    I like this op-ed from Salon about the movie.

    The Pentagon’s amnesia-inducing propaganda

    The military’s first feature-length film wants to make Americans forget about our imperialist
    misadventures

    When philosopher George Santayana said “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” he meant it as an admonition — not as an endorsement of mass amnesia or historical revision. This should be obvious. Yet those operating at the shadowy intersection of the Pentagon and Hollywood either don’t understand – or more likely, refuse to understand — the thrust of the aphorism. Instead, with this week’s release of a much-awaited film, Santayana’s omen has been transformed into a public mission statement for a burgeoning Military-Entertainment Complex.

    Since 1986′s “Top Gun” rekindled the Pentagon-Hollywood relationship from its post-Vietnam doldrums, the collusion between the military and the entertainment industry has become a blockbuster con, generating huge benefits for both participants — and swindling the American public in the process.

    The scheme is simple: The Pentagon allows studios to use military hardware and bases at a discounted, taxpayer-subsidized rate. In exchange, filmmakers must submit their scripts to the Pentagon for line edits. Not surprisingly, those edits often redact criticism of military policy, revise depictions of historical failures, and generally omit anything else that might make audiences wonder if our current defense policy is repeating past mistakes.

    If a studio doesn’t agree to the edits, then it loses access to the martial equipment, and typically, the film is terminated. If, by contrast, filmmakers agree to the edits, access is granted, and the film gets made at a cut-rate price to the studio. Except in the credits’ fine print, the audience is never told about the censorship.

    The predictable result is a glut of movies that both celebrate U.S. military policy and whitewash the checkered history of military adventurism — and relatively few major movies questioning that policy and that adventurism.

    No doubt, as a system of stealth coercion, the arrangement has been wildly effective. But with America now questioning the efficacy of constant invasions and the morality of never-ending occupations, the Pentagon is getting worried and thus intensifying its agitprop to ever more manipulative extremes. Last year, for example, it cemented its first full sponsorship of a major film, “X-Men: First Class,” integrating the movie into recruitment ads. It’s now going even further, fully financing its own feature-length film, “Act of Valor,” appearing in theaters nationwide starting Feb. 24.

    Casting active-duty SEALs, the film is ostensibly about a mission to neutralize terrorists. But as one of the filmmakers let slip this week, its heroic portrayals and triumphs are really designed to once again make us forget the past.

    “I’d like to see the legacy of Vietnam put to bed,” said “Act of Valor” filmmaker Mike “Mouse” McCoy in an interview with the Huffington Post. “It was a really bad time in American history, absolutely, but it’s time to sort of forget that and forget those sensibilities and don’t associate our troops and our men and women to that conflict anymore, and time to really open our eyes to say, ‘What’s going on in this world? What are our men and women in uniform really doing right now for us?’”

    While it’s true that America’s recent wars are not exactly the same as the Vietnam War, a stunning new report in Armed Forces Journal proves there are troubling similarities we could learn from. With history’s lessons in mind, we might learn to refrain from involving ourselves in foreign quagmires because the human costs are too high. We might also learn that some conflicts have no military solution at all.

    But such lessons run counter to a Pentagon focused on perpetually repeating a military-centric past, so those lessons are being deliberately obscured. That’s indeed a triumph of the Military-Entertainment Complex, but it’s a Pyrrhic victory for America — one that guarantees Santayana’s warning goes unheeded.

Comment pages
1 2 13641
You must be logged in to post a comment.