http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/19202.page Public Action http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1139618 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1139618 GMT
Without question, the US government has some very high crimes that it has had to answer for and probably will continue to answer for (currently the largest elephant in the room obviously being our war in Iraq). Everything from our history with native Americans to the civil rights movement to aspects of our current foreign policy are sources of national embarrassment and shame that our country has to face up to. The big difference then between the wrongs committed by either country is that in the US, there is always an effort made to try and face those wrongs and accept them as facts of our history. When the police beat up rodney king, they didn't have the option of suppressing the video tape (though I'm sure they'd have liked to). The US public was put face to face with the reality of the incident and the issue had to be confronted. Certainly not all crimes or misdeeds of those who wield power in the US are exposed, I'm sure; but the point that I'm making is that if the Chinese police or army or some other state run security force beat a Chinese citizen nearly to death, it'd likely never be reported. If it was, it'd more likely be framed in a light that justified the action taken (this is one reason why westerners are skeptical about some of the reports that came out of the Tibet riots).

It's unlikely that everyone in china would suddenly change their minds about something like Tibet if there was suddenly no more state-run censorship, but it would certainly change the argument. If dissent wasn't a crime, we'd all likely be having a much different discussion right now (or rant in some cases). Just as it's been said by others in this thread: both governments are supported by the vast majority of their citizens. I would argue, however, that the system that can express self-criticism, no matter how painful it might be, will ultimately be the healthier of the two.]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1131612 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1131612 GMT in some respects and to certain extent Tibet issue does share some simiarities with the American Indian problem. China was in fact doing something along the lines of what the us had done to the Indians, perhaps in a more subtle way? ]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1122413 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1122413 GMT
Having different notions about Free Tibet issue does not necessarily mean being "insensitive" to the Tibetan people's suffering. many in the US have different takes on the Iraq war. i don't think that even the most conservatives would agree that they are insensitive to the victimized people there. A issue like Free Tibet is not a simple black and white one as many of the troubled issues in the world today and merely a moral stance is a place to start with but not a solution. ]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1122211 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1122211 GMT
But the the bigger answer is: this discussion is not about Hawaiian people to start with!! One of your comrades brought that up. I don't see Hawaiians getting tortured and killed. This is about Tibet and China. AND China has been trying to force Tibetans to be part of China for HUNDREDS of years and it still has not worked. So a very bad job by China then.

People like you who are making fun of this situation & Tibetan people by talking about building Casinos and so forth are showing how insensitive some Chinese are towards miseries faced by Tibetans. All they want is freedom and they should have the right to vote.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1116211 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1116211 GMT
Wow! How convenient? The “pure blood” Hawaiians in Hawaii is now only less than 10% in their own land, and after more than 100 years of annexation of Hawaii and all the things done to the young Hawaiians, are you calling for Hawaiians to vote for their independence?

If the US government allow the Southerners to vote in 1861 to secede, then there will be no Civil War. Now after 150 years of “occupation” by the Yankees, the Southern States are part of the big family and probably very happy about it. Congratulations! Good job!

Sure, China can allow Tibetans to vote, but should just follow the brilliant examples of the good old USA mentioned above, after another 100 years, Tibetans can vote freely at that time!

Oh, by the way, China should encourage Tibetans to open Casinos in the plateau, look at how successful the Native American Casinos on their “Reservations”!
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1111227 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1111227 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1109233 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1109233 GMT
here is what you are completely wrong: the Chinese taking streets in past month was to show their supports to Olympics which weill be hosted by their country and protesting against western media's distortion of facts in Lahsa riots. why are you so angerily against something which was not there in the first place? ]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1122226 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1122226 GMT
If you want to side with anti freedom and oppression forces then that is the choice you have made. If you want to turn a blind eye to china's horrible environmental and labor practices, china's support of terrible governments such as Burma and north korea and then continue singing the motherland songs again that would be your choice. But at the end with this attitude and the path this planet is on right now no one is winning.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1107217 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1107217 GMT
Written by Tang Buxi - May 5th, 2008
http://blog.speak4china.com/?p=23

Over the past 4 weeks, we’ve seen the Chinese community world-wide rise up in protest. In the face of widespread criticism from the West, various segments of the community (including recently arrived students, fourth-generation Chinese immigrants, and even some “old generals” from the 1989 Tiananmen protests) have come together to fiercely and proudly reassert our Chinese identity. It was no small step; for the vast majority of us, this represented the first time we’ve ever waved the Chinese national flag, or participated in a political ‘movement’ of any kind.

I think it’s safe to assume that none of the critics of China wanted (or expected) this reaction from the Chinese public at large. So, what happened? Where did they miscalculate?


A common refrain heard recently in the Western media-space goes like this:

Don’t they understand that we’re not criticizing the Chinese people? Our goal is to criticize Chinese government policy. Why haven’t they learned to distinguish between the Chinese people and the Chinese government?

My response to this is simple: the vast majority of Chinese have no difficulty distingushing between ourselves and our government. Many of the online Chinese forums are filled with debates about our governments’ policies, and the critics often out-number those who support specific government policies. Many of us are not shy about discussing our governments’ failing with anyone ready to listen.

However, even though many of us are critical of our government, all of us love our country with a passion. If you looked closely, you would’ve seen that those of us marching in Toronto, Washington DC, and Canberra were waving our five-star national flag. If you listened carefully, you would’ve heard us singing our national anthem, “Great China” (大中国), “Ode to the Motherland” (歌唱祖国), and “My Chinese Heart” (我的中国心). As you walked the streets of San Francisco or Seoul, the loudest chants you heard would have been “Go China!” (中国，加油!).

All of these are symbols of the Chinese nation, rather than symbols of the Communist Party. None of us recited Communist Party slogans (except perhaps as a sort of tongue-in-cheek/campy humor), none of us carried the Hammer and Sickle flag, none of us sang “If there is no Communist Party, there is no New China” (没有共产党就没有新中国). In other times, there would have been loud and angry political debates between the Chinese who marched on the streets; many of us hold opposing opinions on government policies in the People’s Republic of China. But for this one moment, for this one instant, we were united by love of our country. Our country is China. Our country isn’t defined by the current government, nor is it even necessarily defined by the People’s Republic of China. (For example… many of us enthusastically cheer the sight, at the 3:00 mark in this video, of these torch supporters from Taiwan carrying the Republic of China flag.)

Some Western critics have a difficult time accepting this explanation. When presented with evidence that the Chinese in China were increasingly angered by these activist campaigns (mostly online postings), they pointed to Chinese government controls on free speech, on political dissent, on internet access… the Chinese in China were brain-washed, and could hardly hope to know better. And when hundreds of thousands of overseas Chinese (with full access to the wonders of the free media) came out in opposition to their campaign, this theory was extended further: the indoctrination we all received in our youths must be far more severe than originally predicted, and we were simply ill-equipped to handle “fair” Western criticism. To all of these critics, I have only one thing to say: 6/4/89. It’s a date now 19 years in the past, but many of us (both inside and outside of China) remember its lesson well. I, for one, remember these same indoctrinated, brain-washed overseas Chinese stepping out in overwhelming opposition to our government’s actions in violently suppressing the riots in Tiananmen!

So, this still leaves us with the original question. Why have the protesters and activists calling for pressure failed so miserably on this account? Rather than dividing the government and her people, how have they managed to push massive numbers of Chinese firmly back into the Communist Party’s corner?

In short, it is the activists themselves who’re suffering from severe myopia; it is these activists and their supporters in the West apparently lack the ability to distinguish between the Chinese people and their government. I see two key issues as being the primary driving factor behind Chinese outrage: territorial integrity, and international respect in the form of the Olympics. Due to a combination of ignorance and wishful thinking, they’ve identified these two issues as being “government” objectives, without recognizing their significance to the masses at large.

These are both issues I’ll explore in detail in upcoming articles.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1101646 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1101646 GMT
From your first comments I don't really think you are a middle of the road person. That's a myth to start with, everybody who knows anything about a subject leans one way or another. In this case you are siding with the anti free tibet supporters here. Even if you really think you are middle of the road it does not matter because you need to pick a side on this issue and again the issue is not the press coverage here. Forget the press and think about real issue. Do some research and then get in back into this if you want. Also stop dividing the world into this westerners vs. easterners. I have many friends from everywhere and I understand them not because of where they are from but because of how they think.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1107216 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1107216 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1105236 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1105236 GMT Very logical...the so called "violent element to the protest (a tiny one as it may be)" made them look bad but the "violent element"(not so tiny) nature of the chinese regime does not make them look bad to you at all?!!! Wooow

Again a very biased person speaking on the chinese behalf. ]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1102813 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1102813 GMT
When it comes to protests of the Olympic torch, I understand and respect the right of protesters to express their views, however, the violent element to the protests (a tiny one as it may be) made them look very bad in my eyes. Trying to take the Olympic flame out of the arms of a wheelchair-bound Chinese athlete? Come on!

Now about boycotting the opening ceremony of the Olympic games. I'll only say this, that I was a strong Clinton supporter until she suggested that Bush boycott the opening ceremony. I thought she understood the need for diplomacy and reconciliation, but comments such as these showed me that all those who accuse her of being disingenous and pandering to the masses are right. Mrs. Clinton, you lost me.]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1100412 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1100412 GMT Tibet and China have been at war since the 800’s. Tibet colluded with the Mongols in a priest-patron relationship and where in that relationship of mutual respect and dual responsibility when the Tibet/Mongol alliance invaded and subjugated large parts of China and Asia.
China was thus subjected to illegal rule by the Tibet/Mongol CHO-YON agreement. The priest party of the CHO-YON provided moral legitimacy to the mongols to rule over China amongst others.
After the fall of the mongols, the Dalai Lama established another CHO-YON relationship with the Manchu Dynasty which again conquested China and subjected it to illegal rule. When the Manchu Dynasty collapsed, Tibet suddenly declared itself independant of a ruling regime which it had instigated to conquer China. By conquering China with it’s CHO-YON agreement and joint responsibility arrangement, Tibet made itself a part of China - hence the formal decision to declare independance when it’s ally and hence it’s influence , collapsed.
Britian it appears invaded Tibet twice before the Chinese, and as the Chinese lost the opium wars they where forced by the dominant british army to sign a document waiving chinese sovereignity over Tibet — why oh why , would the British government recognize Chinese Sovereignity over tibet?
You will find that the US and british government have been trying to split the great land of China for decades. George Bush and the CIA invested thousands of Dollars with the University of hawai to examine whether ethnic tensions in china would result in a split of the country. Dissapointed with the results the US resorted to military training and support for rebels in these areas, mongolia, tibet, Xianjing, and the Coastal areas of China leading to a the 1959 Tibet rebellion.
The US announced in 1949 that is was ready to accept Tibet as an independant state. neither the US or Britian viewed it as such prior to this, and did everything in their power to get Tibet to Split from China.
The full history is tedious to be sure….but once again, after meetings between the Dalai Lama and the USA, tension breaks out in Tibet.
These are the snippets I have, more insight would be welcomed. In 1951 The Chinese army merely reclaimed it’s territories and did not invade anything. Hong Kong, Taiwan, Tibet and the tensions surrounding these are a product of British and US imperialism, and the meddling thereof in nations affairs for commercial and military gain.
During the repression of China, the issue lay dormant — As china re-emerges as a regional power the USA, and Britian again see fit to stoke the fires of this division…preferring a much smaller and less influential China.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1096012 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1096012 GMT April 28, 2008 by marranci

http://mar...mment-1039
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1094414 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1094414 GMT everyday as one of the source I get some 'western voice' since then, it helps me to understand how westerner see the same things through different prespecitive, it is nothing right and wrong that we all listen or 'obey' what our ‘beatiful government’ told us, lots of people are not well informed both westerner and eastener that the biased will be worse and worse.
We all need efficient communication, just like CCP is doing with Dalai's representative, but hopefully that is 'efficient'.]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1093816 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1093816 GMT http://www...outus.html TYC's official website.
TYC's first aim and objective is:
To dedicate oneself to the task of serving one’s country and people under the guidance of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, the Spiritual and Temporal Ruler of Tibet.
In another word, TYC's terrorist and racist conduct in Lhasa bloody riots can be conceived as "under guidance of His Holiness". I find this is not very circumstantial, and quite the opposite. If you don't know anything about TYC, I question your professionalism as a journalist; if you know it, I question your motives and authenticity of your reports. And since you can't even speak Chinese and given above context, I question your interviews with "Chinese" maybe are fake ones.]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091824 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091824 GMT
Just one example of your inaccuracies: when people got beaten and busted during the Rodney king riots, I was there and it was bad but people did not get tortured and disappeared like it happens in tibet (and china) and we can go on and on and I can wipe out just about every one of your lines there but no time for that.

Invest in a good therapist too to get all this anger out of you, it's worth it. The world is not as bad as you paint it to be. How about what the other guy was proposing and letting tibetans vote for themselves? Let me give you a taste of your own medicine and borrow a line from your tune:

When we asked you to let tibetan people vote for themselves, You did what?!!!
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091823 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091823 GMT When we embrace Capitalism, you berated us for mercantilism .
When we have a billion people, you said we were destroying the planet.
When we tried limiting our numbers, you said we abused human rights.
When confederates wanted secession, you waged Civil war.
When slave owners want to rule Tibet again, you pile on money and adulation.
When we were poor, you treated us as dogs.
When we loan you cash, you blame us for your national debts.
When we make your products, you call us Polluters.
When we sell you goods, you blame us for global warming.
When we buy oil, you call it exploitation and genocide.
When you go to war for oil, you call it liberation.
When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you demanded rules of law.
When we uphold law and order against violence, you call it bloody repression.
When we were silent, you said you wanted us to have free speech.
When we are silent no more, you say we are brainwashed and angry mob.
When we stay out of spotlight, you said we are selfish.
When we express our views, you said it is organized by embassies.
When we support our country, you say it is dangerous nationalism.
When you love your country, you said you are proudly patriotic.
When Tibetans killed and burned in Lhaha, you call it peaceful demonstration.
When blacks rioted for Rodney King beating, you sent in Federal troops and National guard.
When flame attendants ran along, you call them thugs.
When the relays were violently interrupted and the handicapped attacked, you call them freedom fighters..
Enough is Enough, Enough Hypocrisy , Enough Cryptic Racial Superiority. ]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1088214 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1088214 GMT
Makes sense, but frankly, as a Westerner, I can't see US ever letting go of Hawaii or any other state. After all we've visited that question before and all know how that ended despite the fact that the Southern states "strongly" wanted to succeed.

But all this evoking of history just might be beside the point anyway...]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1100639 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1100639 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1092413 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1092413 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1087265 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1087265 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1120014 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1120014 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1101641 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1101641 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1098220 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1098220 GMT
Why didn't the American government give the right to Texans to vote for independence at the time of that crisis? Because Texas belongs to the united state of america! if a voting option is in order, let's assume, the issue of independent Texas should be voted by all US citizens not merely by the Texans.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091416 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091416 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1087246 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1087246 GMT
in a funny way, I suppose it was because all the "criticizing" has been done or even overly done by your guys in the West; the Chinese who know their government to be of many things felt to be responsible to speak up and clarify certain things now. The western media is making a big deal of Chinese reaction to its biased report in recent months and calling it "demonizing," yet conveniently unaware that they have bashed and demonized China for decades.

By the way how do you know the Chinese who commented here and else where have not criticized their government on other issues or have not done things to let the voice of the downtrodden heard in China? This is a discussion forum on specific topic, not a political show where you are expected to present and be judged by a comprehensive opinions of China and its government and whatever you have done in action.

No one Chinese person in his or her clear mind would think their government is ideal and they know that China is still a developing country and crisis ridden. Without the help from China bashing industry in the West they would have never been so outspoken defending China as the world is witnessing now. My respect is due to whose who can appreciate complexity and contradictions that a nation like China has to deal with often unfortunately in harsh ways and to those ordinary Chinese who work either inside or outside the system everyday often under difficult situations to make China a more democratic country.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091614 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1091614 GMT
I said "Their unified reasoning seems to be improved life conditions and some unwritten contract between the chinese government and its people. Tibetan's don't seem to want to be part of that contract because they want to preserve their own way of life. Even now there is no freedom of speech or information in china but I think if the economy goes south in china, the government will show its true face again so chinese be aware and don't forget the past so quickly."

The statements here are connected so you should not break them into two different arguments. Meaning I am not arguing against the government mandate or chinese giving a chance to their government. “improved life condition” for chinese people is NO reason for chinese to expect TIBETANS to want to be a part of the chinese plan. You are saying tibetans life has improved a lot since the slavery times of 1959. I say it has not improved enough. You are asking me which tibetans am I referring to the 20000 or the 6 mil? My answer is how do you know how the 6 million feel, have YOU talked to every single one of them? Has china allowed them to vote to determine their own faith? Since China does not allow free voting by tibetan people then we need to go by the samples (protests inside and outside and talking to family members of the tibetans) available to us and every indication shows they want to live their lives free of china. So let’s give them a fair chance to voice their desire and see the outcome. Are you Chinese people in this forum against giving the tibetans a chance to vote to determine their own faith? Let’s talk about that.

Also contrary to what you mentioned I have not seen any chinese criticizing the government on anything lately. When you read this and some other fotums it looks like china has the best government in the world!!! You conveniently did not respond to the fact that china does not allow any one to go to tibet and freely report on the condition and the lack of freedom of speech in china. Chinese security force is still alive and kicking and controls many aspects of its citizens' lives. They are just not as visible as the old super communist days.

I'll throw one more thing in the hat for you. The type of chinese people who are commenting here are the educated ones. Even a so called out of touch person like myself knows there are hundreds of millions of people in china that live in poverty under terrible conditions with no voice in a forum like this or any say in the chinese political process. These are the chinese peasants that are being used to fuel the economic rise of china and are paying the price for it. I have not seen many chinese showing sympathy for their country man/women who are slaving away in sweatshops or factories which don't follow humane environmental and labor practices. Chinese desire to want to prove they are not “weak men of Asia,” (which they certainly are not) does not give them the right to close their eyes to all of these facts because at the end of the day as glorified as it seems the Olympics are just games.

By the way I am one of those people who does not pay attention to the media here. I knew the Iraq war was wrong before it started and I even knew Bush is going to start wars the day he became president so I call it like I see it.

]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1087812 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1087812 GMT
While the Chinese as well as the western researchers have all those numbers to show that the majority of Tibetans have gone a long way to betterment from the days of slavery since 1959, how do you know that their way of life has not been preserved? And which Tibetans are you referring to? the 20000 or the six millions? As harshly critical of Chinese government on human rights issues, even the Dalai Lama gave credit to the Chinese government for what has been done to improve Tibetan’s life, and with certain conditions, his proposal for autonomy not independence seems to want Tibetan people to have a fair share of this contract.

“As we all know now, just because most American people were in favor of invading Iraq at the time did not make that right. The difference is most American people speak up against the policies of the US where most of the Chinese people (at least in this forum) are defending their government.”

The Chinese defended their government in recent events because they felt strongly for both the Olympics and the government who represents 13 billions to try to do a good job hosting the games, which bears a profound symbolic meaning for a nation once being called “weak men of Asia,” because they felt nothing wrong for a government to crack down violent riots yet fundamentally wrong for western media to distort the facts about riots, take side with the violent action by the Free Tibet crowd interrupting the Olympic torch run-up and hurting Chinese people’s feeling.

They are not defending their government on everything. In fact many who went to street for the pro-China demonstrations have said that they are critical of government on many other issues; today the Chinese speaking out against their government on internet and in other public spheres is not the news anymore, of course with certain restrictions. Even the most vocal political dissidents, Liu Xiaopo for instance, seem to have no difficult making a living for many years now by regularly publishing articles for foreign media such as BBC (that’s probably why Liu was against boycotting Olympics).

“Their unified reasoning seems to be improved life conditions and some unwritten contract between the chinese government and its people.”

Is this “improved life condition” for one-fourth of the world’s population not substantial enough for a government to have mandate to rule and for the ordinary Chinese to have a solid reason to give their government a chance?

The American people are mostly good intentioned. But many of them are just too lazy to read and see what’s really going on in other part of world. They have such a blind faith in and rely too much and too heavily on their “objective” media. No wonder it took four years for majority Americans to see something wrong with the war on Iraq>
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1084026 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1084026 GMT http://www...-coop.html
The real US deficit with China – knowledge
As China returns as a world power, Americans should update their impressions.
By Xu Wu


Tempe, Arizona - Americans are out of touch with today's China. It's a knowledge deficit that carries more weight in the long-term bilateral relationships between China and the United States than the ballooning US trade deficit with China. And as China makes a comeback on the world stage, it's one that the US should address.

Chinese visitors to the US have shared the shock of witnessing a severe dichotomy between how much Americans seem to talk about China and yet how little they know about it. The US status as the world's superpower, coupled with its location, warrants people this type of benign negligence.

But what about those experts who have the power to impose their perceptions of China on others? All too often China experts in the US cannot even speak the language. How can they claim to understand a culture without knowing how its people communicate?

This knowledge deficit accounts directly for widespread and deep-rooted misperceptions about China.
There are three faulty, recurring talking points in the American media.

First, China is a rising power, and a rising power is dangerous. The first part of this argument is incomplete, and the latter part is misplaced. China is not only a rising power; it is a returning power. China, as a united continental power, has existed for more than 2,000 years.

As a returning player, China is composed, restrained, and mature, just like a former champion returning to the title game after a short lapse. Also, if history is any guide, Chinese-ruling regimes have not been considered aggressive or expansive; they were famous for building walls. This fact alone should call into question the comparison of China's current resurgence with Japan's and Germany's disastrous rising path before World War II.

Second, China is a Communist country, and Communism is evil. Repeatedly placed upon China by media commentators, most notably CNN's anchorman Lou Dobbs, this characterization is both simplistic and utterly misleading.

To today's China, Marxism is as foreign as liberal democracy. When you look back at China's past, no alien cultures have uprooted Chinese tradition; instead, they were either localized, or submerged. China can still be Chinese without the Communism title.

Likewise, today's ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) could easily be renamed the Chinese Confucian Party (CCP) without changing much of its ideological belief or organizational structure, or even its acronym for that matter.

Both the "ruling by virtue" policy promoted by former President Jiang Zemin and the "harmonious society" guideline proposed by current leader Hu Jintao were derived more from the Confucian doctrine than from the Marxist ideology. Singling out "Communist" as the definer confuses the reality.

Third, Tiananmen Square in 1989 is an iconic image that lingers in the minds of the Chinese. American observers' obsession with this tragic event reflects how deep their perception gap about China runs. There is no question that what happened that summer was historic. However, it was a generation ago, and sea changes have occurred since then.

Those who were born in 1989 are turning 19. What this new Chinese generation cares about is not the guy who blocked those tanks, but the Chinese Super Girl Singer and Yao Ming. America's unyielding interest in Tiananmen is out of touch. Is the Watergate scandal still the dominant issue facing the US today?

This lack of updated information about China becomes more problematic in a larger context. Chinese students are required to study English beginning in primary school. Students are exposed to both American culture and the Western way of thinking by college. For at least two decades, tens of thousands of the best and the brightest Chinese students attend American's top-tier graduate schools, channeling back the most updated perceptions and information about the US.

Although the number of American students studying in China witnessed a huge jump over the past few years, the accumulated knowledge deficits and language barriers are still immense.

This imbalance of knowledge, just like the imbalance of trade, is unsustainable. With the trade problem, Chinese leaders outlined a "win-win partner" scenario, and American policymakers have mapped out the "responsible stakeholder" blueprint. However, no strategy will be feasible if the two parties cannot understand each other well enough to weather the uncertainties ahead.

It is highly probable that the next generation of Americans will live in a world where China is the largest economic power. Are they prepared? When and how are they going to fix this current knowledge deficit with China?

• Xu Wu is an assistant professor in strategic media and public relations at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University. He is the author of "Chinese Cyber Nationalism."
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1083449 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1083449 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1076612 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1076612 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1084016 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1084016 GMT
They claim tibet is an internal matter like that gives their government the right to pressure the helpless people of tibet into chinese way of life. While all these chinese people are complaining about biased, china still has not granted access to tibet and has not held up its end of the bargain of free access to journalists. This was one the conditions China had agreed to in order to be chosen as host. There are many chinese people in this world and that's why you see so many posting in favor of china and that's exactly the point.

As we all know now, just because most american people were in favor of invading Iraq at the time did not make that right. The difference is most american people speak up against the policies of the US where most of the chinese people (at least in this forum) are defending their government. Their unified reasoning seems to be improved life conditions and some unwritten contract between the chinese government and its people. Tibetan's don't seem to want to be part of that contract because they want to preserve their own way of life. Even now there is no freedom of speech or information in china but I think if the economy goes south in china, the government will show its true face again so chinese be aware and don't forget the past so quickly.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1079819 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1079819 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1073820 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1073820 GMT
A) I agree with the lady above that moderate chinese are outraged as many of my chinese friends who I love dearly feel offended by this whole event. They feel the spot light has been unfairly taken away from all the efforts the chinese people put in the Olympics and focused on tibet which they feel is part of china and been helped by china.

B) My very few tibetan friends who I love dearly are very sad the spot light has been taking away from their quest for freedom by chinese who they perceive as aggressors and wrongly focused on western media biased and anti chinese sentiment in the world. One interesting point here, you hardly see any tibetans in this forum and many chinese which confirms the strength in numbers chinese enjoy: 6 million vs. 1.2 billion.

C) I disagree with the lady above about chinese being quite and peace loving people. I believe there are quite and peace loving people everywhere but human race as a whole is not peace loving at all. History of man proves to have wars and atrocities committed by all races and chinese are no exception to that. She compares the great chinese philosophers Confucius and Tao Zi ring to Napoleon, Hitler, and British Empire. Fair comparisons should be made with philosophers from other countries such as Aristotle or Nietzsche not military leaders, mass murderers and empires. And the next president of the US should be blamed for the Chaos in Iraq if he is a republican and that's why people associate the chinese government with deaths and events such as tianamen square massacre because they are from the same and the only party in china.

D) I find this to be a mistake by chinese people to lump sum any opposition to their view as western opposition. There is no distinction between different countries and peoples at all. Chinese right now call everybody "West". France, Germany, England, Netherlands, Italy and America are very different countries with different languages, cultures and history and to lump sum as one and call them "West" is as much insult and a racist view as chinese claim the so called west has taken toward them. It’s like referring to Genghis Khan, Khmer Rouge and the Japanese’s empire “Chinese” or china. I also meet people from middle east, south america or japan who disagree with chinese views on this subject.

E) I find the argument about “one reason for hostility toward China is coming from communist's atheist belief “very valid in certain places. People in certain european countries, middle east, south america and also in US are very religious and they simply don't like people who don't share their views.

Z) My final thought: As mentioned I believe in a world with no borders so my solution is for china to allow tibetans to govern themselves and live the way they want. It will diffuse this situation, set a great example for others and chinese will be held in very high standards by all people in the world. I can not call myself a proud human being until there is peace and justice in this world and we are far from it now. Good luck to all.

]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1072026 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1072026 GMT
I have the time to speak up. I can speak for a lot of Chinese because I know a lot of them. I'm fighting for peace and justice in the world. I'm proud of myself! You can say "Oh, Yeh, Yeh!" But you know what. I have been to both world, the east and the west. I have seen it all.

I think another reason for westerner's hostility towards China is for communist's atheist belief. A world can beautiful in THE MATRIX. However painful it can be, the Chinese are unplug from it by the communists. I still think they did me a favor. I'm glad the Christian church recognizes that the earth goes around the sun not vise versa. Chinese need time to craft their country and political system. Religious followers need time to unplug themselves from the Matrix of God, Ahllah or Buddah. There is nothing human about sending 1/3 of the boy population into temples when they are just a few-years old, brainwash them into monks and deprive them basic human needs. Have anyone thought about that? ]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1070241 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1070241 GMT
This is the kind of world the Chinese government and some of the people commenting here are talking about, just close your eyes to all the atrocities and don't say anything bad. Real world is not working out that way for China Olympics though. I bet there is going to be a lot more bad exposure to come for China before, during and after the games no matter how much covering up and spin the Chinese government and the its shameless backers who are commenting here try to put on it. The cat is out of the bag people.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1069215 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1069215 GMT http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1069218 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1069218 GMT [Interview with the renowned German best-seller author, documentary film producer and Asia specialist Frank Sieren, who's been living in China for nearly one and a half decades.]
(Freitag) The West has ceased to impress China a long time ago. April 4, 2008.
[translated by Wild Goose Journal from German into English]
Q: Is Tibet becoming a turning point for Chinas development?
A: It's not a turning point, but simply a tragedy. It seems that most
of the individuals involved have lost sight of the concerns of the
Tibetan people. We may debate about their degrees of involvement in
this disaster, but we should name them first: The government in
Beijing with its relentless, excessive policy of assimilation; then
the Dalai Lama as the head of an exile government, who time and again
tries to politicize his meetings with Western politicians, thus to
suggest latitude which doesn't really exist when it comes to the
crunch.
Q: But there are also other players...
A: If you are talking about the young rioters - they remind me rather
of their contemporaries in the burning suburbs of Paris than of
the demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989. With their senseless
violence against Chinese retailers they have created tailwind for the
hardliners in Beijing and brought the majority of the Chinese totally
against themselves. On the issue of Tibet, the position of the Chinese
leadership coincides with that of the large popular majority. We in
the West tend to sweep this fact under the carpet.
Q: How do you assess the position of the German government?
A: Chancellor Merkel, who's taken the risk of provoking the Chinese
leadership with her reception of the Dalai Lama, in order to score
political points domestically with a romantic sentiment towards Tibet
that has never existed in Tibet itself, has sent careless signals to
the Tibet movement, promising far more than she can hold. Now she's
burnt her fingers, Merkel won't be receiving the Dalai Lama again. In
this crowd of egomaniacs, we also shouldn't forget the great number of
Western journalists, blended by their own self-overestimation, with
their sometimes manipulative, agitating reports.
Q: Wasn't the rebellion in the oppressed Tibet just due?
A: The question must be, was it useful? Anyone who knows even a little
about the Chinese leadership would come to the conclusion that there's
never been the slightest chance for a rebellion to turn things to the
better. The result is shocking and it was foreseeable. Tibet's
latitude was never narrower than today, and it will stay this way for
the foreseeable time. And the threat of boycotting the Olympics
doesn't help, neither. The reformers within the leadership who propose
a more liberal handling of Tibet cannot score points; the hardliners
who claim the West is using Tibet to destabilize China see themselves
in upwind. The more wildly the West gesticulate, the narrower the
latitude for the reformers. We tend to forget that the greatest
changes in the Middle Kingdom have always come from within.
Q: When people in the West talk about China, there's always either
great euphoria or total aversion. Why such extremes?
A: Because there's an epochal change taking place. Ever since the
discovery of America by Columbus the West has dominated. Wherever
the conquerors went, they were able to force the people to play by
their rules. Now, that's no longer tenable. Nations like China are
going their own and very successful way. Many in the West are
fascinated by that dynamics, by the modernity, by how fast those
people are able to leave poverty behind them.
Q: And how is the aversion to explain?
A: At about the end of the nineties the fear came along - the worry of
having to share, the worry that our financial margins would decrease;
that resources would become more and more expensive, and our values
would loose importance; that more and more jobs would drift to China
or Asia and our social standards would no longer sustainable.
Q: Aren't those fears justified?
A: They would be if you believe because of our own natural supremacy
we don't have to do anything. We have to consider what we can still
manufacture in the West and what we no longer can; which of our values
are convincing, which not. What's new is that we can no more simply
command when it comes to the question of what we consider good and
right, instead we have to persuade and compromise. We have to
reposition our way of thinking. That's difficult and it will take a
few generations.
Q: And what if that doesn't succeed?
A: Then we will fare similarly as the nobility of the nineteenth
century. It succumbed to the deceptive belief that the uprising of the
new class were a win-win development. But their exclusive position
could not hold. In hindsight we see it as a natural development. More
and more people were able to participate in decision-making and
advance. What happened then on the level of national states are now
taking place on a global level. And because we are affected ourselves,
our imagination isn't reaching far enough. Future generations,
likewise, will see the relativization of the West as normal and
desirable.
Q: Are we doomed to fall?
A: No. My only concern is that due to our arrogance and self-assurance
we wouldn't take on this issue. It's strange - watching from afar, the
Germans don't appear to be self-doubting, but rather tend to consider
themselves the center of the world's civilization.
Q: Do the Chinese see us that way?
A: The young outgoing Chinese for instance are amazed that we have a
democracy that is thwarting itself - one that hardly allows progress
because it's stuck in the unbelievably complex process of finding
compromises.
Q: Does it mean authoritative regimes like the Chinese one are better
equipped for today's challenges?
A: It simply means that there are badly functioning democracies and
well functioning dictatorships. Even though we don't like it, China is
by far the most successful development project in the latest history
of the world, and it isn't surpassing its peak for a long time yet.
Never before has so many people wrest themselves from poverty.
Q: How do you explain this ascent?
A: To put it blatantly, there are three methods to gain power in the
world: merchandises, arms and values. Value is a jurisdiction for the
Pope or the Islam. The traditional method is the force of arms - war.
However, since the fifties of the twentieth century, that has become
less and less promising - what an incredible advancement! The Korean
War was a turning point - it ended with a stalemate. Almost all wars
raised by the Americans after that either failed or ended without a
clear victory. Slowly it shows that in an era of globalization,
cleverly built trade relationships promise more political influence
than military actions. That's what the Chinese have specialized on -
partly due to weakness, because their army is antiquated, and partly
due to cleverness, because they are traditionally good merchants. They
don't conquer, but create dependencies - containers don't come across
as threatening.
Q: How does it work?
A: They have developed two methods. One I'd like to call the
"concubine economics". Because with their combination of size, price
and logistical agility, they offer the best manufacturing conditions
worldwide for things ranging from bathing shoes to airplanes, they can
afford to pick whom they want to work with. Western businesses have to
court their Chinese partners like the concubines once did their
emperor. The concubine economics brings China the world's highest
foreign investment of more than 60 billion US dollars each year and
the highest trade surplus of nearly 300 billion. The second method is
the "Mother Courage economics". The Chinese help mismanaged
countries, like those in Africa, by building their infrastructures
cheap and fast and then running them, in order to receive long-term
resource contracts in return. If the customer is satisfied - which
usually is the case - long-term political alliances emerge across
continents, shifting the global structures in favor of the developing
countries.
Q: Do you have an example?
A: Take Nigeria. The Chinese say, you have a railway built by the
British and out of maintenance for a hundred years. We'll invest 8
billion US dollars in those tracks. We don't do it out of
selflessness, for we want to buy your minerals and we'll have to
transport them. You can decide for yourselves whether half of the
workers will be locals or only a third. If you insist on half, it will
take twice as long.
Q: You have written that the Chinese are dictators towards the inside
and democrats towards the outside. What do you mean by that?
A: What they want towards the inside is - partly out of conviction
that this were crucial for China's stability, partly for the sake of
power preservation - that democracy be introduced as late as possible.
Towards the outside, the Chinese leadership is already saying, we
represent 1.3 billion people, and we advocate a new world order in
which the original principle by the Europeans apply: "one man, one
vote". In this sense they are the advocates of the largest
co-determination movement in the human history.
Q: How can the Chinese people itself gain influence?
A: Through an unwritten contract with their leadership. If it fails to
improve people's lives, the contract will be cancelled and people will
take it to the street: 10, 20 or 100 million of them. That would be
something different than a rebellion in Tibet, which altogether is of
no importance to China. The fear of such an eruption forces the
leadership to exert itself. It's a mistake to think dictators wouldn't
be under any pressure.
Q: So, are you talking about the breaking point where the China
project could fail?
A: The big question is whether China manages to develop an economic
system that doesn't consume as much resources as it's happening with
us. The Chinese are standing in front of the challenge which even the
West was unable or unwilling to solve. And we should do whatever we
can to help, instead of pointing fingers at China, for a Chinese
environmental disaster would affect all of us. Also crucial would be
the question whether they manage to gradually allow more participation
in decision-making, because in the end that has to be there. However,
it would be certainly unwise to introduce a democracy to the Western
standard.
Q: Why?
A: Because you can only campaign on the same level as the voters, so a
whole bunch of little Maos would be running. A large portion of the
rural population is very traditional. There would speeches to make our
hair stand on end, and then I'd like to read the Western media reports
on that.
Q: In other words, many Chinese are not yet ready for a democracy?
A: The difficult task is to find the right moment for the introduction
of democracy.
Q: How do the young generations see it?
A: The young Chinese have an almost post-modern relationship to
politics, like many young people in Germany. They say, what do I care
about this circus, I'm the captain of my own life and that's that.
Interviewer: Marcus Engler
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1066841 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1066841 GMT
For anyone who wants to be more open minded on the issue besides tuning into Free Tibet’s official web site here is a list of information in paper publications or on internet.

1. A. Tom Grunfeld, book “The Making of Modern Tibet” and “A History of Tibet”. A. Tom Grunfeld is SUNY Distinguished Teaching Professor at Empire State College, of the State University of New York, and specializes in the teaching of modern East Asian history with an emphasis on China and Tibet. His wife is Tibetan and he is fluent in Tibetan language. He has been traveling and living in that region since 1966, with extensive field research with both the exile government and Tibet Autonomous Region. He and Prof. Melvyn C. Goldstein have been considered the two foremost experts on Tibet in US.

2. Melvyn C. Goldstein, book “The Snow Lion and the Dragon: China, Tibet, and the Dalai Lama”,“A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951: The Demise of the Lamaist State”, “A History of Modern Tibet, volume 2: The Calm before the Storm: 1951-1955” and “Buddhism in Contemporary Tibet: Religious Revival and Cultural Identity”. Melvyn C. Goldstein is Professor and Chairman of Department of Anthropology, and Director of the Center for Research on Tibet at Case Western Reserve University, US.

3. Michael Parenti, “Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth http://www...Tibet.html Michael Parenti is award winning writer and political scientist.
4. Barrry Sautman: TIBET: TRUTH VS. MYTH
http://fra...ID=2187567 Barry Sautman is a associate professor of sociology at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

5. Pamela Logon: Politically Incorrect http://alu.../unpc.html Pamela Logon is the founder and executive director of Kham Aid (www.khamaid.org), an NGO assists rural development, environmental and cultural conservation in Kham region (where the inhabitants are mostly Tibetan).

6. The Unusual Suspect, by Hilary Keenan, http://21stcenturysocialism.com/

7. Kenneth Conboy and James Morrison, The CIA's Secret War in Tibet (Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 2002); and William Leary, "Secret Mission to Tibet," Air & Space, December 1997/January 1998.

8. http://www...70146.pdf, “Questions pertaining to Tibet, 1969-1972”, de-classified US government document regarding CIA support of the Dalai Lama.

9. Documentary “Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden” by Swiss Public Television
http://www...5sOm-uQH9Y
http://www...boblx-0zAs
http://www...1dILwsmwCQ

10. The Shadow of The Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism, by Victor and Victoria Trimondi, http://www.../links.htm

]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1072211 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1072211 GMT
http://www...ews.htm#do

In any case, people like me are not encouraging Tibetans to "die in some futile fantasy about independence" like you put it. It's the other way around meaning Tibetans are asking us for help. We are answering their calls for help by exposing the Chinese regime for what it is. The Tibetans will continue their fight regardless of what we do. Our voice will just help them. You can not with good conscious ignore that and simply say we should do nothing. Staying quite helps China murder more people not less. History has shown that nothing is hacked in stone so I don't agree that "They are part of China, and part of China they will stay." All that can change.

I do have a feel for the Olympics athletes though since I have been an athlete all my life and I do wish things were different and the Olympics were somewhere else. The truth is the Olympics have always had a political tone to it going back decades to Berlin Olympics. All athletes know "Enter at you own risk" on this one.

Also I agree with you in regards to terrible mistakes US has made with Iraq and Afghanistan but we can't let actions of the Bush administration who constantly lies to the American people stop us from answering calls of help from Tibetans otherwise we are not who we say we are.

]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1067024 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1067024 GMT
"Coffee sippers who think it might be a good idea to free Tibet from China are about 58 years too late. China is not going to free Tibet, and Western encouragement of Tibetan resistance will only get people killed needlessly.

Tibet was part of China for centuries. In 1913, when China seemed to be falling apart, the British Empire encouraged Tibet to declare its independence. It did, and that lasted until 1950, when, at the end of the Chinese civil war, China invaded and reclaimed the area. By then, the impotent British Empire was in no position to help anyone even if it had been so inclined. America chose to do nothing.

If you are not willing to make your way to the Tibetan plateau and face Chinese guns and prisons, then you certainly should not sit around some coffee shop and urge Tibetans to do so. Tibet is a strategic area of China, and the Chinese government is not going to give it up or grant it independence or even autonomy. To paraphrase a famous outlaw, it is enough that we know that China will do what it has to do.

As for us, we should do nothing. Tibet is part of China, and what happens there is an internal affair of China. The rest of the world has no right to interfere, and other than bloviating for a while, I seriously doubt that it will. Unfortunately, in this age of global communications even bloviating can cause bad things to happen to people.

Boycotting the Olympics is a foolish idea by a tiny minority of fanatics. The Olympics have nothing to do with Tibet, just as they had nothing to do with the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Boycotting the games would be a cruel blow to athletes who have been sweating and training for four years. It would accomplish nothing. It would further politicize the games, which should be encouraged to return to their amateur status.

China was awarded the Summer Games in a fair international competition and has spent a lot of money getting ready for them. Any attempt to spoil the games will do a great disservice to the athletes, the Chinese government and the Chinese people. It will do nothing positive and will only harden attitudes and end up making the world even more dangerous than it already is.

Americans in particular should keep in mind that we are currently engaged in mismanaging two occupations of two countries that we illegally invaded. Neither enterprise is going well. Neither is our economy. In short, we have enough on our own plate without trying to steal a bite off of China’s plate. We should make sure that Afghanistan and Iran are the last wheezes of the sick American Empire and shut it down and return to our republic.

I don’t know why some Americans seem to have trouble realizing that the days of the European empires are over. Part of the problem is that we have way too many vocational intellectuals and way too few real intellects. A vocational intellectual is someone who makes a living writing or talking. Such people tend to live inside their heads. Delusions of grandeur and fantasies about the real world are constant occupational hazards for such people.

No country in the world has to do what we tell it to do. Certainly that’s the case with the big powers like China, Russia, Japan and India. As you can see every day in your morning paper, even a little country like Iraq can cause us more trouble than it’s worth. It’s a crime against humanity that our sons and daughters are dying in the desert dust while fat politicians cavort about in Washington. Don’t encourage Tibetans to die in some futile fantasy about independence. They are not independent. They are part of China, and part of China they will stay."


]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1065030 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1065030 GMT Do you call those, tens of thousands of overseas Chinese and students, who took streets to show their supports to Olympics and protest against Western media bias worldwide all Chinese government's "agents” as well?

If your hatred of China and of CCP cannot allow you to think clear after listening to that American Professor said in that interview from the link I posted here http://www...ioID=17615 (a well balanced view based on well documented research), I suggest you go to China and talk to the people on streets, even to some liberal rightist intellectuals and dissidents. Find out the truth and how ordinary Chinese see their government, their life now and their future for yourselve.

No matter how bitter and anguish your personal experience with the dictatorship might have made you (I know someone just like you and you have my sympathies) an objective view of reality is something to start with, if you have any lofty cause to pursue. If million of people would not agree with you, then you have to respect their choice and wait. As a matter of fact, since the 1990s the Chinese people have been so indifferent to the overseas Chinese political dissidents like Harry Wu and Chai Ling, because they think the dissidents know little about China and care even less about her people when they called for Western economic sanction against China, which, lofty and morally gratifying to some, would hurt the interests of China and millions of Chinese people. As long as the CCP can do a good job improving people’s living standard, the unwritten contract between them and the people will be unlikely cancelled. More political reform will be an inevitable agenda once people is ready and when the government has effectively solved many urgent social and economic issues resulted from China’s capitalist rampage in past decades which threatened instability.

For your information, according to a US independent survey on Chinese and American people's attitude toward their government (in terms of job performance such as the raising of living standard) done by The Committee of 100, the Chinese government got 80% approval while American government got 40%. Why should the Chinese people overthrow such a government just because people like you would like them to do now and who would you suggest in replacement of the CCP right now? Is not true that the Chai Lings who called for blood in the students demonstration in Tiananman Square have given up her or his democratic cause and made millions in their pockets somewhere in the West ( mostly from dealings with China)?


]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1071845 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1071845 GMT
First of all yes I have lived in an “authoritarian Non-communist” country, all the same. That's why I recognize the smell from miles way!! Your version of history of CCP is so wrong it's comical!! So according to your made up version: The CCP does not have the blood of the millions of Chinese on their hands. They did not starve, torture and kill millions of Chinese. The Chinese people loved all the torturing and murdering stuff so much that all 4 billions of them (!) totally freely keep choosing the CCP as their government... And then they all lived happily ever after, Woooww... I guess even though people have so many choices in China, somehow everyone over and over again choose the very same good people of CCP!!! Kind of like magic. you are way off on the numbers too pal since there are not 4 billion Chinese in the world!!!

Oh yeah I forgot, you said "they (CCP) made horrible mistakes from 1949-1977, which they admitted most of them". So I suppose the Tiananmen Square Massacre IN 1989 never happened either, it was all our imagination since We are absolutely ignorant of Chinese history!!! Who is ignorant now Mr. Agent?

As I said all of these dictatorships like the one you work for are the same. I lived under one. They commit unspeakable horrors against their own people and they employ people LIKE YOU to twist the truth and betray their own people. Well next time, twist the truth a little less so people won't laugh so much reading your comments!!!
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1066868 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1066868 GMT
Have you ever lived in an “authoritarian communist” country? Well I have. And three generations of my family have lived in China. I suspect you are absolutely ignorant of Chinese history. There was indeed a government that that would “kill you if you don't play their game.” But it was Jiang Jieshi’s nationalist government, not the current CCP which took power from the nationalist in 1949 precisely because the corruption, ill-management and blood on its hands that caused Jiang regime to lose mandate and legitimacy. That was how the 4 billion Chinese then chose CCP as their new government. without people's support CCP would have never come into power! CCP has accomplished a great deal despite horrible mistakes made from 1949-1977, which they admitted most of them and have tried to right them. For the Chinese their government is to be of many things...
For those who are so out of touch with China today here is a radio link from Chicago's public radio: http://www...ioID=17615


]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1065026 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1065026 GMT
It is in those words that a westerner’s condescending/patronizing attitude and utter arrogance reveals itself.

People don’t “love the authoritarian” government; rather they have to accept and live with one if history has so befallen them. But people can also affect positive change which pushes a gradual transformation of an authoritarian government. This is exactly what has ben happening in China since 1976. How many more times do the Chinese have to tell you that their personal lives have benefited from dramatic changes taking place in China in past decades and that the current government should be given credit for that? How many more times do they have to repeat that if they were to have political reform it has to be in their style, on their timetable and with their own terms? Do you know that it took 200 years for western democracy to evolve while PRC has only been around for 60 years?

Would you rather prefer a quick fix of “regime change” as what the US did for Iraq? If that is what on your mind then please keep your self-righteous “humanitarian” to yourself.

Why do you feel so offended and ask people to go back whenever your notion of authoritarian government is challenged by those who have first-hand experience of such government? Is it that you have more right to freedom of expression than people whose country of origin happened to be an authoritarian government?

]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1075253 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1075253 GMT
But I have a question for you: Why does a person like yourself who loves the authoritarian style of government and seems to despise everything America has to offer including the freedom of speech which your masters don't offer the people over there live here? You should move back to your beloved "Motherland" ASAP and take all the twisted thinking back with you. I am sure you will have no problem finding a job at CCP.
]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1071826 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1071826 GMT
Back to the topic. It's a different government ever since Deng Xiaoping started reform. It's a new generation of leaders. China doesn't have a communist government of Mao. It's a capitalist government of Deng still in communist name. It's the people like you who have a selfish agenda distorting the facts and LIE IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THEIR DESPICABLE GOAL. There is no difference between saying Chinese government torturing and killing Tibetans and Bush calling WMD in Iraq. It's DARK and EVIL!]]> http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1069213 http://action.publicbroadcasting.net/theworld/posts/list/956211.page#1069213 GMT