Former U.S. Ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman, in a televised Republican primary debate told Americans he would reach out to the 500 million Chinese Internet users; to lead them towards change which would ultimately “take China down.” Video below has been circulating in China. It contains what Huntsman said captioned in Chinese. I want to share reader silentchinese‘s response.
Undoubtedly some of the English language ‘China’ blogs will dismiss Chinese reactions to this as ‘nationalistic.’ Their carts are in front of their donkeys aren’t they? Americans wanting to understand ‘China’ will also have to look at her own actions critically.
While I absolutely agree with silentchinese’s analysis on what Huntsman said, I hope the Chinese bend backwards and try to take this in with a big grain of salt. Romney and Perry call each other liars in front of millions of Americans. The American political climate is venomous. Perhaps I am a new convert, but I do believe this phenomenon needs to be kept in mind when looking at what American politicians say.
Yes he was talking about changing china’s political system.
but the interesting thing to me is this: the implication of changing china’s political system, from his standpoint to his audience, was that the change will neutralize china’s manufacturing and economic growth. and bring prosperity and economic growth back to america
2 things one must note in that statement.
1) he thinks (at least speaks as if he thinks) this is a zero sum game between America and China, which clearly and factually baloney. but he felt compelled to sell that as zero sum.
2) and what I think is more interesting: he is stating he believes that a political change in china would slow down china economically… which means, one, current system is actually good for chinese prosperity and growth. and two, his hopeful alternative for the chinese state, a chaotic, pseudo-democratic, post-soviet era like state for China, would means economic dislocation and disruption for chinese prosperity and growth.
Do I hear an implicit endorsement of chinese state? that he is actually acknowledging the current chinese state, which he is so desperately trying to dislodge with all his help “constituencies” in china, is working for china?!
such rare admittance from former US ambassador to china and republican presidential hopeful, a moderate at that.
this should give all the starry eyed “democrats and liberals” in china a clear spalsh of cold water.
or may be not, may be they knew all along the plan to dislocate the current state. and the economic dislocation it would entail… may be they are not thinking in the best interest of china, may be they are ….. gasp… hanjian.
oh I am very sure US is trying all it could to dislocate the current political system. the very fact that china is on such a trajectory now, and is fast becoming in US political elite’s eye an dangerous existential threat to US economic/political/military hegemony, AND thus multifront efforts are being spent to dislocate the very political system that has brought china this far. … is ample enough proof that, despite all the bad about chinese political system (and there are plenty), in a macro-historic standpoint, the system is actually working for china.
which brings me another gloomy observation:
carthago delenda est
sinae delenda est.
Obviously this goes beyond rhetoric. Look at the NED funded Liu Xiaobo, Hu Jia, and scores before. Look at the U.S. media longing for a Jasmine revolution in China. As in Professor Yan’s recent essay, this is a battle for the hearts and minds of people. For countries like China and Russia where the U.S. or NATO cannot outright bomb into submission, they engage in such battles. Qualitatively, this is much more benign. And I think it is important for people in China to be cognizant of it. For if not, they would be playing into the hands of those who precisely want to escalate into real bombs and bullets.