China 08'

[coolotter88 2]

Like in Ender's Game?

"eww, you're a THIRD"

[patriots_1228 51]

Like skigeek said, it probably makes more sense if its commie phobia. if it were sinophobia, which i assume is fear of asians or somthing, i would probably be running to my neighbors house and yelling "even if you were born in america, FREE TIBET!" or somthing stupid like that....

[belfastuniguy 18]

Of course population is a good thing.

What's the alternative....having the population continue to grow by billions leading to further world famine, illness in poorer nations, land pressure leading to war and a whole host of other issues.

Every country should play a part. I also fail to see the arguement that some people make about, maybe that child could have been the next Beethoven or Monet...oh please lets be realistic. Countries which operate this policy tend to aim them at the very poorest in society and I doubt a poverty stricken farmers child from China will suddenly gain the education to become a world renowned composer or the greatest chemical scientist the world has ever known.

As for the poem itself. Its interesting but I have some issues with it and see some flaws of which I'll detail later.

[Meg 368]

From dictionary.com:

Si·no·phobe  

<img src="http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif" border="0" />  Audio Help   (s?'n?-f?b', s?n'-)  Pronunciation Key  n.   One who fears or dislikes China, its people, or its culture.

In the USA, Chinese restaurants outnumber McDonald's, Burger King, and Taco Bell combined.   That would not be the case if the country really had a fear of Chinese people and Chinese culture.

But the evidence of commie-phobia is all over the place.  McCarthyism, the Vietnam war,  the "evil empire", the fact that most citizens are so weirded out by communism that they tar socialism with the same brush.  I know people who use "Communist!" as a cuss word (for instance, directed at someone who cut them off in traffic.)  

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: ephorex_77

Originally posted by: krbe Also, an article "detailing" the views of the common Chinese (which unfortunatly are largely missing from everyday debate here) shows that they have been very effective in making Jin Jing into a hero, because she "saved" the torch from the "vicious" demonstrants in Paris—granted, they did try to rip it from a girl in a wheelchair, but dieing for an torch must be even more ridiculous than dieing for freedom (Golden Girl Lifts a Nation, China Daily 14^th April).quote>

 

Admittedly, this was posted a long time ago, but I find it has relevance for my comment. 

I was just thinking of the rank hypocrisy evident in that comment by krbe. The US sets great store by "freedom", which is in essense, something intangible and subjective. But if you like, I wonder how people would react if I burned an American flag (oh, and spat and urinated on it for good measure beforehand) in front of the Lincoln Memorial (or any other place of national/political significance)? And as to the charge that it's ridiculous to be "dieing for a torch", I wonder how the Roman legionnaires felt when they fell to protect the Eagle? I wonder how many people have venerated icons and safeguarded flags with their lives. 

Your comment just exposes how there seems to be one standard by which China (and ostensibly Chinese) are judged, and one for others.quote>

Not surprisingly, you're barking up the wrong tree. You ridicule people for being willing to die for their freedom; why would  you rather die for a metal thing with a gas canister below? Because it is more "tangible" and "objective"?  Your comaprisons are also wrong.

I live in a country which gets its flags, or what are meant to be flags, burnt every second day—and I can guarantee you, that it isn't flag burnings that are worrying. there are much more serious issues at hand than that. I also vaguely remember a TV show in Norway, where the presenter "accidentially" burned the US flag right before the invasion of Iraq; he was reported not by any Americans, but by some Chistian fundamentalists.

I find it unlikely to hear any Dane say that he would be willing to protect the Dannebrog from being burned with his life, whereever the burning might take place. I also find it hard to believe that any reasonable American would rather die protecting the Stars and Stripes from being burned than die protecting his homeland.

I also find it interesting that they don't have something Chinese to be proud of, instead of the Olympic games, which are a modern, European invention with its history dating back to the ancient Geek civilisation.

Which also leads me to something I|ve noticed in broadcasts from China, both from Chinese and Western media: This is far more important for Chinese in the spotlight than it has ever been before for any nation, perhaps with the exception of Berlin-36. Someone have managed to get them to believe that the Olympics has been something they have "deserved" for over hundred years. They must obviously have forgotten their past, a hundred years ago they could barely hold on to what was left of them. This may well be a western viewpoint, but getting your country up and running are prioritised way before getting the Olytmpics, which you are awarded, not something you deserve.

Which leads to my next comment:

___________________________________________________________________________________

When

[Callbat 8]

- This Big Blue Earth is Big Enough for all of Us.quote>

Very soon it won't.

[ephorex_77 0]

@ krbe: Sorry, but there were some parts of your post that are, frankly, incomprehensible to me; I'll try and reply to the bits that I actually understood.

You ridicule people for being willing to die for their freedom; why would  you rather die for a metal thing with a gas canister below? Because it is more "tangible" and "objective"? quote>

You're missing the point. You snidely attempted to point out the abject foolishness of dying for a torch, even though the torch runner was hardly "dying". I mentioned your comment because I thought it extremely hypocritical that you could ridicule someone for protecting (though hardly to the extent of "dying") a torch, yet fail to realise that there are plenty of others (even on this very website) who ARE willing to die for an intangible, fluid ideal. You're being inconsistent.

And your protest that your national flag gets burned with little fuss is hardly valid in the context. YES, I'm sure there are plenty of Danes who would be more interested in the bowel movements of bovines than their national flag, but there are others in the world who wouldn't hold so indifferent a view towards their own national flag. I fail to see how you can argue against that.

I also find it hard to believe that any reasonable American would rather die protecting the Stars and Stripes from being burned than die protecting his homeland. quote>

Well, I'm sure it's quite within the bounds of reality for me to say that there are plenty. 

I also find it interesting that they don't have something Chinese to be proud of, instead of the Olympic games, which are a modern, European invention with its history dating back to the ancient Geek civilisation. quote>

This ad hominem attack on China made by you perhaps show that you're at the end of your tether; it doesn't seem that this comment is in aid of anything. In fact, it's possible that this comment by you merely reinforces my general hatred of eurocentrism. Look at all the arrogance and contemptible pride in that one, single sentence of yours. In fact, just reading it, I'm not sure if the rest of your post deserves to be dignified with a response. Frankly, your comments only serve to expose the baseness and narrow-minded nature of your views .

They must obviously have forgotten their past, a hundred years ago they could barely hold on to what was left of them. quote>

Oh boy, more western superiority.  And I wonder WHY it was that the Chinese could barely hold on to their country. Maybe it was due to the British (et al) bombing China for not buying enough of their dope?? This comment of yours really hits rock-bottom. It does your intellect no credit by saying such rubbish.

This may well be a western viewpoint, but getting your country up and running are prioritised way before getting the Olytmpics, which you are awarded, not something you deserve. quote>

Damn right it is a western viewpoint. Compared to what China was just over 50 years ago, in the aftermath of decades of civil war and the debilitating effects of the Great Leap Forward (greatest misnomer) and the Cultural Revolution, China IS up and running. And this is MY viewpoint, but I'd leave it up to the IOC to decide who gets to host the Olympics, not you. 

But what is The China Threat? Does it portray all Chinese as gooks

[Callbat 8]

I think some people here need to sit down and have a drink of water.

[skyliner22 16]

I don't know if you guys know this but when the torch relays hit Seoul, South Korea; the Chinese nationalist students attacked the Korean protestors with projectiles. Including pliers, rocks etc. I find this very disgusting especially the fact that it is not their country and acting like that is just rediculous. I stumbled upon it when i was browsing SSC

Heres the thread

I am suprised I haven't heard about this at all before seeing that thread. I'd thought CNN would love to pounce on a story like that. Also I find it kind of funny, in the next few pages it shows the Nagano leg of the torch run. The Chinese media Xinghua's pictures are zoomed in and shows peaceful. But a forumer posted the real protest rallies just on the outside of the pictures. Chinese government brainwashing is too insane!

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: ephorex_77{Angry rant}quote>

I did not comment on the poem, others have already done that. You linked to a video, which I watched, and later commented on. Remember, I started with "viewer", not reader. You haven't even watched it. Do that, before you reply.

From the video page:

Two,

If you don't know the above references,

Go to libraries and Do your own research.

don't get your facts from the tube,

You wouldn't have a Clue.quote>

I checked the references.

[patriots_1228 51]

You know what this reminds me of?

"TEACHER TEACHER! HE CALLED ME A STUPIDFACE!".

[Meg 368]

okay, let's all sit down and join Callbat and have a drink of water.   and take a few slow deep breaths. 

[belfastuniguy 18]

Water.............how about some lovely English Tea....

Callbat and I are having some

[patriots_1228 51]

I am more of a mountain dew person myself.

[belfastuniguy 18]

eeewwwww..

Clearly tea is superior to all other non-alcoholic drinks.

[plus01 0]

Originally posted by: krbe

And European powers wanting their "fair share", that's hardly unique to China. Ask the Poles how they felt about such arrangments. And no words about how effective the Chinese were in partitioning their own country? The Europeans got an International Settlement in Shanghai, access to some Chinese ports and a few consession territories, but the warlords were the ones that got the large slices.

quote>

wow...this is the most ignorant thing i have read/heard this year.

[belfastuniguy 18]

wow...this is the most ignorant thing i have read/heard this year.quote>

In what way......its nice to explain such things.

[coolotter88 2]

where would you get your English Tea if not for the crown jewel of the British Empire? India? of course, India isn't China, but it's still imperialism.

[skyliner22 16]

Green tea perhaps?

[Callbat 8]

In addition to water we need to have a nice discussion about how imperialism ended in the late sixties and is therefore NOT a current event or something whose outcome or moral justification we should debate. We learn from our history, we don't strive to change it. In regards to flaming I belive we all need to stop being hotheaded nationalists which can only lead to further flaming. I apologise myself for my mistakes, I can get a bit passionate sometimes. I hope this hasn't marred your view of me as a person. Now let's debate this like who we are, intelligent human beings. I think (think is the keyword here) that some points in that poem are justified, while others simply depend on your viewpoint. From my Eurocentric point of view, some of those comments are rather harsh and unjustified. I'd post some points right now but I'm using a mac laptop and these things really are a big pain in the rump to use. (for instance the spacing between these various paragraphs and sentences isn't showing up)

[belfastuniguy 18]

where would you get your English Tea if not for the crown jewel of the British Empire? India? of course, India isn't China, but it's still imperialism.quote>

Oh dear...seems your confusing current events with history....a few people here seem to have that disability when it involves the British Empire. You all really should address that and look at a calender.

I think you will also find that China is also a tea producing region as well as Kenya and various other places. Indeed the first tea shipments to the United Kingdom came from China and I think you will find it you look past your own ignorance it was the British that started wide scale tea growing and cultivation in India using Chinese seedlings, and then later those from the Assam region.

[fukuda 351]

Originally posted by: plus01

Originally posted by: krbe

And European powers wanting their "fair share", that's hardly unique to China. Ask the Poles how they felt about such arrangments. And no words about how effective the Chinese were in partitioning their own country? The Europeans got an International Settlement in Shanghai, access to some Chinese ports and a few consession territories, but the warlords were the ones that got the large slices.

quote>

wow...this is the most ignorant thing i have read/heard this year.quote>

Why? Because not all chinese peeps are shown as the good ones? yes, it's not only the fault of the "Western Powers"... Yes, Chinese lords helped immensely to ruin their own country, europeans were not acting alone, and that's history, but I guess that it hurts the nationalism of some people.

[plus01 0]

Originally posted by: fukuda

Originally posted by: plus01

Originally posted by: krbe

And European powers wanting their "fair share", that's hardly unique to China. Ask the Poles how they felt about such arrangments. And no words about how effective the Chinese were in partitioning their own country? The Europeans got an International Settlement in Shanghai, access to some Chinese ports and a few consession territories, but the warlords were the ones that got the large slices.

quote>

wow...this is the most ignorant thing i have read/heard this year.quote>

Why? Because not all chinese peeps are shown as the good ones? yes, it's not only the fault of the "Western Powers"... Yes, Chinese lords helped immensely to ruin their own country, europeans were not acting alone, and that's history, but I guess that it hurts the nationalism of some people.quote>

To put my comment back into perspective, krbe's comment was referring back to one of the poem's stanzas. 

When We were falling apart, You marched in your troops and wanted your "fair share".

Originally posted by: krbe

The Europeans got an International Settlement in Shanghai, access to some Chinese ports and a few consession territories, but the warlords were the ones that got the large slices.

quote>

Here, the author fails to realize that when the poem references China falling apart, it was not during the Warlord Era (between 1910s to 1930s) like he cited in his Wikipedia Link, but around the mid 1800s mainly after the Opium Wars, namely the Taiping Rebellion (1850-64) and the Boxer Rebellion (1900).  The European troops marched into China demanding "free trade" (by free trade is selling more opium into China and taking a lot of money when mercantilism was prominent in Europe).  The time when major concessions were given to European powers was during the late 1800s.  The warlords in China were about 50 years later.

The "fair share" concessions towards European powers were a result of many one-sided wars and unequal treaties where China really had no say in.  In short, China was exploited.  How dare he ask how the Poles felt when the question should be how China felt.

The Opium wars instigated by the British preluded the fall of the Qing Dynasty because many Han Chinese were frustrated at the weakness under the rule of Manchus.  Then there was the 1911 Revolution which ended the Qing Dynasty and formed a republic.  However there were disagreements in how to run the new republic and there was some chaos that led to regional Warlords who ruled by the size of their armies.

Originally posted by: krbe

And no words about how effective the Chinese were in partitioning their own country?

quote>

Indeed, the Chinese were relatively ineffective in ruling their own country during the Warlord Era.  This was because of the upheaval after the fall of the Qing Dynasty.  But remember, revolution in China to overthrow the current regime was sparked by wanting to become stronger as a country and eventually gain liberty from foreigners (namely Europeans).  I

[tyhz 0]

I agree with plus01, but I think all of us should all listen to callbat, sit down and have a drink, the post are getting a bit personal, and offensive. On the topic of the Warlord era, though the europeans did exploit great on china's wealth of human and natural resources, it was the weakness of the Qing government that had tore the country apart giving the europeans the opportunity in the first place. So, fukuda has a point, despite being a misplaced one.

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: plus01 {Explanation} quote>

As I've said before: I'm not talking about the poem per se, I'm talking about the video, where images accompany the verses. You're right, I'd did talk about the wrong picture; because the one I was thinking about was the one under "we were broken into pieces", a picture which shows all of China. The web address printed on the picture/painting is no longer available.

You're also right that that Western powers did their share of the dirty work in order to get hold of trade rights; but somehow some are trying to tell us that Chinese/Western history is unique. It isn't. Wether in Europe, Asia, Africa or the Americas: The Europeans were taking all they could get hold of! To get back to Poland: Thrice has that country been divided by their neighbours. They haven't been satisfied with ports or trade rights; all of it was taken. Only two countries escaped being colonised in Africa. Latin America was pretty much divided between Spain and Portugal long before rest of Europe began talking about the rest of the world. Moving up to North America, Britain, France and Spain were competing for vast untamed areas with little population, though that didn't hinder them in driving them further back and kill those that were there with various means. We all know the outcome of that.

My statement of the ignorance of krbe's post was 1) he fails to know the context of history including the events and a general timeframe, 2) he has an extremely bias eurocentric (or rather Western-entric) viewpoint of how the Opium Wars when down (I know there are many Western people who know this is not the case, but in krbe's point of view, it isn't) and 3) which really takes the cake and caused me to post, is wanting a "fair share" within a country they want to exploit after numerous people have been killed in one-sided wars.  It was as if China actually had any significant influence.  This is akin to how Germany was forced to sign the Treaty of Versailles after WWI.  But the Europeans had to make it seem "fair" and only took major trade posts and concession territories that were beneficial to them in the first place since they had no interest in dealing with the country as a whole (like Britain did to India)quote>

To remind you again: I'm talking about the video. If I am "ignorant", what will you call the editor of this "conciliatory" video clearly directed at westerners in light of the recent anti-China (not anti-Chinese) protests?

"We are called The China Threat" is written over the book of the same name. Do the editor and the author (which is probably the same person) know what this book is about? It is about China policy, how the Americans were unable to catch the mole inside the FBI when they uncovered spies, about the PRC's plans to use nuclear arms against Taiwan and the PRC's long term perspective v. America's short term perspective. It's not called Mein Kampf, because it isn't Mein Kampf. In comparison, China Inc is the one which is "afraid" of China and the Chinese, and not the PRC policies; but The China Threat is much better to use visually for all those out there who don't know what exactly Gertz is writing about.

And "And You killed, burned, maimed and looted" is written to a picture of a little girl sitting alone in some ruins. Who are "you"? Is the poem still supposed to be aimed at the west? If it is, why use images from a Japanese bombing to tell us what we did? Why is there a need to be dishonest about it?

Luckily, it is written, in the "footnote", that you should check the references. I did that, and it doesn't add up. I bet the editor was unhappy with the coverage of the Tibet protests by the AFP, CNN and the BBC. I hope he/she is as unhappy with his/her own wor

[tyhz 0]

to krbe You just proved yourself ignorant by saying all this. The fact is it doesn't matter wether you look at the poem or the video, both aimed at expressing a view that had been widely seen by chinese throughout the world. ephorex_77 posted the poem and the video to offer all of us a different viewpoint, one that many of us may never realize. The video may have some mistakened facts and pictures, but it isn't important, no one's perfect, what really matters is how they looked at the western culture and why, the pictures and the description are simply tools they used to express it. krbe, I admire your attention to detail, but it is hardly appropriate in this debate.

[Meg 368]

In politics, perception is more important than reality.  and it's helpful to understand what other people's perceptions are.

[belfastuniguy 18]

I admire your attention to detail, but it is hardly appropriate in this debate.quote>

Attention to detail is always important. Its always nice to have a proper and detailed discussion and not one based on mistakes and rambling.

[plus01 0]

Originally posted by: krbe

Originally posted by: plus01 {Explanation} quote>

As I've said before: I'm not talking about the poem per se, I'm talking about the video, where images accompany the verses.

...

To remind you again: I'm talking about the video.

quote>

Alright, so before I go any further I understand that you are attacking the video/poem.  What I don't understand is whether your views are solely based against this youtube video (which has its flaws/misplaced references) thus discrediting the views of Chinese nationals in general.  In other words, are you seriously denying all other viewpoints based on an amature youtube video?  This is the theme i'm sensing from your posts. 

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: tyhz to krbe You just proved yourself ignorant by saying all this. The fact is it doesn't matter wether you look at the poem or the video, both aimed at expressing a view that had been widely seen by chinese throughout the world.quote>

If it doesn't matter, why make a poem and a video in the first place?

The video may have some mistakened facts and pictures, but it isn't important, no one's perfect, what really matters is how they looked at the western culture and why, the pictures and the description are simply tools they used to express it.quote>

Double standards are twice as good as no standards. Doubleplusgood, infact.

krbe, I admire your attention to detail, but it is hardly appropriate in this debate.quote>

"Hardly approriate"? As long as it is possible I will refuse to base my viewpoints on inaccurate rants and lies others tell me. Especially when the editor of a video tells me (and you!) to check the references.

Am I ignorant because I'm doing my homework here? May I not critisise those who don't? Some here are watching way too much western media.

Originally posted by: plus01

Alright, so before I go any further I understand that you are attacking the video/poem.  What I don't understand is whether your views are solely based against this youtube video (which has its flaws/misplaced references) thus discrediting the views of Chinese nationals in general.  In other words, are you seriously denying all other viewpoints based on an amature youtube video?  This is the theme i'm sensing from your posts. quote>

It is you who extrapolates.