Archive

Archive for April, 2017

Chinese American Male

April 12th, 2017 18 comments

Coming June I will be traveling to Ireland to attend a wedding for my niece. I am happy for her, yet it triggered reflections on my part on the Chinese male/female dynamic, male and female gender ratio imbalance in China, patriarchy and misogyny.
I have 2 nieces, both vivacious and outgoing, having various American boyfriends since high school through college, and good careers in Manhattan and California. They have white boyfriends, the older one was engaged to a Scotsman and now will wed an Irishman, yet neither ever have a Chinese American boyfriend. It’s not because Chinese American males were absent in NYC. I have nephews and knew other friends’ sons, yet they all seem to have difficulty engaging with females. I know most male Chinese Americans are in STEM fields, are introverted, and socially awkward, and I think they make exemplary husbands both in income and respect for women, but maybe not in Hollywood sense of romance. I am sure I am exaggerating to some extend, but I don’t think I am that off the mark. The sense of loneliness probably drove some over the cliff, such as shootings in Virginia Tech and Isla Vista. Though some will take issue with me that Cho was of Korean heritage and Rogers was only half Chinese, but it still holds.
There is no disagreement that human society is a patriarchy except maybe during cave man era. In China, the need for male heir still dominates even in the era of one child policy. Sex selective abortion and abandonment of female babies, which caused gender disparity in China and large adoption of female Chinese babies by Americans. Yet the sex disparity has perversely increased the status of females in China as much as Mao’s dictate of equality of sexes. Hong Kong billionaires may be able to scoop up Olympic female diving champions as their daughter in laws, but villagers short of females must resort to exchange their life saving for Vietnamese brides. In cities like Beijing or Shanghai, one must have an apartment and car ready before wedding bell tolls.
The enrollments in some elite universities has already tipped in favor of females, and that has caused backlashes from males. I suspect Trump’s triumph in the voting booths to some extend was due to misogyny. They disguise the reason for their dislike for Hillary’s Wall Street connection, but now we have a cabinet full of billionaires dismantling any remnants of Obama’s legacy and even some of Roosevelt’s New Deals.
As a male Chinese American, my advice for others is to break away somewhat from the cultural background of Confucian culture of very reserved indifference, be more open to the opposite sex and sexuality. you don’t have to embrace Dionysian carnality, but be open and flowers will help.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Norwegian media, Hu Jia and Liu Xiaobo

April 12th, 2017 2 comments

The Norwegian prime minister, Mrs. Erna Solberg, visited China April 7–10 this year. This was the first visit by a Norwegian prime minister in seven years, since diplomatic relations between Norway and China has been frozen – due to the 2010 Nobel peace prize.

Personally I am shocked about how Norwegian media covered our prime minister’s visit.

The Norwegian national broadcasting station (NRK) starts one of its net articles with an interview with dissident Hu Jia. It goes like this: «Hu Jia, one of Liu Xiaobo close allies, is shocked to hear that the Norwegian prime minister is not going to address human rights issues when she visits China. … We live like in the German movie ‘The Lives of Others’.» (Oscar rewarded movie about Stasi during DDR-time)

Also the biggest newspaper in Norway «Aftenposten» and «VG» the second biggest, focus 60-70% on Hu Jia, Liu Xiaobo and the 2010 Nobel peace prize. They also carry attacks on the Norwegian prime minister, «who lacks courage», and (of course) on the Chinese government, who should «immediately release Liu Xiaobo».

Since these news organizations are independent from each other, such a similar way of reporting can’t be coincidental and must be organized. To me it seems that there must be a Nato-connection to the editor or the editorial board.

By the way: In the book «What the U.S. Can Learn from China» by Ann Lee at page 81, she refers a conversation with Michael Massing, former executive editor of Columbia Journalism Review: «Mr. Massing informed me that a reporter and friend of his who worked at the Beijing office of the Wall Street Journal told him that the editors in Washington regularly changed material information and opinions in his articles. Given the twelve-hour time difference, by the time his stories went to press in the West, the editors had found the time to replace all the Chinese interviews with statements from American talking heads who work at think tanks promoting anti-China perspectives.»

It is also thoughts-provoking that the editors of Wikipedia has removed the information on Liu Xiaobo receiving NED-money – information which were there in 2011/2012.

In 2010 I posted an article at Fool’s Mountain, http://blog.foolsmountain.com/2010/10/08/liu-xiaobo/ . But since the NED-links do not work any longer, I post an update here at Hidden Harmonies:

 

Liu Xiaobo has received money from the American government for years:

1. Grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government entity, to «Minzhu Zhongguo» or «Democratic China, Inc.», where Liu Xiaobo is the founder.

2005: $136,000

China 2005

2006: $136,000

China 2006

2007: $145,000

China 2007

2008: $150,000

China 2008

2009: $195,000 + $18,000 (supplement): $213,000

China 2009

2010: $220,000

China 2010

Total sum from NED to «Democratic China, Inc.»: $1,000,000

 

2. Liu Xiaobo has also received money from National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as president of «Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc.»:

2005: $99,500

China 2005

2006: $135,000

China 2006

2007: $135,000

China 2007

2008: $152,350

China 2008

2009: $152,950

China 2009

2010: $170,000

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 are about 25% of the level in the West.

In addition Liu and his staff has probably also received training from the Americans.

 

What is NED?

NED (National Endowment for Democracy) is funded by the American government, and is subject to congressional oversight. The purpose is to fund individuals, political parties and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) favorable to US interests.

The payment from NED to US-friendly groups is not a new thing. Eric T. Hale shows in his dissertation (2003) that during the 1990s, China and Russia were awarded the highest number of NED grants with 222 and 221, respectively. Total payment to groups in China during these ten years was astonishing US$ 20.999.229. His dissertation can be found at: http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-1105103-140728/unrestricted/Hale_dis.pdf

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.»

Patrick French writes: «The NED constitutes, so to speak, the CIA’s “civilian arm”».

Conclusion: In this meaning Liu Xiaobo becomes an American agent. And the Nobel Peace Prize Committee’s 2010 decision, since I already had forwarded them the NED information listed above, becomes a political plot.