China 08'

[raja_indy14 8]

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?quote>

you do realize krbe that there is intense animosity between china and japan, there is no reason to think that the poem/video is specifically targeting westerners and ignoring what the japanese did - to think so is merely further evidence of your intensely eurocentric views.  indeed the japanese are almost certainly much more hated within china than the west is.

anyways, the poem/video certainly has inconsistencies (in fact, i think the poem by itself is more effective) but it gets across a message (more a national idea or sense than unalloyed truth) that is both valid and pertinent.  it is a poem, not an essay, so to take it apart systematically and scientifically is quite frankly missing the point.  i too have some problems with some of the imagery and some of the content of the poem, but overall i think it accomplished its aim very well - i think it would be better to discuss the validity of the major themes of the poem, rather than nitpick the use and nature of the images that accompanied the poem.

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.quote>

i think that imperialism is tied to the discussion to some limited extent, it's very easy as the colonizing power to say 'yes, all that was in the past let's just move on shall we?' but likely less so for the nation that was colonized.  in regards to China, imperialism is tied to the present situation in two ways: (a) europe abandoned - or was forced from - colonialism a mere 45 years ago, would it perhaps be hypocritical of them to criticize a state that was carrying out imperialistic policies today, or is 45 years enough turnaround time?  (b) imperialism played a huge role in the modern history of china - it isn't called the "century of national humiliation" for nothing, and this effects everything from china's modern perception of foreigners - particularly westerners and the japanese - to their manner of participating in the global community, and their lack of desire to listen to anything we have to say.  from a chinese perspective, to listen to and alter your policies in the face of foreign pressure would be a huge loss of face, especially when these are the same people who not that long ago humiliated your country - it would be akin to kissing the hand that slapped you.

personally, i agree that discussing it's moral justification is fruitless, but discussing it's outcome is not - current events do not exist within a vacuum, and examining the history is important in cases such as these.  while i think many things that went on under colonialism are morally apprehensible, i don't judge it - it is what states do after all - and it is because of this that i have few major problems with what China does in Darfur or Tibet.

disclaimer: i should note that i'm in no way attacking or singling out the British Empire.

In regards to flaming I belive we all need to stop being hotheaded nationalists which can only lead to further flaming.quote>

oddly, the only people i see being hotheaded nationalists are Brits

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

i agree whole-heartedly, and that sentiment is pertinent to much more than just politics...

one

[belfastuniguy 18]

oddly, the only people i see being hotheaded nationalists are Brits

disclaimer: i should note that i'm in no way attacking or singling out the British Empirequote>

No of course not, just singling out British people...

I think you should also go and get a definition of nationalist. Defending our nations history against false and misinformed comments is not in my view nationalist.

Now if I were to rant about British glory while waving a flag and voting BNP then that would be nationalist. But I don't, not has any other British person here done so.

My most recent comment was directed at coolotter when he/she displayed total ignorance and sought to further denigrate the British Empire thought a post lacking any informed content.

I am perfectly happy for people to comment about the British Empire and what it did or did not do, but what I hate is people just ranting without being aware of the facts.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: raja_indy14

. . . to think so is merely further evidence of your intensely eurocentric views. quote>

I remember the first time I heard the word "eurocentric".    The schools I had attended were being criticized for having a eurocentric curriculum.  I had to stop and figure out what they were talking about.  Once I took a step back and looked at the bigger picture, I could see they had a valid point.

Basically, the approach that was used back then was that things started in Europe and expanded from there.  We never did study Africa, the Middle East, or Asia.   "Eurocentric" is a darn good word for it!

Since then, I have tried to understand various points of view.  I don't always agree with them but I like to understand them.   and that was a concept that was missing from my education:  that history looks different from various points of view.

additionally, for people who believe in the separation of church and state to actively support the reinstation of a theocratic regime seems a little hypocritical, for people who believe in self-determination and democracy to support fuedal monarchy and serfdom is also hypocritical.quote>

okay, I missed something here.   Who wants to reinstate what theocratic regime, feudal monarchy, or serfdom?  

I have the wishful delusion that we can move past such things.  (I know, not in my lifetime but I can hope, can't I?)

[raja_indy14 8]

Who wants to reinstate what theocratic regime, feudal monarchy, or serfdom? quote>

not explicitly perhaps, but is there any reason to think that reinstating the dalai lama would lead to a democratic system of government?  admittedly, it would likely be difficult to return wholly to the original system at this point, but that's the regime that the PRC largely abolished, and having the dalai lama return to an independent Tibet would likely result in a theocratic regime.

i wasn't actualy accusing anyone here of supporting it, but i know many people who do support the return of the dalai lama to an independent tibet, it was more a general complaint.

@belfastuniguy - yes, i can see what you mean that disclaimer was not well placed - the very end of the post would have been better.  i merely hoped to avoid what happened a few pages back where my post involving "undeniable western intervention" was taken as an attack on the british empire and spawned a barrage of nationalistic comments - i decided that from now on i should tread lightely whenever any minor negative inferences could be made linking my posts to the british empire

No of course not, just singling out British people...quote>

further evidence that my caution/concerns are justified, any apparent singling out or criticism based on nationality is wholly unintentional, i assure you.  as i mentioned earlier, i'm half british meself, and tea is indeed a superior beverage

[plus01 0]

Originally posted by: krbe

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.quote>

This isn't a rhetorical question.  (If it was, I admit it does sound like I am inferring something).  I just want to know what is your point, since you are focusing on the video's faults rather than the overall message it brings (that there are other viewpoints and opinions out there).

Well I thought about it even more, and then I realized that you are dismissing the video because it has false information.  And you stated that you only base your viewpoints on fact.  Then you argued against the video with sources against it debunking it.  That I understand.  

But taking a step further instead of moving on, the next question should have been: why are those perceptions there in the first place?  What drove the author to make the video in the first place?  Maybe finding counter-evidence (that is not as bias as this video's imagery) to your own references would have been a better course of action.  Don’t stop once it agrees to a pre-existing viewpoint, but dig deeper.  If you found none after rigorous research in various sources, then indeed it is closer to reality and your viewpoint is valid.  However this was not the case.

To exemplify what I mean by digging deeper, I will refer to what krbe posted in his second to last post from now.  He argues that “China Threat” perception was false since he had evidence against it.  

Originally posted by: krbe

But what is The China Threat? Does it portray all Chinese as (I’m not going to repost a racist comment in my post) trying to take over the world and put Americans in concentration camps, or is it a call for the nation not to let their guard down? Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt. This goes for both the Chinese and the Americans, and The China Threat is supposed to remind the Americans of just that. quote>

Originally posted by: krbe

"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. quote>

For the "China Threat", krbe points out that the book in the video refers to a different kind of threat, a military one rather than on an individual basis.  Someone might say, "These examples are invalid because it is based on perception on false facts."  However, the fact that people do have these perceptions (economic, environmental, and/or military threat) in the fir

[Callbat 8]

further evidence that my caution/concerns are justified, any apparent singling out or criticism based on nationality is wholly unintentional, i assure you.  as i mentioned earlier, i'm half british meself, and tea is indeed a superior beverage quote>

You can cease to patronise us at any time you wish.

[raja_indy14 8]

jesus, there's no pleasing some people...

edit - btw, just noticed this:

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>

wow.  clearly the Chinese are proud of hosting the olympics because they have nothing else to be proud of.  or let me guess, even though the Olympics are an international event - meant to symbolize global unity - only Europeans have any right to be proud of it because it's one of their inventions?  what absolute rubbish; and the antithesis of what the olympics should be about.  any nation that hosts the olympics should be rightly proud to do so, or they shouldn't be hosting them.

on a similar vein, i wonder if ,when 2010 comes around, the Olympic torch relay will be marred by protests over the human rights record of Canada?  almost certainly not, i imagine, the native population isn't nearly so PR savvy as the dalai lama and the tibetan government-in-exile.  it's a bit of a national embarrassment, but luckily - for us -  i doubt anyone will even notice.

[Callbat 8]

Ahh well, the topic of Nationalist flaming, be it British or Chinese, was dropped quite a while ago and I find it silly to raise new concerns and begin arguing over something that is passed, forgiven(?), and learnt from.

That, is why I am not "pleased".

Do forgive me if I sound a bit stern, had a rather rough day.

[ephorex_77 0]

Originally posted by: raja_indy14 jesus, there's no pleasing some people...

edit - btw, just noticed this:

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>

wow.  clearly the Chinese are proud of hosting the olympics because they have nothing else to be proud of.  or let me guess, even though the Olympics are an international event - meant to symbolize global unity - only Europeans have any right to be proud of it because it's one of their inventions?  what absolute rubbish; and the antithesis of what the olympics should be about.  any nation that hosts the olympics should be rightly proud to do so, or they shouldn't be hosting them.

on a similar vein, i wonder if ,when 2010 comes around, the Olympic torch relay will be marred by protests over the human rights record of Canada?  almost certainly not, i imagine, the native population isn't nearly so PR savvy as the dalai lama and the tibetan government-in-exile.  it's a bit of a national embarrassment, but luckily - for us -  i doubt anyone will even notice.quote>

 

Well, I highlighted that comment a page ago, and what followed was rather astonishing (though in circumspect, not really, considering the predilections of a few posters here). Instead of addressing the whole, general concept and purpose behind the poem, rather, a whole barrage of semantics is launched, attempting to discredit the author's knack for picking right pictures to go along with the stanzas. Moreover, krbe follows up his admittedly obtuse viewpoint pertaining to colonialism (such a shame that China didn't give the western invaders more of their sovereign land, isn't it?? <-- sarcasm) by attempting to justify it with the premise: "Well, westerners did it to the rest of the world, right?".

Now, not only is that ignored by the "pro-west" (sorry if I'm generalising, but I think it's easier to split this into two camps for the sake of writing) posters, but racist appellations, ad hominem attacks on China's supposed inferiority as compared to the west and the blaming of China for "barely hold[ing]" onto their country (courtesy of the "we did it in India, SA, Africa, so it's your turn" colonialist mindset) are all likewise ignored by the "pro-west" camp. 

Instead, a few posters courteously advise me to sit down and have some water, compare my comments to that of a juvenile's complaints and then follow it up with an extremely learned dissertation on the virtues of various beverages; exciting stuff, undoubtedly, but rather condescending all the same.

I had hoped for the sheer impudence of krbe's comments to be appreciated by others immediately following his posting of them, but I'm glad all the same to see that I'm not the only one feeling slighted by them. Those comments really were unworthy of posting. To sneer at China ridiculing it for having never invented the Olympics is the absolute height of ignorance and foolishness, only topped by his lament decrying China's apparently inequitable distribution of territories between the western invaders and domestic Chinese warlords. Add to that racist comments (whose gravity, admittedly, may not have been appreciated at the time), and one gets the impression that those posts were not thought through properly, at best.

Really, those comments simply scream to be answered by nothing less than scathing posts and I believe that my response was very measured, considering the insensitivity and patent foolishness it constituted. No need for patronising and anacoluthic comments as to t

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: raja_indy14

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?quote>

you do realize krbe that there is intense animosity between china and japan, there is no reason to think that the poem/video is specifically targeting westerners and ignoring what the japanese did - to think so is merely further evidence of your intensely eurocentric views.  indeed the japanese are almost certainly much more hated within china than the west is.

anyways, the poem/video certainly has inconsistencies (in fact, i think the poem by itself is more effective) but it gets across a message (more a national idea or sense than unalloyed truth) that is both valid and pertinent.  it is a poem, not an essay, so to take it apart systematically and scientifically is quite frankly missing the point.  i too have some problems with some of the imagery and some of the content of the poem, but overall i think it accomplished its aim very well - i think it would be better to discuss the validity of the major themes of the poem, rather than nitpick the use and nature of the images that accompanied the poem.quote>

Is analyzing the poem "missing the point"? If it is, how do you know that your perception of it is right? Is it all a coincidence that almost all sentences begin with "When We", and is later followed by "You"? Of the 18 stanzas, 10 have this composition, most of them in both sentences. The video carries reprints of Western magazines, drawings, cartoons, articles, et. al. All of a sudden it begins with a picture of an Japanese execution, followed by a Japanese bombing, and within the same stanza returning to Europe again! It is published after the demonstrations in Europe. It is written in English. The background music is stolen from an American. The companies, books and places mentioned are in the west, with the exception of NEC. What more do I need to believe that it's targeted at the West?

If the Japanese "are almost certainly much more hated within china than the west is", why not reserve that for its own anti-Japan poem/video? Or has the government decided that it's not that time of the year, especially with an upcoming visit to Japan where it's rumoured that Hu's not going to talk about the Rape of Nanjing, where thousands of Chinese fled to foreigners who had stole their land for protection.

additionally, for people who believe in the separation of church and state to actively support the reinstation of a theocratic regime seems a little hypocritical, for people who believe in self-determination and democracy to support fuedal monarchy and serfdom is also hypocritical.quote>

Self determination means the ability to determine for yourself wether you'd like some Chinese to rule your country in a totaliarian manner, or to let your own people rule it as a feudal monarchy. That being said, it doesn't necessarily mean that Tibet 2008 would resemble Tibet 1950. Remember, Chinese rule 2008 is far from Chinese rule 1950. There is no need being a hypocrite.

Originally posted by: plus01

But taking a step further instead of moving on, the next question should have been: why are those perceptions there in the first place?  What drove the author to make the video in the first place?  Maybe finding counter-evidence (that is not as bias as this video's imagery) to your own references would have been a better course of action.  Don’t stop once it agrees to a pre-existing viewpoint, but dig deeper.  If you found none after rigorous resear

[ephorex_77 0]

Originally posted by: krbe

Originally posted by: ephorex_77[Another rant]quote>

Well, it is you who extrapolates. quote>

Was just about to sleep (11:39pm here in Melbourne), when I noticed this post. Just for the record, my post was incomplete when you commented on it; I hit the post button accidentally, hence the "EDITED BY" message in my post above this. 

Now, I'm not too miffed about my post being called a rant, but what I am concerned about is the way in which you dismiss it. In fact, you've done nothing more than say "Well, it is you who extrapolates", which I believe is what you also said in reply to another "pro-China" poster some time back. I don't believe I've done any "extrapolating". 

Perhaps you can be a little more helpful and point out specific points in which I've committed this clear and obvious sin of "extrapolating", instead of replying to an entire post with just six words and two punctuation maks?

Or should I "extrapolate" from your abrupt reply and conclude that you have nothing worthwhile to say in your defence?

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: ephorex_77 China's apparently inequitable distribution of territories between the western invaders and domestic Chinese warlords.quote>

This is one of them. Are comments like these any more worth of an answer? I haven't wrote what you wrote above; hence you extrapolated. It, along with sarcasm, doesn't become you.

[raja_indy14 8]

Self determination means the ability to determine for yourself wether you'd like some Chinese to rule your country in a totaliarian manner, or to let your own people rule it as a feudal monarchy.quote>

i personally don't believe a nation can be 'self-determinist' when ruled by dictatorship or monarchy - people do not choose or determine these things.  the 'liberation' of iraq from saddam is a violation of self-determination.  actually, forcing democracy down the throats of the worlds peoples is violating their right of self-determination to be ruled by tyrants.

Is analyzing the poem "missing the point"? If it is, how do you know that your perception of it is right?quote>

you've explicitely state you're analyzing the video not the poem.  i personally think that the poem taken by itself is more relevant than the video, since it's much more likely that it came first and the video was a later addition (perhaps not even by the author of the poem).  analyzing a poem is not so much about being "right" as being capable of understanding the underlying meanings and themes, it's not meant to be judged as accurate or unalloyed truth in the manner of an essay, and requires a different form of analysis besides just fact-checking.

when i read the poem - without the video - it seems that the poem is targeting those that judge on the world stage, and those that have, historically, been imperialistic aggressors.  these happen to be primarily western, although the japanese are also heavily involved as well.  would it make sense for them to target africa, say, which has neither engaged in imperialistic aggression in china, nor sits upon a moral high horse dictating from on high how the world should be run?  it would be, quite simply, rediculous.  the poem targets precisely the peoples who behaved, and continue to behave, in the described manner towards china - as these have mostly been westerners that is, of course, who the poem is primarily focused on.

the use of "we" and "you" makes perfect sense, imo.  china and the chinese are percieving attacks on them - "we" - from outside - "you" - (primarily, but not just, westerners).  certainly an aura of misunderstanding - both cultural and political - seems to surround many of china's relations with the rest of the world, and primarily the west, dating back to the mid-19th century.

EDIT - an impasse could be reached, wherein neither side will deign to respond to comments "not worthy of consideration"...

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: raja_indy14

an interesting version of self-determination, i personally don't believe a nation can be 'self-determinist' when ruled by dictatorship or monarchy - people do not choose or determine these things.  by the same token, occupying germany and overthrowing the nazi's violated germany's right to determine their own leadership, and the 'liberation' of iraq from saddam is another violation of self-determination.  actually, forcing democracy down the throats of the worlds peoples is violating their right of self-determination to be ruled by tyrants.quote>

The Romans elected their tyrants in times of war for periods of six months. While it is true that the Germans voted the Nazis in, war did not erupt before Poland was invaded and it did not become hot before they rolled in over France. The nazis would probably have stayed in Germany if it hadn't been for the desire for the rest of Europe and Russia. Saddam Hussein, on the other hand, assumed leadership, the people didn't give it to him.

Also, your last sentence seems a bit out of touch with the latter half of your first.

Is analyzing the poem "missing the point"? If it is, how do you know that your perception of it is right?quote>

you've explicitely state you're analyzing the video not the poem.  i personally think that the poem taken by itself is more relevant than the video, since it's much more likely that it came first and the video was a later addition (perhaps not even by the author of the poem).  analyzing a poem is not so much about being "right" as being capable of understanding the underlying meanings and themes, it's not meant to be judged as accurate or unalloyed truth in the manner of an essay, and requires a different form of analysis besides just fact-checking.quote>

You're of course right, however, I would rather say the "poem as used in the video". While the poetry genre in itself consists of much ambiguity, adding images doesn't relive of one bit of that.

the use of "we" and "you" makes perfect sense, imo.  china and the chinese are percieving attacks on them - "we" - from outside - "you" - (primarily, but not just, westerners).  certainly an aura of misunderstanding - both cultural and political - seems to surround many of china's relations with the rest of the world, and primarily the west, dating back to the mid-19th century.quote>

 

Maybe perfect sense for you, but the use of "you" as pointing to two different "you's", and especially doing it at the same time without distinguishing is not good, as the video, but not the poem, makes perfectly clear.

[Easy Bakes 253]

This months National Geographic is about China. The whole issue.

[patriots_1228 51]

Originally posted by: raja_indy14 jesus, there's no pleasing some people...

edit - btw, just noticed this:

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>

wow.  clearly the Chinese are proud of hosting the olympics because they have nothing else to be proud of.  or let me guess, even though the Olympics are an international event - meant to symbolize global unity - only Europeans have any right to be proud of it because it's one of their inventions?  what absolute rubbish; and the antithesis of what the olympics should be about.  any nation that hosts the olympics should be rightly proud to do so, or they shouldn't be hosting them.

on a similar vein, i wonder if ,when 2010 comes around, the Olympic torch relay will be marred by protests over the human rights record of Canada?  almost certainly not, i imagine, the native population isn't nearly so PR savvy as the dalai lama and the tibetan government-in-exile.  it's a bit of a national embarrassment, but luckily - for us -  i doubt anyone will even notice.quote>

 

Well, canadians were a hell of alot nicer to the natives than the americans were. Also, that happened in the 1800s. In no way does the canadian government support the opression or mistreatment of canadian native americans these days. Therefore, what is there to protest? History? However, china is still support the oppression, as i guess it will be called (although personally, I don't really think tibet is as opressed as we claim), of tibet. It is still allowing darfur to happen.

Would you even talk to someone who would allow this to happen without a word?

This isn't about sinophobia. Its about humanity.

[Micah 16]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes This months National Geographic is about China. The whole issue.

quote>

 

Yeah. I read the whole article. It was actually quite depressing. China's middle class is pretty interesting to read, but the amount of people suffering all kinds of problems is staggering.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

This months National Geographic is about China. The whole issue.

quote>

I don't know how much of it is online but it starts here.

[raja_indy14 8]

Maybe perfect sense for you, but the use of "you" as pointing to two different "you's", and especially doing it at the same time without distinguishing is not good, as the video, but not the poem, makes perfectly clear.quote>

"you" means the rest of the world in general, it doesn't have to, for the purposes of the poem, distinguish between a japanese "you" and a european "you" - any state that is percieved as attacking china is "you".  why can't the japanese and the europeans be counted as "you"?  there could in fact be a few "yous": british, french, germans, russians, japanese, americans.

The Romans elected their tyrants in times of war for periods of six months. While it is true that the Germans voted the Nazis in, war did not erupt before Poland was invaded and it did not become hot before they rolled in over France. The nazis would probably have stayed in Germany if it hadn't been for the desire for the rest of Europe and Russia. Saddam Hussein, on the other hand, assumed leadership, the people didn't give it to him.quote>

hmmm, well i got rid of the nazi reference, so that's a bit irrelevant now - and your comment is too ambiguous to be fully understood.  the rest of it was taking a view of self-determination that you had expressed and applying it logically to other situations to, perhaps, show how absurd it was.  a tyrannic theocracy in tibet is actively supported by some westerners - though they likely don't realize it - which seems to be the antithesis of democracy, freedom, and self-determination.

@ patriot - effective imagery, unfortunately it's a little lost on me.  one could pull up thousands of images of atrocities carried out by all the peoples of the world, sadly human life often takes second place to political and economic considerations.  darfur is not a special case in that regard - it's important because it involves the growing economic reach of China and oil supplies.  if Sudan had no oil, i wonder whether it would garner much more attention and intervention than another African genocide.

i could just as easily post a picture of what happened in Rwanda, which was allowed to happen with virtually no intervention - even when the commander on the spot warned of the impending disaster.  would you even talk to the people of the countries who had allowed such a thing to happen virtually without a word?

i could post images of the carnage in iraq, abu ghraib, the vietnam war, my lae, would you talk to people that had allowed such things to happen?

words aren't as effective, in this case, as images, but you get the idea.

as for the situation of the native americans in Canada, i wasn't referring to the 19th century, i was referring to the situation on reserves at the present time and the horrors of the Residential school system which was only finally shut down in the 1990's.  the rest of the country is largely indifferent, but in most western countries such conditions would not be tolerated for ethnic minority groups.  perhaps some of it is self-inflicted, but there is a history of gross mismanagement by Indian Affairs, which continues to throw vast amounts of money at the problem but is, sadly, pretty much ineffective - and no one cares because native americans are stil percieved as second-class citizens.  the native population is largely isolated - economically and culturally - from the rest of society.

the residential school system violated the UN conventions on genocide, but very few people know anything about it.  conditions on reserves are appalling, medical services are virtually non-existent, the education system rudimentary at best, power supplies are erratic, water supplies are contaminated, drug and alcohol abuse

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: raja_indy14]

"you" means the rest of the world in general, it doesn't have to, for the purposes of the poem, distinguish between a japanese "you" and a european "you" - any state that is percieved as attacking china is "you".  why can't the japanese and the europeans be counted as "you"?  there could in fact be a few "yous": british, french, germans, russians, japanese, americans.quote>

The correct term would be they. They would also be correct as we're talking about history. The Chinese should understand, as they cherish their current state as the successor to the Republic, which was the successor to the Empire. Indeed, why should one look upon France and Britain with our 1880's glasses, but take them off when looking at China?

[About Canada]quote>

You know others are having it worse, so it's not that bad. Anyways, who has the moral to be speaking about Canada?

[raja_indy14 8]

The correct term would be they. They would also be correct as we're talking about history. The Chinese should understand, as they cherish their current state as the successor to the Republic, which was the successor to the Empire. Indeed, why should one look upon France and Britain with our 1880's glasses, but take them off when looking at China?quote>

It's called poetic licence, the "correct" terminology does not have to be used, it does not have to be impartial or from a removed perspective. one might think you had never read a poem before. and the poem does not only describe events in the 19th century, it's scope reaches to the present day - the use of "you" targets all of those that have behaved in the manner described in the poem. To some extent the poem is an expression of China's traditional xenophobia, the "we" and "you", "us" and "them" (meaning the rest of the world) sentiment is quite pronounced; the anti-Chinese protests will serve merely to strengthen their xenophobic tendencies, contributing to further misunderstandings and distrust on both sides which could have serious consequences in the not to distant future.

You know others are having it worse, so it's not that bad.quote>

Suddenly human suffering is relative? A country carried out what would be described by the UN as genocide and it's "not that bad"?? Why shouldn't the Olympics be politicized to target our human rights abuses as they've been politicized to target China's, is it only their Olympics that should be marred in such a fashion???

Anyways, who has the moral to be speaking about Canada? quote>

That doesn't seem to matter. If the country that supplied Saddam with chemical weapons to gas the Kurds and Iranians can turn around and criticize a country for supporting Darfur, "moral credentials" need not apply. Hasn't the whole opposing argument been that it doesn't matter what a state or people may have done in the past it can morally challenge any state that violates human rights?

I certainly hope in two years time you are supporting anti-Canada protesters.

(don't get me wrong, I love my country, that doesn't mean I'm proud of everything it does/has done)

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: raja_indy14 [

It's called poetic licence, the "correct" terminology does not have to be used, it does not have to be impartial or from a removed perspective. one might think you had never read a poem before. and the poem does not only describe events in the 19th century, it's scope reaches to the present day - the use of "you" targets all of those that have behaved in the manner described in the poem. To some extent the poem is an expression of China's traditional xenophobia, the "we" and "you", "us" and "them" (meaning the rest of the world) sentiment is quite pronounced; the anti-Chinese protests will serve merely to strengthen their xenophobic tendencies, contributing to further misunderstandings and distrust on both sides which could have serious consequences in the not to distant future.quote>

No matter which licenses you got, it's common courtesy to know who you adresses, and make it possible for them to know that they are indeed being adressed.

You know others are having it worse, so it's not that bad.quote>

Suddenly human suffering is relative?quote>

Suddenly human suffering is absolute?

I certainly hope in two years time you are supporting anti-Canada protesters.quote>

Indeed I will. They will erupt as soon as the Canadian crackdown on these natives begin. And while the demonstrations fills the air, we also get a chance to reflect over the way the Canadians use the death penalty which may only be reviewed in the Supreme Court as a final "check" that the desk job was done properly. Europeans, Americans and Chinese alike can take turns at mocking the government controlled Canadian press. I'm sure that you've learnt about the Canadian version of the Rape of Nanjing, where the government curriculum has inflated the numbers of dead in just a ridiculous manner. I'll comment on that too. I'll be sure to remind everyone of all those corrupt officials running the country, about the widespread expropriation of farmland, about thightening of visa requirements while they stay all the same, too. And let us not forget about the widespread censorship. I'm sure there is more revolting aspects of Canadian society, but I cannot remember them now. When I see angry Canadians calling for boycott of some foreign chain and the government not throwing people in prison for that, I'll sure I'll be able to come up with some more.

But until then, the authoritharian Ottawa regime may kill off even more of its people. Most probably, I'm going to fall for that cheap "We need to protect our country against violence! Canada is unique! Etc., etc." rethoric.

(don't get me wrong, I love my country, that doesn't mean I'm proud of everything it does/has done)quote>

I do not doubt that you're going to say "no" when the dark side wants to rent you and your friends to counter-demonstrations.

[raja_indy14 8]

No matter which licenses you got, it's common courtesy to know who you adresses, and make it possible for them to know that they are indeed being adressed.quote>

Not in a bloody poem, things can be inferred and not necessarily stated explicitly.

Suddenly human suffering is absolute?quote>

I'm not the one who's been against relativism all this time.

As for what you say about Canada, you're right, it's not nearly as bad as what China does. But you're missing the point; in 2010 when Canada is scrutinized in the same way that China is now there should be attention drawn to our record of genocide and the ongoing human rights abuses that exist within the country. People living in desperate poverty in absolutely primitive and appalling conditions in one of the wealthiest countries in the world is something that should be rectified, where racism directed at the native population is exceedingly common. Surely people will make a big stink about the Seal Hunt? We've been criticized for that often enough (likely more than our treatment of the native population, which is telling...). Should the Olympics have been politicized to such a degree, or is it only China that will be target in such a manner?

I do not doubt that you're going to say "no" when the dark side wants to rent you and your friends to counter-demonstrations. quote>

I'd join wholeheartedly! I detest rallies in general, so I'd gladly join a counter-demonstration!!

[patriots_1228 51]

raja_indy: Well, i give you credit for not being fooled by gruesome pictures. But what about fluffy animals, can they persuade you lmfao?

In other news, the torch has reached the top of the world:

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=3386121

[jj88 23]

I came on this forum for an interesting discussion but that isn't whats here. Your constant arguing is pathetic. You can't change the past. But, you can change the future

[belfastuniguy 18]

I came on this forum for an interesting discussion but that isn't whats here. Your constant arguing is pathetic. You can't change the past. But, you can change the futurequote>

Actually I tend to find various opinions and views of both history and current events rather interesting. Don't think anyone said we can change the past and several also stated we can start making changes and moving toward new polices that will change the future in certain specific cases.

I fail to see the point of that reply, and instead was probably aimed at getting an argumentative reaction from some people. Which I hope does not happen.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: jj88

Your constant arguing is pathetic. quote>

Another reminder:  the rule in this forum is Discuss the Issues, not Each Other.

[thesimbug 0]

"More than 100 heads of state, heads of government and sovereigns attended the opening ceremony. The number of heads of state who attended the opening ceremony was by far the largest in Olympic history." (2008 Summer Olympics Opening Ceremony, Wikipedia)

Merkel must be lonely in Europe, huh?

Another news i read from the newspaper, if im not mistaken, 3 gunned attacks are already staged by East Turkestan Uyghurs since the opening of the Olympics. Kashgar, Kuqa, and one place else. More than 10 Chinese policemen and civilians killed.

The question is: how far will terror work without sovereignty legality?

The effectively self-ruling South Ossetia and Abkhazia are even not recognized by their own big big boss, Russia.

And China does its work well in lobbying.

The US endorses East Turkestan Independence Movement (ETIM) inclusion to the UN's terrorist organizations list not long after 9/11 attack in exchange for China's cooperation in War on Terror, for guarding its western borders facing Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Kashmir.

Xinjiang is the Middle Kingdom's.

[hamsterTK 93]

putting what they are doing in Tibet aside and the Russia-Georgia situation sometimes I think independence movements can get as dirty as imperialistic movements.

What's the motivation? Maybe you and all your "true countrymen" practice religion "A" and have certain customs and now feel like you must force this on everyone else at the point of a gun. How is that better than some imperialistic settler doing the same thing?

Anyways, so back to China, I figure what they should really do is create some kind of "China Zone" that encompasses mostly independent Tibet, Taiwan, Turkestan, etc. Borders and trade would be open and military forces would cooperate together, while people and cultures could govern themselves. Eventually this sphere could also go into central asia, squeezing bad guys like Russia and Iran

I think this would be great, between an allied US/Europe and a united Asia we'd have a huge hold surrounding most of the worlds troubled areas. I think the future could be very peaceful times.