|
icantfindaname posted:The word 'nation' in English comes from a Latin word that means race among other things. Not to say CCP ideology doesn't have weird race stuff in it but that's not much of a smoking gun, it's an exact etymological equivalence I'm not sure what your argument is here. Are you arguing that the Chinese phrase doesn't have racial implications based on the etymology of the translated English word 'nation'? That's what I think you're doing, and if so, it's silly. The Chinese phrase is 民族大复兴 (minzu da fuxing), or as in the article 民族伟大复兴 (minzu weida fuxing). The key word here is 民族 (minzu), which translates very closely to the English word 'ethnicity'. It has no implication of nation as modern English speakers understand it whatsoever. The phrase clearly means the rejuvenation or renaissance of the Chinese race(s) and ethnicity(ies) and nothing else. The subject of why it was translated as nation is perhaps worthy of discussion. The author of that article attributes it to craftiness, and I tend to agree. It could simply be incompetence, however. 11 years in China and I have very rarely met anyone who can accurately translate 民族 into English. The most common translation is always 'nationality', with 'minority' coming in second. Occasionally I've heard ethnic minority from people with good English who know how to say 少数民族, but don't know how to say 民族 itself. Regardless of the intention of the translation, choosing to translate the word into nation absolutely has implications that are creepy to westerners, who would prefer to dissociate nation and state, as the terms are traditionally defined. Where the article might go wrong, however, is in the offhand and unsupported statement that it's "almost universally understood to mean the majority Han ethnic group". I've talked to a whole lot of people about ethnic issues here and it's a thorny, difficult, very sensitive subject that is rarely done much justice by western publications. In essence, I agree with the author. But the vast majority of people in China wouldn't and would say that the phrase is inclusive of all the arbitrarily defined 56 ethnicities in China. Certainly Uighurs and Tibetans, as well as perhaps some Korean-Chinese and other minorities feel left out of the renaissance. But to blithely assert racism to the CCP, even if it certainly does exist, ignores that they actually do quite a lot to improve the condition for minorities in China and are often the voice of reason in terms of ethnic issues. If are ever privy to a Han-chauvinist rant, you'll hear bitter complaints about how affirmative action programs and attempts to provide increased opportunities to minorities from western provinces are making it harder for everyday, hardworking Han Chinese. When there were riots in Xinjiang in 2009, the CCP stepped in to prevent counter riots from Han against Uigurs, in spite of the significant backlash in public opinion that produced. I am not saying the CCP is enlightened on racial issues. There are countless examples, readily available from personal experience or from the news, that show that it is not. But, just as the Chinese notion of racial issues in the west can only be described as a caricature, westerners whose only information about China is from foreign media only understand a small portion of what's going on here in terms of race and ethnicity. The 民族伟大复兴 certainly mostly applies to Han Chinese, but probably not primarily out of outright, Jim Crow style racism, but more out of the sort of subtle disenfranchisement and forced cultural assimilation that also takes place in western countries. I do think the west is generally more enlightened on race and that China has a long way to go in that regard. But then again, whatever awful things a black guy living here might hear everyday, he would certainly not have to worry about being gunned down by the police for driving with a broken tail light.
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
As far as I understand the term, it specifically excludes naturalized immigrants. Though if the CCP were to give a specific position, I doubt it would sound so absolute.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Huh. I was reading a book about debates surrounding national identity between left and right in postwar Japan, and the book said the political left in Japan used the word 民族主義 in a positive way in reference to pan-Asian liberation movements like the Chinese and Vietnamese Communists, and the political right preferred the term 愛国主義 in its argument to get rid of the pacifist constitution and dependency on the USA. The word nationalism in English doesn't necessarily or even primarily refer to ethno-racial nationalism, the original nationalists, the French, were secular, liberal Jacobin nationalists. I take it that 民族主義 does not have that context, though? I don't have a firm grasp on how 民族主义 is used politically here. 爱国主义 is definitely more important. 民族主义 does have a positive connotation, and when I've come across it, it always seems to mean protecting the interests of ones own ethnic or cultural group, though the bounds of that group are hazy, e.g. does it mean Han only or all the supposed ethnicities included in 中华民族. The relation with racism (种族主义） is not considered because, according to the narrative, 民族主义 is good and racism is bad, and doesn't happen in China, but only in western countries where white people go a little too far in their 民族主义. I'm sure that in an academic and political sense, people use 民族主义 in a much clearer and more specific way than I lay out here. But I can't comment intelligently about that. I think it's safe to say that just about anywhere, human beings of any type have a weird, problematic relationship with race. That relationship becomes weirder and more problematic under certain circumstances, like in East Asia, where there generally aren't that many people of other races around to tell you you're being an rear end in a top hat. symphoniccacophony posted:I can't comment on the political language, but as a Chinese person, my understanding is that historically we identify ourselves by our shared cultural identity first. i.e. We are the Han, those are the Hu, over there are the Mongolians and Manchu's and so on. The concept of identifying ourselves by our nationality instead of cultural I believe is quite recent. ie. instead of the Han, now we are the Chinese, over there are the Korean and Japanese. I went to a talk last fall given by a Professor of Early 20th century Chinese Singaporean literature who is a naturalized Singaporean from mainland China. The major theme of his talk was about cultural assimilation, but he made this exact point in regards to Singapore, that mainland Chinese view Singapore, another Han majority country, as simply being an extension of Mainland China, and so are quite baffled when there are political issues between the two countries. In fact, they are two countries that share similarities, but also important differences. Of course, he also went on to say that Chinese and Western academia are irreconcilable, and the example he gave was of a western academic insisting that Fujian belongs to the world, which he thought laughable. So, he clearly still placed high value on the concept of China as a nation-state.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 09:48
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Yeah when that happens I'll believe it, until then you're a full of poo poo moron who has been batting .000 for China's impending collapse since 2011. I think Fojar is an idiot and is wrong, but to be fair, I distinctly recall something on the front page of SA in 2005/2006 making fun of the people who had been predicting the collapse of the US housing market would be coming this year for sure for several years straight. You aren't giving a good counterargument and you wouldn't convince him even if you did. Peven Stan posted:Middle income trap is the best liberal dogwhistle for "brown people need act more like whit--westernized people in order to succeed" This is like a day or two ago when that other guy claimed calling for westernization was white supremacy. You've jumped off the bus and into crazy town. So the May 4th movement was a white supremacist movement? I don't entirely disagree with your point, but you're not doing anything more than pointing out an issue and then shouting back in the same tone. "Westernization" coming from whoever's lips, is an extremely problematic term. What do you think is Western? Are you sure it's the same as what your opponents think it is? What is distinct between westernization and modernization? Certainly some things are clearly identifiable as Western. Hercules, or Odin, for example. Others are less so. Acceptance of homosexuality and rejection of homophobia are a major rallying cry around the world against westernization. But can acceptance of homosexuality really be defined as strictly "western" in any sense? Other civilizations accepted it more hundred of years ago to a greater extent than the west did 50-60 years ago. Westernization is often used as a nasty word for things we don't like about foreigners, like gays or men with long hair. What do you mean by westernization? What improvements would you like to see in Chinese society? Is gender equality westernization? What about democracy in general? What about socialism? What about rejection of homophobia? You do bring up good points to challenge other people views, but rather than staking out a single position, when pushed, you shout down others with racially tinged language.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
I don't have any idea what's going to happen to China, and wouldn't rule out a period of stagnation, but that post is one of many saying the country is hopelessly doomed. I personally expect China to do well, even if it goes through a number of rough patches on the way there.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Yeah that's the tragedy of real oppression. I'm going to assume you're posting your opinion in good faith. That's really great that we have absolute moral superiority. That means that we don't ever have to question the blatantly immoral and hideous things we've done over the past centuries. And we can do whatever we want to remain the dominant cultural force on the planet, no matter the consequences, because God is on our side. I do think that freedom of expression, especially freedom to openly and critically analyze the ideas of our politicians, religious leaders and academics, and the freedom of those groups to disagree, is something that gives western society a moral advantage and even more than that a practical advantage. But to take that advantage as absolute is simply absurd. I'm no tankie. I believe that for all the countless ills of western society, it's overall been more of a force for good than the alternatives. But that's not to say it's actually a force for good in total: there is no way we can say with certainty whether the freedom of our own citizens to think critically, and the capacity to innovate that freedom brings, balances the horrors of war and colonialism we've inflicted on the rest of the world, all the more because we aren't the victims of those horrors. So called "western" values are dominant in the world because of the inherent strength of those values. But it's far more productive for us to use our freedom to criticize to think how we can stop doing so much harm to others than it is to congratulate ourselves on being the best from our own, inherently biased, perspective. That said, the behavior of the CCP towards the overseas Chinese diaspora and Chinese students studying abroad is sickening and inexcusable.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
I actually love that Fojar and Peven Stan have the same avatar now.Peven Stan posted:Apparently if you don't march in lockstep with white liberals racist characterization of chinese people that makes you a psychotic internet nationalist, who knew And apparently you can't possibly be a psychotic internet nationalist as long as you criticize white liberals. That one's new to me, too!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
The Great Autismo! posted:if racism is power plus prejudice, none of us can be racist in china, because as foreigners none of us have a single iota of power The average white guy is still brought up in an extremely privileged position and has been indoctrinated from birth that the world view of his parents and peers is indisputably superior. He brings that birth and upbringing with him to a foreign country, even if he is no longer in the same position there. His attitudes then are completely different from a minority in the US, who might have unfair prejudices against people of other skin colors, but is hardly engaging in systematic racism. And to address the bolded part, it's simply not true that foreigners don't have any form of power in China. White European culture still has the status of a prestige culture here and almost everywhere else. The views, attitudes and behavior of white people leave a strong impression on the people here who witness them. This is extremely obvious even if you just spend a month or so here and I could come up with dozens of mundane examples to support it. So foreigners, especially white foreigners, have a very real kind of soft power that is deeply rooted in racial issues, including white racism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2017 09:25
|
|
|
The Great Autismo! posted:this is almost a conversation that needs to happen personally. I'd be honored to host you in Shenyang, or if you wanna meet at a bar in your city, that'd be cool too. but this point is just so jarringly wrong I don't even really know where to start, and would love to talk to you about 8 years of experiences, of books I've read, and of people I've talked to about how just drastically incorrect this entire paragraph is. lemme know! I've been here for a few years longer than that, if you want to do the comparison thing. I primarily use Mandarin to communicate every day. In a professional, social and academic context I notice that people absolutely give a special status to white foreigners that they don't give to others. This is particularly noticeable in a university, in which a white, western student has a far, far easier time than, say, an East Asian looking student from Central Asia. But it's also immediately clear from the fact that plenty of companies hire random white people to show up for meetings and conventions just to project a sense of prestige. In fact, I don't see how you can arrive at a different conclusion if you've been here for any length of time. I do understand the feeling that foreigners are the victims of discrimination and racism. It's true, they are. But an ethnic group can absolutely occupy both spaces at the same time. Just because people can throw ethnic slurs without restriction and discriminate freely in choosing between possible tenants or employees doesn't mean that traditionally White European attitudes about race have no influence here at all. Rather, that influence is immediately apparent in any serious conversation you could have here about the subject. I live in Shanghai, by the way, if you ever show up here and want to have the conversation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
Link to the Chinese version with all the proposed changes to the constitution: http://china.chinadaily.com.cn/2018-02/25/content_35737745.htm They also propose adding Xi Jinping's name to the constitution alongside Mao and Deng Xiaoping. And, after the line "Socialism is the fundamental system of the People's Republic of China", they propose adding "The leadership of the Chinese Communist Party is an innate feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics." Charming. Has anyone found this from other Chinese sources? I don't really follow the news here.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2018 11:28
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:Someone please explain this sentence to me because I'm having an extremely hard time parsing what it means. It's my lovely translation of this: "中国共产党领导是中国特色社会主义最本质的特征。" It means that the communist party being in charge is the primary feature (literally "most innate characteristic") of the Chinese economic and political system, called "socialism with Chinese characteristics"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:"American style X" is a phrase that is the same thing that gets used in english. (American style capitalism, American style democracy, etc) I used "socialism with Chinese characteristics" because that seems to be the accepted translation that is frequently encountered in both Chinese and American media (e.g. the wikipedia article on the subject). Actually, I would rather have used something else because the 特色 in that term is translated to "characteristic", but in the proposed revision to the constitution, there is also another word, 特征, that is, in fact, closer to the English word "characteristic". I don't think there's anything wrong with "Chinese style socialism", but, probably because the people to translate the phrase in the first place weren't native English speakers, "socialism with Chinese characteristics" is the standard jargon. Heithinn Grasida fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Feb 25, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
therobit posted:I find the suggestion that Chinese students ought to study American literature particularly funny. We never studied Chinese or Russian lit really. Frankly, as a student in the US I am not sure I had a good enough education in American lit. English lit I had a decent education in, but not too much American besides Harlem renaissance (which was an awesome unit). I don’t want to come across as supporting a single thing that youtube guy said, but the vast majority of Chinese students have to study the English language, and for good reasons. Strong proficiency in English is an incredibly valuable skill. If you’re going to study a language at an advanced level, you have to study literature written in that language. There’s a big list of reasons that’s important and I don’t think I need to go into them here. fart simpson posted:Why would anyone study American "literature" ?? Serious question. Instead of posting here, go read Moby Dick — A better command of the English language might liven up your flaccid attempts at trolling.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2018 07:31
|
|
|
Kassad posted:But from the summary of the video's points, it sounds like it's blaming the students when it's a shortcoming in the school system. And "students don't believe in anything" could just mean his students aren't telling him, nothing more. Yeah, I’m fairly sure the video is poo poo and indefensible. That’s why I was replying to the point made by a poster here that Chinese students shouldn’t have to study American Literature. If they’re doing English as their foreign language then they should read American literature. Kassad posted:Edit: There are high school teachers complaining about "zombie students" in a similar way over here (France). We've also got a system that centers on passing a big exam at the end of high school, although not with the insane pressure that comes with the Gaokao. Plus a tendency to treat students like idiots if they don't know the answer to every question (spoiler: this makes students extremely reluctant to answer questions). Make of that what you will. I spent about a year here (Shanghai) teaching mostly French students and I was surprised by the similarities in the systems. And there are plenty of students in China who are nothing at like “zombie students”. The Youtube guy is, unsurprisingly, full of poo poo. Obviously there are significant differences between the education systems and the attitudes of students, but they’re also subtle and complex and could never be encapsulated by such a ridiculous cliche. Heithinn Grasida fucked around with this message at 07:50 on Apr 23, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2018 07:43
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:he was obviously joking but if you could only choose one english-speaking country to pull literature from, it shouldn't be the us True, but if you had to omit one English-speaking from your list of countries from which to pull literature, it also shouldn’t be the US. Unless you think the world will be safer and more whole if Chinese kids only learn stereotypes and online conspiracy theories about the place they’re taught is their primary rival.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2018 08:14
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Like what bathtub cheese implied earlier, liberals don’t really have an endgame for Turkestan other than another Islamist state in Central Asia that the US can soft colonize in a woke manner and turn into an airbase on China’s border. It’s hilarious white Americans are pretending otherwise. I don't think anyone who has their head screwed on straight actually wants an East Turkestan, they hope for change from within China. One can criticize and denounce a bad thing without having any clear idea how to change it. Beijing's treatment of Uighurs is deplorable and needs to change. There is also almost nothing the US can do to affect that change in a productive way other than to call China out on what's going on there, which is exactly what this thread is doing. Rent-A-Cop posted:1938 is calling and it wants its taking points back. This is overtly hysterical and dilutes the effectiveness of your argument. There's no actual genocide in Xinjiang. I've certainly met Han Chinese who think there should be, and most Han think the government is too kind to ethnic minorities. There is certainly mass forced cultural assimilation and an attack at all levels on Uighur heritage and traditions. And things are bad and getting worse, but I don't see actual ethnic cleansing on the horizon unless poo poo really goes pear-shaped in an unexpected way.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Typical of white cismales to deny and minimize other people’s oppressions. This is a real, serious problem but it's hilarious (if that word is appropriate here) that you're doing exactly the same thing with minorities in China.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 15:15
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:The United States can't achieve a good outcome in this foreign political tinderbox but let's repeat the exact same talking points as the people who'd like set it alight in a cynical effort to discredit their geopolitical foe. That's real advocacy for the oppressed and downtrodden. Nice display of cynicism! It's possible people who are worried about the situation in Xinjiang are sincerely worried about the situation there, while also wanting China to grow wealthier and more more powerful. In fact, I believe a hindrance towards a healthier society in China, as elsewhere, is the tribalism of the ruling majority.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 15:56
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:The people with the power to intercede don't give a single gently caress about the Uighurs, and I remain unconvinced those who feel compelled to speak out on their behalf from behind a screen in the West do either. The first part is true, the second part simply indicates you have subscribed, unwittingly and likely unquestioningly, to the world view of another, equally cynical order of "people with power to intercede". If you only allow yourself to view things through the lens of politics you have lost perspective on political issues. Bathtub Cheese posted:Yeah all they have to do is take the propaganda fueled sanctimony of white liberals seriously and China will adopt the Nordic model some day. This is a shamefully mediocre attempt at evasion. There is a legitimate problem with racial tension in China, and it would still exist even if all the white liberals hosed off to the hippy pastures on the dark side of the moon tomorrow. Only the Chinese can fix this problem in the long run, and only by a slow process involving education and exposure to the view points of the oppressed. But to take the fact that "white liberals can't fix a problem" and draw from it the conclusion "the problem can't be fixed and should be ignored" does not indicate great things about your outlook on the world. Heithinn Grasida fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Apr 25, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:This is a pot kettle attack, since you're just taking the other side at face value. The choice to speak out is political in the absence of an effective course of action. This is how the FP establishment subverts good intentions and puts them to work toward cynical ends. This is a better dodge than before, but still fairly transparent. You haven't denied the issue. Do you believe it exists or not? If you don't believe there is ethnic tension in China, lets not even talk about fake news, lets just say you've either never been there, your Chinese is abysmal, you're a Han supremacist or you're out of touch with reality. I assume you're not denying the problem exists because you have enough of a grasp on reasonable discourse that you can't. If you believe the issue exists, why is it political to bring it up? Because "your side" doesn't want to? Ethnic tension is real. If Beijing would prefer to not acknowledge it, they are the ones politicizing the issue, not liberal westerners who are well informed about China and capable of taking a nuanced view. No racial problem will ever improve if people don't agitate about it. Western liberals can't effectively start that agitation, but by keeping up awareness of the problem, we can offer some measure of validation to those who do. Note, I don't think sensation anti-China articles from the NYT are very helpful and typical Western media has serious issues in its dealings with the country. And the CIA is just as much our enemy in this issue as the CPC. But that doesn't somehow absolve Beijing of all wrong. Nor does the fact that direct action is useless mean that the correct thing is to completely turn our eyes from injustice and be silent. There is a problem and there is a rational path towards resolving it. If you accept that, you have to accept that people should have the freedom to speak about the problem. If you deny it, you're either deluded or completely given over to cynicism.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:You're a much less interesting bad faith wumao than Peven Stan, that's for sure. His bullshit is entertainingly grandiose, yours is just tedious I'm going to entertain the thought that even though we completely disagree, Bathtub Cheese is probably a better poster than most people in this thread. Peven Stan is, indeed, entertainingly grandiose. hypnophant posted:That's not why you're getting attacked, people just find your absolute refusal to address the core point of the other side, combined with your constant and obvious whataboutism, to be tedious and obnoxious At least he's consistently engaging the issue and admitted that the situation "could be better". Whataboutism isn't worse than ad hominems and that's what about 40% of this thread is. At least some of them are artfully constructed and entertaining to read. Heithinn Grasida fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Apr 25, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:these paragraphs were separate thoughts, right? the system of autonomous regions, prefectures, townships, etc. is totally different from one country two systems Uh huh. And Guangxi province is legitimately and completely autonomously governed by its 30 something% of the population Zhuang minority. "Actually, the huge economic gulf between ethnic minorities and Han isn't nearly as bad as some agitators say. And if those bad elements just kept quiet and minded their own business, the whole ethnicity would be much better off. I'm not racist, but their culture just doesn't have the same entrepreneurial spirit and work ethic of the Han. That's why they can't get good jobs even though the affirmative actions system gives them a huge advantage in society. But it's okay, they're free of spirit and innocent. Did you know most traditional Chinese music comes from ethnic minorities?"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 17:11
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:I don't think that's what Guyovich was saying; 自治区and 一国两制 are two different ideas that are usually talked about in different contexts, and I'm not sure Hong Kong is even considered a 自治区 in the Chinese system I got that part. Holy poo poo I read 明报 and 苹果日报 all the time to practice reading stuff in traditional characters. I read this post: caberham posted:The idea of autonomous regions sound great on paper where there’s local customs and rules and languages. as suggesting that autonomous regions and “one country two systems” are equally hollow. So I found this: R. Guyovich posted:these paragraphs were separate thoughts, right? the system of autonomous regions, prefectures, townships, etc. is totally different from one country two systems a post suggesting that caberham, the guy who frequently posts in the thread that he lives in Hong Kong and seems to identify as a Hong Konger, doesn’t know the basic administrative status of the city he lives in to be particularly arrogant and condescending. So I made a snippy reply as to the hollow ring of the name “autonomous region”. But my post was legitimately terrible, so I apologize.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
stone cold posted:in a raenir v fojar fight, the thread is the biggest loser I mean, raenir’s posts read like a 23 year old philosophy student who’s tearing pages out of his Critique of Pure Reason to roll blunts, but he’s still arguing against someone who’s head is so far up his interventionist rear end that he thinks that in 2018 regime change by force is likely to produce a good outcome anywhere. There’s a clear “good guy” in this argument. The notion that autocratic governments can’t be taken to represent the interests of the people is dangerously naive, and the idea that foreign intervention is not only likely to improve the lives of people under an autocratic regime but that it’s the moral obligation of liberal democracies to intervene betrays the sort of fanatical hubris only available to those who have never authentically been pushed out of the safety of their own cultural bubble. I, too, believe western liberalism still has a lot important contributions to make to the world and autocratic regimes thwart themselves in many cases by ignoring its principles. But the belief that you can determine by some utilitarian calculus that its forced adoption will result in the greater good for China or anywhere else shares more in common with the principles of the Spanish Inquisition than the doctrine of the enlightenment fojar claims to uphold. Imagine what would happen to ethnic minorities in Xinjiang if the CPC were replaced with a democratically elected government tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I would make this same argument against those holding up autocracy as a legitimate and representative form of government. It sounds like someone who lives in a democratic country and has become so used to their freedoms that they don't notice them anymore, arguing that it's okay for those other people to live in a dictatorship because the trains run on time and besides, we all know that those other people are crazy and can't be trusted to self govern. Oddly enough they then hide behind the cloak of anti-imperialism to justify why it's okay for modern day slavery to happen as long as it's across the ocean. First, I argued in this thread just last week that western liberals are in the right when trying to publicize and make known issues faced by ethnic minorities in China. I don't believe that China's moral authority on domestic issues is beyond reproach or that western countries should always avoid human rights issues in respect of autocratic government's sovereignty. Second, my social circle, right now, is either all Chinese people, with whom I converse almost entirely in Mandarin, or people from the Middle-East, Central Asia, Africa or former Soviet republics. Very few of them subscribe to Western liberalism and every single person I know deplores American intervention, even even when they agree with the human rights issues that are its prima facie justification. If you had a lot of experience talking with people from the countries you propose to intervene in, I suspect you'd find most of them would not be happy about your ideas. Third, I didn't read a great deal of nuance in your posts, and maybe that's my fault. But fairly addressing China's human rights issues on the international stage and outright hostile intervention (which hardly has to be military!) are at far different ends of the spectrum, and I doubt anyone could read your points as advocating for anything other than a strictly hawkish approach.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 07:56
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:My social circle also consists of plenty of people from all of those regions (though I only speak English), and like any other demographic they vary in their opinions, ranging from pacifism to neoconservatism regarding interventionism. This is a weak argument in either direction that always inevitably results in people arguing over whose experience is more "legitimate" so it's better to not go down that rabbit hole. I agree that this isn’t a fruitful line of discussion — any appeal to personal experience will never be persuasive. I was responding to your initial point that my view could also be attributed to the safety of a Western bubble, when in my case it most certainly could not. I do think, as a general point, if you only engage with people in an environment in which you have cultural prestige, that is when you are speaking to non-native English speakers in English, and particularly in an English speaking country, you don’t have authentic access to main stream viewpoints of people coming from their region. Fojar38 posted:But it is fundamentally a contradiction to make an appeal to the inherent rights that people have to agency, in support of why they shouldn't be afforded the right to representative government. You yourself hinted at this with the "Can you imagine what they would do to Xinjiang if they could vote?" Which not only implies that if China could vote they would vote for genocide, but also implies that what the CCP is doing right now to the people of Xinjiang is a mercy. You’re twisting my position. I don’t think people shouldn’t be afforded the right to representative government, I think it’s a pipe dream and also ludicrously arrogant that the west can affect change in the manner you’re suggesting. I don’t believe China would vote for genocide, I think the current policies would continue and affirmative action programs or other benefits minorities enjoy under CCP law would be rescinded. Ethnic violence from Han towards minorities would be more frequently overlooked by the police, and the police themselves would be more frequently violent. I don’t in any way think that what the CCP is doing there is a mercy. That’s a ridiculous conclusion to draw. I merely believe that the degree of badness under the CCP, while high, is not as high as it would be under a democratically elected government given the current mood, not that the Chinese people want genocide, holy poo poo. Fojar38 posted:Hawkish in the sense that I don't think military action should ever be completely off the table, sure. But at what point does intervention become "hostile?" Military intervention is obviously hostile intervention. Espionage can be interpreted as hostile intervention as well even if not necessarily destructive. What about refusing to trade? Sanctions? Denying access to academic institutions? Openly denouncing autocrats as illegitimate and building diplomatic coalitions against them? In the parlance of autocracies, all of these things are hostile infringements on their sovereignty that post hoc justify their autocracy, even though all of them would be the result of policy formulated in other countries. You’re twisting my position into something ridiculous yet again. I said there’s a continuum and you’re at a fairly extreme end of it. I’m on the other end, but not on the end of complete submission (what!?). Economic sanctions, trade restrictions, international condemnation, even military action, all of these things are things that can be considered in measure. I never announced categorical opposition to any of them, only that I highly doubt their efficacy in many of the situations you propose them. You’re saying that autocratic governments fundamentally lack legitimacy under the international system and it’s the moral obligation of democratic countries to impose change on them. You present all actions under an autocratic government to be maximally bad, and when faced with evidence that sometimes they do good things, you dismiss them as “making the trains run on time”. Your biggest weakness is you give no clear picture of how representative democracy is supposed to be achieved in places that lack it, you only state we most oppose and seek to destroy, then “nation building” will happen and everyone will be happy. My position is that representative democracy is inherently superior to autocracy, but liberal democracies don’t have any guaranteed way to force change on other countries and even if we did, the argument that we should in every case is dubious at best. Yes, we should seek to affect change, but we have to keep in mind that people, and especially populations are not rational. Most people would rather side with the home team than make choices that will benefit them. Going around the world and overthrowing despotic governments, imposing poverty on populations and inciting chaos will not somehow imbue the residents of the countries we gently caress up with liberal ideology. The world is complex and how we deal with autocratic governments requires nuance and the understanding that we can’t fix everything for everyone else. It should not be informed by a crude, morally absolute utilitarian calculus.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 11:57
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Certainly China should just let US backed Islamic terrorists roam freely because woke liberals in the west might be upset This is the casually racist proclamation of someone who has never been to Xinjiang and never made an earnest attempt to talk to a Uighur person and listen to his or her problems. I’ve met plenty of people from Xinjiang, some of them Han, some Kazakh and most Uighur. Of them, only the Han people were happy with what Han people are doing there. None of the Uighurs I know are separatists, but they were all unhappy. Under your view, the Uighur college students, waiters and even the CCP official I’ve met must have been in pay of the CIA and all their complaints of racial injustice completely hollow. The CIA is not on the side of the angels. We all know that. Given the track record of the US government, it’s hopeless, head-in-the-sand naïveté to suppose that they are not funding separatist, anti-CCP movements in Xinjiang. But just because the US government is bad, which again, we all already know, doesn’t mean that any problem existing in the world was created by the US government. It’s far more likely that problems like what’s happening in Xinjiang are already there, and the US is merely capitalizing on them. Only hopeless ideologues would deny that their “team” is incapable of racial injustice all on it’s own, and the immeasurable weight of all of human history stands against such claims.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2018 02:05
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:I should talk to more native informers that are the backbone of US foreign policy overseas Are you really making the blanket statement that all people of Uighur ethnicity are brainwashed by American propaganda and therefore you have nothing to gain from listening to them? Do you really believe the CIA is so powerful as to be able to convince millions of people who would otherwise be happy that they're oppressed? If so, why does this seem to work only on certain ethnicities? If the CIA is so capable, why can't it convince Han people that they're oppressed? Either Uighur people are legitimately marginalized and actually face significant racial injustice, so messages and narratives from abroad resonate more powerfully with them than with other ethnicities in China, or you have to assign some racially essential characteristics to them that explain why they're unhappy when they shouldn't be.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Are all uighur people against the PRC? It seems like American liberals are suggesting that in this thread. I find that kind of casual racism and ethnic essentialist politics offensive. That’s a weak attempt to turn my point around on me. And you didn’t even answer a single one of my questions. First, I didn’t say anything about being “against the PRC”. I said that Uighur people often feel they are the victims of racial injustice. That doesn’t mean they’re separatists. I’ve probably only talked politics with 5-6 Uighur people, but only one of them said anything that could be taken as separatism. Others were very clear that they don’t think independence is viable, or even that change is really possible, they just want to keep their heads down and weather the storm. Second, are you suggesting there isn’t any racial tension between Uighur and Han people? It’s plainly evident from both events in Xinjiang and from any discussion you hear about race and ethnic minorites there, regardless of the ethnicity of the people it’s coming from, that there’s considerable tension. Even in friendly interactions it’s obvious. Just go to a Xinjiang restaurant and pay attention to the Han customers and the Uighur waiter. My point was about racial prejudice from Han people towards Uighur people. And if you’re willing to earnestly listen to what Uighur people say they face in Xinjiang or elsewhere in China, it’s pretty hard to conclude there are no problems at all and everything is made up by the CIA. And nice link. Yes, we already knew the CIA is awful and the US government has no problem being in bed with religious radicals of any stripe as long as they see some short-term gain from it. That doesn’t mean all Uighur people complaining of problems in China are against the PRC or separatists or CIA agents.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2018 10:43
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:Tedious cant about "neither Washington nor Beijing" while reciting Washington's talking points to the letter doesn't raise questions about anyone's motives ever Allow me to recite one of Beijing's talking points and agree with CAPS LOCK BROKEN: if China had a western-friendly regime and weren't growing so quickly, Washington wouldn't give a flying gently caress about Uighur people. That hardly means that those of us who are capably of viewing politics outside of the lens of our tribal association would suddenly think China is a society of perfect racial justice. How often do you see well informed Western leftists singing the praises of Saudi Arabia?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
Bathtub Cheese posted:My point is that neither would anyone in this thread, and that's assuming information currently inextricable from its context as American agitprop is sufficient enough to allow you to make that judgment, itself a dubious prospect This is not a position you could faithfully hold if you had on any occasion earnestly listened to a Uighur person talking about ethnicity in China. What you're saying is the very reification of a "talking point". CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:None of the people concern trolling chinas human rights record are leftists. The D&D human rights think tank is firmly in the establishment camp and were the same people insisting that Hillary Clinton was the only viable candidate and Obama’s drone wars were woke and necessary. Do we need to apply the western conception of race to China? To be honest, I legitimately don't know. I'm not well read enough in Chinese classics to have a thorough sense of the "Chinese" conception of race. But like it or not, borrowed or native, Chinese people do have a conception of race that is quick to assign essential features to specific ethnicities. China does have solid affirmative action programs -- that seem to be deeply unpopular, it might be added. But, like American affirmative action programs, they're not enough. I think social awareness of racial injustice and a willingness to have meaningful dialogue about race in China is critical, or else minorities will continue to be mariginalized. Do you think that race relations have not improved at all in the US in the past 100 years? Are you saying the civil rights movement was totally in vain? What conditions would make it acceptable for a black football player to take the knee in the US but would make a similar thing unacceptable in China. tino posted:You don't have to wear a team jersey and pick a side when you just want to discuss international geopolitics. And there are other marginalized minorities in China. Refusing to accept that there are marginalized minorities in China at all is such a willful denial of fact and human nature that it is in itself putting on a team jersey. Heithinn Grasida fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Aug 28, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2018 16:56
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:I think if you compared black America today to the black America written about in the Moynihan report you will find that the needle hasn’t moved on anything except the incarceration rate. Brushing past the woke idpol and affirmative action policies that do very little to help the majority of poc this country is rapidly resegregating: So you are stating in plain language that you think the civil rights movement accomplished nothing in the US. That contradicts what was mentioned in the article you yourself linked. To preempt you here, I'm not saying the civil rights movement succeeded completely, just that it did bring about major, important changes. Things are getting worse in the US because white people decided a few changes were enough, and older generations are now stepping back from those changes. But if you do believe that the civil rights movement was a waste and a failure, what is the correct policy that human beings could employ that will lead toward better racial equality? Because, remember, we're talking about China. All you've managed to do is deny that change is possible at all and insist the PRC shouldn't even attempt it. Do you have any constructive recommendations for how the CCP can improve the situation of marginalized minorities in China?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2018 17:38
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:I think you should read Derrick Bell’s take on the CR movement: You're just quoting people at me to say the same thing I said in my post! But this is the China thread and you didn't say anything about the country we're talking about. If the civil rights movement was a complete failure (nothing you've quoted has said that by the way), what instead should the US or China do to improve racial equality?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
Darkest Auer posted:Unless you go to a hospital that specifically caters to foreigners they will just tell you to get out, doesn't matter if you're dying or not. You might have a chance to get some treatment if you have a Chinese friend with you, but then again, if you go to Number 888 Nongmin Hospital the doctor will say that diabetes doesn't exist, you just need to get your qi in order and give you a huge bag of random medicine, some of which might contain actual medicine instead of asbestos and tiger penis. No. ThomasPaine posted:Hi china thread. I am a brit and am considering applying for a postdoc in Shanghai next year. Exciting stuff! Only issue is I'm insulin dependent diabetic requiring two specific types of medication (lantus and novorapid). In the UK this is covered by the NHS and I pay nothing, but while I can bring a fair amount with me it won't be enough to live for a year. From what I have read these should be fairly easy to buy in China, but does anyone have any experience sourcing them (or other imported medicines)? I'm also worried about cost as I'm not certain I'll get health insurance covered. Are they affordable? I'll be working with a budget of just over 5000yuan/month after rent. Should that be workable? I have friends who don’t speak any Chinese and have navigated hospitals in Shanghai fairly well. Healthcare can be difficult and complicated here even if you’re Chinese, so it really depends on your luck and on the doctor. Actually, not speaking Chinese might be beneficial in Shanghai in a weird way, since they’ll give you a doctor who speaks English and because you’re already a “special patient” who demands more time, the doctor isn’t likely to try to push you out the door as fast as possible. Healthcare isn’t free, but is heavily subsidized and prices are controlled by the government. I have no clue what the prices for your medication will be, but generally just seeing a doctor and getting medication is very affordable. Seeing a doctor with no insurance is in Shanghai costs maybe 20-30 RMB, and the big bag of random medication they give you rarely costs more than 200 RMB. That part of Darkest Auer’s post is true, by the way, hospitals are here are always starved for funding, so one way they meet costs is by always prescribing overpriced Chinese medicine to go along with the stuff you actually need.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
Chinese doctors in most hospitals are undertrained, underpaid and badly overworked. The absence of primary care providers and the guahao system contributes to a revolving door style of diagnosis and treatment, where each doctor tries to get you out of his or her office as quickly as possible and if it’s not immediately clear what’s wrong with you, you’re extremely likely to be given the run around between multiple doctors or hospitals until someone bothers to actually sit down and figure it out. Prescription of Chinese medicine is basically required at some hospitals, and if you’re particularly unlucky, that’s all you’ll get, along with instructions straight out of the 19th century about how it’s important to avoid strongly flavored foods that could excite the wrong humors. What’s more, there are a number of small hospitals that don’t even have proper qualifications and exist basically as scams. This was a major scandal with Baidu, that their top search results for hospitals very often directed people to for-profit scam hospitals where they were charged 5-10 times the standard cost for treatment by unqualified doctors. As suggested above, getting in touch with your consulate to figure out which hospitals are recommended is a good idea. If you’re doing a postdoc, people at your institution will also be able to tell you where to go, and will probably volunteer to take you. But there are good doctors too, the cost of basic care and medication is very affordable and as long as you are willing to put up with some hassle and make sure you go to a reputable hospital, you will eventually get the care you need. Kassad posted:I used ExpressVPN when I was there earlier this year. It worked fine.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2018 06:39
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:The example of TCM in China is substantively different from the example of, for instance, Native American traditional medicine in the United States, because as Telsa has been pointing out, it’s key that for Native Americans, the mainstream medical system is a foreign system that often isn’t familiar with their culture and values, isn’t staffed by their people, and is almost always systematically biased against them. But in China, the choice isn’t “go to the hospital and/or go to a doctor who knows and cares about who I am and where I come from.” You can go to a Chinese hospital and talk to a Chinese doctor trained in China, be examined with Chinese machines, and receive medicine made in China. The same isn’t true for minority groups. Treating TCM in China the same way as other traditional forms of medicine is looking at it with a very American mindset—Chinese people are a minority in America, so of course, the same issues that confront them in America must be present in China too? This is a good point, but a modified version of Telsa Cola’s argument still obtains. I think it’s very likely that if someone went and researched the topic, they would find that wellbeing according to TCM is intrinsic to the concept of wellbeing among probably the majority of the people in China. TCM terminology, though perhaps misused and poorly understood, and quite likely bullshit in the first place, has extreme currency here. It’s not at all hard to imagine that if people are not treated with at least some recognition of the ideology that lies at the core of their sense of being healthy and well, they might do badly. It likely doesn’t matter to them if the doctor looks Chinese and speaks Chinese and the machine is made in China if the medicinal system is fundamentally western and the terminology both incomprehensible and clearly foreign. It’s still a kind of very arrogant, colonialist attitude that enlightened westerners know what’s best for everyone in the world and they’d all do better if they just threw out their ignorant rubbish. I’m not about to go to bat for how TCM is practiced in China. The system here is awful and deeply in need of reform. I’ve seen first hand someone go through a terrible ordeal because they went to a hospital and were prescribed Chinese medicine for an infection. But the psychological need for alternate sources of treatment isn’t going anywhere any time soon. CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Western medicine is responsible for such great hits as SSRIs, xanax and short acting benzodiazepines that absolutely lose efficacy past 2 weeks, and the practice of cherrypicking and submitting only the studies that make your drug look better than what actually does. In what way is this relevant to the conversation? We all know about corruption in our medical system and hopefully nobody here thinks western medicine is perfect or has all the answers. But if you got an infection, would you get acupuncture or antibiotics?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2019 06:34
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:I’m not sure you’re... arguing with me? The fact that many people still see mainstream modern medicine as inherently Western is a problem I’ve acknowledged, and it often comes as a product of mainstream medicine not doing enough to serve the communities it’s meant to take care of. I guess we basically agree. I think everyone in the thread agrees that the current system is bad, rather the argument is over how it should be changed: whether TCM is important in a reduced and more heavily regulated supplementary role to mainstream medicine or whether it’s entirely worthless. It’s possible I misread the discussion and I almost certainly got confused about who said what, though. I do think that there might be a difference between how people see medical terminology in the west and in China. “Foreign” here doesn’t just mean foreign to one’s knowledge and experience but also clearly not traditionally Chinese. But I’m not sure how impactful that is. My feeling is that western medicine is generally well received here. But for most westerners, there is a much more conclusive sense in which “medicine” means “western” medicine and it is the primary authority on whether someone is well or not, which is definitely not the case in China.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2019 07:11
|
|
|
It’s possible to believe people have a right to protest without defending them burning someone alive. Attempting to justify actions like that discredits any other attempts to defend the protests. It doesn’t matter what that guy did, pouring fuel him and lighting it on fire is not an appropriate response. Unrest is necessary to force change, and violence sometimes is going to be a part of that, but there’s no need to step in and defend sadistic, inhuman behavior. I don’t think anybody in this thread changed their minds about the protests because of that incident. The tankies and Chinese nationalists or whoever are still going to oppose the protests and most everyone else is still going to support them. Hopefully everyone together can oppose burning people alive. Heithinn Grasida fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Nov 12, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I said to a HK goon "I won't feel sorry for you when poo poo hits the fans." not "I hope you get stabbed or torched to death like Joan of Arc". What exactly do you think would happen if the poo poo hit the fan? Is being run over by a tank a better fate than being stabbed? You were also being quite ghoulish. Kill All Cops posted:Thanks for reminding me that he was burned alive. My opinions on the protest have now shifted 180 degrees and now I must condemn protesters and talk about what a tragedy this is for the poor innocent old man because to be seen otherwise must mean I support and justify arson on human beings. Please support the Hong Kong Police and their brave actions on peacefully pacifying kids and pregnant women. Nobody's opinions have shifted at all. There's no reason to be afraid that if you condemn a wanton act of sadistic cruelty, even if it was perpetrated by the people on "your side", that people will stop supporting the protests. Not burning people alive is a pretty low bar to clear. Saying that doing something like that is bad doesn't make you a cop or a boot licker. Condemning barbaric behavior helps the protests and supporting it harms them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2019 13:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Um yes, to leave no ambiguity here, Hong Kong is one of the most capitalist cities on earth and I have expressed this before in this thread. I think the idea is that this is unlikely to change significantly under CCP leadership and is, in fact, a situation preferable to the CCP elite, who themselves are capitalists in all but name and have enriched themselves considerably at the expense of the working class by encouraging the growth of capitalism in their country. By expressing support for them, you’re not supporting socialism over capitalism, rather you’re expressing support for rightwing authoritarian capitalism over centrist liberal capitalism.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2019 07:11
|
|