Hu Jintao Urges Closer Ties with Taiwan
Filed under:-mini-posts, General, News, politics | Add comments
Now that the three links have been established, what should the next step be? Would it be membership in the WHO, demilitarization between the island and mainland, or something in the economic realm?
China’s Hu urges closer ties with Taiwan
Chinese President Hu Jintao said Wednesday that often-hostile relations with Taiwan have improved greatly over the past three decades and that Beijing remains committed to its long-term goal of peaceful reunification with the island.
Associated Press Writer
“Great changes have been made in the cross-strait relationship with efforts by compatriots from both sides of the strait,” Hu said in an address marking the 30th anniversary of a message from China to “compatriots in Taiwan” calling for reunification by peaceful means.
Hu also laid out the possibility of discussions with Taiwan on the highly sensitive military level.
“The two sides can engage in … contacts and communications on military issues when appropriate, and discussions on building a trust mechanism for military safety,” he said.
At the same time, Hu reinforced Beijing’s “one China” policy, saying to heavy applause that “any attempt to separate Taiwan is doomed to failure.”
“We call on both sides to negotiate on ending hostilities and reaching a peace agreement on the principle of one China,” Hu said.
He specifically addressed Taiwan’s pro-independence political party, urging it to give up its policies.
“As long as the Democratic Progressive Party changes its Taiwan independence policy, we are willing to make a positive response,” he said.
On Jan. 1, 1979, China’s Communist Party announced a reversal of its official policy of using “armed liberation” to repatriate Taiwan, replacing it with a policy of “peaceful reunification.” Since then, about 1 million Taiwanese have moved to China to live and work, investing an estimated $150 billion on the mainland.
China and Taiwan split in 1949 during a civil war, but Beijing considers the self-governed island a part of its territory and is determined to get it back, by force if necessary.
Relations between the rivals have improved greatly since Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou, a politician from the Beijing-friendly Nationalist Party, took power in May.
Earlier this year, the two sides agreed to begin direct air and shipping services across the Taiwan Strait, ending a nearly six-decade ban on regular links. Regular direct flights resumed Dec. 15.
Hu said China would be willing to work with Taiwan on getting it admitted into international organizations.
“The issue of Taiwan’s involvement in events held by international organizations could be reasonably arranged through pragmatic negotiations under the condition of not causing “two Chinas” or “one China and one Taiwan,” Hu said.
Ma has made participation in international organizations a key goal of his presidency, and has openly pushed to join the World Health Assembly, a United Nations body.
There are currently 6 comments highlighted: 24533, 24536, 24564, 24567, 24575, 24632.
December 31st, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Finally the official rhetoric from both sides of the strait have caught up with reality and common sense. The DDP is the only one left out now … but as President Hu has noted: even the DPP will be welcomed if it can reform its independence ideology and rhetoric.
AS for the international organization thing: I am sure a solution will be found. If the Pandas can arrive as “gifts,” surely, Taiwan will be able find a way to meaningfully participate in International Organizations without demanding any suggestions or legal precedence of establishing Taiwan as a sovereign state.
My only regret is that all this did not happen earlier this year. It would have been very, VERY wonderful to have the Olympic torch go through Taiwan.
Maybe the Shanghai Olympics….
December 31st, 2008 at 9:02 pm
The Shanghai Olympics? My guess is that will be some time after 2050… 🙂
December 31st, 2008 at 9:13 pm
@ Allen: The part about the DPP being welcome was the only thing that didn’t make sense to me. Parties don’t negotiate, governments do. Right now, the DPP has no real power after losing the presidency and has no ability to block any legislation in Congress. At this point in time, the DPP is mostly irrelevant, similar to the present day Republican party.
Political parties reflect people’s attitudes. If the attitude of the Taiwanese people no longer jives with the policies of the DPP, they can either change their policies or die as a party. Right now the Ma administration has very low approval ratings, so only the future will tell us if those attitudes have truly changed. I do feel that future DPP policies will not be as extreme as the ones espoused by Chen’s administration. Politicians don’t like being out of power, and make adjustments to regain it once it is lost.
I’m not sure it would have been such a good idea for the Olympic torch to have gone through Taiwan earlier this year. Outside of China itself, the torch relay was a security and logistics nightmare for everyone else. Can you imagine the amount and size of protests if it had actually happened? I think it would have been pretty brutal. We’ll have to wait and see what the future will bring…
December 31st, 2008 at 9:21 pm
@Steve,
You wrote:
Yeh – nightmare caused by all the professional activists and protesters…
Nevertheless, I stand by my position. It would have been worth it!!!
December 31st, 2008 at 9:26 pm
@Steve #3,
You wrote:
Well … the spirit of the whole negotiation was done under fuzzy circumstances where the status of the Taiwanese gov’t was never quite explicitly defined. It’s really a negotiation between peoples; hence to me it makes perfect sense for Pres. Hu to make a pitch for the DPP and their supporters. It’s irrelevant whether DPP is in power (or even whether DPP will never get back to power). It’s only important that they exist and are Chinese compatriots that need to be brought back under the fold.
December 31st, 2008 at 9:30 pm
@ Allen: Were you able to catch the torch run when it came through San Francisco? Just wondering…
December 31st, 2008 at 11:39 pm
@Steve – yep. I rode around on my mountain bike with a Chinese flag poking from my backpack.
Rode through crowds of Free Tibet people – to some boos – and crowds of pro China people – one time to roaring waves of approval as I incited the crowds with a big long thumbs up (till a police stopped me, some 20-30 seconds later)! 😉
December 31st, 2008 at 11:54 pm
@ Allen,
For me personally the nightmare of the torch relay was not caused by ‘professional activists and protesters’, it was caused by violent Chinese students misbehaving overseas. I was assaulted by them myself, and no I was NOT protesting or doing anything to provoke them. Things got to the point where they were simply running around assaulting white people. Quite disgusting.
As for decades of threatening to murder Taiwanese finally yielding dividends, whoopie doo! If unification happens while the PRC continues to threaten to murder Taiwanese it will forever be a stain on the honor of the PRC.
I’m all for unification with the PRC if Taiwanese want it. However, for as long as Taiwanese are being threatened with murder if they choose anything else, nobody has any way way of knowing what they really want.
January 1st, 2009 at 2:41 am
Peaceful reunification is great (at the very least it would imply no violence). And if that’s what Taiwanese people want, then even better. Too bad this didn’t come a few months ago…would’ve saved Taiwan some serious coin in buying those choppers and Patriots. Have the Americans cashed that cheque yet? It also would’ve saved a lot of huffing and puffing on this blog at that time.
January 1st, 2009 at 7:02 am
@8
“violent Chinese students misbehaving overseas”
Stop slandering overseas Chinese students! Many of my friends were in S.F. that day. I was on the phone with them the whole time. There WERE spirited arguments between the two camps. But at no time did they see any physical violence. If there were any violence, it would have been reported by the blood thirsty reporters anyway.
“threatened with murder if they choose anything else”
What’s your opinion about the American Civil War then? What did Lincoln do to the Confederates?
January 1st, 2009 at 7:47 am
I wonder what Taiwan’s propaganda errr Media has to say about this. I’m just curious as the public opinion from the Taiwanese themselves about this situation. Although the DPP rejects Hu Jintao’s olive branch, the KMT seems like that they want to go to the next level. There were little criticism from the Western media toward China’s and Taiwan’s diplomatic ties this year.
January 1st, 2009 at 7:58 am
To Pugster:
“I’m just curious as the public opinion from the Taiwanese themselves about this situation.” – absolutely, that should be the bottom line. If the Taiwanese want to reunify, then they should. If they don’t, then they should just keep talking about “long term goal of peaceful reunification” until the cows come home. In the meantime, they should disarm on both sides of the strait, dial back the rhetoric a number of notches, and continue to remove barriers to trade and travel.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:10 am
@huazai 10
I am not talking about San Francisco (I wasn’t there). I am not slandering Chinese overseas students. I am reminding everybody that Chinese overseas students misbehaved around the world in the most disgusting manner. Have you seen the videos of what happened in Seoul for Chirst’s sake? Hundreds of violent Chinese xenophobes set upon a lone Tibet sympathizer in a hotel lobby in Seoul. Utterly, utterly disgusting.
I was attacked by Chinese students myself, and for no reason besides me being white. Disgusting isn’t it?
January 1st, 2009 at 9:14 am
@ Pugster 11
The Taiwan media is in the process of being muzzled by the KMT, well the non-KMT media are anyway.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:20 am
@ S.K. Cheung 12
Can anyone know what the Taiwanese want before Beijing stops threatening to murder them if they make the ‘wrong’ choice?
PRC citizens love to snigger at Taiwanese democracy, yet Taiwan’s number one problem is Beijing’s endless interference in its domestic affairs. If Beijing would stop the bullying and just leave Taiwanese to figure out what they want we might be able to get some meaningful public debate in Taiwan.
I’m not holding my breath though.
The current rapprochement is farcical because it is happening under threat of wholesale murder.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:53 am
@BBD post 13.
“misbehaved”, “violent”, “disgusting” When Chinese practised our democratic rights to spoke out, we were given plenty nasty words like above. Any one die? Any one got injured? Can you prove your claim? When Tibetan extremist bashed and stabbed Han and Hui people on Lasah street, it was called as peaceful protest. When they broke into, and burned banks, shops, schools, and hospitals, and killed innocent life they were right to do so for the sake of their freedom. The person who harrased wheelchair bound Chinese torch bearer was cheered as a hero because westerners like you whould like to see a slap at China’s face. Thank you very much and we know who looks after our interest and who doesnot. Important lessons learned. Thanks a million.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:56 am
@BBD #13
BBD, I have read and heard about the Chinese student’s protests and/or riots in Seoul and Auckland. As long as they behave civilly, I don’t care if they protest. But if they are violent and destructive, I have one simple solution. Arrest them and deport them. Do not let them back into your country. Have the foreign ministry send their names, passport ID #’s and other relevant info to the foreign ministries in other countries, so they are aware of those particular students’ behaviors. I suspect that, by handling the miscreants in this manner, this will act as a deterrent to others contemplating this kind of behavior. A very effective deterrent. Natural consequences.
I know that in Seattle, some Cambodian youths and young adults got involved in gang activity. They were arrested and convicted several times. The INS deported them back to Cambodia. They did not want to go back. Some of the kids turned their lives around in Cambodia and were let back into the USA. So chastened were they that they became much better citizens. Natural consequences.
January 1st, 2009 at 12:11 pm
“When Tibetan extremist bashed and stabbed Han and Hui people on Lasah street, it was called as peaceful protest”
Eh, no… There were reports about peaceful protests in the beginning, but most people saw these riots as violence. And violence is wrong, whether it’s Tibetans against Han or Chinese against some guy in Korea.
January 1st, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Just want to add something: while violence is wrong, it’s no excuse for not trying to understand it (yes, there was a reason for 9/11 as well).
And one more thing: who saw that guy who tried to snatch the torch as a hero? Is that what anti-CNN says?
January 1st, 2009 at 12:13 pm
I was at the protests in London, I saw no violence, some egg throwing though, and a lot of flag waving. Really, the torch relay was a ridiculously stupid thing to do after the Lhasa riots and their suppression. Even without the trouble in Tibet there would have been protests, but the knowledge that half a world away a fresh set of political prisoners were being subjected to torture at the hands of the colleagues of those blue-suited thugs gave the whole thing quite an edge. The decision to go ahead with the relay was bone-headed in the extreme, and insulting to the city of London.
January 1st, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Jerry @ 17
Good suggestion.
Unfortunately the authorities are pussies and won’t do it. It’s one law for foreign scoff-laws (provided they come from China) and another law for peacefully protesting locals.
This was very evident in the contrasting police responses to the Electoral Financing Act protests and the 427 protests in New Zealand. A massive police presence was lining the street to control several hundred quiet retirees protesting the Electoral Financing Act, yet when several thousand violent foreign students from China caused mayhem on 427 there was not a policeman to be seen.
Gosh. . . I wonder why?
So far as I can see western governments are simply spineless when it comes to China.
Western governments drone about ‘democracy’, ‘human rights’ and so on, yet they refuse to meet the democratically elected government of the ROC. Instead they salivate at the thought of the giant PRC market, failing to realize that hell will freeze over before that market becomes a level playing field.
Hypocritical and dumb? Seems a fair assessment.
January 1st, 2009 at 12:32 pm
“I am reminding everybody that Chinese overseas students misbehaved around the world in the most disgusting manner.”
In the long torch relay around the world, there had been violence committed by protesters against the torch carriers. It’s only in Seoul that any kind of violence by Chinese counter-protesters were reported. So your assertion that they misbehaved around the world is not factual, in fact I consider it intentional slander.
“Hundreds of violent Chinese xenophobes set upon a lone Tibet sympathizer in a hotel lobby in Seoul. Utterly, utterly disgusting.”
Hundreds vs one, wow. What happened to him then? Surely if the crowd were violent, he wouldn’t have survived attacks from hundreds of people, would he?
January 1st, 2009 at 12:33 pm
@ Kui 16
Can I prove my claim?
Can you lean to say something original?
I never cheered the protester who attacked the wheelchair-bound Chinese fencer. I thought the incident was pretty stupid.
Take your assumptions about me and shove them up your backside.
Incidentally the Chinese fencer was called a whore and traitor by her ‘compatriots’ when she dared suggest boycotting Carefour was stupid. . . What a bunch of sick scum the Chinese nationalists are.
If only China still had an honorable leader like Sun Yat-sen.
January 1st, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Er Huazai @ 22
I was attacked by violent Chinese xenophobic racist scum pigs. .
January 1st, 2009 at 12:41 pm
@24
There you have proved what kind of person you are.
Editing for clarity 🙂
January 1st, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Uh huh. . .
Supposed to pucker up and take it like a bitch am I?
January 1st, 2009 at 1:13 pm
@Wukailong #18, 19
WKL, I don’t trust the Chinese standard of determining violence committed by the Tibetan people. What you or I would call peaceful protests, they would probably call “violence and destruction” because they do not tolerate peaceful protesting by the Tibetans. I am talking about a more Western view, obviously.
The epistemologist and theoretical physicist in me always want to study the underlying relationships between everything. I would look at the underlying anger and the roots thereof. But when violence or destruction is occurring, often the best allopathic remedy is to stop it and prevent it from happening again. Then, with the luxury of time, we can take proactive discussion and measures.
January 1st, 2009 at 1:36 pm
@BBD #21
And, BBD, as is usual, one should always suspect greed and money. You don’t want to offend the source of lucre. Money as god. Ugly reality. Oh, I almost forgot the eternal quest for power. I am such a sarcastic cynic.
I have no idea what is going on in NZ with regards to the situations you cited. Other than what I read. I have never been there.
January 1st, 2009 at 1:49 pm
@Jerry: I gathered the impressions of what happened in Lhasa from both Western and Chinese sources, and I don’t doubt there was indeed ethnical violence where Han and Hui Chinese were attacked and killed by Tibetans (there was also a Tibetan girl who burned to death). The Chinese media only reported this and refrained from mentioning any of the factors that caused the riots or made them worse (that’s why they call it 3.14 rather than 3.10, when the whole thing really started). The response from Chinese nationalists when mentioning 3.10 is interesting – they just dismiss it as not important or irrelevant, which is the usual way of sticking one’s head in the sand. Then they can bring the seeming suddenness of it all as an evidence of foreign involvement.
Another thing that seems quite clear to me is that the Chinese response to these riots were low-key, completely different from the response to the Tian’anmen massacre.
In retrospect, most of the Chinese nationalist anger over “complete lies” and “total fabrication” as regards to Western media coverage now seem exaggerated – sites like Anti-CNN point to wrong captions under pictures (Nepalese police claimed to be Chinese) or dubious cropping, but I haven’t seen anything else than that. Most of the anger came from the torch relays and what happened there, again a few highly symbolical events that involved little violence. And whatever the reasons to start Anti-CNN ever was, it’s now just a hotbed for the most vile forms of nationalism.
In the same manner, I don’t think there’s much support for claims of “violent Chinese behavior” abroad either.
January 1st, 2009 at 2:57 pm
@Wukailong #29
Thanks for the information and your reply.
I don’t support violence and destruction, whether Han, Tibetan, American, Israeli, European or whoever. At least by my sense of what is violence and destruction. As I said before, I just don’t trust the Chinese in determining those standards for me. I am glad to know that you think that the Chinese response was more subdued in Tibet than in past events.
The caricaturistic response and anger of the rabid nationalists. ::shaking my head:: The “Leni Riefenstahl effect”. That kind of nationalistic response always triggers memories of LR’s propagandistic movies of “Der Führer” and the Third Reich. It also triggers wariness on my part. Oy vey, it evokes memories of how German and Russian nationalism caused much suffering for many Jewish people and other groups.
I wonder if those rabid Chinese nationalists know how cartoonish and mindless they appear in my mind? I wonder if they care? I wonder if they know how reminiscent they are of young Nazi brownshirts and Hitler-Jugend?
Personally, I have no idea how many Chinese students or protesters engaged in violence or destruction. Whether in the West, Asia or Africa. I hope it is not many.
Have a great year, WKL. And keep selling that product with the fruit logo. 😀
January 1st, 2009 at 3:01 pm
@Wukailong – Like I said, I saw no violence in London, and heard no reports of serious injuries elsewhere.
Anyone familiar with either being an immigrant or living around them knows the fear that someone who is living in a foreign country feels of being involved in a fight with a local and losing their visa as a result. When I lived in Nanjing and Shenzhen I was involved in more than one fight with locals (all of which were racially motivated at heart) and I never threw a punch for exactly that reason, even if I did take more than a few blows.
I agree entirely with your summation of the anti-western media movement, and of the Tibetan riots. it seems to me that the government will rue its decision to indulge the kind of nationalism represented by Anti-CNN. In future, it is difficult to see how the government will be able to control the nationalists in the way that they controlled the anti-Japanese protests (not least because that generation is no longer in university where pressure can be applied through the exam system!).
One last thing, I see a lot of people referring to the anti-CCP torch relay protesters as ‘pro-Tibet’, indeed, this is the way they were reported in the media, but a lot of the anti-CCP demonstrators were pro-democracy/human rights types. The pro-Tibet people were perhaps the most organised and militant of the anti-CCP groups, but I have little time for them. I myself hold no strong views on whether Tibet should be independent or not, I don’t think making that choice is any of my business. I do, however, believe that Tibetans should have the chance to express their opinions on the matter within their own country. I do believe that torture and false imprisonment is wrong wherever it is done. I do believe that democracy is the best form of governance that humanity has created so far. This is why I protested the torch relay, and to be frank, the pro-CCP protesters were there to show their support for a brutal and murderous regime, even if some of them did so out of misguided patriotism, and I form my opinions of them accordingly.
January 1st, 2009 at 3:29 pm
@Jerry: “I wonder if those rabid Chinese nationalists know how cartoonish and mindless they appear in my mind? I wonder if they care? I wonder if they know how reminiscent they are of young Nazi brownshirts and Hitler-Jugend?”
I hope Facts will one day find out. 🙂 Honestly, I was completely flabbergasted by his reply to Steve. Indeed, it was a bit like those amateur alternative physicists snubbing Einstein because his theories goes against all common sense…
Happy New Year to you too, Jerry! If I pass by Taibei this year, I’ll be sure to contact you! 🙂
January 1st, 2009 at 4:10 pm
A lot of things can happen, but “peaceful unification” is the least likely of all.
And the DPP could never give up its perfectly reasonable insistance that Taiwan’s future can be decided only by the people of Taiwan through referendum.
January 1st, 2009 at 4:15 pm
# 29 Wukailong
“that’s why they call it 3.14 rather than 3.10, when the whole thing really started). The response from Chinese nationalists when mentioning 3.10 is interesting”
I think you are being overly nit-picky. perhaps we shouldn’t say 911 then? look at your own comment #19 😛
January 1st, 2009 at 4:27 pm
@Jerry –
January 1st, 2009 at 4:32 pm
@yo: 🙂 In the case of 911, secrecy was quite an important part of the process. The same can’t be said of 3.10-3.14, which happened in the open.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:08 pm
@ Wukailong 29
You say there is not much support for claims of Chinese violence overseas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0r2ax9bzKY
Check that out. . .
I was attacked in similar fashion. The key difference would be that unlike the person attacked above I was not a pro-Tibet protester, or even a non-protesting supporter of their cause, I was simply a solitary white person caught up in a very hostile section of the Chinese crowd. It’s pretty incredible when stroppy Chinese students run around in other people’s countries randomly attacking white people to express Chinese pride.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:27 pm
@BBD #37: Reminds me of something Friedrich Nietzsche once said: “Insanity in individuals is something rare – but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:30 am
@BBD
“I never cheered the protester who attacked the wheelchair-bound Chinese fencer. I thought the incident was pretty stupid.
Take your assumptions about me and shove them up your backside.”
When did I assume that you cheered the protester who attacked the wheelchair-bound Chinese fencer? Can you point it out for me?
“Incidentally the Chinese fencer was called a whore and traitor by her ‘compatriots’ when she dared suggest boycotting Carefour was stupid. . . What a bunch of sick scum the Chinese nationalists are.”
As you might know, there are lots of heated debates in Chinese forum and strong words are used some times from bothsides. Why do you ommit the fact that some Chinese and China bashers (they obviously can read and write Chinese) called those patriotic Chinese as brainwashed pigs? And watch your own language, I think “a bounch of sick scum……” are equally good/bad.
I have watched the evidence you provided in post 37. Let me make it clear. We Chinese condemn all violence. If you call it violence or riot then I would like to ask you why you have been avoiding the looting, stabbing, burnning by Tibetan extremists? You certainly do not have to prove your claim of being attacked by Chinese students. You have provided one piece of evidence of violence happened in SK then your calim of being attacked may be some whereelse? does not sound not reasonable. Then it can lead to the conclusion that “Chinese students run around in other people’s COUNTRIES randomly attacking white people to express Chinese pride.” GOOD JOB. In fact, many claims against Chinese, Chinese government and China are taken as truth without any prove. So, one more claim is nothing. And you can continue using your microscope on an inperfect Chinese population, find fault, and generalise it to your targeted group or even 1.3 billion Chinese people. Thanks again.
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:43 am
@FOARP #35,
I don’t agree with ultra nationalism and know nothing about SongQiang. But I 100% agree with what he said to you . We’ve have talked about that point too many times in last year .
“Their main reason for being there simply seem to be to wave the red banner and sing the Chinese national anthem”
Is this the same form with any other street demonstration-waving flags/banners and chatting slogans/songs? You’ve done few but just on the other side. Did you drink too much on the new year’s day? 🙂
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:51 am
All you Chinese here, never mind the China/Taiwan cross-strait issue. We Chinese and other minority groups in Canada should fight for the right things, like bringing down the rasist Canadian gov’t, screw their racist immigration policies and fire or jail those racist Nazi custom agents. Because it’s an anti-human rights and an APARTHEID experience for many Chinese coming back to Canada with those NAZI Canadian customs working the border crossings and at the custom check points in the airports.
And why are there so many white or western lovers on this blog?
You Chinese poeple here, get it together or China will go the way the USA is in the near future splitting up into pairing states.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:08 am
@BBD #21
I am sorry you got attacked in NZ. And there was one or two in SK. But I am not sure it concluded all overseas Chinese students in those protest were violent. I can’t image if there were thousands of violent Chinese students in the streets of NZ without police’s presence what would have happened? I am not saying I don’t believe few violent incidents but I just don’t believe the big violent picture you are drawing.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:35 am
@Bodyguard Buggering Dictator!
“It’s pretty incredible when stroppy Chinese students run around in other people’s countries randomly attacking white people to express Chinese pride.”
Indeed, I am sorry you got attacked in NZ.
It’s pretty incredible when arrogant White folks (mostly who are not interested in integrating or are on short term assignments or on sensual and or criminal escapades) run around in other people’s countries mouthing-off and stirring up public emotions to proslytize / promote Western values.
FOARP: “When I lived in Nanjing and Shenzhen I was involved in more than one fight with locals (all of which were racially motivated at heart) and I never threw a punch for exactly that reason, even if I did take more than a few blows. ”
Everybody’s Kung Fu fighting…. so, you never threw a punch for exactly racial reason, was it over girls, then?
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:38 am
@ Kui 39
You said “The person who harrased wheelchair bound Chinese torch bearer was cheered as a hero because westerners like you whould like to see a slap at China’s face.”
Since you specifically said “westerners like you”, I naturally assumed you believed I was happy to see the wheelchair bound fencer attacked. You appeared to be making a false assumption about me. I still believe you made a false assumption.
You said “Let me make it clear. We Chinese condemn all violence.”
First, you do not speak for all Chinese people so don’t claim to. Second, plenty of Chinese people were clearly participating in and cheering on violence during the torch relays. Third, at least in New Zealand, there was little Chinese condemnation of the violence. The loudest reaction was vociferous praise for the ‘patriotism’ of these violent xenophobes. The other notable reaction was denial that any violence had occurred, because after all “we Chinese condemn all violence”.
The attack on myself was actually filmed, but the cameraman refused to release the footage to help identify my assailants because. . . and this is both amusing and educational. . . he didn’t want to be seen as ‘against China’ in the wake of the Sichuan Earthquake. Hmm. . . patriotism (or fear of reprisals?) trumps fundamental morality.
“I would like to ask you why you have been avoiding the looting, stabbing, burnning by Tibetan extremists?”
I am not “avoiding” anything. I was not in Lhassa and was not attacked by Tibetan extremists. I was in Auckland and was attacked by Chinese extremists.
You said “you can continue using your microscope on an inperfect Chinese population, find fault, and generalise it to your targeted group or even 1.3 billion Chinese people.”
The hail of blows and abuse I was subjected to made things pretty clear without the aid of a microscope.
You also need to sharpen up your comprehension skills and realize that I am not generalizing. I am simply commenting on the violent xenophobic racist Chinese nationalist scum who export their dubious behavior. It is important to highlight how unacceptable their behavior is.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:57 am
@ BMY 42
I never concluded that all of the protesters were violent.
That said, the event (clearly a political ‘protest’ despite originally being billed as an Olympic ‘celebration’) was surprisingly nationalistic, hostile and violent. While the violent individuals were a minority, they were a fairly sizeable minority and caused a fair amount of trouble. What I experienced was not an isolated incident, it was part of a wider pattern of political, xenophobic and racial violence.
There were several violent events that day, mostly involving Chinese attacking Tibet protesters/sympathizers, people they suspected of belonging to that category, and bystanders who intervened to help victims of the aggressive young Chinese thugs.
January 2nd, 2009 at 2:23 am
Good show, all you “violent xenophobic racist Chinese students”, Chinese extremists and Chinese “nationalist scums”. Practice your new found human rights and freedoms on those white people in those western countries that has put you down for so many humiliating or shaming years.
Take it to those western pig’s land. Oh how I love those “violent xenophobic racist Chinese nationalist scum” students and extremists. Proud tobe a Chinaman.
January 2nd, 2009 at 5:38 am
I am happy to hear the Mainland rhetoric soften. In 1986, when I spent a length of time in Taiwan, we were all very aware of tension across the strait. Over the years, I have had grave concerns about the safety of my friends on the island. On one hand, I am extremely sympathetic to the idea of a Taiwanese identity. On the other hand, nobody in the world would “win” a military conflict over Taiwan.
The feeling of many Taiwanese, even the KMT, I suspect, is pragmatic about the “reunification” question. A friend of mine who supported the KMT in May found that she’d rather call herself Taiwanese than Chinese when she started her studies in the UK. Her identity is Taiwanese. At the same time, she recognizes that closer ties to the Mainland can have a positive impact on the economy of Taiwan.
For the Mainland to be successful in wooing the Taiwanese, they have to acknowledge and respect the unique identity of the Taiwanese.
January 2nd, 2009 at 6:09 am
Wow, and I thought this was a positive development! Posts are getting pretty nasty here… 🙁
My theory on the Olympic torch demonstrations is just a theory, so don’t get all over my case about it. I’m willing to hear any other theories anyone might have.
When China was picked for the Olympics, both the government and people were justifiably proud of the achievement. It was to be their first Olympics ever. The government decided to not just put on an Olympics but to make this China’s “coming out party”, so to speak. This would showcase China’s development over the last 30 years and be the best Olympics ever. From what I’ve seen and heard, the Chinese people felt exactly the same and made it the #1 objective for the next few years.
China planned to build the best facilities (which they did), have the best opening and closing ceremonies ever (which they did), have the best cheerleaders (which they certainly did, those cheerleaders were fantastic), have the most organized, well run, secure and safe Olympics ever. From what I saw, they accomplished all of these objectives. Even the weather cooperated; after the first few days it rained, knocking the pollution out of the sky and the weather for the rest of the time was really nice for Beijing.
The torch relay was set up to be a world event, since there are overseas Chinese all over the world. This would give everyone a chance to cheer the torch on, etc. There was some talk about Darfur protests, but I don’t think anyone expected there to be much about Tibet. China even sent paramilitary troops to protect the torchbearers (this was probably a mistake, in my opinion, because they went overboard on a few occasions and ruined their welcome in those countries), but never expected what happened. Then things in Tibet went sour, protests happened all along the parade routes, certain individuals went after the torch (with some initial success) so I can understand why the Chinese living overseas were furious. It was going to be their big moment and it was being ruined. The press was pretty negative, at least what I saw, and crowd reaction is pretty predicatable in those circumstances, especially when students are concerned.
So here come the Tibet protesters, the Chinese student react, and there’s fighting in the streets. Unfortunately, it’s the innocent bystanders like BBD that get nailed. Mob violence is pretty predictable in all cultures, and BBD got caught in the middle of it. Of course he’s resentful; he was in his own country, innocently watching the torch relay, probably cheering on the runner, and suddenly he’s singled out as western and gets pummeled. I can understand his deep resentment and anger but I also know that probably 80-90% of those students only did it because everyone else did, and probably regretted their actions after it was over. It only takes a few instigators to get a mob to act violently. Personal responsibility seems to disappear when that happens and bad things occur. It happens like that in every country in the world if the circumstances are right.
On the other side, I wasn’t happy about anyone attacking the runners. I thought that was wrong. These people are guests in the respective countries and as guests, should be safe from any harm. I don’t care what you are protesting, you don’t do it violently and whoever attacked any of those runners, whoever grabbed the torch, was completely in the wrong. I think what truly kicked it ove the edge was when that poor girl in the wheelchair was attacked. After that, public sentiment (though many on this blog don’t seem to realize it) turned completely against the protesters and sympathized with the Chinese torchbearers. It reminded me of when I was in China; everyone kept asking me what I thought about Falun Gong. I didn’t really have any opinions about them since I didn’t really care, but when I asked them what they thought, they all mentioned those people who had set themselves on fire in Tiananmen Square and from that point, public sentiment turned about the organization. I think that’s also what happened with the girl in the wheelchair; after it occurred the western world turned against the protesters. A line was crossed.
Then the Sichuan earthquake occurred and a mass outpouring of sympathy occurred everywhere in the world. I didn’t hear much about the torch relay after that, and I think it was back in China by that time anyway.
In the final analysis, at least to me, it’s ok to protest on the side of the road but not to attack anyone, least of all a girl in an wheelchair. For any person to attack a girl in a wheelchair, they’d have to lose all their humanity. Apparently some did just that. For some Chinese students to do the same… well, two wrongs don’t make a right either. BBD was on the receiving end of a bad situation so of course he’ll feel emotional about it; we all would if it happened to us. But I don’t really think Chinese students attacked innocent people very often. I did know a few Chinese students that were studying overseas at the time and they all felt very patriotic and all had the “I ‘heart’ China” on their MSN Messengers. A case could be made that the Chinese government overpoliticized the Olympics but were resentful when other groups politicized it. I think because it was their coming out party, it was more of a nationalistic thing than a political thing.
I would be willing to be that more than 90% of the students never attacked anyone but were branded with that reputation because of the actions of a few. The Chinese students I’ve met in my country have all been very nice people. I’m not willing to paint them with so broad a brush.
January 2nd, 2009 at 6:13 am
Many people from the UK call themselves Scottish and not English or Brittons.
Many people in Canada don’t call themselves Canadians.
Many people in the US don’t tell anyone that they are Americans when they travel outside the US.
People from Hong Kong don’t say that they are Chinese.
So a silly low life Chinese girl looking for a white or black mate in the west, it would be better she don’t shame me by telling people she is Chinese. Yes Taiwanese girls are easy and make for better western life style.
January 2nd, 2009 at 6:14 am
@ MutantJedi #47:
Thanks for bringing the conversation back to the original topic. I saw this article in CommonWealth Magazine’s website today, concerning Direct Cross-strait Links and what they mean for Taiwan. CommonWealth is pretty objective and might be considered light blue from a Taiwanese perspective. I thought the article was well written and very thorough. It’s nine pages, so not a quick read.
January 2nd, 2009 at 6:51 am
@BBD,
I feel sorry for what happened to you on the day and fully understand your feeling. But I don’t see any justification of constantly using violent language on this blog
January 2nd, 2009 at 6:55 am
@ BMY: You expressed my feelings exactly.
January 2nd, 2009 at 7:17 am
@ pug_ster #11:
You asked about Taiwan media. I bookmarked two English sites for the opposite views and my wife has a few Chinese sites covering both sides.
For English:
China Post This is the KMT paper.
Taipei Times This is the DPP paper.
For Chinese:
China Times
Taiwan US
South News
1-Apple
Liberty Times
UDN News
Google News Taiwan
I think the China Times is KMT and Liberty Times is DPP, but I’m not sure.
January 2nd, 2009 at 7:46 am
@ BMY 51
And returning to the Taiwan topic. . .
My language may be colorful, but at least I am not regularly threatening to murder anyone, unlike the government of the PRC. In comparison I’d say I’m very restrained.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:27 am
demilitarization between the island and mainland
How is that possible? You can’t erect an energy barrier between the two sides. So unless China is willing to dismantle its short-ranged missile arsenal any other gestures would be meaningless.
Steve
I can understand his deep resentment and anger but I also know that probably 80-90% of those students only did it because everyone else did, and probably regretted their actions after it was over. It only takes a few instigators to get a mob to act violently.
Sorry, are Chinese humans or animals? Humans do not automatically turn to mob behaviour. If you think it’s a natural reaction for Chinese then there’s something seriously wrong about Chinese society.
I don’t think the problem is that Chinese people are especially violent. It’s that people like yourself try to justify certain people’s behaviour after the event rather than condemn them and say “this is wrong – we must respect others’ views and not argue with our fists”. There is, I think, still relatively speaking a lack of respect for minority views in China and a tolerated attitude that if you do not conform, regardless of where you live, if you get attacked it’s your fault.
Chinese society won’t improve until, Steve, people like yourself stop trying to explain away behaviour and just condemn it. Otherwise the “explanations” will let others worm out of examining their behaviour and support the mentality that it’s “always someone else’s fault”. Because, in China it seems, it’s so often always someone else’s fault.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:40 am
Raj, according to KMT affiliated groups in Taiwan the PRC missiles targeting Taiwan may in fact be intended to protect Taiwan against Japan!
http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=824692&lang=eng_news&cate_img=46.jpg&cate_rss=news_Editorial
Yes, we all know that the Japanese regularly threaten to invade Taiwan if the Taiwanese government fails to comply with their imperialistic demands.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:41 am
Wow, based on the word choice in many of the posts today, perhaps some of us imbibed a little excessively at New Year’s, and are writing with a splitting headache or something that is peeving us off a little more than usual.
To Vmoore55:
I assume you’ve had some bad border experiences. But in my experience passing through Canada customs countless times, I’ve never had issues. A check of the passport, a few basic questions, and off you go. And I’m as Chinese-Canadian as the next Chinese-Canadian. So whatever you’ve experienced, I am not sure it represents any systematic flaws.
On the other hand, what’s up with a statement like this: “And why are there so many white or western lovers on this blog?” Why the racial/xenophobic tone? The whole point of this blog is to increase mutual understanding; if an echo-chamber is what you seek, may I suggest your bathroom as a good starting point.
“white people in those western countries that has put you down for so many humiliating or shaming years. Take it to those western pig’s land.” – wtf, dude!?! Racism is a two-way street, and you’re on it.
If most people you know in Canada don’t consider themselves Canadian, you’re associating with a very strange crowd.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:45 am
To Steve #48:
“I would be willing to be that more than 90% of the students never attacked anyone but were branded with that reputation because of the actions of a few.” – I agree. It’s usually the few bad apples who ruin it for everyone else.
Likewise in this discussion about protesters on both sides, I think some on both sides crossed the line, but the vast majority didn’t. And to suggest otherwise by using overly broad strokes as a means of making a point serves no one.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:57 am
To Raj:
“Sorry, are Chinese humans or animals? Humans do not automatically turn to mob behaviour.” – this statement is a little excessive. There is a recognized “mob mentality” or “mob psychology” exactly as a characterization of such traits. It’s not to excuse it. But one also cannot deny human nature, and that doesn’t matter whether you’re Chinese or not.
THe tendency for mob behaviour is no more and no less prevalent is CHinese as opposed to any other society. And while the entirety should be condemned, it’s certainly not helpful to suggest that Chinese are somewhat “less human”. That would seem to put you on the road that Vmoore55 seems to be travelling, albeit in opposite directions.
BTW, saying someone acted only as part of a “mob” doesn’t excuse their behaviour, it only serves to explain it. And that’s a big difference.
January 2nd, 2009 at 9:06 am
To Raj:
“Because, in China it seems, it’s so often always someone else’s fault.” – once again, the character flaw to which you refer hardly seems the exclusive domain of Chinese people. North Americans seem increasingly adept at it as well.
I take issue with China-apologists and CCP-policies as much as the next guy. But if you’re going to criticize Chinese people, it makes you no better, and likely worse.
January 2nd, 2009 at 9:34 am
@S.K. Cheung
@Steve
@Vmoore55
Yes, the comments have been getting a little wild today. If it is not the booze talking, maybe it is those damned “chem trails” that Art Bell talks about. I stayed on the sidelines. It is just too peaceful here today. I did not want to break the spell.
Vmoore55 said “Many people in the US don’t tell anyone that they are Americans when they travel outside the US.” I can’t speak for other Americans, but I tell people that I am American and Russian Jewish. What’s to hide? Regarding “Taiwanese girls are easy” and “silly low life Chinese girl looking for a white or black mate in the west”, I don’t know what you are talking about, VM. Yes, I have met easy girls, but they are hardly the exclusive property of any one country.
Steve, and SK, I agree with your discussions on mob mentality and “the few bad apples”. Kind of why I winced when my son wanted to join a fraternity at Oregon. Not my style.
I always wonder, what is behind rabid nationalism, whether Chinese or American or wherever. Mindless, IMHO.
BTW, USC beat Penn State at the Rose Bowl. 😀
January 2nd, 2009 at 9:37 am
S.K. Cheung
On mob mentality, if there’s a difference between excusing and explaining behaviour why mention mob mentality at all? Also I don’t believe that any crowd of people can become a mob. It depends on the people there.
For the second point, I don’t think that every other country deflects “fault” to the degree one may see in China. As an example, you mentioned the US but in the US you will get a host of different views that often include passionate criticism of America. You simply do not get that in China to the same degree.
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:43 am
@Raj,
By implying some people superior than other dose not make a good argument.
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:01 am
The two sides should have much closer military ties. There should be cross military officers training, cooperated military exercise etc
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:11 am
@BBD – I agree with much of what you have to say, but the use of rude language and swearing is hardly justified – particularly that in your handle. If you want to say that Hu Jintao has engaged in homosexual activities with one of his bodyguards, then say it, and show us the evidence you base this on. Putting it in your handle makes it appear as though you wish to simply state this as a fact which needs no examination.
On the subject of Taiwan? I disapprove of all non-Taiwanese telling people who live in Taiwan whether they should independent, unified with the mainland, or whatever. Particularly bad are those individuals who, born in Taiwan, then emigrate to other countries to gain foreign citizenship, but then insist on making continuous disparaging remarks about a place they have no intention to live in. An opinion on a place is one thing, but a continuous dissing of Taiwan’s economic and political situation seems like so much sour grapes. Many of these people cannot return to Taiwan because they would be liable for military service if they did. As much as I sympathise with those who wish to avoid compulsory national service for conscientious reasons, I have no time for people who avoid national service sheerly for personal benefit but then continue to claim that they are patriots. Many also are those who might have expected through family connections to occupy positions of power had the KMT dictatorship remained in place, these also I have no sympathy for.
As a regular reader of the Taipei Times, I have to say that although I find their reporting style decent (if occasionally a bit bland) I find their one-sided pro-green editorial stance pretty pathetic. Much of it seems to come out of a love for Taiwanese culture that I entirely recognise and share, but come on guys, surely you realise how stupid it is for foreign residents in Taiwan to write editorials encouraging Taiwanese to be more ‘taike’ instead of the ‘colonial’ Chinese identity. It would be like a Taiwanese person coming to the UK and encouraging us to embrace ‘Chav’ culture instead of that high-brow European stuff – just nonsensical.
The only things I am absolutely sure of are that no military aggression from mainland China towards Taiwan should be allowed. All the means of deterring invasion should be placed in the hands of the Taiwanese, and Taiwanese democracy should be encouraged as much as possible. Beyond that, let the Taiwanese people choose their own path.
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:42 am
@ FOARP 64
Well my handle’s just a bit of obnoxious fun really. It has nothing to do with Hu Jintao. Mao is the guy I’m honoring.
Now I’m not honestly sure how true this one is, but flicking through a biography of Mao written by his doctor (forget the title or author) there was a story about him getting rather friendly with his bodyguards. Was some years ago I read that so maybe I have the details slightly wrong. It could have been his hairdresser, and perhaps the bodyguard was the one who caught them.
I also find the Taipei Times editorials unimaginative and hugely biased.
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:55 am
@FOARP,
I feel warm and fuzzy after I read the link you quoted as it uses the language style and tone I am very familiar with even I grew up in mainland. It looks like KMT,CCP and DDP all like to use similar revolution style language. very good.
“It does not now bear a fanatical hatred of Japan as do others mired in the past”
It’s very cool that I didn’t see the hatred of Japan but I did see the hatred of KMT from the article. It has the right target.
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:58 pm
@Raj #62
@S.K. Cheung
@Steve
@Wukailong
@BBD #66
Raj, mob mentality and mob psychology have been discussed for many years and generations.
I don’t believe that Steve and SK are trying to excuse irresponsible behavior. I don’t believe anybody is saying that all crowds will become violent. And this goes for any mob/crowd, Chinese, American, Israeli, German, Britain or wherever.
You think this is exclusive to China and the Chinese? There have been soccer riots all over the world, horrible behavior at American baseball games (even Little League games), lynch mobs in the Deep South, race riots in the US, witch hunts in New England and Europe, Kristallnacht in Germany, the 2005 riots in France, the recent Shanghai altercations between Japanese and Chinese students, the recent Greek student riots and the Rodney King riot in LA, just to name a very few.
I agree with Steve, SK and WKL. This is not prevalent behavior. And understanding the roots of these situations will allow us to enact proactive, preventative measures. Raj, the way I see the world, there are many relationships between us all and the parts we all play in those relationships. As WKL pointed out earlier, being able to see these relationships more clearly and understanding them will help us deal proactively with the root issues.
Raj, “Blaming someone else” and evading accountability is a human trait, hardly the exclusive property of the Chinese. That said, if you feel the Chinese are being unaccountable on some issue, call them on it. If you believe that China is “deflecting fault” on some issue to an unacceptable degree, call them on it. I appreciate good discussions and arguments. But let us try to avoid broad statements.
I have a problem with that statement. I can’t wrap my head around it. For me, it is just too nebulous. I would appreciate it if you use a single specific issue which we can use as a starting point.
Thanks. I appreciate your consideration in this matter.
—————-
BBD, I appreciate the gravity of the problems you had in NZ. I would find that a most threatening and dangerous situation. Furthermore, I am allergic to beatings. I am sorry that you had to go through that trauma. And thanks for calling my attention to the word, “stroppy”.
I would like to ask you to tone down your comments. I have a problem when you resort to that kind of violent language and provocation. It discourages the kind of discourse I would like to see here at FM. Furthermore, I believe that you have a lot to contribute here.
Now I know that some of the people, like “Fiction” and some others, make it difficult to maintain civility in any discourse with them. Their writings are illogical, often ad hominem and abusive. Let’s not descend to their level.
Thanks.
January 2nd, 2009 at 2:50 pm
BMY
By implying some people superior than other dose not make a good argument.
How have I done that? And please do not respond “by saying only Chinese people are [negative comment]”
The two sides should have much closer military ties. There should be cross military officers training, cooperated military exercise etc
If that’s what China wants, it can start by decomissioning its short-ranged missile arsenal. How can you built trust when you still make nasty threats, whether they are made directly or implicitly?
Jerry
You think this is exclusive to China and the Chinese?
No, but “tu quoque” isn’t a defence. I wouldn’t use history from centuries ago (witch-hunts) or brutal dicatorships (kristallnacht) to compare with modern circumstances. Football punch-ups are more relevant but also not that useful because the people who fight are often thugs who deliberately look for trouble. Some “good” people do get sucked in, but despite the fact I often watch rugby and have lived near a stadium I have not seen such behaviour repeated there. In any case you wouldn’t want to compare Chinese students to football thugs, surely?
Raj, “Blaming someone else” and evading accountability is a human trait, hardly the exclusive property of the Chinese.
Never said it was their exclusive property. No offence, but that’s another “classic response” I sometimes see when “China” comes in for criticism – the “other people do it too/why are you saying this only happens in China/Chinese people do this” accusation.
But as an example I have had too many discussions with Chinese where at some point they say “you do not understand China”. Though I would stress that I would not say this is the preserve of China/Chinese people and I also have more open conversations, I hardly ever hear that sort of comment from people from other countries. Why is that? As much as I often learn something new about China I don’t think it’s down to any general ignorance. Some years ago one of my good Chinese friends didn’t know that the “Golden Flowers” had been juicing, despite the fact that they knew about their victories in the pool. Sometimes I learn something about China and sometimes I have something to tell others.
If you believe that China is “deflecting fault” on some issue to an unacceptable degree, call them on it.
I do, but it is for Chinese to recognise this because they are the ones that can principally do something about it. As a foreigner I can’t spend all my time wagging my finger – it would annoy my Chinese friends for one thing.
I have a problem with that statement. I can’t wrap my head around it. For me, it is just too nebulous. I would appreciate it if you use a single specific issue which we can use as a starting point.
I thought that the point was clear enough, though I will explain it a little more carefully this time. For just about any topic where you will see at least some US commentators blame other countries, social groups, etc for problems you will find other Americans to counter that point and suggest the US is at least partly at fault too (even saying mostly/all at fault).
Even in regards to the September 2001 attacks you will see people saying that America “brought it upon itself”, had lax security, etc. Not all those points would be agreed upon in general society, but certainly they have led to quiet reflection at times. Foreign wars, trade disputes, the environment – you name it and you will find a range of views that point the finger inwards, not just outwards. Can you really say there is as much self-criticism in China as you might find in America, Europe, etc for comparable matters?
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:50 pm
@ Raj #55 & 69:
Hi Raj~I’ll address your two points:
“How is that possible? You can’t erect an energy barrier between the two sides. So unless China is willing to dismantle its short-ranged missile arsenal any other gestures would be meaningless.”
I believe the short-ranged missiles are on the table for discussion. I’ve spent enough time in Taiwan to know that when someone has over 1000 missiles aimed at you (the gun to the head) and then calls you “compatriot”, you aren’t inclined to agree. Until those missiles are removed, I’d say the chances of reunification are zero. Maybe the CCP is starting to figure this out?
The other side of this are military to military discussions to prevent mistakes from being made. These also take place between China and the US, except when something annoys China and they suspend them for awhile (take my ball and go home). Right now there is no communication between the two militaries so easy for a misunderstanding to escalate into something worse.
As far as the student riots, I absolutely condemn them! And I don’t have any sympathy for anyone involved. It’s like the person who gets drunk, does something stupid and then tries to claim that it wasn’t his fault because he was drunk. No one forced him to drink the alcohol. It’s the same with mob violence. There might be leaders and followers, but whoever commits assault is 100% responsible for their actions. There are no excuses.
What I was trying to explain was mob behavior, which has been studied for a very long time. Have you ever been in a work environment where everyone got along great, no one complained and it was a great place to work, then they hired someone who complained all the time and soon many were complaining? That’s a microcosm of mob violence. There are instigators and followers. The instigators, once they’ve roused the crowd, almost always stay in the background and rarely get arrested. Police are trained to pick them out because once they do, the violence stops. It’s no different from a fight where a group attacks one person; I’ve been trained to figure out who the leader is, take him out first, and the rest will run away. It works.
During the recent riots in Greece, I bet 95+% of the teens watched the whole thing at home with their parents, but if you saw it on TV it seemed that 95% were on the streets rioting, burning cars and destroying shops. I just didn’t want to paint every Chinese student with the “violent” brush because I don’t think it is deserved.
But every person who struck BBD committed assault and should have been arrested, period. When you break the law, you should pay the price. Just because you are a “follower” doesn’t absolve you from any guilt, you are still 100% responsible for your actions.
I feel your point about blame in #69 is a byproduct of ultranationalism. It appeared in the Soviet Union after WWII (“we will bury you”), was very prevalent in Japan during the 80s (I know from personal experience) and has now appeared in China. I have a theory as to why that is, but that whole discussion deserves its own thread. It can appear at times in every country, but usually for a short period of time and then it dissapates, with criticisms being voiced from fellow countrymen, just like you said. Based on my personal experience in China, there is private self criticism but no public self criticism, and the closer you get to Beijing, the less criticism you hear of any type.
January 2nd, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Hi Steve thanks for your message.
I’ve spent enough time in Taiwan to know that when someone has over 1000 missiles aimed at you (the gun to the head) and then calls you “compatriot”, you aren’t inclined to agree. Until those missiles are removed, I’d say the chances of reunification are zero. Maybe the CCP is starting to figure this out?
The first part is common-sense – of course the missiles don’t help. But simply removing them wouldn’t be enough, as they could be moved back at any time. That’s why I said they need to be decommissioned. If they’re not to be used against Taiwan there isn’t much else they’d be good for.
Right now there is no communication between the two militaries so easy for a misunderstanding to escalate into something worse.
True, but I think that there has to be more trust before better communications could be laid down.
Have you ever been in a work environment where everyone got along great, no one complained and it was a great place to work, then they hired someone who complained all the time and soon many were complaining?
Honestly, no. That’s just my experience.
I just didn’t want to paint every Chinese student with the “violent” brush because I don’t think it is deserved.
Of course.
I have a theory as to why that is, but that whole discussion deserves its own thread.
I think that the discussion would be better if it focused again on Sino-Taiwanese relations. Apologies for any part I played in diverting the topic.
Based on my personal experience in China, there is private self criticism but no public self criticism, and the closer you get to Beijing, the less criticism you hear of any type.
It is also my experience that self-criticism tends to be private rather than public (I’ve heard the point about Beijing too). A few times on the internet I’ve seen comments from Chinese BBS members that they discuss politics and criticism of the government on more than a few occasions but not in public and especially not in front of foreigners. That might explain why some Chinese actively try to break up certain discussions on English languages forums.
January 2nd, 2009 at 5:00 pm
@ Raj:
Your point about the decommissioning makes sense. There has to be some guarantee that the missiles won’t be back again in a few weeks.
My feeling is that there can be no trust without communication first; that’s how you get to know each other and form personal relationships. So I would expect everyone to be wary in the beginning and gradually form relationships and understandings that help to prevent conflict. The military isn’t really negotiating, that’s for the diplomats. Though there was no trust between the USA and Soviet Union, their militaries still met with each other to prevent accidental war.
I found in China that if you were really friends with someone, they would tell you everything including their feelings about the government, but only in private. I found that in or near Beijing, no one wanted to discuss politics except to give the official government line. In Shanghai, I’d be asked in public my feelings about Falun Gong, the “one china” policy and what I thought about their city, and when I turned the question around they would usually tell me their opinions, so it wasn’t that bad. But I can certainly understand being circumspect online, since the online mob likes to seek out and destroy anyone they deem “unpatriotic”, which carries a pretty narrow definition.
One thing I did notice in the run up to the Olympics is that Chinese friends who were apolitical suddenly became very nationalistic. I think a wave of nationalism swept the country and affected pretty much everyone. Over the years, I’ve met many in China that didn’t like the CCP, but I’ve never met a Chinese person that didn’t love their country.
January 2nd, 2009 at 5:22 pm
I think Chinese president Hu Jintao overreached this time. Three links are accomplished because Taiwan was marginalized: Taipei is becoming a provincial town as it is and Kaoshiung is becoming a small and insignificant port. Taiwan needed desperately the three links and the Mainland gave them to the Ma Ying-jeou government to save it from confusion and incompetence in its early days in power.
And pandas? I think they should stay in China and released to the wild.
January 2nd, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Really, the Taiwanese should think long and hard in terms of what they are going to be good at in the international division of labour.
Hong Kong is finance and trade, professional and legal services and transshipments.
Macau is gaming and entertainment and tourism.
Singapore is finance and private asset management, transportation, and education and medical tourism.
Taiwan? I don’t know if Taiwanese have decided yet. R&D, transportation, services? Any of these will require the Mainland’s goodwill and support. Without it, Taiwan is going down a pack a year.
January 2nd, 2009 at 7:48 pm
@ Jerry 68
Fair enough I will try to tone things down.
@ Netizen K 73
I don’t know if Taiwan ‘desperately needed’ the three links. They’ve managed to do a massive amount of business in the PRC without them. There is also controversy as to how many Taiwanese transportation firms are benefiting from the cross-strait business anyway.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:32 pm
@ BBD #75: I guess the benefits of the three links are still speculative at this time, but this article from CommonWealth Magazine online that I referenced earlier: http://english.cw.com.tw/front.do;jsessionid=C1629B0690CDF5BC6E82D7D1D993B752?action=index talks about a lot of advantages for Taiwan businesses, many whom have said they can keep jobs in Taiwan rather than moving them to China because of the cost savings and quicker transportation. It’s just one article so I’m not saying it’s perfectly accurate, but it seemed pretty logical to me.
This same article also addresses Netizen K’s question about division of labor. I also read an article on the same site: http://english.cw.com.tw/article.do?action=show&id=10674 about Taiwan’s DRAM industry and how they need government assistance to stay alive in the latest downturn and to be able to compete with Samsung. If this industry dies, so does Taiwan’s hardware industries that use these chips. Price control would switch to South Korea who would then have an advantage in those hardware products, hollowing out those same industries in Taiwan.
January 2nd, 2009 at 9:20 pm
# 57 S.K. Cheung
Why are you talking to me fool?
Just by the way you talk I would never know a Chinaman like you.
If you do travel a lot like me as well as many Chinese and if you are lucky NOT to be humiliated everytime coming back to Canada by those RACISTS NAZI custom agents asking 21 questions and getting searched & inspected more than whites, well you’re blessed. And the CDN gov’t should be nailed for the racists rules and what powers that’s given to the custom agents.
You know what you know just don’t tell others about it, like to my “strange crowd”.
January 2nd, 2009 at 9:32 pm
More than three times the US had planned to nuke China and a few times there were talks about nuking China over Taiwan.
So what has China talked to Taiwan about, invasion and reunification.
Wow so scary, do as the US would do to you, nuke them.
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:04 pm
@ vmoore 55
I thought PRC generals have also discussed the possibility of nuking Taiwan?
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Are they the central gov’t now? Do they make laws and are there a decider in that bunch? No, I want a decider in the gov’t to talk openly about nuking Taiwan.
Well at least the military have balls, China needs to stand up and be strong or they will make me sick and living with my head down.
Even the pee wee Janpanese wanted China nuked. Can you beat that.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:47 am
To Vmoore55 #77:
“Why are you talking to me fool?” – because I can, dipstick. Whatcha gonna do about it?
And likewise, by the way you talk, I would take pains to never associate with someone like you, Chinese or otherwise.
I’ve traveled plenty, over many years, and have never had issues with Canada customs. Perhaps it’s because I don’t address the agents as racist Nazis. You might try that using a different phrase next time, and save yourself a body cavity search.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:56 am
To Vmoore55 #78 and #80:
you are a moron. Are you seriously advocating someone nuking someone else? You actually want to see a nuclear war? Get real, dude.
Have you seen how far Taiwan is away from the Chinese coast? If China nukes Taiwan, the radioactive fallout will be on top of their own heads. Does that seem like a good plan to you?
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 am
To Raj #69:
“For just about any topic where you will see at least some US commentators blame other countries, social groups, etc for problems you will find other Americans to counter that point and suggest the US is at least partly at fault too (even saying mostly/all at fault).” – Americans complain about the US because they can, and often do. But isn’t that what we’ve been talking about, one of the many freedoms that PRC citizens need more of? When 303 people write a Charter in part to advocate more freedoms, they get detained and interviewed. So perhaps you don’t see many PRC citizens complaining publicly because they can’t do so without dire consequences. I think when the day comes that PRC citizens CAN complain about their government, yet still DON’T, then you might be able to begin to make that point about CHinese people.
January 3rd, 2009 at 3:48 am
@Raj #69
@S.K. Cheung
Thanks for your reply, Raj.
Raj, mine isn’t a “tu quoque” defense because I am not defending or excusing “mob mentality” behavior. I am just noting its existence. I reached back to the Salem witch hunts to show that this kind of mentality is not new. I brought up the Greek student riots to show the latest example. I threw in soccer riots as another example. I brought in Kristallnacht to show how a government can use “mob mentality”. The Tsars used “mob mentality” very effectively against generations of my family and other Jews in Russia. No, I am not calling Chinese students “hooligans” or thugs. But there are probably a few Chinese students who have a violent streak. And not all crowds are violent or mob-like. Some are downright collegial.
Now you wrote to Steve earlier:
I do not approve of mob violence, no matter who is committing it. Violence is violence. I wrote earlier to BBD:
That said, condemnation and allopathic remedies such as arrest and deportation, in and of themselves, will not stop violence. They are necessary steps, but, IMHO, more is required. I have often spoken of Fritjof Capra’s “crisis of perception”. We need to see the roots of violence, all of the relationships between all of us, and what part we play in those relationships. If we do that, we will probably find motivation and means to start to resolve the problem of violence. Please note, I am not saying that this will be easy.
On the other matter, Raj, you wrote:
“Can you really say there is as much self-criticism in China as you might find in America, Europe, etc for comparable matters?”
I have never been to da lu, so I can’t comment on this directly. Now, I have encountered Chinese writers here at FM that seem to fit the above statement, who refuse to engage in self-criticism or criticism of their country. I just can’t and won’t say that they represent a broad cross-section of Chinese people. I don’t know. BTW, I think that SK answered that statement well in #83.
I am not excusing/defending anybody’s unaccountability or irresponsibility. It has never been my desire or intent.
I accept, at face value, your frustration in your discussions with various Chinese people you encounter. I am sorry that you have to encounter such an attitude. I would not find it very comfortable, either. Actually, I find your statement very plausible. It seems reasonable that there is not as much self-criticism in China. I just don’t know for sure. You did say something which I found very interesting.
“I hardly ever hear that sort of comment from people from other countries.”
Well, I have heard worse in my beloved country.
After 911, many Americans became very strident in their opinions about Iraq and Muslims. Their attitude seems to be embodied in Shrub’s “You are either for us or against us” mentality. In 2002, if you said that you were against invading Iraq, well, “them were fighting words” in many instances. I heard more than once, “If you don’t like this country, get the hell out of this country.” It was not a pleasant time.
Then there is the whole question of AIPAC, Israel Firsters and Israel. It seems that questioning Israel about their treatment of the Palestinians is considered “anti-Semitic”, at best. It has become a “third rail”, if not the leading “third rail”, in US politics. It has been the genesis of many disagreements, arguments and downright fights in my own family, where one relative suggested that I was a “self-loathing Jew”. My own father (whom I love dearly) was so piqued during one discussion, that he angrily suggested that we should nuke the Arabs. That created a few uncomfortable minutes of silence. I have had many uncomfortable times with my Israeli friends during our discussions about the Palestinians. They often questioned my loyalty to Israel because I had Palestinian friends at Microsoft. Israel and the notion of Israel work strange magic on the soul and psyche of Western and Israeli Jews, alike.
All that said, I am glad that I am a Russian Jewish American. I appreciate the freedoms I have as an American. I am glad that I have free speech. I am glad that I have the right to criticize my country.
Last of all, Raj, I am glad that you and I can have this discussion. We may disagree at times, but we do so in an amicable manner. Thanks.
BTW, Raj, I had never heard of “Golden Flowers”. Is this a reference about the swimming team? I did see this in the Washington Post.
January 3rd, 2009 at 4:24 am
vmoore55 #49,
You know nothing of my friend. Her scholarly aspirations seem to be beyond your comprehension. I doubt if anyone, Chinese or foreigner, could shame you more than your own words.
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:44 am
@BBD
@Raj
Raj, in an earlier post, BBD wrote:
The Chinese fencer in question is the disabled Chinese Paralympian athlete, Jin Jing, who was an Olympics torchbearer in Paris. Some protesters attacked her in an attempt to take away the torch. She was an immediate heroine in China. One week later she stated that she did not support the Carrefour boycott. To a number of Chinese, she transformed from heroine to goat.
I saw this out at zonaeuropa.com, [030] The Chinese Traitor Jin Jing!. I was appalled at the diatribes and invective hurled at this Chinese woman who merely spoke her mind. And she was not speaking for her own benefit, but for the benefit of Chinese workers of Carrefour whose jobs would be affected by the boycott. I must say I admire her. II find some of the remarks below inexcusable and hateful; most are disgusting. I hope that they represent a small minority of Chinese people.
I just don’t understand this kind of reaction, Raj and BBD.
I have a daughter her age. My daughter also went through cancer and has an artificial hip because of it.
I support people’s freedom of speech. Everybody has the right to their opinion. But some of this is just too much for me.
So here are some questions for people who have such vociferous opinions on this matter. Do you have a mother, sisters, daughters, grandmothers, aunts, female cousins, nieces, female friends, etc? How would you feel if people spewed hatred at your mother, sister, daughter, etc? I would hope that you would be appalled.
This I plainly don’t understand. I do not like Condi Rice, Sarah Palin, and Hillary Clinton. But I do not publicly spew this kind of hateful rhetoric towards them.
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:53 am
To Jerry:
well, it seems to some Chinese, it doesn’t take much to be a traitor. Either that, or they’re demeaning the word. Hopefully, they represent the outliers and the wingnuts, and not mainstream Chinese.
BUt how can you not like Palin? She is a treasure trove for American comedy. I honestly hope she runs in 2012.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:21 am
@S.K. Cheung #87
Thanks. BTW, great posts to VM and Raj. And yes, VM is a moron; I just can’t imagine anyone proposing nuclear war. And/or a serious inferiority complex or anger management problem or suffering from a psychopathic disorder or a combination thereof. Oy vey!
I will make you a deal, which I would only make for you. We’ll give you Sarah and you get to keep Stephen. Such a deal. 😀
Speaking of Stephen, I see that Ignatieff is drawing a line in the sand over the budget.
—————-
Reminiscing about Canada today:
Peter Mansbridge and the National. I love that news show. I would watch it in Seattle nightly.
The Red Green Show. I love Possum Lodge and Possum Lake, the Man’s Prayer and Red. And how can I forget the Word Game.
The Royal Canadian Air Farce. Somebody told me it ended in 2008. Pshaw.
Little Mosque on the Prairie. Another great show.
And I remember when Montreal and NS native Robert MacNeil left MacNeil-Lehrer. The show went downhill, fast.
January 3rd, 2009 at 9:38 am
To Jerry,
I usually try to stay away from the name-calling. But sometimes, if the shoe fits…
Sounds like you’re a fan of the CBC. Didn’t know you can get that in the States.
Ahhh, Red Green. That is one funny show. “Keep your stick on the ice…we’re rootin’ for ya”; “if the women don’t find you handsome, they should at least find you handy”…so many great lines. And the things you can do with duct tape.
I never got into the Air Farce; though I do enjoy This Hour Has 22 Minutes, and the Rick Mercer Report (sorta like the Canadian/poor man’s version of the Daily Show and Colbert Reporrrrr). I’ve seen some of Little Mosque, but mostly because of the guy who was also on 24. Did you know he also hosts a cooking show?
But first and foremost, it’s Hockey Night in Canada, baby. Although it’s still weird to hear the “anthem” on the other sports network. Only goes to show you that nothing lasts forever. I’ll bet VM doesn’t watch hockey…he doesn’t sound all that Canadian. 🙂
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:36 am
@S.K. Cheung #89
Your comment on hockey leads me to the most important question ever asked at this thread, or for that matter, FM. Does Don Cherry still do Hockey Night in Canada? Is he still just as crazy and wear crazy clothes? The man is a frigging institution. 😀
Which leads me to another ice sport, curling. Did you ever see “Men With Brooms”? I love that movie.
A demain, mon ami, eh!!
“Keep your stick on the ice! … I am rooting for you! Especially with impending teenagerhood about ready to strike your abode. Mazel tov, haimisher mensch!”
And I hope your wife finds you both handsome and handy.
Regarding VM, he sounds like an outlier to me. I tend to stay away from name-calling, too, but I make exceptions for ranting proponents of nuclear holocaust. That is one bridge I intended to burn. And I will keep checking to make sure it remains burnt. 😀
BTW, my daughter arrives in Taipei Sunday night, my time.
January 3rd, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Jerry, yes the Golden Flowers were a celebrated Chinese women’s swimmers team – until they were found to be doping. I wouldn’t have held it against my friend if they’d simply not known the story, but they’d heard about the medals – not the scandal.
January 3rd, 2009 at 4:08 pm
@ S.K. Cheung & Jerry:
Once again you both are gloriously off topic! 😛
Don’t worry SK, I’m pretty sure you’ll get your wish in 2012 so no matter what happens to Tina Fey’s career, she’ll have a bunch of guest appearances on SNL. Maybe by then Sarah will have a stronger pair of binoculars and be able to see China from her front porch.
I’ve stayed away from VM because half the time I have no idea what he’s talking about or who he’s trying to insult. He doesn’t seem to have anything to say. At least with facts there tends to be some content underneath the insults, so I gave it a try. I just can’t understand all the anger and attitude. That’s actually what those customs agents are looking for, the attitude of the people coming through. My wife still has an accent (she’ll always have it and for me it’s part of her charm) but she’s never been stopped anywhere we’ve gone, and I think it’s because of her sparkle.
Oh boy, Canada stories! My first trip to Canada was August of ’77 when my college girlfriend and I hitched from NYC up the coast into New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and a ferry to Newfoundland. She was my first true love; a green eyed blonde of Swedish descent (and I’m not usually big on blondes) with a great personality. We had no problem getting rides! In Campobello Island, we were befriended by a few fishermen who took us to a Canadian Legion dance that night. It was right out of “Happy Days”. We set up our tent on their property overlooking the Bay of Fundy and those 40 foot tide rises. We even saw a tidal bore churning as it moved up the Salmon River near Truro. Circled the Cabot Trail, took the ferry to Newfoundland and then a smaller boat to Burgeo on the south coast, where tourists fear to tread. The people could not have been nicer, there was no crime to speak of, Scottish accents were prevalent in Cape Breton Island and we had a fantastic time. It’s amazing how many great stories one can accumulate in just a three week trip!
A few years later I went back to that area by myself to see PEI, picked up a couple of girls hitching back into town (they were from Montreal) and dated one of them for the week. She was a folk singer performing there that summer. I hung around with a bunch of Canadians the entire time, living on Tenpenny Ale (cheapest beer with the highest alcoholic content, the only thing that mattered to them). They couldn’t have been nicer and it’s tucked away in my memory bank as another of my all time best holidays.
Since then, I’ve spent time in Quebec and once in college (in January) we even took a “road trip” up to Ottawa, then west through Algonquin Provincial Park to Georgian Bay and down to Toronto. Back then, there were virtually no Asians in Toronto; so very different than today. The food is MUCH better these days. 🙂
I’ve been to Victoria, Vancouver and Whistler but that’s all I’ve seen of the western provinces. My wife went up to Banff before we met and thought it was beautiful.
One, my best friend from college’s older brother was taking the Canadian Railroad across the country. One of the guys on the train started to sing Gordon Lightfoot’s Canadian Railroad Trilogy and soon the entire car joined in. He said it was amazing! I guess that is virtually the national song of Canada. Incidentally, I was a huge GL fan growing up and still have something like 18 of his albums. I’ve seen him twice in concert over the years but unfortunately, his voice is starting to go. Here’s a live version of Canadian Railroad Trilogy performed a few months ago, and a tribute performance of the same song on Canadian Idol with GL in attendance.
Jerry, I know you’ve really been looking forward to her visit, so have fun with your daughter! 😀
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Here is a follow up story to Hu Jintao’s comments from the Taipei Times concerning Taiwans’ reaction to the overture. (Note: The Taipei Times is a pan green paper and supportive of the DPP)
MND Unmoved by PRC Missile Report
By Rich Chang
STAFF REPORTER
Sunday, Jan 04, 2009
The Ministry of National Defense (MND) said yesterday it would not cut back on the nation’s defense despite a media report that said China could gradually decrease the number of missiles targeting Taiwan.
China is believed to have deployed around 1,300 missiles across the Taiwan Strait, a figure that has steadily risen for years.
The latest issue of the Chinese-language Yazhou Zhoukan, a Hong Kong-based magazine, reported that after Chinese President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) suggestion last week that Taiwan and China discuss a military confidence-building mechanism, the Chinese government and military were mulling the option of gradually decreasing missiles aimed at Taiwan once military exchanges had begun.
“The ministry welcomes the idea of China withdrawing missiles and believes it would be a positive development between the militaries of both sides,” ministry spokeswoman Major-General Lisa Chi (池玉蘭) said.
But, she said, removing missiles would be purely symbolic because they could be easily redeployed.
The ministry would not let down its guard, she said.
On the issue of military exchanges, Chi said the ministry felt that cross-strait economic and political exchanges must come first. The ministry would follow the government’s policy, she said.
Commenting on the Yazhou Zhoukan report, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) yesterday said the government and the public should not mistake an alleged offer by Beijing to decrease the number of missiles targeting Taiwan as a gesture of goodwill.
“Cross-strait relations are extremely complex. Do not take this reported overture by Beijing as the goodwill gesture it seems to be, because removing the missiles cannot be done overnight,” she said.
Separately, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Lin Yu-fang (林郁方) said yesterday that if China withdrew missiles without setting preconditions — such as requiring Taiwan to withdraw troops from Kinmen and Matsu or to stop procuring weapons from the US — then it would be a goodwill gesture.
If China were to remove some of the missiles aimed at Taiwan, it would be better for China’s short-range missiles in Guangdong, Fujian and Jiangxi provinces to be withdrawn first, as those constitute the greatest and most immediate threat to Taiwan, he said.
ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY CNA
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:13 pm
S.K. Cheung # 83
When 303 people write a Charter in part to advocate more freedoms, they get detained and interviewed. So perhaps you don’t see many PRC citizens complaining publicly because they can’t do so without dire consequences.
That is a fair and obvious point I should have kept in mind. Perhaps the lack of ability to point to problems in China helps those who like to point the finger elsewhere as they can’t easily be countered in public.
January 4th, 2009 at 7:42 am
@BBD
“First, you do not speak for all Chinese people so don’t claim to. Second, plenty of Chinese people were clearly participating in and cheering on violence during the torch relays. Third, at least in New Zealand, there was little Chinese condemnation of the violence. The loudest reaction was vociferous praise for the ‘patriotism’ of these violent xenophobes. The other notable reaction was denial that any violence had occurred, because after all “we Chinese condemn all violence”.”
Have to tell you again, we Chinese condemn all violence. As a Chinese born in mainland China, I have every rights to make the statement as I lived with the people and know the people well. It is a statement made on behalf of the majority Chinese. Ofcourse it does not include every single Chinese. There are criminals in every race would use violence to achieve what they want. But that doesnot mean that race can not condemn violence.
“The attack on myself was actually filmed, but the cameraman refused to release the footage to help identify my assailants because. . . and this is both amusing and educational. . . he didn’t want to be seen as ‘against China’ in the wake of the Sichuan Earthquake. Hmm. . . patriotism (or fear of reprisals?) trumps fundamental morality.”
Sorry, BBD. I do not trust you. If it is filmed then it can be easily posted on You Tube without disclosing who film it and who post it. The Earthquake has past and the footage can be easily release on internet. I will wait for your footage.
“The hail of blows and abuse I was subjected to made things pretty clear without the aid of a microscope.”
Let everyone at FM see how you were attacked. If it was filmed then prove it. Do not tell me the footage had been destroyed in your next post.
“You also need to sharpen up your comprehension skills and realize that I am not generalizing. I am simply commenting on the violent xenophobic racist Chinese nationalist scum who export their dubious behavior. It is important to highlight how unacceptable their behavior is.”
I am sharp enough to know whether you are generalising it and what your motives might be. I am very suspicious about you being attacked story.
As you said, if the attack was filmed then post it on the internet. The camera man does not need to worry about anything as we do not know who he is. Post it.
January 4th, 2009 at 8:06 am
To Steve #93:
“removing missiles would be purely symbolic because they could be easily redeployed.”- I believe Raj essentially said the same thing.
“cross-strait economic and political exchanges must come first.” – if I were Taiwan, I would beat this drum till I was blue in the face. Open up commerce, normalize travel, maybe give Taiwan representation on some international bodies with an ambiguous moniker so as not to stir up sensitivities. Heck, call them Chinese Taipei at those tables. Basically, get Taiwan most of the things she would stand to receive with “actual” reunification; then see if Taiwanese are still inclined to take the last remaining steps. If they do, fine. If not, then China has at least shown Taiwan the money, and they can keep talking about “eventual” reunification.
January 4th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
@Raj #69
“If that’s what China wants, it can start by decommissioning its short-ranged missile arsenal. How can you built trust when you still make nasty threats, whether they are made directly or implicitly?”
My friend,you talked like if I was President Hu JinTao. 🙂
If it up to me, the missiles would have been removed, ROC should have been be recognized as equal as PRC, the overhead missile tests shouldn’t have been done etc which have all pushed many Taiwanese people further away from PRC. But it’s not up to me.
I don’t agree the missiles should be decommissioned. They have many other uses like they could be sent to help “war on terror”, they can be sold to some democratic country’s defense force to get some cash for poor Chinese farmers.
January 4th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Calling for the decommissioning of short-ranged missiles is a pointless rhetoric. Unless China decomissions all it’s short-ranged missile arsenal throughout the country, which would be ridiculous, these missiles can be redeployed anywhere just a question of time and logistics.
January 6th, 2009 at 3:37 am
@ ARJ: I was thinking about what you wrote and it occurred to me that Brits and Americans don’t worry about each other’s missiles since they are no threat to each other. In the end, it isn’t how many missiles you have, it’s whether you have made enough political accomodations with each other to diffuse the threat of missile attack.
But would the redeployment of those missiles send a powerful political message to Taiwan and reduce the influence of the Taiwan independence groups? Would it also reduce one of their most powerful and emotional arguments? Would the goodwill engendered by this act offset any military advantage held at the present time? I’m curious as to everyone’s opinion.
January 6th, 2009 at 3:54 am
@BMY: “I don’t agree the missiles should be decommissioned. They have many other uses like they could be sent to help “war on terror”, they can be sold to some democratic country’s defense force to get some cash for poor Chinese farmers.”
Good one! If the US could cut its defense spending in half and use it on their society instead, they could probably solve a lot of problems. Unfortunately, I’m not the American president and can’t bring it about. 😉
January 9th, 2009 at 7:28 am
@ Kui 95
How do I make this clear?
I can’t post the video on Youtube because *I do not have the video*.
The cameraman has the video but *is/was unwilling to post it*.
Once the cameraman reneged on his promise I stopped communicating with him. Why deal with a liar?
I can assure you the footage is out there somewhere.
Since you don’t believe the event actually happened, I have to take your condemnation of violence on behalf of the “Chinese race” even less seriously than I did previously.
What type of moron even makes a statement like “we Chinese condemn all violence”? How many citizens of the PRC have peacefully protested their government’s policy of threatening to violently annex Taiwan? None? Did you peacefully take to the streets to protest when your government lobbed missiles into Taiwanese harbors to suggest to the Taiwanese that they should vote the ‘right’ way or face annihilation in 1996? You didn’t? How many PRC citizens hit the streets in Shanghai to violently smash up Japanese businesses and vandalize the Japanese in 2005? Hmm. . . quite a few!
January 9th, 2009 at 11:29 am
@BBD – No argument with what you’re saying, but could you please change your handle, pretty please? Every time I see a comment by you a most unfortunate image shoots through my head and I want to throw up.
January 9th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
OK, I’ve changed my handle. . .
返青復明！ 反黨復唐！
Yeah, it’s all about revolution baby!
January 12th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
“How do I make this clear?
I can’t post the video on Youtube because *I do not have the video*.
The cameraman has the video but *is/was unwilling to post it*.
Once the cameraman reneged on his promise I stopped communicating with him. Why deal with a liar?
I can assure you the footage is out there somewhere.”
When no evidence is provided, accusation stays as an accusation. I do not understand you. If the camera man is unwilling to post it he must have his own reasons. What do you mean it is out there somewhere? Where?
“Since you don’t believe the event actually happened, I have to take your condemnation of violence on behalf of the “Chinese race” even less seriously than I did previously.”
If you go to a court and make some accusations but can not provide any evidence to back it, should the judge trust you? If the judge does not believe it then any statement the judge made ca not be taken seriously? Do not tell me that I am not in a position to judge. When you pulled your self in as part of the event you had already put your self in a position to be questioned. I can either choose to believe you not to believe you. In this case, I do not believe you. You have used the allegely happened event to justify your aggressive attacks on Chinese.
“What type of moron even makes a statement like “we Chinese condemn all violence”? How many citizens of the PRC have peacefully protested their government’s policy of threatening to violently annex Taiwan? None? Did you peacefully take to the streets to protest when your government lobbed missiles into Taiwanese harbors to suggest to the Taiwanese that they should vote the ‘right’ way or face annihilation in 1996? You didn’t? How many PRC citizens hit the streets in Shanghai to violently smash up Japanese businesses and vandalize the Japanese in 2005? Hmm. . . quite a few!”
You have provided enough evidence in your last post that you are trying hard to generalise the alleged event to cast a violent image of all Chinese.
January 12th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
@ Think Ming
What do you mean? Against Ching and go back to Ming? Against CCP and go back to Tang? We are in 2009. Are you Ok?
May 14th, 2013 at 10:07 pm
Oh my goodness! an amazing article dude. Thank you However I am experiencing subject with ur rss . Don抰 know why Unable to subscribe to it. Is there anybody getting equivalent rss problem? Anybody who is aware of kindly respond. Thnkx