Short post. With the recent events with Donald Trump, Kim Jung Un Summit Meeting, even the western media are questioning the effectiveness of Donald Trump. Now even the Media refers to following of Trump to some kind of Cult.
China has gone that path before with the Cultural revolution but is Trump’s America is going down the same road?
NYT last weekend has 2 opinions, pro and con on mayor DiBlasi’s attempt to change the admission standards for elite high schools in NYC. It’s standard arguments by liberal intelligentsia on both sides trying to be reasonable, yet totally missing the point. The fact is student population at Stuyvesant is less than 5% African American, and more than 60 % Asian, or more precisely, more than 50% Chinese American. I myself have mixed feelings on this topic, as I attended a public HS in the early 60s that’s 75% Blacks and Puerto Ricans and still managed to get in an Ivy League school. My son attended Stuyvesant and hated it with the 3 hours round trip commuting and lack of sleep, and I regretted pushing him to attend it.
The conflict pits Chinese American community against African American and Hispanic communities with charges of discrimination, quotas, and diversity arguments flying back and forth. Obvious it has implication on the Ivy League schools’ admission policy with regard to the limits on Chinese students. I am in favor of some form of affirmative action as China do by adding 20 points to minority nationality students in their college entrance exams and actively trying to eliminate poverty in those areas. The question here is why the education system here is failing students except in some of the elite schools? It’s certainly not the financing or teachers per se. If we go into the deeper reasons, whether it be income inequality, residential segregation, family values, or residual effects of slavery, we can’t avoid going into the big elephant in the room, Capitalism and profit motive, which nobody wants to touch. Liberals are losing to Trumpism by emphasizing politically correctness, standing on high ground and looking down on the deplorables while losing the cultural war.
DiBlasi’s proposal whether it passes the state legislatures will not solve the problem, but it will visually soothe some feelings while structurally left the system in tact. Chinese parents can easily skirt it by enrolling their children in low performing middle schools and saving them a bundle by not needing those cram courses, and they will automatically be granted entry to elite schools being in the top 10%. 10 years from now there will be another outcry on why elite schools are still predominantly Chinese and new proposals restricting enrollments to neighborhood middle schools or segregation will be enacted.
China has started the ambitious “China 2025” to challenge U.S. dominance in technology. The U.S. has responded by throttling ZTE and showing the bottle neck in semiconductors. This action only reinforce the need for independence and accelerates the drive. The fact that West is always cognizant of Chinese threat and various events has delayed that response. Certainly 9/11 and 2008 financial meltdown gave China extra 17 years to face the reaction. The neocons were ready to target China over the spy plane incident when 9/11 diverted it to anti-terrorism. 2008 financial meltdown caused emphasis on strengthening economy and Wall Street.
China has used the intervening years well, from building the “Great Fire Wall”, enlarging the South China Sea Islands, to elevating Xi Jinping as leader with vision for future. Some may disagree with GFW for censorship and disrupting free communications. Yet censorship is necessary for filtering out harmful diseases like greed, pornography, and ideology detrimental to harmonic society we aspire. Certainly elites or scientists have no problem accessing internet by jumping through GFW with minor delay. The South China Sea assertion of sovereignty is important in limiting U.S. Seventh Fleet on encroaching on Chinese sea coast and expanding Chinese naval presence. And we only need to compare the biography of Xi and the accomplishments of last 5 years with Trump’s disasters to see the opposite directions of 2 countries. China has sent hundreds of thousands of students to Western countries annually in investing for the future. Yet the return is not that obvious when without inoculating them against hostile ideology and values, many become infected and turned against her.
The liberal values of Ivy League colleges portrayed U.S. as freedom loving, free thinking, without giving any historical contexts. One good thing about Trump’s ascension is open the façade of humanism in Capitalism. Historically we have Rockefellers, Fords, or Carnegies, having philanthropical foundations ameliorating the worst aspects of Capitalism, but now Trump has make racism, white superiority, and immigrant bashing if not totally respectable, at least publicly bearable. The liberals always hide behind the “Constitution”, “Lady Liberty”, or “Founding Fathers”, to divert any criticism against Capitalism. Americans are always proud of their exceptionalism, that we did not participate in colonialism as Europeans did, discounting Puerto Rico and Philippines. Yet the 2 greatest crimes against humanity occurred in U.S.. That’s the extermination of Native Americans and slavery. We sent Native Americans blankets infected with small pox as gifts and celebrate Thanksgiving as historical drama of Native Americans helping Pilgrims to survive. We make “The Rule of Law” a mockery by tearing up hundreds of treaties whenever we need their land for farming, or oil, or gold is discovered in their barren reservations. The Constitution was a compromise that treated slaves as subhuman and the resulting effect on society I do not need to belabor other than China eliminated slavery 2,500 years ago.
China has been establishing Confucian Institutes around the world to push soft power Chinese values, and even that minimal goings face push back by West. I do think China’s education ministry should require a course of Chinese and American history before allowing students to go to West for higher learning. I learned Opium Wars in grade school and “Brain Washed” to not touch drugs even when it makes me socially awkward in refusing a joint. The soft power push should start at home and young. I think the recent offerings at CCTV on “Reading Aloud”, second season, which gave interviews to people having a story to tell before letting them recite from books or poems is great in soft power education.
Today is the 200th anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx. China celebrated it by a 2 parts TV documentary ( Marx Forever) of his life and a speech by President Xi Jinping attended by all politburo members. I am of course familiar with Marx and Marxism as I attended schools in the 50s in China, yet I was not that knowledgeable about his life until I saw the documentaries, and I was deeply moved by his life story. During the 60s when I attended college, there was a short revival of Marxism in the West because of the intersection of civil rights and anti-war protests. Due to the backlash against the excesses of Cultural Revolution and the economic liberalization in the 90s, China generally moved away from Marxism and ideology and I felt estranged even though I felt proud of China’s achievements. Now Xi has returned to the root of Marxism as China proclaims to the world of Socialism with Chinese characteristics. I feel rejuvenated by the positive activities happening in China, from the poetry competitions, folk songs, reevaluations of Chinese histories and philosophies, to hopefully, a more even evaluation of the first 30 years of People’s Republic.
The media in the West such as NYT has been evolving from openly hostile to grudgingly acceptance and taking pot shots instead. They recruit people like Helen Gao to write columns that really irritates me. I guess she can be described as part of the second generation of rich or/and official families who benefits from China’s rise. I look up her profile, going from Beijing University attached high school to Deerfield Academy, Yale, East Asian Studies of Harvard, and presently working in a think tank in Beijing. She embraces the liberal ideology that’s very much part of the Ivy League schools. The most recent column she bemoans the loss of investigative reporting such as championed by Southern Weekly and indirectly attacks the corruption which she thinks Xi unable to attack structurally. She didn’t really think through whether investigative reporting is declining in U.S., after all it took 20-30 years before Weinstein and Crosby are dethroned, and now someone like Trump triumphs here. I think people like her should have read Marx’s high school graduating speech on what career choice one should make upon leaving the school. It was a moving speech on devoting one to the rest of humanity. She probably discount recent news of reversal of 2 high profile murder cases where innocent men were executed for rape and murder during the 90s, and government admitted errors and paid compensation to their families, while in U.S., wrongfully murdered men and lynching victims stand witness in the recently opened museum in Birmingham.
In my last post, I have posted about a potential trade war between US and China. The recent ban resulting ZTE may longer purchase American hardware and software for the next 7 years. This ban will definitely mean that even if ZTE manages to source parts of the phone from non-us manufacturers, they may no longer sell Android phones in the west because google has the monopoly on their Android app store.
While the punishment by the US’ commerce dept is harsh, China’s State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC) has been equally critical of how ZTE handling this situation. However, this ban is really about the deployment of 5g technology that is coming soon. Huawei and ZTE has been the primary targets of western governments and are blamed for ‘spying,’ despite there is lack of proof. In fact, in one of Edward Snowden leaks, it was revealed NSA’s operation “ShotGiant” used an exploit in Huawei’s networking equipment and spied on the Chinese.
Between Huawei and ZTE, Huawei was more cautious in entering the American market, they concentrate in European and Asian markets. ZTE was more foolhardy and decided to put most of their eggs in the US market and now is punished horribly. At least for now I do not believe that other Chinese phone makers like Motorola, Alcatel, and Oneplus are not the target of US’ wrath because they don’t produce telecom equipment.
But should China be worried? Many in China pointed yes and it is not the first time that the US government try to stop China leapfroging the US over technology. In 2015, the US government banned the Chinese government from buying Intel Xeon Processors so it can prevent China supercomputer effort. The result? China has produced the TaihuLight Supercomputer and created a supercomputer without American technology. Recently, Alibaba and Tencent announced a similar effort to wean away from American Technology.
What will happen in the next few years? I will guarantee that we will see less “Made in America” parts in Chinese technology. This will certainly be very interesting over the next few years.
Living in U.S. one can’t help but be aware of the biases and distorted views against China, but for the hermit kingdom it must be 10 times more so. We’ll probably not know why North Korea started the peace offensive for a while, whether China joining in enforcing UN sanctions push them over the edge? The defector crossing with worms in his bowel, the dead fishermen found in boats drifting to Japanese islands, the nuclear testing mountain might has collapsed under the repeated tests, or even the bluster of Trump threatening nuclear preemptive strike. But one thing is certain, the coming meeting between Trump and Kim will determine war and peace, not only in Korea peninsula, but the world in general.
For Donald Trump, under assaults by Stormy and Mueller, it will be a welcome distraction from his travails. It will showcase his showmanship of deal making with a Nobel Peace Prize in grasp if he can pull it off. The question is whether the deep state will allow him the luxury of starting to dismantle the empire. Trump campaigned to make America great again, a more isolationist foreign policy with allies paying a major share of the burden of empire, but if peace reigns in Northeast Asia, what possible justification will there be for maintaining troops in South Korea, or for that matter in Germany or Britain?
For North Korea, the dream is always a strong unified Korea. They have pay a price of tightened bellies to achieve nuclear weapons and missiles. Yet U.S. will not tolerate the threat implicit in it and in danger of spiraling out of control to all out war. A peace treaty guaranteeing their survival and eventual conciliation with South Korea. South Korea with their economy showing North they can also achieve it with peace. For South Korea living under the gun from North this is an opportunity they can’t afford to miss. They might not want to incur the cost West Germany did to absorb East, but gradual improved relation and offers of help they can certainly afford. As relation warms up, eventually they will feel the burden and indignity of U.S. troops and demand their withdrawal.
For China this is win-win. A nuclear free Korea is China’s goal all along. China wants friendly neighbors whether a unified Vietnam or Korea. China do not want to annex other countries as portrayed by West. West don’t understand for China, space is the frontier.
The US has threatened China with Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974 against China since early this year but China has retaliated back against the US. The only time when this section 301 was applied successfully was with Japan in the 1980’s but it would not be the same with China today. I would like to point out this good article from Wall Street Journal.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-trade-fight-china-today-differs-from-1980s-japan-1523202722
WASHINGTON—The White House is looking at the U.S. trade fight against Japan in the 1980s and 1990s for lessons in its trade battle against China. But the two eras are as striking for their differences as they are for their similarities.
U.S. trade officials admire Ronald Reagan’s use of tariffs to get Japan to open its semiconductor market and limit steel and other exports to the U.S. Current Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, then a midlevel U.S. official, helped carry out that strategy.
Japan back then, like China today, ran a large trade surplus with the U.S. Japan, like China, used industrial policy to turn favored companies into global powers and like China was looking to get U.S. technology any way it could.
The main tool the U.S. used to get Japan to change course, section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974, is the one the Trump administration is using to confront China. It gives the president broad powers to retaliate through tariffs and other means in trade disputes. “The last time it was used [with Japan], it worked,” says Clyde Prestowitz, a prominent Republican trade warrior from that era.
But even Mr. Prestowitz doubts such tactics will work again.
“China is a different animal,” he says.
Along with targeting Japan, the U.S. used section 301 to pressure India. Washington threatened tariffs unless Delhi liberalized its protected insurance market. India was so incensed, it refused to negotiate. “It is not for [the U.S.] to decide the Indian policy matters,” said India’s finance minister at the time. The U.S. backed off.
China today is more like India of that era than Japan. Like India, China is a huge, nationalist country. Its leaders believe they are destined to reclaim China’s place as a world leader and are building a world-class military in the process. Japan was a relatively small nation, whose global aspirations were snuffed out during World War II. It depended on Washington for its security.
While Tokyo frustrated the U.S. through delay, it ultimately had to accommodate Washington’s demands. Among other things, says Mr. Prestowitz, “Japan needed us to protect them from China.”
In practice, that meant Japan never retaliated against U.S. trade actions by putting tariffs on U.S. goods—indeed, it never even threatened to retaliate.
Contrast that with China today. Less than 24 hours after the Trump administration threatened tariffs on $50 billion of Chinese imports to the U.S., China published its own $50 billion hit list of U.S. goods. When President Trump added another $100 billion of Chinese goods subject to levies, a spokesman for Beijing’s Commerce Ministry pledged, “China is fully prepared to hit back forcefully.”
Japan de-escalated the trade battles by allowing some of its most successful auto and electronics companies to build factories in the U.S. Japanese companies continue to invest in U.S. plants, and today directly employ hundreds of thousands of U.S. workers, and through that investment have cultivated useful political allies, particularly among Republicans.
That avenue isn’t as open to Beijing. Chinese investment in the U.S. was $29 billion in 2017, estimates the Rhodium Group a market-research firm. That was down by about one-third from a year earlier. The U.S. is increasingly blocking Chinese purchases of semiconductor and other technology firms because of concerns about national security.
China is fighting back by targeting politically sensitive goods for sanctions, especially U.S. agriculture and aircraft. The idea is to make a trade war so costly, that the U.S. will back off, even if the fight harms China’s economy.
When it comes to imposing tariffs, there is another lesson from the Japan fights: Domestic opposition blunts White House plans. In 1995, the Clinton administration was set to put 100% tariffs on imported Japanese luxury cars to pressure Japan to buy more U.S. auto parts. Few U.S. consumers would be affected and, some Clintonites assumed, they were mainly Republicans anyway.
But the uproar from U.S. auto dealers put pressure on the White House to cut a deal that mainly required Japan to expand production in the U.S., which it was planning to do anyway.
In the current fight with China, U.S. lobbyists are focusing on the potential harm to farmers—a politically sympathetic and powerful group that is an important part of Mr. Trump’s political base. The president last week said the administration would come up with a plan “to protect our farmers,” but provided no details.
U.S. presidents have long overestimated their advantages in trade fights. In the early 1800s, President Thomas Jefferson embargoed British exports to get Britain to stop harassing U.S. ships, figuring the move would damage the British economy. The plan backfired. When trade collapsed, the U.S. was the loser. “Jefferson was delusional,” says Dartmouth trade historian Douglas Irwin.
Former U.S. Trade Representative Mickey Kantor, who helped negotiate U.S. deals with Japan in the 1990s for the Clinton administration, says his biggest takeaway from those days is the need to be steadfast in deciding goals and strategy.
President Donald Trump has threatened massive retaliation against China but his aides then tried to calm markets by claiming there is no trade war. “The uncertainty undermines your credibility domestically and with the Chinese,” Mr. Kantor said.
Japan in the 1980’s has many established brands in the US like Sony, Panasonic, Toyota, Nissan, Honda that produced many value added goods in the US and most of the market of these Japanese companies are to the US. Therefore, many of the profits from the value added Japanese branded goods are going back to Japan and the US was able to use that as leverage against Japan during the negotiations.
China on the other hand has few established brands in the US today. In fact the US government has taken steps to stifle them from succeeding in the US, think Huawei and ZTE. So the profits from value added Chinese branded goods are low. In fact, many of the profits of the value added goods go back to the US companies, think iphone, HP, Dell, Appliance makers and etc… The very same reason why the US deficit with China is so skewed. China companies has reduced its reliance in developing markets in the US, but focusing its market in Europe, Sooutheast Asia, Africa and Latin America.
As the result of US stifling China from big name companies succeeding in the US, most of the companies who are doing business in China are mostly low cost, low profit margin goods, like cheap stuff you get from walmart and your typical dollar store. A tariff will hit the poor the hardest. Even if the US hits a tariff on them, you won’t see many countries to replace China to produce those goods. In fact, many Chinese companies being established overseas will build factories there in order to circumvent the tariff. IE, as the result of good relations between China and Mexico, many Chinese companies will establish their presence there and circumvent trade with the US because of NAFTA.
I wrote before the election why I prefer Hillary over Trump because she will be a competent leader managing the slow decline of American Empire, while Trump will be an incompetent megalomania accelerating the decline and endangering the world. Now after more than a year into his presidency, his incompetence is in full display, and his danger to the world is worrying everyone from liberals to conservatives in Washington. With Bolton, a super hawk as his new security advisor, Pompeo, heading the State Department, with Iran nuclear deal to be undone by May, possible ultimatum meeting with Kim soon, war with both Iran and North Korea not only possible, but probable, and trade war with China pales into insignificance.
I agree with pundits that all those moves may be distractions of the nets closing on Trump, from Mueller investigation, from Stormy and her coming revelations on “60 Minutes”, or even the salacious elements from Steel Dossiers which nobody took it serious before. Yet I can’t shake the feeling of doom those old Hollywood movies used to make me laugh becoming reality, “Manchurian Candidate”, “Wag the Dog”, and “Dr. Strangelove”.
Certainly Trump took the deep state by surprise by agreeing to meet Kim Jong-in. Yet unless U.S. agrees to dismantle the empire by no longer threaten the existence of North Korea by signing a peace agreement, in which case troops in South Korea and Japan cease to have any purpose, I don’t see the meeting other than an ultimatum by Trump and will go no where. Trump may has vilified Hillary’s vote on Iraq and call Iraq War a mistake, but he now has hired the architect of Iraq War, Bolton, and defense spending is going up by double digit percentages to “Make America Great Again”. Kim maybe forced by China enforcing the UN sanctions, his failing economy, lack of oil, his people’s starving to make the offer. His sincerity is actually irrelevant, but I don’t see him surrender to U.S. on that ultimatum. For China, a denuclearized Korea is in her interest, and China is doing her best to make it become a reality, but she should be prepared for the worst.
Recent announcement of the revision of Chinese constitution removing term limit for President and Vice President generated a lot of commotion in the Western press and some opposition from small group of intellectuals, mostly liberals, human right lawyers, and some with bad memories from Cultural Revolution. The superficial reflexes are it’s bad for China, Lord Acton’s maxim, “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.”, and Xi wants to be the next Mao. Instead of suppressing the opposition I would like to examine the issue here on the merits of the criticisms.
The question whether it’s good or bad for China obvious only history can answer. For all we know Xi may decide after this term is over that he has found his successor and retire. FDR got elected for 4 terms because he felt with the war emergency it would be disruptive to change administration. China is at present in middle of war against corruption, consolidation of socialism values, and achieving China Dream. Xi may feel the need to push ahead to lay the foundation for the victory. If we pay attention on Xi’s speech, ” 功成不必在我”, he doesn’t consider he or any leader is essential for the success of socialism. For western reporters claiming it will be bad for China smack of arrogance like colonialists claiming colonialism is good for those colonies because they bring civilization to those unenlightened. For they always proclaim China will collapse and now feel it will be bad for China is the height of hypocrisy.
As for Lord Acton’s maxim, there is certain truth in it, but by no means all. For what is power? Which has no intrinsic value of good or evil, it’s the imperfect human being wielding power that tends to corrupt. Nuclear power can generate electricity for masses or nuclear weapons can kill millions. Who has absolute power? For Christians, it’s the almighty God. Do we infer since God has absolute power, he is by definition corrupt absolutely and is the Devil?
As for Xi wants to be Mao, the implied criticism is Mao was bad, but overwhelming majority of Chinese consider Mao as the founding father of China, a great man, and revered by Chinese. He may have make some errors impatient to change human nature. Some whom suffered during CR may blame him for their wounds. Do Americans blame George Washington for slavery? I am sure some American Indians and African Americans would.
During the recent spring gala on CCTV1, one episode portraying friendship between China and Africa caused some backlashes mostly from liberals and America educated Chinese students on whether China was insensitive or was racism. To me it’s instructive that actually it shows the U.S. centric view on culture and the brain washing or propaganda that most are unaware.
To be abhorrent of blackface argument one must know its history rather than accept it without understanding and then condemn it. In U.S., especially South, mixing of blacks and whites in social settings were discouraged if not unlawful until late 1950s. There were separate bathrooms for different races, blacks have to move to the rear of buses in public transportations. Vaudeville shows using black faces to portrait black characters to avoid hiring real black actors. So use of black faces in movies, especially better paying roles by whites were normal. Othello were played by white actors in the movies until 1995. Paul Robeson was the only exception playing Othello in theatres before 1960. This is why black face is a symbol of discrimination in U.S.. It was different in Europe where black singers and actors perform with acclaim. In Africa, white men playing black doesn’t exist and certainly is a cause for laughter than insult.
Of course some Chinese in U.S. being under constant cultural brain washing also inherit the same narrative of viewing blacks as lower class. preferring white as a standard of beauty, social class, and intelligence. As for China herself, the preference of whiter skin has everything to do with class. Those working in the field under the sun have darker skins than those indoor or under parasols.
China as Xi stated want to contribute to a better world and help African countries to be developed by building up their infrastructures. West can only seen from their own perspective that everything has to do with profit motive, so China must has ulterior motive. As anyone who knows “Journey to the West”, that monkey king is a positive character and not like in West a derogatory term of subhuman. Furthermore it was revealed it was played by a Chinese actor. As for the black woman she need to be fluent in Mandarin to convey the meaning of the skit. It certainly would be more racism to be portrayed by someone who is black speaking in halting Chinese.
It’s unfortunate those liberals brainwashed in U.S., and taking offense in anything Chinese government trying to do, whether aiding Africa, eliminating poverty at home, or fighting corruption from their lens of so called phony human rights.
After living in U.S. for a long time, I am still surprised by the ignorance of Americans toward China. Maybe I shouldn’t have been surprised giving they did elect a semiliterate ignoramus Trump as president and most of them are ignorant of American history, not to mention Chinese history. Yet those CIA analysts and those from academia continue to display arrogance and predicting China’s demise or threat, What cause this blindness as China is vaulting ahead of U.S. in economy and science? There were many people predicting China’s rise correctly. I will enumerate those as examples, Joseph Needham ( Science and Civilization in China ), Martin Jacques ( When China Rules the World ), Edgar Snow ( Red Star over China ), and William Hinton (Fanshen ).
What differs these people from the so called China experts and even those reporters stationed in China for a while are the understanding of Chinese history and the value system. For those reporters took away from what President Xi of China spoke on the 19th Party Congress was mostly the length than the content of his speech. For those educated in the West the most important value are “Rights”, “Freedom”, and “Individual”. For Chinese they are “Obligation”, “Harmony”, and “Society”. They view China from their own perspective and thus unable to understand China. For them human rights in abstract such as superficial view of voting and slogan of democracy are paramount, while belittling the real human right to food, shelter, and health. They disregard the meritocracy of China as exemplified by Xi’s biography compared with the rise of Trump which reveals the bankruptcy of liberal democracy. So called freedom and individualism isolate people in their struggle for survival with opioid epidemic to ameliorate their physical and mental pains. The rights are meaningless when structural blocks such as gerrymandering and electoral college belies 1 man, 1 vote mantra. China has abandoned slavery 2,500 years ago and evolved social relations as obligation to society and each other. Xi’s lifting all Chinese out of poverty by 2020 is achievable comparing with Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty which is receding in U.S..
As China’s 1 Belt, 1 Road initiative gathers steam and shows the world a better path to prosperity than the failed Washington Consensus, I think we should recognize China is not a threat but necessary ingredient for world peace. I would like to make certain predictions on China’s relation to her neighbors which is exaggerated as threats by Western Press.
As Xi said, China is building toward socialism which is certainly a threat to western Capitalism, but on peaceful competition. West sees China as a threat because they can’t imagine China not using her power as West has been doing for the last 200 years. Thus U.S. is both over estimating China’s military threat and under estimating China’s peaceful ambitions.
After the deluge of tweets by Donald Trump after the New Year one can’t help but questioning not only his qualification as the leader of U.S. presidency, but his sanity. Those so called serious people in DC no longer call out President Xi as authoritarian, and U.S. president as symbol of democracy, but avoid the comparison totally. Foreign leaders are now embarrassed and frightened to be associated with him and hoping Mueller will save the day. The situation reminded me of a movie I saw from 1979, “Being There”, starring Peter Sellers so much, that I ordered from On Demand and watched it again.
The movie was a satire of American politics and politicians, that people in poverty as the camera panned across downtown Washington DC of the homeless and jobless young African Americans, while Chauncey Gardner, an imbecile former gardener walked among them with the background music of “2001, A Space Odyssey”, signaling the dawning of a new age. He accidentally became avatar of the rich, his utterances became pearls of wisdom, with a blank page which people wrote their own biases and desires. The black humor of him being unable to read or write but relied on TV for wisdom is peerless now that we have Trump being essentially the same except the contrast of innocence with evil today. It is life imitates art with an evil twist that no one could have predicted it became reality, except probably what the black maid Louise said in the movie, “What white people with no brain can do, maybe become president”. The movie ends with Mr. Gardner walking away over the water as if he’s Christ.
I was saying before the election that Trump if elected will be a disaster and accelerate the decline of American empire. Events since then has validated my view. Yet while this has been good for China, we should not underestimate the danger it poses for the world. After all, 1/3 of U.S. wants the nuclear preemption war against North Korea, it’s probably higher in the military, with Trump in desperation and senility we may see it yet. I myself have no sympathy for the Kim Dynasty, and China probably has no more danger beyond the radiation fallout and refugee camps, but still the thought of millions dead nauseates me.
Recent fires outside Beijing and in Tianjin caused stirs in Chinese internet and criticism of safety violations, non performance of local officials, and the resulting hasty eviction of migrant workers in unsafe buildings. There was also the uproar of kindergarten abuse of children and swirling of rumors. Those incidences are the results of growing pains of urbanization. Even in West we have the London tower fire killing 70 people, and the Oakland converted warehouse fire killing more than 30 people, resulting blames and the Fire Department started evicting artists from other converted warehouses whom were forced out to Oakland because of the high rents from San Francisco.
Yet the controversies died out pretty quickly as those who spread false rumors were arrested or forced to confess their mistaken reports, while those correct reports were addressed by officials showing transparency and promises better services. The true name requirement serves its purpose by limiting unfound rumors while still protecting the privacy of those whistle blowers showing true short comings.
Looking at all the Russian bots interference in 2016 U.S. election, with false stories of Clinton wrong doings permeated in social media. With a cost of only a few hundred thousands of dollars, reaching tens of millions of U.S. netizens. The true cost to U.S. society and the world will not be known yet for years to come. Even in Hong Kong today, U.S. is still paying to stir the pot of independence movement there while claiming it’s all for democracy.
Of course the GFW will slow down true exchange of ideas, but for those who need scientific exchanges I don’t think it’s that difficult to circumvent it, and China is willing to pay the price for Cyber Sovereignty to prevent the chaos like in U.S. still not resolved from the Mueller investigation.
Living in the West has the advantage of access to everything from good to bad as long as you have money, but one disadvantage is being somewhat cut off from Chinese literary scene. Thus I was excited when NYT recently talked about a Chinese living in Montreal having his novel translated to English published. His name is Xue Yiwei. He immigrated from China to Canada on a skill visa 15 years ago. He published about 13 works, with 10 in China, and is very popular in China but little known in the West. The recently translated book is called “Dr. Bethune’s Children”, and it excites literary world in the West. While no publisher in China after 7 years of effort dare to publish it because it deals with 2 taboo subjects of CR and TAM, I do hope China will allow it to be published soon. It is time to revisit those events 50 and 38 years later to show confidence and draw lessons from history.
After I read the article, I immediately downloaded the book from Amazon and finished reading it in 1 weekend. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in China or Chinese literature. Unable to get the Chinese edition here in New York, I ordered it from Hong Kong by mail, hopefully I can read it soon.
The author was asked by publisher in China to write a biography of Dr. Bethune as he has access to archives in Montreal. After studying the archives he was unable to write it, but instead wrote a series of letters to Dr. Bethune as one of his millions of children from China. The questions he asked deal with life and death, tragedy and comedy, public persona and private anguish, parents and children, sex and emotion, in other words, philosophical questions eternally asked by philosophers. He constructed 2 characters both ended tragically to symbolize the 2 events, yet he didn’t really blame the government directly but treated them as historically inevitable, just as Dr. Bethune must go to China and died there. He skillfully interwoven events and interactions from China to Canada, from 1938 to 1976 to make you feel real. The juxtaposition of his personal struggle against loneliness and Dr. Bethune’s loneliness makes it unforgettable. For I, Mr. Xue, and even President Xi are all Dr. Bethune’s children, and by inference also Mao’s children.
Nobel Prize for Literature has been very much a political game. I think only about 10% of the winners in last 60 years since WW2 are worthy the prize, certainly not the Chinese winners. After reading only one book by Xue Yiwei, I think he may truly deserve one.
It’s more than a week since the close of 19th Chinese Communist Party Congress. It’s obvious big news in China, with commentators explaining and expounding its significance and vision for the future. With the release of many documentaries before the opening showing the achievements during the past 5 years. (Those who are interested can easily access them from YouTube.)
For readers in U.S. who are interested in world affairs and gather their news from the main stream media it might as well nothing has happened. Obviously Trump and Weinstein scandals dominated the news. Even NYT and WP barely covered the events in Beijing. When they did spare some space to discuss it, it’s the usual suspects. Authoritarianism versus the exceptionalism of democratic West, even though daily news emanated from Washington D.C. belies the truth of total moral and political failures here. When those China experts from academic circles are quoted they mentioned the personnel changes in Politburo, the failure of anyone in the standing committee in the 50s, so that implies no successor to Xi was named, or Xi’s intention to serve longer than 10 years. And finally the military threat implied by a strong China, be it South China Sea or Asia in general.
After being here in U.S. for more than 50 years, it still caught me by surprise the ignorance displayed by Americans in science and geography, but the elites are of such low quality astonish me to no end. I have served in jury duties and attended small claim court. I find lawyers are ignorant of basic math, logic, and even common sense. Certainly unlike those lawyer shows on TV like Perry Mason. A country that produce Mark Twain, Jack London, and Edgar Snow now have few writers and philosophers that are valued. We might be in the terminal stages of the decline of Roman Empire. (U.S. Empire.)
For me, Xi’s message is obvious and magical. China Dream will become a reality. 2 fifteen years stages to reach prosperous strong SOCIALISM China by 2050. Emphasis on “Serve the People”, Mao’s calligraphy adorned all those documentaries. Marxism integrating with Chinese characteristic values. A green future with green covered mountains and clean waters are the real gold and silver mountains. Poverty elimination for shared prosperity for all. Any Chinese that knows Chinese history will applaud the ancient vision of clean non-corrupt officials serving the people. It may be beyond the understanding of those China experts based on individualism and not society in general.
Mainstream media were already conforming to America’s censorship towards any ‘unfriendly’ messages against them. Perhaps the last known frontier towards free speech is the internet and it is going down also. Recently representatives from Twitter, Google, and Facebook are called to Capital Hill because of ‘Russian Propaganda.’
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/facebook-twitter-google-reps-grilled-senate-about-russian-propaganda-n816121
Many Westerners grilled China for their censorship efforts towards Western Media but now America is doing the same. While it is understandable that China censors news that is anti-China, these American internet companies were grilled not necessary because of Anti-America news.
Most ‘themes’ of the news were about content supporting Texas secession movement Anti-Muslim Jesus for Trump, Miners for Trump, and etc… were nothing about Russia at all. These ‘ads’ were blamed for trying to separate America but it is no different than what Trump was doing all along during his campaign during 2016, but Trump were a stronger voice to separate America than what this ‘Russian Propaganda’ could ever do.
Obviously most will associate this question with Hillary Clinton’s book of the election of 2016 in U.S., but it can also applied to what Ken Burns and Lynn Novick asked about Vietnam War in their mesmerizing documentary, and hopefully we will not be asking the question in the future upon a devastated Korea peninsula with irradiated North.
Hillary Clinton pleaded mia culpa and took some responsibility for her failure, but she also blamed FBI director Comey, misogyny, Sander supporters, Russian Hacking, and of course the archaic electoral system, since she did get close to 3 million more votes than Trump. There were various detailed studies on the voting pattern since the election. She not only lost the white votes, she lost the white women votes. She got less black votes than Obama did in the 3 key states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, which more than covered her deficit of 70,000 votes in all three, not to mention the Green Party votes. She even lost the millennial votes. So now we have a chaos president whom the Secretary of State called a f___ing moron, with Iran nuclear deal all but decertified, Paris Climate Accord withdrawal, Korea in danger of incinerated, or as Trump said, we are in the calm before the storm. I just hope the bureaucracy can stall Trump long enough to prevent a nuclear holocaust before Mueller finishes his investigation.
Yet to an observer like myself, the elephant in the room which she avoids touching is liberal’s bible, the U.S. Constitution. This document which supposed to be shining city on the hill, with constant propaganda unquestioned by all, supposedly emulated by all developing countries is really naked emperor. Trump with his Muslim ban has already unclothed Lady Liberty, now with Washington unable to control Trump, it has revealed the nakedness of the emperor. This sclerotic document was a compromise originally favored slavery states and small states. With small educated elites controlling the government it still splintered by Civil War. The Second Amendment as Bill Maher said was originally for militia to suppress slaves and native Americans. It metastases today to Las Vegas shooter. It needs 2/3 of both houses to pass 2 years in a row and 3/4 of states to pass any change. With a Supreme Court of conservatives favoring original meaning this dead document will never be able to change. The Supreme Court will also soon decide on the Wisconsin gerrymander case, whether they will sanctify it’s legal for 48% of votes getting more than 60% of seats in legislature.
Contrast present state of affairs of U.S. with China, the 68 anniversary of the founding of PRC, and the oncoming 19th Party Congress. Certainly there were errors and cul de sacs, yet as those documentaries shown recently that those errors are corrected and China is on a path to China Dream.
Constitution is changed and modified as society changes. I am happy that “Serve the People” is not just a slogan, but attaches meaning to move everyone out of poverty. Socialism with Chinese characteristics and integrating Marxism with Chinese conditions are goals for the party, as black cats or white cats no longer serve the present situation.
The 6 episodes of “Amazing China” are now available on YouTube. I haven’t visited China for 2 years now, yet the speed of transition described in this video series caught me by total surprise. I do hope CGTN will translated it to different languages and broadcast them. It probably will cost a lot less than those short video montages shown in Times Square and much more effective.
Coming the month before the convening of 19th Party Congress, it described what China has accomplished during the last 5 years and the bright future of China Dream. It fills me with a sense of optimism contrasting with the pessimism I feel of U.S. after the election of Trump. The events of last 8 months only confirmed my pessimism. As a Chinese American I can’t be indifferent to what is happening in U.S., no matter how it will benefit China, I do wish U.S. well.
Of course we expect that the videos will sing paean of party secretary Xi Jinping. Yet, when we contrast his eloquent speeches over the years when he’s not at the top with the vulgarity and illiteracy shown by Trump, one can’t but wonder so called Democracy can produce such trash as leader of the so called Free World. One quote by Xi when he was party secretary of Zhejiang province and repeated at Davos is instructive, ” We aspire for gold and silver mountains, yet we want green mountains and green waters, for they are the real gold and silver mountains.”.
The current world order is grossly unfair … historians of an enlightened future may come back to view our times as the dark ages … when humans remain bonded to and oppressed by the hegemony and ideology “markets,” “rule of law,” “freedom” and “democracy”.
The pure hypocrisy of the world is never ending. And here is just one other small case study…
China is often accused by U.S. and Europe and Japan of over-protecting its economy from foreigners. The foreigners want more access but Chinese are greedy; they disregard any concerns of China of over dependence on foreign nations for critical sectors of technology. Read more…
During the 2008 financial crisis, it is well known that nobody went to jail because of it. However, it is relatively unknown that only one bank did get charged for mortgage fraud. Abacus Federal Savings Bank is a relatively small bank which has 6 branches in NY, PA and NJ, has uncovered improper behavior of one employee and was subsequently fired and reported the proper authorities. However, in the coming months prosecutors increasingly ask questions about the incident which led to this. Unlike the big banks where the cases settled out of court with a fine, Abacus was criminally charged. It should also note that out of about 3000 mortgages sold to Fannie Mae during 2005-2010, only 9 of them defaulted, which is less than 1/10 of national average. PBS Frontline has an excellent documentary about this ordeal. Here’s an story about this.
Pete Seeger wrote that song in 1963 about a training accident during WW 2, and obviously referring to the then developing Vietnam War. Incidentally I think he should have received the Nobel Prize for Literature that went to Bob Dylan 1 year later instead after he died. The reason this song triggered in my memory is the recent policy shift/continuation of Trump administration on Afghanistan and “Fire and Fury” toward North Korea.. The lyric perfectly illustrates the dilemma faced by U.S., “Waist deep in the big muddy, but the big fool said to push on”.
The increase of troops in Afghanistan was expected and received approval from the military and main stream media, but opposition from both right and left. It’s true that Trump campaigned against bigger involvement in Afghanistan and certainly not in the best interest of U.S., but that’s the nature of empires. Afghanistan has been the burying ground for empires from British to Soviet, and now probably American Empire. To me Taliban is a push back against modernity which U.S. helped to finance during the Cold War, and sowed and reaping the backlash now. I detest Islam’s treatment of women, and time and modernization is the only solution as China is doing so in Xinjiang.
As for North Korea I think Trump and Kim deserve each other. For me Trump reminds me of the character in Stephen King’s novel and movie, “The Dead Zone”, Greg Stillson. I just hope the generals can somehow restrain Trump from releasing a nuclear holocaust. At least Steve Bannon understand there can be no military solution against North Korea which probably is beyond Trump’s understanding. Logic dictates U.S. has to negotiate with North Korea for denuclearization in exchange for American troop withdrawal from South Korea. U.S. do not need those military exercises, or troops as hostages in South Korea to deter North Korea from invading. Nuclear umbrella from Japan or submarines are more than sufficient. If North Korea feels survival is no longer a question it will evolve by herself. Similarly U.S. do not need troops in Germany to deter Russia from invading, all are excuses to maintain the empire.
Looking at the world today, one can’t help but admire China’s policy of non-interference of internal affairs of other countries. This policy may be dictated by China’s weakness in the beginning, but I think also due to the wisdom of Chinese history and philosophy. The “Star Trek” has the “Prime Directive” which every episode of the TV series violated because entertainment value, but for China it’s great and wise.
In the past, the US stance on North Korea gone from the ‘appeasement’ during the Clinton Era, “Axis of Evil” Era during Bush Era and “Strategic Patience” during the Obama Era. In the advent of Bush Era and Obama era, the US has been trying to hatch a plan of trying to overthrow the North Korean government, very much like what happened to Syria and Libya years after the “Axis of Evil” speech.
The US, South Korea and Japan has been pushing for regime change while China has been pushing for talks and the status quo. Up to this point, North Korea has little threat to the mainland US, but has ballistic missiles to go against South Korea and Japan. In the latest Nuclear test by North Korea, they claimed that they had built a nuclear fusion bomb that can be installed on top of an Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). What has changed is that North Korea has the capability to go after large cities within the continental US.
What I am surprised is that South Korea favors dialogue with North Korea and Trump blamed South Korea that “appeasement does not work.”
http://www.newsweek.com/north-korea-south-korean-president-wants-make-peace-not-war-659669
Meanwhile, China has been blaming the US for not having a dialogue with North Korea which caused this mess.
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/09/05/2017090501307.html
Russia agreeing with China and warns of “Global Catastophe.”
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/05/asia/north-korea-putin/index.html
What I am now starting to find that some western sources now start favoring dialogue instead of doing the same thing over the past few years.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/05/america-north-korea-diplomacy-negotiation
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/09/south-korea-north-korea/538815/
I do believe that this is a turning point where the US will start to give up is grandiose ambitions of taking over North Korea. Considering that China and Russia is condemning more on the US and South Korea for not acting and the US did little after the latest nuclear test, we will see a change in a few months or years.
Finally, after over two months, the Sino-Indian Crisis at Dong Lang (Doklam) that began with Indian troops crossing into Chinese territory to stop a road construction is over. On August 28, the Chinese government confirmed that the Indian troops have withdrawn from the Chinese side of Doklam. The Indian government gave the following statement:
- In recent weeks, India and China have maintained diplomatic communication in respect of the incident at Doklam.
- During these communications, we were able to express our views and convey our concerns and interests. On this basis, expeditious disengagement of border personnel at the face-off site at Doklam has been agreed to and is on-going.
I don’t need to go over all the details of the crisis here, as those are readily available elsewhere. But those who want a primer, do an internet search for stories between June 18 and August 29, 2017 on “India” and “China” or “Doklam” or “Donglang” and you will get a good sample…
What I want to share here are some of my thoughts about this whole standoff… Read more…
We have talked abo
ut media bias against China, Chinese culture, and Chinese people a lot here. Almost every day, you hear stories about how China is doing illicit things … or creating demands for illicit products.
We hear about China polluting the world, “flooding” the world with steel or solar panels or electronics or toys, etc. Of course, we rarely hear about the social good the world reaps with China’s “cheap” steel, solar panels, or electronics …
And when it’s not China doing bad things, we hear how China is making others do bad things. We hear for example how China creates illicit demand for shark fins, ivory, rhino horns, etc. The poachers become the victims when it comes to China. There are no evil poachers à la say evil “drug growers” and “drug dealers” in Mexico or Columbia supplying illicit drugs to the U.S. …. just bad Chinese consumers.
The world is rarely about saints and villains, but the West almost always caricatures China in those terms. If China is involved in any way in a problematic supply chain, the fault is placed squarely on the Chinese. Such reflexes are so ingrained that people often do it without even thinking about it.
The following screen shot is taken from Asia Times, not the most anti-Chinese publication per se. But it’s noteworthy in the sense that rarely do I find a publication that unabashedly blames China on both the demand as well as supply side on the same page.
It’s truly damned if you do, damned if you don’t…
I was going to write another case study on the intrinsic hypocrisy in the rhetoric of freedom – how “freedom” is uttered when useful, and completely ignored when not – using Google’s recent “firing” of an employee who had written a memo that some deemed not politically correct as a basis of discussion.
But then I found that Paul Craig Roberts already wrote a good post on it already.
Here is a copy: Read more…
China has been giving warnings right and left on the oncoming border war with India, while India has been downplaying it and very much ignored by the West fixated on North Korea ICBM testing. The facts are obvious to those interested in them. The Tibet border with Sikkim was set in 19th century and undisputed. India annexed Sikkim and very much like to annex Bhutan next. The border negotiation between Bhutan and China has been inconclusive because India has exerted veto over any normalization of relations. China initiated road building on land she controls, and India moved military personnel over the Sikkim border into China, claiming she is doing so on behalf of Bhutan. India demands that China stop the road building before she will withdraw the troops. China has refused the demand. The situation is obviously untenable.
China has been doing live military exercises in Tibetan plateau, and both sides have been re-enforcing border troops. China conducted military parade for the 90th anniversary of the founding of PLA in Inner Mongolia. Yet all the warnings have been fallen on deaf ears. Chinese Politburo is probably meeting in summer beach resort and a decision will be make soon. Obviously any confrontation will affect the Shanghai meeting in September, but I think China will act probably within a week or two and not delay until after the meeting of BRICS.
Scenario I imaged will start with artillery barrage annihilate those invading troops, that is artillery against foreign troops in Chinese territory. When India try to respond by counter barrage, then it automatically become incident for expanded conflicts. The routing of Indian army is not really in question. The question is how far does Chinese troops will advance? Whether China will retake control of areas when she withdraw after 62 war? Whether China will assert air superiority and bomb airfields and support troops. I suspect China will be more restrained after victories and proclaim cease fire, that would disappoint those more nationalistic, but I think China will demand Bhutan be really independent and settle border with her. Modi may beg for American help but with North Korea indigestion Trump will pass.
Recently I saw Oliver Stone’s film on Snowden from Showtime and read NYT magazine article on Chinese human rights lawyers and feel the need to discuss both here. Mr. Snowden and the lawyer Liang Xiaojun and his client Xie Yanyi are in both cases dissidents. Yet their stories are so different and revealing. I suspect Chinese propaganda department could learn something from both Mr. Stone and NYT in the treatment of stories when they bemoan the soft power deficits. I hope maybe they can hire Mr. stone to do a biography on Xi Jinping.
The NYT article is by Alex Palmer. The article reads like a gothic novel, heavy laden dreads, implied threats everywhere, worried spouses and innocent children, tea meetings for interrogations, ending with Mr. Liang free but uncertain, and his client freed after 1 year in detention because prosecutor dropped the charges. Nowhere does Mr. Palmer stated how did the lawyers make their living or their economic status. Did they get subsidies from West? From lawyer’s fees? Rich families? Suddenly my memory stirred about the 709 ( July 9, 2015) incident. There were swirling rumors before then of a police brutality in Chinese internet. A beggar was shot and killed in a railroad station by police. There were demonstrations and lawyers and “big V”s demanding justice on Weibo. Then the government initiated crack down, some lawyers were arrested and law firms closed. Then the truths were revealed. Surveillance video showed a professional beggar, yes, he makes his living by traveling from Northeast to major cities with his 2 children begging for living, got into a scuffle with the security police at the checkpoint in rail station. He was drunk and used his young daughter as a battering ram against policeman, and using that distraction attempting to disarm the policeman. In self defense the policeman fired 1 shot and killed him. And those demonstrators? more than half were professional demonstrators traveling place to place and paid by the lawyers to extort from local governments weary of mass incidents. I also recall there was a film about murders committed by gangs throwing unwary recruits down coal mining shafts and pretending grieving families to extort from mine owners and local government trying to hide unsafe working conditions. I guess they also need human right lawyers to negotiate a price. The only thing I gleam from Mr. Palmer is they both have military officers as parents, corrupt enough to send one to Singapore to study law? Where he learned rule of law, the law from British colonial days where communists were jailed from 30-40 years without trial? I did learn from the comment section one claimed that 14 student activists were awaiting beheading in Saudi Arabia and nowhere from the newspaper.
Mr. Stone is a gifted story teller. I am his fan since “Platoon”. Snowdon portrayed by him is a patriot who volunteered for Special Force because of 9/11, he broke both of his legs due to stress fracture in training. He didn’t finish high school because of family circumstance, yet smart enough self studying computer to pass CIA school in flying color. His politic is more like a conservative unlike his liberal girl friend. He revealed law breaking by NSA and CIA, and willing risk jail for the rest of his life. He’s an American dissident and a worthy contrast to those Chinese lawyers.
When Trump was voted president last year, I was hopeful that the door for next level of U.S. China cooperation will be opened. I am still hopeful, but when things like this happen, it makes me realize just how hard change can be.
The U.S. and China share many differences that should be smoothed out. Here, I am not talking about garbage talks about “human rights” or “democracy,” or boastful jousts protecting “freedom of navigation” in the S. China Sea. I am talking about straight-forward win-win deals between Chinese and U.S. Companies.
In an earlier post, I had noted that a big part of the “deficit” between China and U.S. is because on the balance, many more U.S. companies invest in China as compared to Chinese companies investing in the U.S. I had written: Read more…
1. Grants in US$ from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government entity, to «Minzhu Zhongguo» or «Democratic China, Inc.», where Liu Xiaobo was the founder.
Comment by Rolf in 2018:
The links below are not working any longer. It seems that NED is trying to conceal their support for Liu Xiaobo. But by using the WayBackMachine, it is still possible to find the original links. (Se further below).
2005: $136,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2005/
2006: $136,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2006/
2007: $145,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2007/
2008: $150,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2008/
2009: $213,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2009/
2010: $220,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2010/
Total sum from NED to «Democratic China, Inc.»: $1,000,000
2. Liu Xiaobo also received money from National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as president of «Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc.»:
2005: $99,500; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2005/
2006: $135,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2006/
2007: $135,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2007/
2008: $152,350; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2008/
2009: $152,950; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2009/
2010: $170,000; http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2010/
Total sum from NED for «Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc.»: US $844,800
Total support from NED during these six years is US$1,844,800, which is about 14 million yuan – a huge sum of money in China – where salaries at that time were about 25% of the level in the West.
Original links recovered by using WayBackMachine, https://archive.org:
(Uses for unknown reasons 10-20 seconds to load)
http://web.archive.org/web/20170718023142/http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2005/
https://web.archive.org/web/20170718023154/http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2006/
https://web.archive.org/web/20170718023158/http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2007/
https://web.archive.org/web/20170718023203/http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2008/
https://web.archive.org/web/20170718023209/http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2009/
https://web.archive.org/web/20170718023214/http://www.ned.org/region/asia/china-2010/
What’s the purpose of National Endowment for Democracy (NED)?
The National Endowment for Democracy’s purpose is to fund individuals, political parties and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) favorable to US interests.
Former CIA-agent Ralph McGehee writes: «… the current US policy of using (rightly or wrongly) the theme of human rights violations to alter or overthrow non-US-favored governments. In those countries emerging from the once Soviet Bloc that is forming new governmental systems; or where emerging or Third World governments resist US influence or control, the US uses ‘human rights violations,’ as an excuse for political action operations. ‘Human Rights’ replaces ‘Communist Conspiracy’ as the justification for overthrowing governments.»
British writer Patrick French: «The NED constitutes, so to speak, the CIA’s “civilian arm”».
After reading his column from July 8 in New York Times, I found his arrogance unbearable and have to respond. Although there is a comment section there, it is usually censored and full of praise, so I decide to write a rebut here.
As most of us have preconceived biases and opinions on Liu Xiaobo, yet mostly ignorant of his real writings I decide that Wikipedia might be a good place to start. Mr. Kristof compare Liu to Nelson Mandela. Mr. Mandela spent 27 years in jail fighting against colonialism and racism, while Mr. Liu wants China to surrender and subservient to West completely.
“In a 1988 interview with Hong Kong’s Liberation Monthly (now known as Open Magazine), Liu was asked what it would take for China to realize a true historical transformation. He replied:
“[It would take] 300 years of colonialism. In 100 years of colonialism, Hong Kong has changed to what we see today. With China being so big, of course it would require 300 years as a colony for it to be able to transform into how Hong Kong is today. I have my doubts as to whether 300 years would be enough.”[22][23]
Liu admitted in 2006 that the response was extemporaneous, although he did not intend to take it back, as it represented “an extreme expression of his long held belief.”[23] The quote was nonetheless used against him. He has commented, “Even today [in 2006], radical patriotic ‘angry youth’ still frequently use these words to paint me with ‘treason’.”[23]
Known for his pro-West stance, Liu once stated in an interview: “Modernization means whole-sale westernization, choosing a human life is choosing Western way of life. Difference between Western and Chinese governing system is humane vs in-humane, there’s no middle ground… Westernization is not a choice of a nation, but a choice for the human race” [24]”
Now it might seem I am quoting him on his extreme position, he might walk back a little. He did claim, “I must: 1. Use Western civilization as a tool to critique China. 2. Use my own creativity to critique the West.'”[27]”. Yet he did nothing of that sort, as we can see from his opinion on Iraq War.
“Liu also published a 2004 article in support of Bush’s war on Iraq, titled “Victory to the Anglo-American Freedom Alliance”, in which he praised the U.S.-led post-Cold War conflicts as “best examples of how war should be conducted in a modern civilization.” He wrote “regardless of the savagery of the terrorists, and regardless of the instability of Iraq’s situation, and, what’s more, regardless of how patriotic youth might despise proponents of the United States such as myself, my support for the invasion of Iraq will not waver. Just as, from the beginning, I believed that the military intervention of Britain and the United States would be victorious, I am still full of belief in the final victory of the Freedom Alliance and the democratic future of Iraq, and even if the armed forces of Britain and the United States should encounter some obstacles such as those that they are currently facing, this belief of mine will not change.” He predicted “a free, democratic and peaceful Iraq will emerge.”[29] During the 2004 US presidential election, Liu again praised Bush for his war effort against Iraq and condemned Democratic Party candidate John Kerry for not sufficiently supporting the wars in which the U.S. was then involved. He commented on Islamism that, “a culture and (religious) system that produced this kind of threat (Islamic fundamentalism), must be extremely intolerant and blood-thirsty.”
As we look at Iraq today, Libya today, and Syria today, we can see why Mr. Liu is the darling of the neocons and liberals like Mr. Kristof. For them China Dream is a threat to their way of life. A divided, broken China, with pseud-democratic farces like U.S. where presidents are elected with minority votes, where republicans dominates in the House when their vote totals less than Democrats is his beacon. The 1.3 billion Chinese people standing up against poverty is less important than his concept as a savior. It’s sad and certainly a personal tragedy for his family on his liver cancer. The Chinese government has gave him medical parole and allowed German and American specialists to treat him. It was his choice to stay in China, and certainly China is under no obligation to allow him to die in U.S. as an anti-China martyr.
Recent Comments