There might be a difference in priority setting between Westerners and Chinese, but as taiwanese Chinese got used to this rights, for them, this difference is not so big anymore. And I don’t think a “democratic Taiwan” within a “One China” is a workable solution, while on the other hand the Hongkong approach would not fulfill the requirements.
It might be, seeing today’s PRC, that this freedoms are not so important, but there is no guarantee that today’s PRC, as an undemocratic system, is not changing back to a “Mao”-istic system, while a local return to a CKS Dictatorship, I think, can be excluded (and at least would be in the hand of the Taiwanese).

+++++
Actually I think the priority of the Taiwanese are quite close to that of the mainland Chinese, which is to live a good and comfortable life. People tend to favor the system they live in if they are doing well materially. That’s just self-selection bias.

By the way, would you like to tell, for the sake of argument, why a “democratic Taiwan” within “One China” is not workable? Besides that it may offend some people’s ideological sensibilities? I can think of several farfetched doomsday scenarios that you can construct out of that, but they are just that: farfetched. China is not any more likely to become anachronistic than Taiwan. If anything, a highly “democratic” and populist political process is more likely to produce extreme results, to the extent that they mirror society’s conflicting extremes.

Lincoln was the paramount pragmatist.

If you don’t understand, please ask a specific question and I will be glad to try to give an adequate answer.

Sorry for butting-in ; I surmise you are from PRC, perhaps an party official. May I ask you:

i.You say South Tibet/Arunachal is just a bargaining chip for Aksai Chin.Fine.What about the Tawang tract..is PRC ready to forego that too?

ii.In 1962 war, PLA reached the Assam plains(Chinese claim line) in both the Western & Eastern ends of South Tibet/Arunachal, but only half-hearted progress in the central regions; any reasons?

just my curiosity..I am from Arunachal

No he wasn’t. He may believe Blacks are human beings but he did not believe blacks should be granted the rights of American citizens, and did not wish that they be a part of American society. He believed that all blacks should be removed from the United States and resettled in some other country.

You really think Obama cares about voter sentiments? I think he only responses to corporation interests. So does the congress. I do not think most Chinese have any illusions about the U.S. president and congress. BTW, the U.S. is being screwed on issues of North Korea and Iran. They picked the wrong time to announce the weapons sale – arrogant, but not clever.

It seems also slightly strange to me this references to Abraham Lincoln in the letter above: Wasn’t Abraham Lincoln the one who regarded freedom of the people (translated to today wpould be, for example: press, speech religion… freedom, or simply: to read the FM blog) as a fundamental right for everyone? How should Obama let people, who enjoy this freedom be unified with people who doesn’t? (on top of the public opinion in the U.S.).

There might be a difference in priority setting between Westerners and Chinese, but as taiwanese Chinese got used to this rights, for them, this difference is not so big anymore. And I don’t think a “democratic Taiwan” within a “One China” is a workable solution, while on the other hand the Hongkong approach would not fulfill the requirements.
It might be, seeing today’s PRC, that this freedoms are not so important, but there is no guarantee that today’s PRC, as an undemocratic system, is not changing back to a “Mao”-istic system, while a local return to a CKS Dictatorship, I think, can be excluded (and at least would be in the hand of the Taiwanese).

To the Chinese Maihesuti’s activism in helping fight terrorism against China is contrbution in global security.

Like I said, this is not our narrative, so no Nobel.

Google’s words have not been as reliable as it used to be.

As we say in contract law class, it’s not the real deal until they sign.

Since you are the administrator, I cannot dispute with your claim. I do not know how you infer these signature name are from different countries. I respect the code of conduct of this blog and I admit I made a breach of conduct. I apologize for my action of deviating from the subject of conversation and associating Victor with hainan88 without substantial proof.

Looks like google is leaving.

I rarely read a good report on China coming out of Wall Street Journal. This one is on China’s efforts to reduce emission intensity.

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2010/03/10/behind-a-power-plants-efficiency-drive/

the Chinese way of negotiation on conflicts: if you are hard, then we will be harder and stronger; if you are soft and reasonable, then we will be softer.