Loading
Dec 30

我看08宪章

Written by guest on Tuesday, December 30th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Filed under:-chinese-posts | Tags:, ,
Add comments

我看08宪章

作者:magiczerg 文章发于:乌有之乡 点击数: 更新时间:2008-12-11

《08宪章》终于出炉了,很好,它们终于又从黑暗中窜出来,张牙舞爪的向人民冲过来了。这个阴险的敌人在76年劫后重生以来,一直像病毒一样偷偷的复制着,今天爆发了,看来我们现在的免疫力确实是不行了。病毒总是趁人虚弱的时候爆发,08是中华民族由于长期虚耗,刚刚病倒的时候,它们果然就发作了,治病救人看来是势在必行了。

看病之前,我们先诊断诊断病情,以便对症下药。大凡病毒老病毒易治,新出现的病毒难医,这个病毒是新病毒还是老病毒呢?翻开历史看一看原来这个病毒1908年就出现了,当时清政府像现在的走资派一样为了笼络人心预备立宪了。看来《08宪章》应该改为《1908宪章》,变异了的病毒出现了,只不过又换了个马甲。如果这思想的深度尚不及旧民主主义的东西祸害成功了,只能证明我们民族的思辨力已经退到1919年前了。

接下来我们看看病因。 照理说老病毒,我们应该早有免疫力,不应该害怕的,为什么政府又一次的讳莫如深呢?难道毛主席给我们民族注射的疫苗失效了?如果失效为什么会失效呢?我想我们的政府该反思一下了!资本主义在中国走不通是历史证明的了,为什么现在的善良的人们人们还总是一厢情愿的相信呢?政府一直以来摇摆不定,被走资派挟持,篡改历史的恶果出现了。现在走资派利用被篡改的历史去蒙蔽广大老百姓的时候,政府只好把长期以来对付正派(之所以不称左派的原因是个人觉得现在的右派是反动派,真正的右派在我们的所谓的“左派”中间,还没到显露的时候)的手段拿出来了,那就是封杀。就像纸里的火一样是封不得住,这样做只会把自己推向人民的对立端,成全了这帮畜生。唯一也是最正确的办法就是还原历史的真相,让人民自己认清它们丑恶的嘴脸。让人民了解真正的历史,让祖国的未来–青年人真正了解中国的历史,这样中华名族才能真正自信,自强。中华民族才能永远拒毒于体外。

除了加强免疫力,我们最重要的是还要给病毒杀死。看看这份病毒的制造者吧,两个长期以来通外祸国的跳梁小丑。不能再纵容它们了,对待敌人就要像秋风扫落叶一样。来一场正义的审批再送上人民垒起的断头台是它们的最好的结局。还有那帮亡我中华之心不死的帮凶们,也要用痛打落水狗的精神来对待它们(榜单上的茅于轼之流)!

题外话:本人是一名大学教师,虽然教龄不长,但是跟现在的青年学生接触比较多。特别是80后,感觉他们属于没有信仰没有精神的一代。我有上课给他们讲一些关于人性美好的一面,教人上进的故事,竟遭一些学生不理解的经历。他们自己不愿意思考,如果你想让他们思考还会引起他们的反感。深表无奈,又充满同情,其实他们才是最不幸的一代。希望大家多拿出耐心对待他们,温暖他们,不要在网上人云亦云的打击他们了。他们中间也有不少热血青年,由于了解了错误的历史反而更容易误入歧途。他们更容易受08宪章蒙蔽,热爱祖国的人们的路很长很长。现在工作在一线的老师可以说忙的连自己思考的时候都快没有了,更不用说教学生思考了,教育的悲哀啊!平时由于时间的缘故,很少发东西,今天熬夜仓促写了一些,希望大家多批评。

乌有之乡 http://www.wyzxsx.com


There are currently 2 comments highlighted: 24970, 24989.

59 Responses to “我看08宪章”

  1. BMY Says:

    I am not criticize you, Charlies.

    I am no fan of the charter08 but this kind of culture revolution style language is also out of my taste.

  2. FOARP Says:

    @Chuck – I am to criticise you, Charlie-boy. This deranged screed is the best you could come up with? Let’s have a little look:

    “(after describing Charter 08 as “a poisonous infection” which must be “expelled”) . . . apart from strengthening our immunity [to the 'disease' of Charter 08] , what is most important for us is to kill this disease. Let us look at the creators of this disease, two long term mischief-making clowns, harming our country through foreign powers! Let us not indulge them again, we must sweep away these enemies as the autumn wind sweeps away the leaves! A righteous reckoning at the people’s guillotine is the best solution for them!”

    Charles, if you agree with this, you are a fascist.

  3. Charles Liu Says:

    BMY, none taken. Just posting it as an opinion of 08 Charter from the Chinese blogsphere. I have no opinion of it.

    If any I agree it is an overly extereme reaction; having no profund expreience/knowledge of CR, I am ignorant of it’s context.

    The point is 08 Charter is not univerally accepted within China, as our tainted western view would wish for. At best 2000 out of 1.3 billion people voted for it.

    Foarse, you might be more right about my fascist asperation than you think. I’m American ain’t I?

  4. Charlotte Stant Says:

    I am well-acquainted with Chinese people of your stripe, Charles. Rather than fighting for your rights in the U.S., you put all your hopes in a China which will emerge as a world power. You care little that its rise in the current order is at the expense of the vast majority of the people there. You care even less about the absurdity of saying that only a tiny minority of Chinese voted for the 08 Charter when you well know that no one in China has ever seen a real ballot. OK, I’ll exempt the Politburo if you insist.

    Honey, guess what? Grow a spine. If you feel like a second-class citizen in a fascist state here in the U.S., try living in China for a while and see if that honorable patriotic brand of fascism suits you any better. As a fellow Chinese American my statement is different than the racist and xenophobic white rant of “go back to where you came from.” What I am doing instead is exhorting you to stop hiding behind your fake hard-on. 在中文叫意淫﹐魯迅已經說得很清楚了。The freedom and well-being of Chinese people is not your viagra.

    老舍愛國沒留在英國﹐結果共產黨的無產階級專政把他法西斯了。閣下沒有他的偉大靈魂﹐但連他後來那樣委曲求全尚且無法苟活﹐估計閣下這樣怨天尤人的暴躁性子﹐黨也不愛瞧你,撂在哪個勞教所裡﹐到時候還得勞駕閣下家人奔走呼号请美国使馆的人营救。而美国法西斯近来偏又和行走资派之事专无产阶级之政的共产党很近乎,就算你是美国公民,或许也爱理不理,正巧坐实了美国的法西斯本质:美国子民投奔法西斯国家出了点事,美国不给撑腰子,那不是天大的法西斯么?哎,到时候你又是法西斯的美国人了,一笔帐真是教人怎么算哟,估计连郭德纲说你都得狗咬乌龟没处下口。

    in all seriousness, Charles, if you don’t like your lot here, fight for your rights! There is some discrimination here against people of color; there is room for improvement in the U.S. But don’t use China as a distraction for your problems. They don’t deserve it, and you have no right to ask it of them.

  5. Netizen K Says:

    Charlotte Stant,

    You seem to presume and extroplate a lot. I hope you are not one of those FLGers who are debate irrationally. Once FLGers get involved, all discussion become accusation and fiction. No fact is not needed, it seems.

  6. FOARP Says:

    @Netizen K -

    I don’t believe she said anything about FLG. It is true that Charles Liu has a lot of FLGers following him around, but this would seem to be because he keeps starting arguments with them, indeed he seeks their attention. Charles Liu describes himself as a “Community activist” for the Asian-American community, you have to ask, what has he ever done for the Asian-Americans of Seattle? In fact the only signs I have ever found of his ‘activism’ are on websites such as these. He has started seven blogs all told, all of which were directed at issues within mainland China – FLG, Tiananmen, Organ transplants, the Diaoyutai islands etc. etc. Nothing to do with people of Asian descent living in North America.

    Charles Liu posted this message by someone calling for the execution of the drafters of a charter which merely asks for the same rights which he by-and-large already enjoys as a US citizen, and has not distanced himself from the remarks. It appears entirely like he has posted what this person has said because it is what he would like to say, but will not say because he is afraid of criticism.

    In the light of this, I beleive that Charlotte’s criticism is entirely valid, he does nothing for the rights of Asian-Americans in the US, the rights of Asian people generally, or for the rights of Chinese people living in mainland China. Instead he defends a totalitarian government, and poses as a patriot of China, but when pushed on this hides behind his US citizenship. Fascism is fascism wherever it happens, if Charles Liu really believes that there is fascism in the US, then he should protest it, not attempt to defend a totalitarian government verging on fascism from domestic critics.

  7. Steve Says:

    @ Charles Liu #3:

    Why would you say “as our tainted western view would wish for”? Firstly, I doubt 1% of westerners have ever heard of Charter 08. Secondly, why would they assume China has universally accepted it? I feel confident saying that most don’t care one way or the other. Concerning Americans, most have little to no interest in foreign affairs.

  8. Netizen K Says:

    FOARP,

    “Charlotte’s criticism is entirely valid.” I don’t think so.

    Look at this sentence: “I am well-acquainted with Chinese people of your stripe, Charles.”

    First of all, is Charlie Chinese? I don’t know. He says he is. That’s fine with me. But based on this self-provided information, Charlotte Stant dropped a racist accusation bombshell. That’s FLG coming to my mind because the whole accusation was not based on a verified fact.

    Then there is this “Chinese peoplle of your stripe” generalization. I need names, names of real people. She didn’t provide any. This type of thinking and reasoning seemed racist to me even if she knew some of such persons, which she didn’t provide, I repeat again.

    Finally, her arguement was not really coherent. That’s why I asked if she was a FLGer. I didn’t say she is. Just wondering if she was.

  9. FOARP Says:

    @Netizen K – So let me get this straight:

    - Her argument, which was quite understandable and coherent, is proof that she is an FLG member, even though she doesn’t mention FLG anywhere.

    – saying that someone who calls himself Chinese (and there’s no reason why we shouldn’t believe him) is Chinese is dropping a “racist bomshell”. I guess I’ll remember this the next time I see you refer to me as British (I mean, how do you know?).

    - You have to refer to specific examples of how people from a certain group think before you refer to the traits of that group as a whole, otherwise you are being racist. So comments like this:

    Netizen K: “China has many powerful tools to confront any country. EU countries are naive and unable to recongnize [sic] it.”

    are, by your logic, racist.

  10. Netizen K Says:

    FOARP,

    You are very loopy and proper reasoning. I don’t want to rehash your past here. Just want to say that you lie easily, and so what it is fact, what is fiction, is not issue with you.

  11. Charlotte Stant Says:

    Netizen, I happen to be a Confucian-Renaissance secular humanist by conviction, and you can find nary a FLG idea in my body. I also happen to agree in part that many of them, driven by zeal and understandable if unwise bitterness, exaggerate and distort facts. But hey, take a look at their opponent. They show that the CCP is adept at corrupting some of its enemies into its own attenuated mirror image.

    As for the racist claim, um, like I said above, I am Chinese, like Charles. My father is from 江苏宿迁,my mother’s family lived in Taiwan for 200 years but came from 福建漳州。 Indeed, on my father’s side our ancestral records, 祖谱,go back to the Song dynasty in 河南。 Thus is every other obscure peasant in China a peer of British aristocrats tracing their lineage back to the Norman Conquest (FOARP, are you REALLY British? Smile.)

    Netizen, as a fellow Chinese who had to learn English as a teenager, let me tell you that “of that stripe” dooes not connote a formal organization (such as the Communist Youth League) as you immediately assume. It merely means a group with some defining characteristic. Do I know such people? Oh yeah. If personal knowledge is required to recognize a distinct group (which I don’t think is needed; for example, the Arkansas governor against integration at Little Rock. 西施不用知其名而后称其美,庸人无庸与之游而后惊其愚。I number among my acquaintance my own cousins living in LA, who like Charles glory in China’s rise while harboring resentment against their own adopted country. I’ll be charitable and assume that your demand for names is a gracious Chinese joke to soften the polemics here.

    As for the U.S.’ tolerance of that immigrant resentment, I for one would continue to support it, because it is the one quality about this country that I would die for above all.

    Netizen, 既然你这么风声鹤唳,那我也得见贤思齐。您该不会是查理的马甲吧?还是党的好五毛?要出国冲杀,我们无任欢迎,但拜托那套文革乱带帽子的把戏玩到今天也该稍微加点粉翻新一下了吧,姐姐我早在翻阅伤痕文学的时节就看伤了耶,怎么办?你有一句实证没有?我种族歧视自己人?那像你这种捍卫为暴政压迫自己同胞辩护的人的作风,该怎么称呼才是?劝你回去烧香问问自家祖宗牌位。英文不溜不要紧,说中文麻也通,我是长统派爱国台胞,只管放马过来,只要你能说出几句理实具在的话替中国共产党辩护,姐姐一定陪你玩!

    FOARP,as you pointed out, Netizen provided no refutation of my argument except by imposing on me some conviction I do not profess. Interestingly enough, primitive tactics like that would no longer draw a response on boards in China such as 天涯 or 猫眼,as they are deemed too thoughtless and lazy. So you are showing uncommon kindness and possibly insufficient condescension to senseless cultural-revolution style attacks. I am guilty of the same only because I usually cruise the boards in Taiwan and China, and rarely get to take folks like that with bilingual artillery. For a pacifist feminist this is such good harmless blood sport I just could not resist.

  12. Charlotte Stant Says:

    FOARP, do you live in China? If so, I envy you. I was there the last couple of years and was blissfully happy.

  13. pug_ster Says:

    For those people who can’t read Chinese, maybe you should translate it. Google translator doesn’t do any justice. The Chinese has been wronged in numerous occasions in the last 200 years, The opium wars, Japan invasion, cultural revolution, etc… Unfortunately, there are organizations, groups, and countries who always likes to thumb down their nose at China and its people despite what China does. As one time that Perspectivehere wrote, we persevere, we go on, we hold firm in our beliefs, and should not impose them onto others (or something of that sense.) Know that the Chinese government are not going to listen to this kind of charter 08 garbage and Chinese government has their ways to move foward. Like you mentioned this 08 sickness happened in 1908, but it almost happened in 1988 (err 1989) when those Western Educated Chinese lackeys almost overthrew the Chinese government. I’m glad that the Lhasa incident happened last march. It did show the true face of anti-sinoism that is going on in many of the Western Countries and the need for a wake up call for the overseas Chinese to react.

    I’ve lived here in the US for a long time, so long that I can’t even read or understand most of the words in my native language. I used to know what’s wrong and what’s right because at the time, I thought the US was a great country and Chinese Communist country oppresses people. But as I got older, it is harder to know what’s right and wrong anymore.

  14. Charlotte Stant Says:

    Pugster, for someone as lost as you are, perhaps we should start from the beginning. Umm, remember Marx? Engles? And Lenin? How come the Chinese Communist Party picked up so eagerly on their foreign garbage and imposed it on everyone else in China? They are just as foreign to China as the constitutionalism of the 08 Charter.

    I am amazed to see that you consider the founding of the Republic back in the early 1900 a sickness, as had that sickness been cured, you would still be under Manchu rule today. To your credit, Manchurian 文字狱,inquisition against dissent, was quite effective, and left its indelible Chinese imprint on the CCP down the line. But that belief of yours would throw a monkey wrench into your own mouth right now, wouldn’t it? I mean, if your wish were to come true you would cease to exist here on the Internet as you are known.

    You’ve been in the US for so long that you can no longer read Chinese (that’s astonishing, considering that I came to this country at age 12 and can still read and write at native proficiency in my late thirties.) And yet your English does not appear to have gained from it. I assume this means that you can no longer read much of the protest and anger that millions of Chinese citizens write on their Internet. Perhaps you should brush up on your Chinese, hone your English, read some Enlightenment and 五四 writers including Rousseau, Voltaire, Lu Xun and 张爱玲 (她对中国人性可爱与阴暗的刻画极其深刻), and go back to the mainland for a visit. Until then, your inability to be in touch with your own homeland and its people makes your support suspect, let alone the cause for which you assert it.

  15. Wahaha Says:

    Charlotte,

    Here is master piese of democracy, have a good look of the picture :

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/us/28edith.html

    Can China afford this ?

    ___________________________________

    What are you trying to convince us with history 30 or 40 years ago ?

    By lot of western scholarship, the current system in China is authoritarian plus technocracy. You are talking about some chinese people are suffering, dont you think living with $2 a day is a big suffering ? and there are still hundreds of millions of people living with less than $2 a day in China.

    Please dont throw some textbooks on our face like you are on morally high ground, the number of people you are talking about is maybe be 100,000, or maybe 1,000,000 or maybe even 10,000,000, but did you ever think how to save 100,000,000 people from suffering ?

    ______________________________________

    You came from Taiwan, tell us what Taiwan has accomplished economically after democracy besides non-stop Zheteng.

    Dont ask us like we dont know what is going on in China, like the corruption, like police violence. WE KNOW !!! Give us a solution (or system) under which MORE people will be better off, LESS people will suffer. You sound like we are so stupid that there is wonderful system out there that would make 100% people happy.

    Go back to read your 张爱玲, will you ?

  16. Charlotte Stant Says:

    From what I can see, many Chinese people living in the US are in limbo spiritually and ideologically. They hate the century of humiliation the West imposed on our homeland; quite understandable. They feel awful about never being able to feel completely at home here for many reasons: not fitting in with mainstream WASP culture; an accent that makes even a Yale-educated heart surgeon hard to understand; downright dirty racism from others; children who refuse to attend Ivy League schools, run a division at Goldman Sachs (before 2008), AND come home to watch Taiwanese soaps at night and marry the Chinese-speaking spouse their parents hand-pick all at once; guilt from betraying their deep-seated belief that in naturalizing here in another country they have betrayed their motherland. As a 1.5 generation Chinese immigrant, I can certainly identify and empathize with these feelings.

    What I find disappointing and harmful, however, is their coping mechanism. They equate condemnation of the Chinese Communist Party with condemnation of the Chinese nation, when anyone can tell you that you condemn the Party because of what they are doing to the nation and its people. This is amnesia of the worst order, as you can be certain these immigrants left China in part because they could not compete against corrupt party princelings and a system rigged against the little guy. (I discount for now those princelings who were sent abroad with illicit hoards of cash so that their parents could have a safe haven with their now-American children.) Many swagger when they do return to China, buying into the myth that they as overseas returnees are 高等华人, higher-class Chinks than their countrymen, breezily ignorant of the fact that that class hierarchy belongs to the same imperialist pre-49 era they profess to hate. They wanton with the freedom of speech here in the U.S., and heed but little the responsibility of citizenship, the impulse for consensus and the tolerance of dissent that freedom must be linked to. They skulk and cower and distort and lie in their defense of an oppressive regime, imagining that this furnishes them with the pride of belonging to a world power, since they erroneously believe all foreigners value wealth and brute power more than freedom and justice. They are so ashamed of China’s poverty and brutish oppression, they would rather hide those facts than call out for their alleviation, making it harder for those back home in China to improve their lot, since the overseas Chinese can point to their own ethnicity and self-appoint as spokesmen for the nation’s well-being.

    Well, guess what? You can’t get away with that. If you like, you can go and rave about Sarah Palin; volunteer at the local shelter; picket your congresswoman; read what an inspired mess Ezra Pound made of Tang poetry (I haven’t really dug into that myself but I read a very good criticism of that effort once, smile); get counseling about the granny, hopefully not your own, whom you beat with the steel buckle of your belt as a military-courtyard brat from Beijing (a la 王朔) in 1966. (I would have done that myself if I’d grown up then; as you can see I am a full-blown case of self-righteousness). I beg you, fix yourselves. Or don’t. But don’t keep doing what you’ve been doing. It’s bad for others and no better for yourself.

  17. wuming Says:

    Charlotte

    I also happen to agree in part that many of them, driven by zeal and understandable if unwise bitterness, exaggerate and distort facts. But hey, take a look at their opponent. They show that the CCP is adept at corrupting some of its enemies into its own attenuated mirror image.

    Turn the mirror back toward yourself from time to time. The righteousness is blinding.

  18. Charlotte Stant Says:

    <,dont you think living with $2 a day is a big suffering ? and there are still hundreds of millions of people living with less than $2 a day in China.

    Can you please enlighten me as to why those people who live on less than $2 a day are better off in the current political system, when the county or village party committee can levy more school or agrarian or miscellaneous taxes at the drop of a hat to undo whatever extravagant tax cuts promised by the knowing collaborators in Beijing? When the land where they eke out their $2 a day can be confiscated or polluted without any recourse for them? 听过拆迁没有?听过污染没有?对极了,这些张爱玲都没教 – 张爱玲只在秧歌和阿小悲秋和金锁记和十八春里写了那些被损害被侮辱的小民,教导了我什么是道德,什么是压迫。看您的留言,也自认在道德上是为那一千万穷苦人说话的,建议您不妨去看看。Eileen Zhang is one of the greatest humanist writers in the Chinese tradition, and I know many people while in China who saw that and loved her for it.

    As to your unfair assertion that I am trying to burden you with 60-year-old history which is no longer relevant, when I lived in China last year and wanted to pull up the abstracts from the CCP newspapers during the 40s I quoted above, my Google search engine immediately shut down, the screen went white, and I couldn’t so much as look up a restaurant on Dianping, a lovely consumer ratings website, for the next 5 minutes. You see, the Party was Pavlovian and I was their dog. They were slapping my hand for searching for something that is so irrelevant they don’t want me to get hold of it. If you are so sympathic to their cause, I assume whatever they find relevant should of interest to you. Tsk, tsk. Are you sure you are as red-blooded a communist as you ought to be? You know what used to, and can still happen, to people like you.

    <,Dont ask us like we dont know what is going on in China, like the corruption, like police violence. WE KNOW !!! Give us a solution (or system) under which MORE people will be better off, LESS people will suffer. You sound like we are so stupid that there is wonderful system out there that would make 100% people happy.

    If you do know, and you do live in China, then I ask you to at least investigate the 08 Charter and say what faults you find with it. You are free to tear it to shreds, so long as you give it some consideration. If you are outside of China, then please see the first part of my answer.

    I don’t think anyone out there is saying democracy would be a panacea – the US system is really decrepit, for example. But the people in China are fresh to it and their push for freedom would have more verve, their vigilance higher. All we are saying is give it a try. If the existing system is so great, why does the party have to censor its own words from 60 years ago? Why has the party rounded up petitioners in the 北京信访办 area? How does that help the $2 crowd live better, once again?

    As for what Taiwan has accomplished? Well, they’ve had a couple of peaceful regime changes since 1988, are now able to have well-organized protests which do not disrupt, have wonderful civic groups and robust volunteerism (the same outpour of feelings and camaraderie as during the 汶川 earthquake this year in China), and charged a corrupt ex-President. I think that’s pretty good. That’s actually better than the US has seen for a long time, unfortunately.

  19. Charlotte Stant Says:

    <,Turn the mirror back toward yourself from time to time. The righteousness is blinding.

    I said myself already that I suffer from the same malaise. But here’s the rub: a lot of these people are counting on the fact that the native-born Westerners are too politically correct to take them on, while other Chinese people are weighted down with fear of being seen as siding with outsiders.

    My self-righteousness will damage nothing. I am not advocating that these Chinese-Americans should continue to be censored, to have their land dispossessed, to have their vote taken away. The beliefs they are spouting do the opposite.

    You are free to criticize me, and I am sure I benefit from it, but the content of the beliefs, and their implications in the real world, do matter.

  20. pug_ster Says:

    @Charlotte Stant

    Gee, I wrote something and you are already starting to insult my intelligence when you don’t even know who I am just because I just wrote something that is not to your taste. Truly sad of what you wrote. Guess what, your lack of maturity does not impress me a bit. I don’t impose my beliefs to you and I expect the same because we should have a civil conversation. Maybe Netizen K was right about you that you are an FLGer or someone who thinks that you are wronged by the CCP or something.

  21. Wahaha Says:

    Can you please enlighten me as to why those people who live on less than $2 a day are better off in the current political system, when the county or village party committee can levy more school or agrarian or miscellaneous taxes at the drop of a hat to undo whatever extravagant tax cuts promised by the knowing collaborators in Beijing?

    Charlotte :

    Can you please enlighten me why People in Russia gave the power back to KGB after pathetic 10 years of democracy ?

    Can you please enlighten me why Senators and congressmen easily gave 700 billion dollars to the richest people in US WITHOUT ANY CONDITION but ignored the victims in Katrina and Ike ?

    Can you please enlighten me why after 60 years of democracy, 43% of kids under age 5 in India are under weight ?

  22. pug_ster Says:

    @Charlotte Stant

    It sounds like your rant about ‘give me liberty or give me death.’ Heck yeah, when I read this kind of BS in elementary school I believe it. In the last 30 years, Chinese government lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty and more people have to eat, better place to live, and better schooling. The only catch is that they would allow these so called ‘thugs’ run their government. Would these Chinese citizens who benefited as a result bite the hands that feed them?

    This total BS about the charter 08 does not have the solution to address these Economic and social issues within China. I don’t know about you but more than 90% of the Chinese leavefrom China is not because of political or religious reasons, but because of economic reasons. If tomorrow some international company offer me a high paying job in China, heck yeah, I will go there. Call me a Communist if you want, but I call myself an opportunist.

  23. kui Says:

    @Charlotte.

    May be CCP did something wrong to your family. They did wrong things to my family too. But after eyewitnessed what happended in the last 30 years I say I support the CURRENT CCP. I guess you have never lived in poverty for one single day. I did. Not exactly poverty but close to it. My English is still poor after ten years living in Australia. I guess at least part of my brain is not as good as yours. I think you are a very smart person given the fact that you handle both languages very well. But, to me, your tunneled vision is fixed at the falws Chinese government has. would you look at the whole picture? Corruptions? poorly trained officials violate human rights? Tell me which developing countries donot have these problems? Tell me your dear US of A is not dictating this world, not violating human rights on a much larger scale? Tell me they did not rob the middle class, did not wreck the country to benefit few rich? You want me believe your proud American brand of democracy is the answer for China’s problems? I did think so 20 years ago.

    I do not believe any political party can do a perfect job in China without upsetting anyone. Wahaha’s post remind me of the situation in China. My family used to live in a district that had few public toilets for thousands of local residents. I am not ashamed to tell you I grew up in a house that did not have a toilet. It gives me the insight that you will never have when it comes to the problems in China. Do you know what is it like to go to the public toilet in subzero temperature in the middle of the night? Our houses got flooded whenever it rained. The entire district was choking in smoke in winter because every family used their own little coal-furnace to keep warm. The district was demolished and rebuild by the government in 1997. My parents was given a two bed room unit as compensation from the government. Most people happily moved out. But few were not happy. They refused to move out and demanded for more. Back 12 years ago, the governmenbt cut off electricity and water supply to force these people out. This makes good material for human rights group and liberals. But there is one thing they will never really look at is the majority ‘s interest. The same people moved back within 20 month to a completely different district. Every unit has central heating, gas cooking, and ofcourse a toilet. When you look at those unhappy people should you also look at those people who are happy with the government? Should all these thousands of people continue to live miserablly in poor housing because of few wanting more? How about the construction workers who need income? Without these fast developments how many will continue to live in poverty? Human rights? democracy? freedom? What about these people’s rights to have a dinner that satisfy their stomach? What about their rights to have money to go to hospital when they are sick? Did the brutal efficiency the government has benefit the majority? Compare to 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago, I think it is safe to say that Chinese people benefit collectively from their government’s efficiency. You may call it brutal efficiency but I think you will not be able to travel very far in China if you act upon the interest of slef centred few while unable to deliever practical stuff to majority. CCP knows it very well that is why they manages to hold on to power. The deal CCP offers is not bad at all at least for now. So be it.

    I do believe the Chinese government is changing and getting more careful. One of my relative is living in a 6 story 40 years old building that has no central heating. The local government approved plans to demolish it and build a highrise on the spot. The residents will get a morden apartment in compensation. Now the entire project is held back because of one single family. They painted slogan on the building. “Brutal government forces people out.” ” The thuggery government denies people’s human rights”. My elderly relative has to continue to live in the building and is looking forward oneday she will be able to move into a morden apartment. The poor old building is now nicknamed “Human rights building” by local residents.

    20 years ago I protested against government on Tian An Men Square and demanded democracy. How much did I understand democracy? Almost nil. Today I think I understand better but still has to learn. But one thing I got out of my life experience is political movement can never save China. Democracy, humanrights, freedom sounded very attractive to me in the past but not anymore. The Charter 08 is nothing but a pile of beautiful words delievered by a foreign sponsored person who was jailed by CCP. The collection of signature suggests a very obvious intention. Liu or his employer wants another round of political movement in China. This time, sorry, Liu Xiao Bo , I have my own idea.

    My dear older?sister, I think you are going to have a go with me. I do not have much time for it until my next dayoff. I think I am looking at the problem at a angle which is different from yours. By the way, I am an individual receiving no money from Chinese government. Fifty cents Chinese Yuan is too little compare to what I get from my Australian employer. Your believe of fiftycents party only confirms how effective the propoganda is in another camp.

    Yes Pug-ster, you are right. My family came to Australia for better incomes and so did my friends. I think the number one reason for our migration is money. The second is better environment. China is too overcrowded.

  24. FOARP Says:

    @Anti-Democracy Folks –

    1) Medvedev and Putin were both Yeltsin cronies hand-picked by Yeltsin, despite how much they try to distance themselves from the Yeltsin years, they owe their careers to him and took an active part in his government. Russian elections during the Yeltsin period were equally as corrupt as they are now – that’s what the head of the OECD monitoring group said. The only reason why Putin was criticised where Yeltsin was not was because western governments saw Yeltsin as an improvement on the communists – who were the only effective opposition during the Yeltsin years. Anyone who thinks that Yeltsin was some kind of democratic crusader obviously hasn’t heard of his siege of the Russian White House. As for ‘voting for the KGB’, don’t be ridiculous, Putin got his job because Yeltsin gave it to him, he won the elections the same way Yeltsin did – he cheated. It was only Russia’s economic recovery and victory in the 2nd (or is it 3rd?) Chechen war that made Putin so popular.

    2) The Indian economy did not experience its ‘reform and opening’ until the early nineties, and reform has been slower than in China. Before that, India was awash with state run enterprises and subsidy, and imports were either restricted or heavily taxed. It is therefore ridiculous to compare the Indian economy to the Chinese one and say that the Chinese economy shows the disadvantages of democracy, in fact the Chinese economy is only yet another example of the advantages of the free market.

    3) Why do you keep going on about how this charter does not address China’s economic situation? Let the economists address the economic situation, and let the political theorists address the political situation – that is the entire point of the free market.

    4) “tell us what Taiwan has accomplished economically after democracy besides non-stop Zheteng?”

    Taiwan has had 4-5% GDP growth year on year on average since 1996. Please tell me what the CCP has achieved politically since 1949 except non-stop oppression?

    @Charlotte – I lived in Mainland China and Taiwan for five years and I’m sure I’ll be going back some time in the next few years. I enjoyed living on the mainland, but Taiwan was my favourite, not Taipei particularly, but the mountains and the east coast – some of the most beautiful scenery I’ve ever seen.

  25. wuming Says:

    FOARP

    The examples of China, Russia, India and Taiwan, though each unique, do point to a rather common phenomenon, which as astute as you are, cannot fail to notice. The circumstantial evidence seems to show that free market with or without (actually, at least in these four cases, more without than with) democracy is the recipe for success.

    In my personal opinion, the deeper lesson of these examples is that pragmatism (or the lack of it), more than anything else, is the main reason for the success (or failure) of a nation.

  26. Wahaha Says:

    FOARP,

    West democracy means that government has absolutely no power on individual, no matter how reasonable it is or how many people would benefit if government can do what is necessary.

    In the system in China (or authoritarian governement), government has too much power over individuals.

    Neither of them is good form of government. But I think it is obvious that authoritarian government is more effective in solving problems of large scale or during period of crises; democracy is better form in solving local or individual problems.

    Does there exist a form between them ? I dont know.

    BTW, Is democracy judged by that the political system is one-party or multiple party system ? or IS MULTIPLE-PARTY SYSTEM THE ONLY WAY TO LIMIT THE POWER OF RULING PARTY ?

  27. Charlotte Stant Says:

    <<In the last 30 years, Chinese government lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty and more people have to eat, better place to live, and better schooling.
    Pugster, the historical perspective to the economic reasons you talk about for leaving China is all-important. One of the most cogent arguments for political reform in China is that many of the past mistakes with gargantuan consequences for China’s foreseeable future may not have been made if many segments of society have been allowed to give more input. If China had a more participatory political process and the “consultative parties” not mere flower-vases as they came to be known after the Ant-Rightist movement of the 1950′s, the radical communization that led to PLA soldiers guarding granaries and turning away starving peasants would not have happened. So the party, before they “lifted millions out of poverty,” first plunged them into it. Certainly China was a mess after WWII; certainly unfair restitutions, opium and backward technology took its toll. But the CCP made it far worse and squandered the opportunity.
    In today’s context, China’s economic reform would have been more tempered, the pains and gains shared more evenly, and the environment, worker and farmer rights better protected.
    Pugster, you and I could both be living in a Seattle-shiny (discounting the weather) condo in Hangzhou overlooking the West Lake right now (there are, by the way, just such buildings there now, belonging for example to the former SFDA head who was executed last year, a la 阿瞒借人头) if the CCP has done the right thing. You and I would not have had to leave the mainland and Taiwan respectively for economic or political reasons, but could have been happy, prosperous and free in the land our ancestors left us.
    <<The only catch is that they would allow these so called ‘thugs’ run their government. Would these Chinese citizens who benefited as a result bite the hands that feed them?
    I agree with you there. The relatively small group of elites and urban residents have been co-opted by the party and are less likely to rebel against the thugs in government. Having said that, in almost all other democracies it was this middle class that formed alliances with less advantaged groups when the situation became explosive. And within their ranks there are enormous class divisions between those who are fed out of the thugs’ hands and those who have to give up their own blood and sweat to feed the thugs, and you can bet the latter are in far greater numbers. So when that contradiction worsens splinters within the group would also threaten stability.
    Please do not give me the sob story of what a difficult job the CCP has always had and would others have done better. As a surge of Chinese people would tell you on the message boards in China, a) China would not be such a mess now if the CCP has not f*ck’d it up so badly and b) if it’s too hot get out of the kitchen and let others have a go at it! c) the Chinese people are tired of being told that they are the most intelligent race on earth, beating out even the Germans and the Jews (Yes, the leadership is racist to bat, but no surprises there!), and the most hard-working, and the most moral, etc. Except that they are not fit to rule themselves. Just a tiny caveat, that.

  28. Charlotte Stant Says:

    I still have to see someone respond to my statements about why they assume the current system is the best of all possible worlds specifically for the under $2 crowd. Any takers?

    As for the US system, I already said above that it’s decrepit. It sucks. I agree with you all heartily. However, I am not so Americentric that I would hold it to be the only model for democracy around the world. First of all, there are democracies of Swiss and German and Korean varieties that you can emulate. Second of all, China has the late-comer advantage as well as all the vigor and faith of a newcomer to democracy at their disposal. For one, China can learn from the U.S. mistakes, and look at how a once vigorous and fairly clean set of governing institutions fell into disrepair, and build in more checks and balances to stave that off longer than they otherwise can. China would simultaneously benefit from the extraordinary surge of citizen vigilance and good faith which such civic movements build. Without that faith and participation, democracies fail or go into decline. That civic spirit has been on the wane or else hampered here in the U.S.

  29. Wahaha Says:

    I still have to see someone respond to my statements about why they assume the current system is the best of all possible worlds specifically for the under $2 crowd. Any takers?

    ___________________________________________

    The answers are in the answers to the 3 questions I asked you.

    I gave the answers before, and I dont have interest typing the long answer again; and dont try to get answer from novels by 张爱玲.

    good luck.

  30. Wahaha Says:

    admin :

    Will you post this link ?

    http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1156381

    Chinese selling cheap cars in Mexico.

    Yahooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo !!!

  31. wuming Says:

    @Charlotte

    You made quite a few “would have been” (if China had been democratic) argument. How about a few “have been” examples?

    South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan are examples of economic success that were mainly achieved when their governments were authoritarian. In fact Taiwanese economy slowed when it became democratic and now largely rely on Mainland China to fuel its own growth. On the other hand, India has been democratic for over 60 years, it did not prevent its economy from stagnating for more 50 years. In each case, there are complex reasons that explain the respective history, but from none of these cases one can easily detect the benefit of democracy.

    I don’t necessarily want to make an anti-democracy argument myself. But it seems to me worth considering that the entire premise of the ideological outlook of the ruling government determines the success of a nation.

  32. wuming Says:

    @Charlotte

    … China has the late-comer advantage as well as all the vigor and faith of a newcomer to democracy at their disposal. For one, China can learn from the U.S. mistakes, and look at how a once vigorous and fairly clean set of governing institutions fell into disrepair, and build in more checks and balances to stave that off longer than they otherwise can. China would simultaneously benefit from the extraordinary surge of citizen vigilance and good faith which such civic movements build. ….

    I must say I envy the fluency and flare of your writing, but I can’t find a solid ground on which these statements can stand. To prove all these are not wishful thinkings you need examples of peoples or countries that have done at least some of what you believe to be obvious. The news of just last few days speaks of the lack of the “checks and balances” in institutions in other democracies such as UK, Germany and France that would have prevented them from suffering tragic consequences of this current financial disaster. On the other hand, by accident or by design, Chinese banks did not suffer the financial disaster that fell to everyone else. Should one conclude that there are “checks and balances” already built into these Chinese institutions?

  33. Charlotte Stant Says:

    Wahaha, I would love to hear what expertise you have to base your observations on. But I worked for a big multiinational law firm in China on top of reading 張愛玲. I had dinner with FDA, NDRC and MII officials, so I saw many of these thugs up close (heck, I became friendly with some of them! Some of them were brilliant, all of them quite shrewd, and a few were nice to me, and overall it’s a jungle in there.)

    <<The news of just last few days speaks of the lack of the “checks and balances” in institutions in other democracies such as UK, Germany and France that would have prevented them from suffering tragic consequences of this current financial disaster. On the other hand, by accident or by design, Chinese banks did not suffer the financial disaster that fell to everyone else. Should one conclude that there are “checks and balances” already built into these Chinese institutions

    Even if you did not work in trade and business in China you must have heard about the bad debt taken off the banks’ balance sheets, the raiding of the Shanghai pension fund and funds elsewhere, and the monopoly of the banking sector so that the savers are forced to either deposit their money at negative interest or get their money hooked in the stock market (圈錢)。 China has a population bonus that its government is squandering like mad. SOEs have been transferring public assets overseas with very little supervision. All of these factors, driven by lack of political accountability, serve to postpone enormous problems. And given China’s enormous population and relatively low income, when they are exposed the consequences would make what goes on in the West now a walk in the park.

    Like I said above, some democracies have become decrepit and need fixing. The governments have failed, and we’ll need stronger citizen movements than just trying to vote them out. Now, if you want to place your faith in an authoritarian regime instead and hope they’ll take care of ya (Go away Sarah! You’re haunting me!) that is certainly your prerogative.

  34. wuming Says:

    As far as I know, the loss endured by the Bank of China in the sub-prime crisis is around $30 Billion, which is indeed a large sum of money when you count in terms of pairs of shoes sold to US and Europe to earn it, but it is also a “walk in the park” measured against loses endured by some of the “healthy” commercial banks in Europe and US. Especially considering the trillion dollar US asset that Chinese banks are holding.

    I know there are “decrepit” systems of every kind, I am more interested in the smooth functioning democracies you seems to be dangling in front our eyes.

  35. Anon FMer Says:

    @Charlotte, I’m an ordinary -American. I smoke cigar when I golf and play poker with my buddies. I have no accent and I hang with pretty waspy crowd. I met my wife at a TSA mixer and we got married in US without asking our parents (I’m WSR and she’s BSR, everyone was pissed.) Thou my family is pretty hardcore KMT blueblood, my political views are formed in US, on my own terms.

    Now, can you accept the fact my balanced view on China, and introspection about America’s foreign policy, are not due to psychosis?

    Twinkies rule!

    BTW, Baidu is censoring 08 Charter, but Sohu is not.

  36. FOARP Says:

    @What!hahaha – “West democracy means that government has absolutely no power on individual, no matter how reasonable it is or how many people would benefit if government can do what is necessary.”

    Not exactly sure where you got this from. If you want examples of democratically elected governments which engaged in massive economic projects without having much regard for minority opinions, then you need look no further than, for example, the British Labour government under Clement Atlee, which nationalised the railways, the coal mining industry, car and steel manufacturing, the universities, the hospitals, the telephone exchanges, and a great many other aspects of the economy. Britain is far from the only country to have democratically elected such a government.

    Large housing development projects have also taken place in the UK, the example of individuals refusing to sell up is not valid – the important thing is that reasonable compensation is paid and that individual opinions have at least been taken into account.

    Democracy means allowing the people to make a choice as to how the direction their country goes in. A choice necessitates that there should be more than one option, a single-party state cannot deliver this. Yes, you can attempt to compensate for this by having people choose between party factions, but this makes the party meaningless, as without unity it cannot function properly. Single-party democracy is impossible – even Japan elected three different opposition parties to power during the last 20 years, and its main party contains many different factions.

    @Anon FMer – You haven’t actually said what it is you think. I hope you’re not going to say that you agree with the original post’s call for the execution of the people who drafted Charter 08.

    errr . . . by the way, you do know that that is a Google search? Here’s the Sohu search:

    http://www.sogou.com/sohu?query=%2208%CF%DC%D5%C2%22&_ast=1231545984&_asf=www.sogou.com&w=01029901&num=10&p=01040100&dp=1

    Yep, you guessed it, not a sign of 08宪章 searching without speech marks, and with the speech marks I got this:

    “您输入的关键词可能涉及不符合相关法律法规的内容”

    It seems that Charter 08 is now on the banned list.

    @All people using the phrase “anti-Sinoism”. I hate to be picky like this, but since this is a romance word it should be “anti-Sinism”. The ‘o’ ending is merely used to attach the phrase to another – hence it is “Hispanic” not “Hispanoic” even though I would say “Hispano-American” or (an extreme example) “Hispanologist”.

    @Charlotte – I would love to read Zhang Ailing, but I hoping to wait until I can do so in Chinese without having to check a dictionary every five minutes – although I fear this may be a long time!

  37. Steve Says:

    @ FOARP: Off subject, but was one of the guys you worked with in Miaoli named Larry Pringle? My wife found his card and it listed him as Assistant Director C215 Site Office. He’s the guy who lived next door to us.

  38. Anon FMer Says:

    Opps my mistake, your’e right that’s a Google link. It’s a darn shame the powers that be in China is censoring. The debate already shows 08 Charter has serious problems and far from universally accepted.

    It WAS running out of steam, but now all them NGOs just have morre reason to be self-righteous that much longer.

  39. FOARP Says:

    @Anon FMer – To be honest, you can’t claim any of that. You cannot say that a debate was loosing steam if it was stifled, you cannot say that it was not accepted by the majority if the majority of people never even got to hear about it. As for NGOs being ‘self-righteous’, if you mean ‘supporting freedom’ then why shouldn’t they?

    It amazes me that to some people government censorship and oppression is somehow less or equally as bad as people trying to think about how they would like to change things.

    @Steve – Can’t say I know him, it’s odd, but even though we were in Miaoli around the same time we must have been running in different ex-pat sets. Actually, thinking about it, most of the guys I knew I knew from the pub – maybe that might explains things!

  40. Wukong Says:

    @Charlotte #33

    I see your “bad debt of Chinese banks”, I raise you WorldCom, Enron and Madoff.

  41. Steve Says:

    @ FOARP: He was the only expat I ever met in Miaoli. I had so many in-laws there that all my social contacts were Hakka. I can’t recall ever going to a pub there, just a couple in Hsinchu with work colleagues and a couple in Taipei with family members. All I remember about that guy, who lived next door on our apartment floor, was that he worked on the high speed train. Oh well…

  42. FOARP Says:

    @Wukong – Do you really want to raise questions of large-scale corruption?

  43. Charlotte Stant Says:

    Kui, I grew up in the relative poverty of Taiwan in the late seventies, when the KMT government told us likewise to be grateful for the improvements in roads, water and electricity and not ask for anything else. I understand how your personal experience has deeply affected you, but beg to differ as to the conclusions you draw from them. Like I said, push your timeline back! Why were the people all so poor to begin with when you were born? Why were you made so grateful by these improvements? Did the government bureaucrats dig into their own bank accounts or take a salary cut to give them to you? Would you act the same in Australia where you are – are you grateful to the government for taking your tax dollars and doing things for you, and would you willingly give up political and social rights in exchange for their service? (I think my fifty-cents accusation was rather kind, since otherwise I would have to believe you were being hypocritical as an overseas Chinese person, which I wrote about below. But the web surveillance and propaganda team does exist in China; many do not even receive 50 cents for their efforts; petty government workers are impressed into serving as part of their job sometimes, so the quality of their work is wildly uneven. I heard this from reporters in China, one of whom worked for a Ministry paper.)
    There is nothing efficient about the brutal type of capitalism I saw practiced in China. It was wildly inefficient. Enormous environmental devastation took place because of energy subsidies, government collusion and . The educational and healthcare systems are privatized so that China has a less well-educated and healthy workforce. Costs were socialized while profits were pocketed by individuals.
    Yes, I know the American government has done some of this too, but all that means is that democracy is broken here. If your neighbor’s light goes out because of a wiring problem, you don’t therefore hug your armload of tallow candles and howl at anyone who suggests you wire your house that they are trying to take away your right to read by 5 watts at night. Or would you prefer 囊萤读书?
    As for the story about the conflict of interest between minority rights and majority interests, please see FOARP’s answer. Chinese intellectuals say that in China you cannot have citizens; either you are an oppressor, a slave or one of a mob. This is not a reflection of the individual moral fiber of the people there but rather the institutions. Only a fool would act in the common interest when there is no effective mechanism to ensure that those in power would adhere to the common interest.
    I believe my answers are all in the spirit of pragmatism. The problems I mention are all specific and real, and require real governance improvement, just as they do here in the U.S.
    Like I said above, the US does not have a patent on democracy. I agree with you that American foreign policy has often been a disaster around the world. But how does that excuse what happens back in China? I think you can do better, as a concerned Chinese, than to justify what goes on there by pointing to other developing countries – would you do the same when it comes to economic success, standardized tests or the level of medical care? Would you say, “Look, the folks in Mauritius only have vegetable stew once a day, and so our farmer brothers are getting on splendidly”? Why is such a glaring and paramount exception made for the political order?

  44. Wahaha Says:

    “Wahaha, I would love to hear what expertise you have to base your observations on.”

    Charlotte stant,

    the three questions I asked you :

    Can you please enlighten me why People in Russia gave the power back to KGB after pathetic 10 years of democracy ?

    Can you please enlighten me why Senators and congressmen easily gave 700 billion dollars to the richest people in US WITHOUT ANY CONDITION but ignored the victims in Katrina and Ike ?

    Can you please enlighten me why after 60 years of democracy, 43% of kids under age 5 in India are under weight ?

    _______________________________

    The answer to first question is that most people, unless brainwashed, care more about their material life than political lifes.

    The answer to 2nd queston is that voting system doesnt mean that the elected will work for people,

    The answer to 3 rd question is that democratic system doesnt deliver, at least materially.

    Please kindly have a look of the situation in Zimbabwe and following article :

    http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_12/b4026001.htm

    I am not an expert, I just pay lot more attention to what have been going in the real world than getting some concepts from books by an auther who didnt even care her country was invaded by another country.

  45. Charlotte Stant Says:

    Wahaha, just because India has not succeeded does not mean that China should not try. India has a colonial history, many brands of separatism, hundreds of languages and many religious and ethnic divisions. China is blessed in being mostly free of these burdens. Certainly Chinese democracy may, in its early stages, look quite a bit like India: a middle class unconcerned with anyone else’s well-being except its own, for example. But just as you would with installing a new line of equipment maintenance software or introducing a new pedagogy, you learn from the errors of others. Why this constitutes idealism on my part and not pragmatism I fail to grasp.

    Anon FMer, it is not my intent that everyone should bare their soul and self-criticize, like they did in struggle sessions in China. At heart I am motivated by the same drive as those other overseas Chinese I talked about above, with a fundamental difference: I would like to see China wealthy, powerful, free and yet benign to its neighbors. But the emotions are the same. I identify with this mother civilization, which has nourished my soul and made me thrive against many odds in a hostile environment as a young immigrant, and like all other overseas Chinese I want to be able to take pride in the country that has inherited that civilization. I care about its people because we have so much in common, and because I understand their plight so well. 本是同根生!
    What I object to in the people I talked about is a fundamental hypocrisy between their words and actions. Like I said, many overseas Chinese live free of the censorship and oppression they advocate for their own brethren back home. Nor is this hypocrisy limited to the ranks of overseas Chinese. Any American who enjoys the basic freedoms which for example allow us to be having this very debate, and yet defends the denial of these freedoms in China, has to first defend that contradiction. To take it one step further: even a Chinese person living under these policies in China only has the right to submit to them, but certainly not the right to ask anyone else there to do so. It’s a fundamentally untenable proposition to ask someone else to suffer what you are willing to suffer yourself, unless you can make a point that their failure to do so threatens your own livelihood. However, in today’s China, anyone who does so calls to mind that well-known textbook-favorite by Lu Xun, where the slave drives away the fool trying to smash open the slave’s mud hut in so as to ingratiate himself with his master.

    I never mean to say that you can only be well-balanced and just in your political views on China if you hang out with WASPs. My own parents never have, and yet they are objective and concerned about what goes on in China. All I was addressing was that some Chinese feel embittered and excluded by that group, and find an outlet in taking up CCP’s cause. Heaven knows you can be really well-assimilated into WASP society and be completely messed up, self-hating and all that.

    Like FOARP, I would also be curious to hear your views on China and US foreign policy’s impact.

  46. Charlotte Stant Says:

    BTW, I’ve noticed that people who have contempt for Zhang’s supposedly bourgeois prose are usually not any better versed in the more obviously leftist writers outside of 鲁迅,such as 萧红,穆时英,鲁彦 (菊英的出嫁 really got to me)。The conclusions I drew from these great writers are the same as those from the supposedly reactionary great writers such as 废名,张爱玲and 沈从文. Namely, that the spirit of their writing teaches egalitarianism, justice and humanitarianism, all of which were dumped into the latrine by the CCP regime. (How anyone could ever have driven 沈to the brink of suicide with accusations of his being a decadent writer in the service of the bourgeoisie is mind-boggling!) On the other hand, the fact that 鲁迅 is still taught in China is testimony to the audacity of the propaganda machine – they really believe they can brainwash people so effectively that they would never grasp the full significance of Lu’s admonition.
    What is so depressing about the 极左 is how poor their knowledge is about Chinese history and literature. Anyone well-versed in 明清小说 or the burlesque of Ming officialdom can see how 卖官鬻爵continues in its exact same form today, that 衙内still prevail in their venerable tradition, failing to veer so far as an inch from that trodden path set down so beautifully in 元杂剧。You would think even 极左 would be tired of something this ancient and immutable and want to change it. 就算你是病急乱投医也罢,就算民主了以后也照旧,至少你试过了不是?打着马克思的旗号,抱着封建民为轻的幽灵的粗腿,亏他们怎么不精神分裂,说来真的心理素质过人,我辈自叹不如。
    当然,这些旁边摇旗呐喊的还不是主子。讲到主子们,说来大奇,我可是在北京月坛街发改委亲眼得见的。这些官老爷们,对着欧盟官员满嘴的民主发展,开的是德国车,采购的是美国软件,脸不红气不喘实行的是马克思唾弃,连亚当史密斯都要摇头的三不管强盗资本主义,再加上不忘老祖宗遗训,骨子里仍旧是家天下的中央集权,国务院都得搞个机密调查发现头五百名首富90%是太子党。嘿,这会儿全身上下都是国王的新衣,可他硬要说他那话儿遮的是社会主义的无花果叶,所以他堂堂正正仰不愧天俯不怍人,对得起国家人民,事实上国家人民都要感激他!不,事实上他们就是国家人民,谁不信谁是反革命。
    我实在厌倦这些厌倦极了!美国民主的确稀巴烂没错,那也是因为美国人民不念书,不争气,好逸恶劳,给了点毛皮好处就傻了白痴了给卖了还帮着数钱,跟资本家借债借到眼眉毛高!既然中国正在雄起,就该有信心,美国人弄坏了的东西中国人能汲取教训把它搞上去!奇怪了这回子又拿美国当榜样了,怎么这么不争气呢?看到美国资本主义的脏事就指着呱呱大叫:你瞧,你们的银行不也都这么烂到根子上吗?所以中行建行就拿了外国主子的丹书铁券,可以把中国小民的储蓄折腾光了是不是?
    不民主也行,那你说个第三条路出来听听,兴许走得动,西方人民会丢下民主来追随你也未可知。

  47. Wahaha Says:

    Charlotte Stant,

    Democracy failed to deliver everywhere, and NOW IN AMERICA.

    The current financial crisis in USA, you think this crisis can be solved by “discussion” ? With the scale of crisis, it is time that some people have to scrafice, it is not the time that everyone complains and yells “give me the F#$%ing money” , which is part of basic “human right” under democracy.

    But no1 can be forced to scrafice under democracy, and it is unfair to ask those who are willing to scrafice for those who are not willing to scrafice. As a result, no1 will scrafice anything. This is what is going on in USA; that is why india infrastructure lags behind China; that is why people of Thailand wasted two years in political chaos while China stayed focus in economic development.

    Please read the following by Franklin Roosevelt :

    ….
    If I read the temper of our people correctly, we now realize as we have never realized before our interdependence on each other; that we can not merely take but we must give as well; that if we are to go forward, we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline, because without such discipline no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline, because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a sacred obligation with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife.

    With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.
    …..

  48. Charlotte Stant Says:

    The CCP has done far less to my family than just about everyone in China today (heck, even the very elders of the party were brought down during the Cultural Revolution), since my dad’s family got out in 1949. I am actually a very liberal social democrat (my party has completely sold out here in the US), and have pinko sympthies through and through. It’s too bad that the CCP won’t give me the chance to embrace them, as I am more than eager to do so given an opportunity (smile).

    FOARP, I hear you about Zhang; she is erudite and whimsical in her application of classical Chinese, for example, which makes it difficult. Have you read 阿城 or 王朔? Wang’s earlier writings are better than his latest, even though I still love him. They are the best representatives of that stripped-bare, plebeian and subversive post-CR Chinese which challenges the Maoist totalitarian language everyone was brainwashed with. And with them there is, fortunately and unfortunately, no baggage of classical learning to contend with any more. One other fascinating writer is 李零 – a Beijing University archaeologist and oracle bone scholar whose incisive essays push the envelope, even though he often ends with pro-authoritarian conclusions.

  49. FOARP Says:

    @Whathahah – If you don’t like democracy, don’t vote, but don’t force your disdain for democracy on the rest of the population. I am amazed to see you defending dictatorship, when history is so replete with examples of exactly what the unchecked and unfettered exercise of power leads to – war, genocide, and oppression. Even if you do believe this to be true, by what right do you force this on other people?

    As for the quote by Franklin Roosevelt, at no point does he advocate dictatorship, what he was asking for was for people to work together – but this is impossible unless people know what they want to do. No intelligent human being can submit without question to the will of another, at all points they must ask “Why should I do this? What benefit is there in this for myself and the whole?”. These are not selfish arguments, but the simple level of respect that one adult human being owes another.

    Human rights are not simply about ones own demands, but about the duties one owes to the human rights of others. The democratic system is not a suicide pact, but a way in which the majority opinion can seek the greatest good for the greatest number of people whilst respecting the minority.

    Finally, just remember – “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword”. You may think that certain groups of people must suffer for what you believe is the greater good, but one day it will be you who is on the rough end of things, and you who will be sacrificing your basic human dignity so that others may gain.

  50. FOARP Says:

    @Charlotte – I am ashamed to say that the only books I have ever read in Chinese were collections of short stories by Lu Xun (which I thought brilliant, particularly “Tomorrow”) and Hu Shi (whose famous comment: ” 争你自己的自由就是争国家的自由,争你自己的权利就是争国家的权利。因为自由平等的国家不是一群奴才建造得起来的!” ought to be better known than it is)

  51. Wahaha Says:

    “when history is so replete with examples of exactly what the unchecked and unfettered exercise of power leads to – war, genocide, and oppression. Even if you do believe this to be true, by what right do you force this on other people?”

    FOARP,

    1) The disasters you mention were of course the results of dictatorship ……. + the control of information (or people had little information cuz of financial situation.) Did chinese in 50s and 60s know that people in West lived much better than in China ?

    Yes, China still have information control, but becoming a country like it was in 60s or like North Korea ? sorry, it is impossible.

    2) Force on other people ? frist I was not, is not and will never be a CCP member; 2nd you made a assumption that if the government is not elected, then the government doesnt represent people’s will; and if the government is elected by people, then government represents the will of people.

    Sorry, this is simply not true. In what way can you claimed that chinese government is less a representative for Chinese people than any government in any country ? simply cuz 0.1% of people or 1% of the people think differently ? ( 0.1% of chinese = 1,300,000 people, 1% of chinese = 13,000,000 people.)

    3) “自由平等的国家不是一群奴才建造得起来的!”

    Name a “平等的国家”, please.

    “自由” ? yes, you have “自由” to fight the crumbs left by riches and attorneys for those riches.

    Chinese have had enough idealism.

    4) The first thing I check a government is if it is controled by riches, not if people can vote or not.

  52. Charlotte Stant Says:

    FOARP﹐funny you should bring up that Hu Shi quote! I saw it for the first time ever (that I can remember) on the Chinese internet where someone quoted it in a debate about democracy and the slave labor in the Shanxi brick kilns. (That shows how woefully inadequate my education has been.) I was immensely struck. And yet it can sound like a platitude to someone who grew up with Johnl Stuart Mill and all that. Thanks for reminding me of it.

  53. FOARP Says:

    @Whahahahah –

    “Name a “平等的国家”, please”

    If you do not recognise that countries in which people are equal in the eyes of the law can seek equality in other areas, there is little for us to discuss. Still, I know my home country to be one in which people of either sex and all ethnic backgrounds can seek the highest office, and in which people are granted power under the law to demand equal treatment.

    Both my parents were university graduates, so I guess you think that I am a member of a priveleged class, but my mother grew up in an orphanage, and my father comes from a poor background in a mining town in the north. I grew up in the north during the aftermath of the collapse of the nationalised industries, my father spent years unemployed and we lived off state benefits. I guess you can see that I don’t think of myself as particularly privileged, and I thank god that I grew up in a country where access to education and health care for young people are not dependent on how rich your family is.

    So yes, I believe that the UK is a 自由国家, and that UK law gives people access to the tools which they need to fight for equality.

    “Yes, China still have information control, but becoming a country like it was in 60s or like North Korea ? sorry, it is impossible.”

    Why do you believe this? Many countries saw increased restriction placed on the flow of information in the last century in the period 1930-1960. Some, like Germany after the rise of the Nazi party, saw heavy restrictions put in place where before there had been a free press. Can you see any reason why China should be immune to this kind of occurence?

    Anyway, what good does it do you to have free access to information if you cannot act on that information? Chinese officials most definitely did know that capitalist countries were far richer than the communist ones in the 50′s, but they simply told themselves that they would catch them up – indeed communist countries in the Soviet block saw high growth until the early seventies. You have not shown me any mechanism by which the Chinese people can prevent their government doing palpably bad things. You have not shown me any mechanism by which the Chinese people can ensure the current level of access to information.

    I did not accuse you of being a CCP member, but by advocating a dictatorial system you are advocating restricting the freedoms of others. This should be obvious.

    @Charlotte – The first time I saw this phrase I thought it was the most amazingly refreshing thing I had ever read in Chinese. Call it “the banality of good” if you will.

  54. Charlotte Stant Says:

    FOARP, I like that – “banality of good.” Beautifully said.

    Thank goodness there is someone from the UK to diversify this conversation, as I am the first one to admit that the US brand of democracy is sorely soiled. (Sorry for the mixed metaphors, but these are extreme times.)

    Charlotte Stant is from James’ Golden Bowl, you know, one of his expatriates who take up residence in London. I am a hopeless anglophile. All American brahmins are makeshift Europeans, James said, so there is the authority for my idolatry.

  55. kui Says:

    @Charlotte.

    I saw your post last week but could not find time to reply. Push the timeline back and find out why every one was so poor when I was born? I was born in 1968, almost 20 years after the funding of PRC. Do you think people in 1968 and 1949 should also look back and find out why China was so poor? KMT was defeated by CCP and China’s upper class run away with what ever they could take with them. Do you know what kind of situation they left behind? My grandfather had a small factory in BeiJing. They printed books and newspapers. He was not a poor man but grandmother gave birth to 9 babies and only 4 survived. Before 1949, in old BeiJing, every morning there were carts went around on the streets to collect bodies. In winter there were more to collect. Opium shops were legal business. Why did Chinese people resort to communism you think? It is out of desperation. A drowning man will try to grasp a straw thinking it might save his life. When the communist army came to TianJin and BeiJing, they did not come alone, they had a bigger army of peasants pushing a kind of one wheeled carts to supply them. KMT ‘s army did not have that kind of support. That is why they lost. Why were the country in such bad shape? Blame whom? The communists? the Japanese invation? Again why communists’ “Down the landlords, share the land” won over KMT’s “People’s rights, people’s living, and people’s democracy”? KMT was largely a rich people’s party. It failed to understand China’s majority poor. It failed to deliever any thing to the majority poor. The very high goal set up by KMT did not benifit Chinese people and was too remote for people to understand. Again why Chinese were so poor? I would say that the nation had a very poor start, was isolated from the outside world and certainly chose the wrong way (communism) to go. Why do I appreciate the improvement? I do because Chinese people finally break the isolation and abandoned communism. We are back on the right track.

    “Did the government bureaucrats dig into their own bank accounts or take a salary cut to give them to you? Would you act the same in Australia where you are – are you grateful to the government for taking your tax dollars and doing things for you, and would you willingly give up political and social rights in exchange for their service?”

    I certainly know that no governments official in this world would dig into their own bank account or take salary cut to give back to the people. My dear Australia government cut down the benefit for disabled people and at the same time gave themself a payrise for managing the budget well. They take 30-40% of my income as tax and I got the my political and social rights in return. I can post my comments in ABC ‘s discussion forum if my political opinions are not too offensive to moderators. I often wonder am I freer here in Austrralia? I have to zip my mouth at work to maintain peace because I have some ideas that are different from the main stream. Am I freer here? I do not know. But one thing is certain that I pay a big percentage of my income for the “free speech”. When one day Chinese people start to pay 30-40% incometax to the government, they will have similar service from their government if not better.

    I want to say more about your “fifty cents party” thing. Unfortunately I am running out of time again. I hope one day I can retire and have plenty of time to chat with people. I will be back soon.

  56. kui Says:

    @ Charlotte

    “(I think my fifty-cents accusation was rather kind, since otherwise I would have to believe you were being hypocritical as an overseas Chinese person, which I wrote about below. But the web surveillance and propaganda team does exist in China; many do not even receive 50 cents for their efforts; petty government workers are impressed into serving as part of their job sometimes, so the quality of their work is wildly uneven. I heard this from reporters in China, one of whom worked for a Ministry paper.)”

    Charlotte, pls forget about those hearsays. If you heard this from a person work for a Ministry paper then it is nothing compare to what Australians heard of from a senior Chinese diplomat from Chinese embassy in Australia. Australians were told during their TV peak hours that Chinese government had kidnapped Australian citizens and at least one kidnapping a year. Not only this, Chinese government had sent 1000 spies to Australia. Chen Yonglin the Chinese diplomat also claimed that he participate 1989 student movement and was jailed for years by Chinese government. There was one thing is clear during his interview with ABC that he had close ties with FLG. AFP investigated the Australian citizen kidnapped case for a month and found the supposed kidnapped citizen safe and well still in Australia. AFP concluded that there was no substance to the allegations. Chen failed to produce a spy list or any document to support the accusation. No spy was deported or persecuted by Australian government. Let’s look at the other claim he made. He was jailed for years for participate student movement? The 1989 student movement probably had a million or so participants, those jailed were student leaders. Is CCP or Chinese government democratic enough to employ a former political prisoner to work in Chinese embassy on forein soil? What skill did he have to make the Chinese government so keen to employ him? His poor English? Is China running out of university graduates? It was very obvious to me that he is a liar. Such liar was granded with protection visa and invited to USA’s congress to give a speech!!! There is a system in place to encourage lying. Even after one is proved lying he is still given a prize for lying against China. That is why there are plenty of accusations around. How many of this human rights abuse accusations was seriously investigated? Once some one makes the accusation then China is immediately guilty. The system is still intact after the coalition of the willing went to the war for the reason that didnot exist.The media is cooperating with the government very well to make the public believe what the government want them to believe. Charlotte, mainland Chinese were once fooled by the CCP. The western public are still being fooled by their own government’s propoganda reg matters in far away places.

    I have so much to say but I think I am talking to nobody. If you are still around then could you response?
    I do not agree with your last post, almost every single sentence you said. Can we continue this conversation?

  57. Charles Liu Says:

    @ Charlotte

    I already told you I’m American. I ain’t from mainland China, ain’t never been citizen of the PRC a day in my life. My opinion is strictly formed by myself, freely in America.

    Now what have you to say about “my stripe”?

  58. tanjin Says:

    Some people sound like living in a greenhouse for far too long. Don’t forget what Mao used to say: power comes from the barrel of guns. Chapter08 was mere a “kiddie play” to ask for some candy and allowance.

  59. tanjin Says:

    Some people say US is run by a democratically elected government every four years. I think that is only true on the surface. The real power is still held by that small group of selected founders and the Revolutionary army they help build. No one in US has power to say no and make any fundamental change to the basic system and authority structure they designed a couple of hundred years of ago

Leave a Reply

Powered by sweetCaptcha