Quote from: uffeviking on August 14, 2008, 05:39:16 PM
Above post has nothing to do with the title of the topic: 2008 Olympics, as the sentence I deleted had nothing to do with the title of the thread. It was criticism of the Chinese justice system in regards to free speech.
The Olympics are about competitive sporting events, let's keep the discussion to the topic. If anybody wants to talk about Chinese internal affairs, start a topic with the subject. $:)
I don't want to miss any of the drama!
;D
Quote from: Lethe on August 14, 2008, 05:42:36 PM
I don't want to miss any of the drama!
How bloodthirsty you are. ;D
I don't share the idea of a complete democratic consensus world. I want a world of diversity. It's simple: human beings and regimes have skeletons in their closet. China simply is developing.
The question is if we want a mediocre world (look at Europe) where anaesthesia is the biggest value, consensus is the god, where the middle class has to settle enormous payments in order to keep anything quiet.
And yet you haven't moved to China....
Quote from: Wurstwasser on August 14, 2008, 08:34:50 PM
..... where the middle class has to settle enormous payments in order to keep anything quiet.
What does this mean?
Mike
Quote from: Wurstwasser on August 14, 2008, 08:34:50 PM
I don't share the idea of a complete democratic consensus world. I want a world of diversity. It's simple: human beings and regimes have skeletons in their closet. China simply is developing.
The question is if we want a mediocre world (look at Europe) where anaesthesia is the biggest value, consensus is the god, where the middle class has to settle enormous payments in order to keep anything quiet.
You have a strange idea of what diversity means. Democracy is the one system that prizes diversity of opinion as well as diversity of ethnicity. It's expensive for the members, but well worth the price
Since you have so little love for democracy, why don't you move to another part of the world where democracy is valued the way you value it? I'm sure you will love living in places like Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Sudan, where democracy is considered an aberration and a free press unnecessary. You won't have to pay any taxes either, because you won't have the money to pay them. Just watch your step and don't bother to express any opinion that diverges from the official line.
Quote from: Bunny on August 16, 2008, 06:56:17 AM
You have a strange idea of what diversity means. Democracy is the one system that prizes diversity of opinion as well as diversity of ethnicity. It's expensive for the members, but well worth the price
Since you have so little love for democracy, why don't you move to another part of the world where democracy is valued the way you value it? I'm sure you will love living in places like Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Sudan, where democracy is considered an aberration and a free press unnecessary. You won't have to pay any taxes either, because you won't have the money to pay them. Just watch your step and don't bother to express any opinion that diverges from the official line.
The irony is that most people in China do love living in their country, I can't speak for the other countries, but all the Chinese I have spoken to seemed to be much happier and why? They are wealthier than ever, and i wondered whether they could've become this wealthy by taking the "democratic" approach.
I sense that you have a profound hatred towards China, but why? Just because they aren't democratic? So, it's that logic that "if they aren't one of us, than they are against us?" Why are you against China anyways? attacking them all the way from the Olympics to their national alcoholic beverage. What's your problem?
Quote from: Gustav on August 17, 2008, 10:41:52 AM
The irony is that most people in China do love living in their country, I can't speak for the other countries, but all the Chinese I have spoken to seemed to be much happier and why? They are wealthier than ever, and i wondered whether they could've become this wealthy by taking the "democratic" approach.
I sense that you have a profound hatred towards China, but why? Just because they aren't democratic? So, it's that logic that "if they aren't one of us, than they are against us?" Why are you against China anyways? attacking them all the way from the Olympics to their national alcoholic beverage. What's your problem?
A typical blind and mindless westerner..what do you expect? $:)
Quote from: Bunny on August 16, 2008, 06:56:17 AM
I'm sure you will love living in places like Russia
I will. $:) And I suggest you read the topic about Russian attacks over Georgia - what an American person who is living there thinks and also suggest that you read what I wrote for you in the topic about Astonishing Opening Ceremony. Your opinion is zealously pro-Western and very media-based. I bet you have no perception of how people live in these countries, or it is biased for some reason.
I'll go with Gustav.
It is sad that so many of them are stereotype makers...and culturally ignorant ones at that. This goes for both the east and west. I have met Americans who thought all Chinese were dirt poor farmers living in slumps, and I have met Chinese who think all Americans are imperialists just because Bush loves war. So I guess it's all about not being ignorant by actually learning about other countries' affairs, history and culture before making bold statements.
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 17, 2008, 04:02:38 PM
A typical blind and mindless westerner..what do you expect? $:)
I hope you don't mean that a typical westerner is blind and mindless? Using all three adjectives in connection with a single noun is likely to give the wrong impression.
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on August 17, 2008, 05:06:48 PM
I hope you don't mean that a typical westerner is blind and mindless? Using all three adjectives in connection with a single noun is likely to give the wrong impression.
Nope, that is not what I meant. I meant that he is a typical mindless and blind Westerner. Of course not all westerners are mindless and blind. If I meant that, that would make me stereotypical too. If you actually read my other post in this very thread, you can see that I'm against westerners making stereotypes towards the east and vice versa.
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 17, 2008, 05:24:25 PM
Nope, that is not what I meant. I meant that he is a typical mindless and blind Westerner. Of course not all westerners are mindless and blind. If I meant that, that would make me stereotypical too. If you actually read my other post in this very thread, you can see that I'm against westerners making stereotypes towards the east and vice versa.
Making generalizations about things that we are only superficially familiar with is what people
do, actually. I do it about you, you do it about me, even though we may not want to. And when one has a basic antipathy towards the subject, then the generalities always tend towards the worst stereotypes. This, of course, is the underlying basis for all wars that are not directly caused by greed. It is so very easy to make the worst out of whatever we don't know a lot about. Much easier than making the best of it. :)
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2008, 06:14:08 PM
This, of course, is the underlying basis for all wars that are not directly caused by greed.
Are there any wars not caused by greed? My impression is that all wars were/are fought for economic reasons, the ideological/religious/national interest reasons given are just how they sell it to the people who have to do the actual fighting and dying.
While the CCP is largely a bunch of corrupt thugs, they do deserve some credit for opening the economy and preserving stability. Despite the stereotypes of unity and tranquility, China's history is market by devastating civil wars and the country has dozens of potentially rebellious non-Han ethnic groups. More important than elections, China is developing institutions and public discourse - essential components of a stable liberal society. The mistake we in the US make is to confuse the existence of elections (i.e democracy) with a civil society when nothing could be further from the truth. Witness Iraq or any number of African or Latin American countries where elections are merely a continuation of civil war by other means. In most developing democracies politics is a zero-sum game between rival ethnic / religous groups for control of public resources (particularly if some valuable export commodity like oil is involved).
QuoteSeeing China Whole
Don't underestimate its capacity for positive change
Steve Chapman | August 11, 2008
If you look closely at a spot in a meadow, you will see some things you may not enjoy looking at—weeds, bugs, funguses, bare spots of dirt, bits of trash, animal bones, and so on. If you view it from a distance, however, you may see a vista that is far more appealing.
With the opening of the Beijing Olympics, outsiders are putting modern China under a microscope and finding much that is ugly. That perception is accurate but not complete. A full appreciation requires taking in the panorama of Chinese life and history, which may be hard to do in the preoccupation with the host country's flaws.
There are plenty to choose from. The government is repressive, undemocratic, and often brutal. It censors news coverage, imprisons dissidents, restricts religion, and maintains a monopoly on political power.
So far, the Olympics have not served the goal of fostering liberalization. "The year-long prelude to the Beijing Games has seen a major crackdown on free speech and dissent; a massive sweep of 'undesirables' from the host city; and increasing abuses of ethnic minority Tibetans and Uighurs," says Minky Worden, an official of Human Rights Watch, in an e-mail. In the next two weeks, the Chinese leadership is going to get a lot of unflattering coverage, all richly deserved.
But it would be a shame to focus on its sins to the exclusion of everything else. Westerners can easily forget that this authoritarian country used to be a totalitarian country, with perhaps the most grotesque human rights record of the 20th century
During the three decades after the Communist Party took over in 1949, it was responsible for more than 70 million deaths. Some of them were due to political persecution and terror, and some to catastrophic economic mismanagement. The party deliberately fomented savage social upheavals that not only punished its alleged enemies but devastated China's cultural heritage. It also kept the country poor.
All that is in the past. Since Deng Xiaoping gained power in the late 1970s and liberalized the economy, China has been transformed almost beyond belief. Its economy has expanded tenfold. No country in history has ever lifted so many people out of poverty so rapidly.
What was once a vast prison camp has conceded a great deal of personal freedom to ordinary people. They can work and live where they choose. They can travel and study abroad. They have access to the Internet. There is a growing sense among the Chinese that they are entitled to certain basic human rights—a startling development in a country where, for centuries, individual rights have been an alien concept.
As repressive regimes go, this one could be worse. Robert Ross, a China scholar at Harvard and Boston College, says, "I would put China in the top 10 percent of all the authoritarian states in the world"—comparing it favorably with many East Asian countries (notably North Korea and Burma), most Middle Eastern countries, including Saudi Arabia, and most African nations.
He thinks the recent pre-Olympics security crackdown won't last long. And there is good reason to expect that in the coming years and decades, China will continue to progress in human rights.
Hoover Institution fellow Henry Rowen, an East Asia specialist, notes that development and democracy almost universally move in tandem. A market economy can't function without substantial freedom from state control. As countries become richer and more educated, they unleash forces that are incompatible with authoritarian rule.
You can usually anticipate political advances by gauging the rise of gross domestic product per capita. "In 2005," writes Rowen, "every country in the world (oil states excepted) with GDPpc topping $8,000 was at least Partly Free [as categorized by the human rights group Freedom House]; indeed, all ranked as Free except the tiny island city-state of Singapore." Given China's growth trajectory, he predicts it will move from Not Free to Partly Free by 2015—and by 2025, it will be "classed as belonging to the Free nations of the earth."
Anyone contemplating the thuggish repression still prevalent under the Beijing government may find that hard to imagine. But if the last 30 years have taught us anything, it is not to underestimate China's capacity for positive change.
Quote from: Gustav on August 17, 2008, 10:41:52 AM
The irony is that most people in China do love living in their country, I can't speak for the other countries, but all the Chinese I have spoken to seemed to be much happier and why? They are wealthier than ever, and i wondered whether they could've become this wealthy by taking the "democratic" approach.
I sense that you have a profound hatred towards China, but why? Just because they aren't democratic? So, it's that logic that "if they aren't one of us, than they are against us?" Why are you against China anyways? attacking them all the way from the Olympics to their national alcoholic beverage. What's your problem?
Most Iraqis told anyone who asked that they loved Saddam before he was overthrown too.
Where have you been in China? Have you been to the villages that were destroyed by the earthquake where parents are weeping because their one child has been killed and they are unable to comprehend this loss? Have you been to Tibet where most of the people would prefer to be independent again? Have you seen how the farm labor lives there -- struggling in houses without electricity and no indoor plumbing, with a per capita income of about $1.00 per day? I've been in the Chinese countryside and seen huge plantations that produce fruit and vegetables where workers live in barracks with holes in the floor for the plumbing while the owners and operators of the plantations live like the plantation owners in the Antebellum South. Being assured that these people are grateful for the meager wages they earn in the fields all day isn't reassuring.
Sure, there are plenty of people in China who are making good money. The guide that we used in Beijing carried a Louis Vuitton handbag (hopefully real and not counterfeit) and wore a scarf from Hermes. We went to stores filled with luxury goods. There is great wealth in China and even a burgeoning middle class. However, there is more poverty in China than you or I can imagine. For years, thousands of Chinese passed into Hong Kong every day to find economic opportunity while Hong Kong was under British control. To this day, Chinese immigrants board ships operated by unscrupulous profiteers who charge enormous amounts of money to take them out of China and deliver them to America and other countries. China is a vast country, and not everyone lives a happy life. It's also a country where if you even mention Tiananmen Square you had better not be talking about this -- an image that is blocked in China:
(http://metaversed.com/files/images/tiananmen-square-tanks.jpg)
It's easy to accept the smoke and mirrors presented by the Chinese government, but anyone with a grain of intelligence should realize that sometimes a show is is not reality.
Quote from: Wurstwasser on August 14, 2008, 08:34:50 PM
I don't share the idea of a complete democratic consensus world. I want a world of diversity. It's simple: human beings and regimes have skeletons in their closet. China simply is developing.
The question is if we want a mediocre world (look at Europe) where anaesthesia is the biggest value, consensus is the god, where the middle class has to settle enormous payments in order to keep anything quiet.
If it were so awful living in Europe,then why would so many people from Turkey, Africa and the Middle East be going there for economic opportunity? If it's so expensive and awful to live there, then why do so many leave their homeland to settle there? Obviously it's better there than where they came from or they would go back.
Quote from: bwv 1080 on August 17, 2008, 08:03:29 PM
While the CCP is largely a bunch of corrupt thugs, they do deserve some credit for opening the economy and preserving stability. Despite the stereotypes of unity and tranquility, China's history is market by devastating civil wars and the country has dozens of potentially rebellious non-Han ethnic groups. More important than elections, China is developing institutions and public discourse - essential components of a stable liberal society. The mistake we in the US make is to confuse the existence of elections (i.e democracy) with a civil society when nothing could be further from the truth. Witness Iraq or any number of African or Latin American countries where elections are merely a continuation of civil war by other means. In most developing democracies politics is a zero-sum game between rival ethnic / religous groups for control of public resources (particularly if some valuable export commodity like oil is involved).
First, saying that the CCP is a group of thugs who keep things stable is like saying that Mussolini wasn't so bad because kept the Italian trains running on time, or that Hitler had his good side because he managed to build a great autobahn and eliminate street crime. What a ridiculous premise! I can't believe that no one here is not laughing in disbelief at such a ridiculous statement!
If you don't think that it's possible to have economic development with a democratic government, then consider India where they are experiencing tremendous growth with a government that is a parliamentary democracy. Poverty is still rampant but India is changing and growing, with a rising middle class. It's far from perfect and too many people live in desperate poverty, but it's a country with such great potential.
Totalitarian governments don't guarantee stability, economic success or a better standard of living any more than any other government. Democratically run elections do not guarantee the establishment of a democracy either. We have a lot of history to prove this: Germany elected Hitler; Argentina elected Peron (twice); The Iranians elected the Ayatollah Khomeini; and Russia elected Putin and then Medvedev. But totalitarian governments are rarely concerned with sharing wealth and political power; they are more concerned with preserving their political power and accumulating wealth. The totalitarian governement is the ultimate form of "trickle down" economics, but a lot less trickles down there.
You mention that there are diverse ethnic groups (non Han) in China which would rather rebel and start a civil war than live as "chinese." Well, if you dominate a territory the size of China, you should expect that there will be different ethnic groups that don't understand why a government of people speaking a different language that is thousands of miles away wants to come in and run them. Certainly Tibet is one of these places! But, who really believes the Tibetans are trying to create a civil war in China? They just want to be left alone, and they really don't understand why they aren't allowed to be as they have been for thousands of years. If you want to maintain an empire, it costs money and blood. It also means that you have to have an army that is willing to fire on its own citizens, and I think that is the most dangerous aspect of all.
QuoteFirst, saying that the CCP is a group of thugs who keep things stable is like saying that Mussolini wasn't so bad because kept the Italian trains running on time, or that Hitler had his good side because he managed to build a great autobahn and eliminate street crime. What a ridiculous premise! I can't believe that no one here is not laughing in disbelief at such a ridiculous statement!
Spare me the histrionics. The CCP is not Hitler and the only credit given was for opening the economy and averting civil war, which was and remains a real possibility. Realistically the current situation of the country, given the devastation caused by a generation of Maoism, is probably the best outcome that could be hoped for.
QuoteIf you don't think that it's possible to have economic development with a democratic government, then consider India where they are experiencing tremendous growth with a government that is a parliamentary democracy. Poverty is still rampant but India is changing and growing, with a rising middle class. It's far from perfect and too many people live in desperate poverty, but it's a country with such great potential
.
At independance India had relatively stable institutions and legal systems. China in the late 70s had neither. The track record of countries moving quickly to democracy without institutions is extremely poor - Russia, Iraq, any number of African countries etc.
QuoteTotalitarian governments don't guarantee stability, economic success or a better standard of living any more than any other government. Democratically run elections do not guarantee the establishment of a democracy either. We have a lot of history to prove this: Germany elected Hitler; Argentina elected Peron (twice); The Iranians elected the Ayatollah Khomeini; and Russia elected Putin and then Medvedev. But totalitarian governments are rarely concerned with sharing wealth and political power; they are more concerned with preserving their political power and accumulating wealth.
Seems to me you are proving my point here. China is currently more properly authoritarian than totalitaran - probably on par with 1950s Tawain or South Korea.
individuals in any government are generally concerned with preserving their political power and accumulating wealth.
QuoteYou mention that there are diverse ethnic groups (non Han) in China which would rather rebel and start a civil war than live as "chinese." Well, if you dominate a territory the size of China, you should expect that there will be different ethnic groups that don't understand why a government of people speaking a different language that is thousands of miles away wants to come in and run them. Certainly Tibet is one of these places! But, who really believes the Tibetans are trying to create a civil war in China? They just want to be left alone, and they really don't understand why they aren't allowed to be as they have been for thousands of years. If you want to maintain an empire, it costs money and blood. It also means that you have to have an army that is willing to fire on its own citizens, and I think that is the most dangerous aspect of all.
I did not say that non-Han groups "would rather rebel and start a civil war than live as "chinese." " just that it is a potential source of instability. Eventually the Chinese government will either have to create a civil society that these groups want to participate in or cut them loose.
Quote from: Bunny on August 17, 2008, 08:42:49 PM
However, there is more poverty in China than you or I can imagine.
As I posted in another thread, there are 37 million people in the USA that live below the poverty line, about 12%. For example, 12% of the Chinese 1,321,851,888 is 158,622,226. Indeed, a lot.
Quote from: Bunny on August 17, 2008, 08:42:49 PM
China is a vast country, and not everyone lives a happy life.
Is everyone in the USA lives a happy life?
I understand your point well and think you are good-hearted person, you want everyone to be happy, but it is unattainable for many reasons, one being politics.
Do most westerners know that Hong Kong is largely autonomous and its standards of life and existence of human rights are no different than any other global city in the west? I keep getting the feeling that people seem to think that after 1997, HK just became another city under the "communist" regime. Seriously, it has the world's most capitalist economy (and freest), and is as modern as say, NYC or Paris or London.
Quote from: Sarastro on August 17, 2008, 09:25:57 PM
I understand your point well and think you are good-hearted person, you want everyone to be happy, but it is unattainable for many reasons, one being politics.
Words of wisdom from the extensive life experience and studies of the world of a 19-year old...It is also very obvious (and very interesting to see) that you grew up in an environment in which forming and voicing your own opinion was not exactly encouraged. Just accept things the way they are, if somebody says something you don't like, just point the finger back at them, things can't be improved anyway. You are surprisingly young to have arrived at the point already where you just don't give a shit about anything anymore.
Quote from: M forever on August 18, 2008, 12:14:49 AMf somebody says something you don't like, just point the finger back at them.
This tactic always worked for
you. $:)
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 17, 2008, 09:33:09 PM
Do most westerners know that Hong Kong is largely autonomous and its standards of life and existence of human rights are no different than any other global city in the west? I keep getting the feeling that people seem to think that after 1997, HK just became another city under the "communist" regime. Seriously, it has the world's most capitalist economy (and freest), and is as modern as say, NYC or Paris or London.
Sorry, but that comment won't do. Hong Kong is "independent" in business, not political matters, its
"parliament
" is nothing but a puppet installed by Beijing.
It has always been the policy of the Beijing CP to allow "free market economy". That doesn't mean it's a free city politically. The rationale behind it is if people are getting more wealthy, they'd stop asking for more democracy. In China, that seems to have worked so far - and why shouldn't it? I've been working with many, many Chinese people in business affairs, and privately. All they do think about is money - all the time. ;)
Thomas
I'd already corrected it. :P
Quote from: Wurstwasser on August 14, 2008, 08:34:50 PM
The question is if we want a mediocre world (look at Europe) where anaesthesia is the biggest value, consensus is the god, where the middle class has to settle enormous payments in order to keep anything quiet.
Yeah, right. That certainly outweighs the trivial matter that this "anaesthesia" has prevented European democracies from going to war against each other for a longer time than in any other period of history before. ::)
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time" (Winston Churchill)
Quote from: Sarastro on August 17, 2008, 09:25:57 PM
As I posted in another thread, there are 37 million people in the USA that live below the poverty line, about 12%. For example, 12% of the Chinese 1,321,851,888 is 158,622,226. Indeed, a lot.
no comparison when the US poverty line is well above China's per capita income
Quote from: sound67 on August 18, 2008, 12:43:54 AM
Sorry, but that comment won't do. Hong Kong is "independent" in business, not political matters, its "parliament" is nothing but a puppet installed by Beijing.
It has always been the policy of the Beijing CP to allow "free market economy". That doesn't mean it's a free city politically. The rationale behind it is if people are getting more wealthy, they'd stop asking for more democracy. In China, that seems to have worked so far - and why shouldn't it? I've been working with many, many Chinese people in business affairs, and privately. All they do think about is money - all the time. ;)
Thomas
But the freedoms of assembly, religion, speech, etc etc are all there. The quality of life is as good as any other global city. Have you lived there for 7 years like I have, sound67?
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 17, 2008, 09:33:09 PM
Do most westerners know that Hong Kong is largely autonomous and its standards of life and existence of human rights are no different than any other global city in the west? I keep getting the feeling that people seem to think that after 1997, HK just became another city under the "communist" regime. Seriously, it has the world's most capitalist economy (and freest), and is as modern as say, NYC or Paris or London.
Well, what are the effects of the place being communist? Is it, in truth, not bad at all, and pretty free over there besides minor restrictions?
Is it just that Americans get the wrong impression because whenever we hear the word "Communism", immediately Russia and the Cold War pops into mind first, before every thing else? So I'm assuming living in China now must be much much better than living in Russia back in the day?
Quote from: GGGGRRREEG on August 18, 2008, 11:30:47 AM
Well, what are the effects of the place being communist? Is it, in truth, not bad at all, and pretty free over there besides minor restrictions?
Is it just that Americans get the wrong impression because whenever we hear the word "Communism", immediately Russia and the Cold War pops into mind first, before every thing else? So I'm assuming living in China now must be much much better than living in Russia back in the day?
I have never lived in mainland China so I won't comment on the quality of life there. But in HK, it is as good as any global city in the west, I can assure you that. I lived in HK for 7 years, Toronto for 5, and Vancouver for 4 (and still counting...). In fact, it is better than Canada in some regards. Of course, Canada is also better in some other ways or else I wouldn't be living here right now.
But it is true that many westerners immediately think of Cold war and Stalin whenever they hear "communism". Wake up, people. Especially when that is related to HK in some ways. Don't make retarded statements like that if you haven't actually LIVED there and experienced life there, please. China is growing rapidly, perhaps faster than any country when they first developed, and HK is, along with Shanghai, the most modern, advanced and beautiful cities there. I have been to both.
P.S. I admire Greg because he is willing to learn about other cultures, as evident by his Chinese and Japanese studies. He hasn't made any generalizing, ignorant and blatantly discriminatory comments many people have about other cultures before studying them. If only everyone would learn to be like him and respect others as much as themselves...
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 12:09:04 PM
I have never lived in mainland China so I won't comment on the quality of life there. But in HK, it is as good as any global city in the west, I can assure you that. I lived in HK for 7 years, Toronto for 5, and Vancouver for 4 (and still counting...). In fact, it is better than Canada in some regards. Of course, Canada is also better in some other ways or else I wouldn't be living here right now.
awesome.
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 12:09:04 PM
But it is true that many westerners immediately think of Cold war and Stalin whenever they hear "communism". Wake up, people. Especially when that is related to HK in some ways. Don't make retarded statements like that if you haven't actually LIVED there and experienced life there, please. China is growing rapidly, perhaps faster than any country when they first developed, and HK is, along with Shanghai, the most modern, advanced and beautiful cities there. I have been to both.
I think I know why. In school, when we learn about Communism, we mostly just study Russia- and don't go into too much detail, even then. We don't learn anything about modern China or other communist countries like Cuba or North Korea. We just get general impressions from the media, and i think they're using it now to inform the public about a country that most people don't know much about besides a few of the basics. I like the Chinese lessons they have on NBC- the lady that does it, she's seems nice and all, but I just have to laugh. Something funny about it.
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 12:09:04 PM
P.S. I admire Greg because he is willing to learn about other cultures, as evident by his Chinese and Japanese studies. He hasn't made any generalizing, ignorant and blatantly discriminatory comments many people have about other cultures before studying them. If only everyone would learn to be like him and respect others as much as themselves...
I try not make too many "general" comments, if I can. Or if I do, hopefully, i say something like "i hear"/"based on the little i've read, i get the impression"/whatever.....
But yeah, other cultures are fascinating to me. Just a week ago, i checked out a course on German and am trying to learn what little i can. It's actually a pretty fun language to pronounce, although i bet learning the big words would be a headache at first. I would probably devote all my studies to world history and languages if I weren't interested in so much other stuff, so i probably won't learn too much because of that :(
Yeah, I feel lucky to have the opportunity to live in both the West and the East, and learn about both, whether in culture, history, politics or whatever. There are people that I know from both sides that are just ignorant about the other. I wish I could convince them that you really have to have lived in a place to truly learn about it.
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 17, 2008, 05:24:25 PM
Nope, that is not what I meant. I meant that he is a typical mindless and blind Westerner. Of course not all westerners are mindless and blind. If I meant that, that would make me stereotypical too. If you actually read my other post in this very thread, you can see that I'm against westerners making stereotypes towards the east and vice versa.
Of course I read your posts. And it's precisely because of that that I thought you should be alerted to a rather poor choice of words. I'm sure you didn't mean that kind of generalization. But if we have to figure it out by reading between the lines and assuming what you mean instead of what you actually write, it does not help conduct an informed discussion. Personally I have no opinion on the subject other than a long held one about the present being in continuity with the past. IOW it's up to the chinese people to figure out what society they want to live in. That's where history and culture come into play, and that's a collective internal state of mind.
Quote from: M forever on August 18, 2008, 12:14:49 AM
Words of wisdom from the extensive life experience and studies of the world of a 19-year old...
It is Leo Toltsoy.
Quote from: M forever on August 18, 2008, 12:14:49 AM
forming and voicing your own opinion was not exactly encouraged
One again you are talking about things you know absolutely nothing about. Who told you that, M? If you do not trust me, I insist you read posts #65 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,8694.msg217780.html#msg217780) and #78 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,8694.msg218176.html#msg218176) by an American in Russia, he assures the opposite to you.
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 12:09:04 PM
else I wouldn't be living here right now.
It is because you have no other choice except returning to the poor communistic Hong Kong which is ruled by a bunch of thugs. >:D >:D >:D
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 12:09:04 PM
Don't make retarded statements like that if you haven't actually LIVED there and experienced life there, please.
I wish I could convince them that you really have to have lived in a place to truly learn about it.
Exactly my point, but some people here are completely dim, and the first association with "communism" is Stalin's Russia. >:D In this case Communism is confused with Leninism and Stalinism.
Quote from: Sarastro on August 18, 2008, 03:51:34 PM
It is Leo Toltsoy.
One again you are talking about things you know absolutely nothing about. Who told you that, M? If you do not trust me, I insist you read posts #65 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,8694.msg217780.html#msg217780) and #78 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,8694.msg218176.html#msg218176) by an American in Russia, he assures the opposite to you.
It is because you have no other choice except returning to the poor communistic Hong Kong which is ruled by a bunch of thugs. >:D >:D >:D
Exactly my point, but some people here are completely dim, and the first association with "communism" is Stalin's Russia. >:D In this case Communism is confused with Leninism and Stalinism.
Very funny ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 03:55:44 PM
Very funny ;D ;D ;D
Not, it's not! >:( You just have no clue what's going on there! Totalitarian government takes people's lives away, shuts down all the non-governmental publishers, and for some reason the stupid population elects those thugs again and again! The poverty level is beyond your wildest guess, crimes walk the streets and kill innocent civilians, it is, frankly speaking, the most disgusting place on the Earth. Moreover, it's hard to sell them our crap.
But some of Hong Kong'ers wear Manolo Blahnik shoes (hopefully real and not counterfeit), Vivienne Westwood dresses, Christian Louboutin accessories, and buy Givenchy cosmetics, that's really a step up into the Civilized World. :D I learned it from a commercial between my evening house-wife talk-shows.
Disclaimer: I didn't intend to offend anyone, just experimented with
M's tactics.
Quote from: bwv 1080 on August 18, 2008, 04:10:37 AM
no comparison when the US poverty line is well above China's per capita income
Maybe they have different prices?
I nominate Sarastro's last post as GMG's Funniest Post of The Year. 0:) 0:) 0:)
Sarastro and Bonehelm, I have only one issue I want to pick up with you, especially since you are backing one another up in it. That is your suggestion that you have to have lived somewhere to have a legitimate profound opinion about it.
That would exclude almost everyone from commenting about most places. You both have a great advantage and we are very interested in your fix; which is gained at first hand. But, others of us can form legitimate opinions based on comparisons between wherever they live and being intelligent about the sources they use in order to learn about other countries.
Taking your own stricture to the extreme, we cannot even learn from you....since most of us have not lived in Hong Kong or Russia. Using your own argument against you, neither of you will have a legitimate opinion on the UK....unless you come here to live. I don't buy into that idea.
Another angle on it: the opening line from the book The Go-Between is, "The past is another country, they do things differently there." And that is very true. So, to know anything about history, we need to rely on a combination of eye witness accounts and other evidence plus the informed opinion of scholars. Again, extending your argument, we might as well forget about trying to understand any history, none of us were there for most of it.
Again I don't buy into that.
Sarastro, when I was reading the post you attributed to the M technique; I had assumed you were successfully channelling Bunny; well done either way.
Mike
Great post, Mike!
Quote from: knight on August 18, 2008, 10:51:42 PM
Sarastro and Bonehelm, I have only one issue I want to pick up with you, especially since you are backing one another up in it. That is your suggestion that you have to have lived somewhere to have a legitimate profound opinion about it.
That would exclude almost everyone from commenting about most places. You both have a great advantage and we are very interested in your fix; which is gained at first hand. But, others of us can form legitimate opinions based on comparisons between wherever they live and being intelligent about the sources they use in order to learn about other countries.
Taking your own stricture to the extreme, we cannot even learn from you....since most of us have not lived in Hong Kong or Russia. Using your own argument against you, neither of you will have a legitimate opinion on the UK....unless you come here to live. I don't buy into that idea.
Another angle on it: the opening line from the book The Go-Between is, "The past is another country, they do things differently there." And that is very true. So, to know anything about history, we need to rely on a combination of eye witness accounts and other evidence plus the informed opinion of scholars. Again, extending your argument, we might as well forget about trying to understand any history, none of us were there for most of it.
Again I don't buy into that.
Sarastro, when I was reading the post you attributed to the M technique; I had assumed you were successfully channelling Bunny; well done either way.
Mike
True, I've never lived in the UK, but do you see me making threads here titled "Great Britain's internal affairs"?
If we watch western media, we should see what our "knowledge" about China and Russia is worth. It's just western propaganda. It's the choice of news that counts. I don't buy anything at all, at least it's getting lesser and lesser.
Watched CNN two days ago and they reported about Russia/Georgia. A shame. What a propaganda channel. OH, Russia leaves Georgia 5 minutes too late. OH, they destroyed a bridge!!!1! Unbelieveable! The Ivans have gone crazy again!²!!! OH, people have been killed (Georgians only). How surprising in a war! OH, lootings! Again, how surprising! German media followed the western guidelines very soon.
In my opinion Putin was/is a stability factor for Europe, much better than Vodka Jelzin. I may be wrong.
And I'd say it's pretty unfair to only judge over a country from a regime opponents point of view. Most people aren't. From only one point of view! How ridiculous! We have Russian emigrants, who happily go back to russia. Let's not forget: Countries and their people have millions of good and interesting aspects. Not only if a regime is democratic or not.
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 11:11:20 PM
True, I've never lived in the UK, but do you see me making threads here titled "Great Britain's internal affairs"?
No....but that does not mean I would discount your opinions if you gave them, merely because you had not lived there. Our knowledge of the world has to be wider than merely the small corner we personally experience. It is about being intelligent in our selection of sources, which will almost inevitably end up being biased.
If people here only get their information from the Daily Mail and believe it, then they will be purblind and prejudiced. I tend to read The Times; but there is a lot of it I simply don't believe.
Recently I visited Jordan and I urge anyone to to that to get an alternative view to that of the Rabid-Arab caricature that the Western Media often pushes on us; but then, that merely confirmed what I knew from other sources, that Arabs, like others, can be open, friendly and reflective....nothing at all like the typical Jihadist extreme. So, going there is great, living there provides real insights, but there are other forms of legitimate opinion forming.
Mike
Quote from: Wurstwasser on August 18, 2008, 11:12:21 PM
If we watch western media, we should see what our "knowledge" about China and Russia is worth. It's just western propaganda. It's the choice of news that counts. I don't buy anything at all, at least it's getting lesser and lesser.
Watched CNN two days ago and they reported about Russia/Georgia. A shame. What a propaganda channel. OH, Russia leaves Georgia 5 minutes too late. OH, they destroyed a bridge!!!1! Unbelieveable! The Ivans have gone crazy again!²!!! OH, people have been killed (Georgians only). How surprising in a war! OH, lootings! Again, how surprising! German media followed the western guidelines very soon.
In my opinion Putin was/is a stability factor for Europe, much better than Vodka Jelzin. I may be wrong.
And I'd say it's pretty unfair to only judge over a country from a regime opponents point of view. Most people aren't. From only one point of view! How ridiculous! We have Russian emigrants, who happily go back to russia. Let's not forget: Countries and their people have millions of good and interesting aspects. Not only if a regime is democratic or not.
Excellent points :)
Quote from: knight
No....but that does not mean I would discount your opinions if you gave them, merely because you had not lived there. Our knowledge of the world has to be wider than merely the small corner we personally experience. It is about being intelligent in our selection of sources, which will almost inevitably end up being biased.
If people here only get their information from the Daily Mail and believe it, then they will be purblind and prejudiced. I tend to read The Times; but there is a lot of it I simply don't believe.
Recently I visited Jordan and I urge anyone to to that to get an alternative view to that of the Rabid-Arab caricature that the Western Media often pushes on us; but then, that merely confirmed what I knew from other sources, that Arabs, like others, can be open, friendly and reflective....nothing at all like the typical Jihadist extreme. So, going there is great, living there provides real insights, but there are other forms of legitimate opinion forming.
Mike
That sounds good, I agree. :)
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 18, 2008, 11:11:20 PM
Quote from: knight on August 18, 2008, 10:51:42 PM
Sarastro and Bonehelm, I have only one issue I want to pick up with you, especially since you are backing one another up in it. That is your suggestion that you have to have lived somewhere to have a legitimate profound opinion about it.
That would exclude almost everyone from commenting about most places. You both have a great advantage and we are very interested in your fix; which is gained at first hand. But, others of us can form legitimate opinions based on comparisons between wherever they live and being intelligent about the sources they use in order to learn about other countries.
Taking your own stricture to the extreme, we cannot even learn from you....since most of us have not lived in Hong Kong or Russia. Using your own argument against you, neither of you will have a legitimate opinion on the UK....unless you come here to live. I don't buy into that idea.
Another angle on it: the opening line from the book The Go-Between is, "The past is another country, they do things differently there." And that is very true. So, to know anything about history, we need to rely on a combination of eye witness accounts and other evidence plus the informed opinion of scholars. Again, extending your argument, we might as well forget about trying to understand any history, none of us were there for most of it.
Again I don't buy into that.
Sarastro, when I was reading the post you attributed to the M technique; I had assumed you were successfully channelling Bunny; well done either way.
Mike
True, I've never lived in the UK, but do you see me making threads here titled "Great Britain's internal affairs"?
I do not make such threads either and was going to reply the same, but with little difference.
Mike,
Though first I thought you are right and this is a one-sided point of view, it turns out that knowing the country from the inside will eventually prevail as a major factor in discussing "internal affairs," maybe not
direct knowing, but as least...so here I go (hopefully do not fall asleep).
Knowing the nation from the inside has substantial validity in discussing such things, especially when you switch East to West and understand what was wrong about the West there and what is wrong about the East here. Here I am just concerned how mislead and media-dependent some people are. Not just here, many people in Russia think completely dumb things about the USA.
It is also a good idea to check if a person has bias. Unlike M or Bunny, I do not tend to be very pro-Western, on the other hand, unlike Florestan, not very aggressive towards the Soviets and Russia (yes, I've noticed it reading old topics and one particular topic that grew up into WWII discussion), but I enjoy living here, know positive sides and am certainly no defender of the Stalinism society. I do not trust most of the media and prefer to hear what ordinary people say about their homeland - here they are, biased anyway, either for or against :P - but at least it makes sense and presents the inside. I would gladly trust credible-the-least-biased scholars, but they may come up with a legitimate opinion only after having lived in a nation, not just outside.
And if someone has a personal story of his/her misfortunes in China and how they couldn't sell them something, it may indicate only bad luck or fatality, or just be accidental, I don't know...just not enough to make conclusions about how things are going there and how deprived and unhappy people are.
We will just have to agree to disagree a bit over this. What comes to my mind is the BBC correspondent Mark Tully. He lived in India for a very long time and clearly loved the country, without being in the least blind to it's problems or what caused them. He certainly had a better understanding of what made India tick than most of the locals could have had, as he had access to such a range of people and circumstances. Likewise, the writer William Dalrymple has in recent years provided books and journalism from what is almost his adopted country. Again insights galore. Such sources are valuable and together with Indian friends have been giving me a reasonable range of impressions.
I am not going to concede that... you have to have lived there. But, as I indicated, when you do live in a place, it can give you unique authority....though you can also be so close you cannot see what is going on in your own society. Speaking to many of the men and women on the streets here....I would not put much weight on their opinions about a lot of things. Many could not tell you the name of their MP, what vegetables come into season and when, roughly how many people live in their town and so on. Even personal experience is viewed from a specific viewpoint, observing how locals have reacted to one set of events in Georgia exemplifies how the same events give rise to extremely different opinions on what happened and why.
Now...must go off to work unfortunately.
Mike
Quote from: Sarastro on August 18, 2008, 11:57:34 PM
unlike Florestan, not very aggressive towards the Soviets and Russia (yes, I've noticed it reading old topics and one particular topic that grew up into WWII discussion)
Well, this is a little upside-down. The USSR have been aggressive to Romania and implicitly to me, not the other way around. My dislike of Russian foreign politics is not based on fantasy or biased media. It's based on historical facts and figures and on personal experience. My country would have been a far better place than it is now had it not been for the USSR and its puppet regime in Bucharest. I am not going to derail this thread with details about the systematical and criminal destruction of the whole fabric of Romanian society inflicted with the help of Soviet komissars by the Communist regime forced down our throats at the point of the Red Army's machine-guns --- and all done in the name of liberation and democracy. Suffice it to say that this is more than enough to make me distrust Russian government and officials even when they say "Good day"...
Quote from: Florestan on August 19, 2008, 12:25:41 AM
Well, this is a little upside-down. The USSR have been aggressive to Romania and implicitly to me, not the other way around. My dislike of Russian foreign politics is not based on fantasy or biased media. It's based on historical facts and figures and on personal experience. My country would have been a far better place than it is now had it not been for the USSR and its puppet regime in Bucharest. I am not going to derail this thread with details about the systematical and criminal destruction of the whole fabric of Romanian society inflicted with the help of Soviet komissars by the Communist regime forced down our throats at the point of the Red Army's machine-guns --- and all done in the name of liberation and democracy. Suffice it to say that this is more than enough to make me distrust Russian government and officials even when they say "Good day"...
I am sorry.
Quote from: knight on August 19, 2008, 12:15:15 AM
though you can also be so close you cannot see what is going on in your own society.
I understand your point clearly, that is why I mentioned switching the poles; it opens new perspectives and helped me realize Russia's vices, by the way. ::) That's why "have lived" was used instead of "have been living."
And I go off to sleep. ;D
Quote from: Sarastro on August 19, 2008, 12:42:17 AM
I am sorry.
I appreciate that. And please don't get me wrong, I am not a Russophobic. I love Russian music and literature and I don't hold the common Russian people accountable for the faults and crimes of the Russian government.
It's not true that we understand a nation by virtue of living among them. If it were true, then most of us would understand our wives.
Quote from: Sarastro on August 18, 2008, 05:07:09 PM
Maybe they have different prices?
The PPP(purchasing power parity) adjustments take this into account, the and with the adjustments, the capita income of china is around $5300 / yr (it is $2500 / year without the adjustment)
To put this into perspective, it is less than half the per capita income of Mexico
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
The US poverty line for a single individual is $10,400 / yr (the threshold is higher for families
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 19, 2008, 04:49:50 AM
It's not true that we understand a nation by virtue of living among them. If it were true, then most of us would understand our wives.
I thought wives came from a diffeent plant, not quite the girl from next door.
Mike
Quote from: knight on August 19, 2008, 06:08:54 AM
I thought wives came from a diffeent plant, not quite the girl from next door.
Planet? As in, "Men are from Mars, women are from Venus...and wives are from a genetic engineering lab in Hell?"
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 19, 2008, 07:04:26 AM
"...and wives are from a genetic engineering lab in Hell?"
That would explain a lot... ;D
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 19, 2008, 07:04:26 AM
Planet? As in, "Men are from Mars, women are from Venus...and wives are from a genetic engineering lab in Hell?"
Women are from Venus, but as far as I know they undergo severe metamorphoses on the Earth and after the marriage. :P
Well, no complaints about my wife whatsoever. I am sure she puts up with a lot more than I do.
Mike
Quote from: knight on August 19, 2008, 12:50:13 PM
Well, no complaints about my wife whatsoever. I am sure she puts up with a lot more than I do.
Mike
Ah, I see you have given her your log on password... :D
8)
She was standing over me with a cattle prodder.....but has now gone to bully my son to tidy up his room; so I have at least an hour.
Mike
:)...GMG off-topic threads really do have a more complexly interesting development than any 20th century avant-garde composer's work...
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 19, 2008, 01:51:56 PM
:)...GMG off-topic threads really do have a more complexly interesting development than any 20th century avant-garde composer's work...
Hehe
Quote from: Bonehelm on August 19, 2008, 01:51:56 PM
:)...GMG off-topic threads really do have a more complexly interesting development than any 20th century avant-garde composer's work...
Yeah...hopefully we won't have recapitulation and then locking the thread as coda. 8)
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 19, 2008, 07:04:26 AM
Planet? As in, "Men are from Mars, women are from Venus...and wives are from a genetic engineering lab in Hell?"
The original title was intended to be
Men come from Mars, women come from time to time. But that didn't fly by the Editor, who insisted on a purely astronomical metaphor.