Let's Read America Against America

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Let's Read America Against America

«‹›4 »

Glazius: Jul 22, 2007; Hail all those who are able,
any mouse can,
any mouse will,
but the Guard prevail.; Clapping Larry

Kangxi posted:

Short thoughts:
-This looks a bit too rosy compared to how many people believe in mystical conspiracy theories and QAnon bullshit these days; but Wang is perhaps being overoptimistic here to illustrate the points he wants to make.

I think there's a distinction there, in that... people believe in them but they're not societal? Part of the reason they work is that they hold themselves outside society and try to cut people off from general circulation.

That said, one of the things mystification does is simplify whatever's under the mystic veil, which has its uses in a society that's often too complicated to easily understand.

# ? Jan 13, 2021 23:06

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 27, 2024 16:37

Big Hubris: Mar 8, 2011

I would say that a total lack of mystery is a defining trait of QAnon and conspiracy theories in general, but maybe I'm mistaken?

quote:

But the great power of religious preachers in America is not proof of the mystery of religion and God.

# ? Jan 14, 2021 06:15

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

American are heavily influenced by Protestantism and the Enlightenment. Both of those have Demythologization as a project.

# ? Jan 14, 2021 07:08

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

I've also updated the Table of Contents for the first time in ... months. The work goes on. The next chapter is on 'Sanctification', as a complement to the previous chapter.

Big Hubris posted:

I would say that a total lack of mystery is a defining trait of QAnon and conspiracy theories in general, but maybe I'm mistaken?

I've lurked in the QAnon threads for a while; from these Qultists, I understand just a desperate sense to try and make sense of the world even through the most convoluted stories but still believing what they prefer to be true. It's like the human tendency for pattern recognition gone completely haywire.

Bar Ran Dun posted:

American are heavily influenced by Protestantism and the Enlightenment. Both of those have Demythologization as a project.

Or Marxism - at least in the early years of trying to demythologize the industrial revolution with the idea of commodity fetishism.

# ? Jan 16, 2021 20:45

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

Well, looks like this thing has caught some attention:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxNB-j04s-w

# ? Jan 19, 2021 13:58

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

Chapter 3: A Colorful National Character

Part 4: Sanctification

quote:

Americans tend to demystify, but they also tend to sacralize the most. Sacralization is still not deification because it involves relationships between people. Americans rarely deify anything. In some societies, a thing is often sanctified when it reaches beyond the capabilities of ordinary people. [...] Some people on the Pacific islands deified the accidental landing of a U.S. Army plane during World War II by making a realistic plane out of wood to worship. In not a few societies, shamans possess mystical perceptions. American society does not have such a culture, and while there have been cases of mass suicides of hundreds of people like the People's Temple Church, these are rare. The American nation does not tend to mystify or deify, but it has a special nature that I call 'sanctification'.

The wooden plane phenomenon of Melanesia has been a topic of discussion by anthropologists for decades: some authors believed that these cargo cults could be direct antecedents to other forms of social organization. The term 'cargo cult' was used in previous decades to discuss the phenomenon, but now it has fallen out of favor among academic anthropologists.

The People's Temple was a new religious organization that was founded in 1954 and led by the Reverend Jim Jones. It combined elements of Christianity with Marxist elements and a message of racial equality. At its peak in the 1960s, it claimed membership in the tens of thousands. The temple is best known for the events of November 1978, where members of a visiting congressional delegation were murdered and nearly all the members of the church in Guyana, including Jones, committed mass suicide by drinking poisoned grape juice. It was the single largest deliberate loss of American life in a single day until the events of September 11, 2001. It is widely cited as one of the most prominent incidents of a destructive cult.

quote:

What is "sacralization"? Sacralization is first and foremost a secular domain. It has a certain nature of worship, but it is not religious worship. The process of sanctification is the elevation of an earthly phenomenon to a very high status. This process is not initiated by any one person or organization but it is a process of socialization. Let's look at the specific analysis of what I call sacralization before we analyze the social function of this phenomenon.

The American nation is very susceptible to emotional impulses, and a people that are very receptive to externalities. Sacralization can be seen in the political sphere. The National Convention of both parties is a typical example of this sacralization. The enthusiasm, the excitement, and the genuine emotion of the people in the room were a rare spiritual resonance. The candidates of both parties will be warmly welcomed in this venue. When they come out, people can cheer for as long as ten minutes. Their speeches, constantly interrupted by applause and cheers. Throughout the campaign, candidates from both parties are greeted in this way wherever they go. As usual in such an individualistic and egalitarian culture, it is difficult for an individual to receive such adulation. One of the reasons for this is that they are sanctified. They are just a symbol, a symbol of a culture, or a goal that people are pursuing more of a sacred frame of mind.

Wang does get more into the process of conventions and parties later in the book.

quote:

Americans are also very easy to get to this point for individuals. No matter who they are and what industry they are engaged in, as long as they have made achievements, they are often easy to become the object of sanctification - even up to the president. It can be said that Washington and the founding fathers, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy, etc. are sanctified. While praising them, Americans are also praising a spirit. The sanctification of the individual is not only embodied in the political realm.

Wang then goes on a long tangent about individuals from the sports world - such as the Olympic track and field athlete Carl Lewis, the Olympic diver Greg Louganis. Then he moves onto the world of business, with Lee Iacocca and Pete Ueberroth. After that, one military figure, Lt. Col Oliver North, who is still lauded in some quarters for his 'patriotism', and then figures from pop culture - where Michael Jackson went to receive awards from President Reagan. Finally, he moves to figures from the world of technology, such as the founders of Apple Computers, and An Wang, of Wang Computers.

quote:

This process of sanctification is fully open, not by a center that decides who can become the object of sanctification, but by the public's choice.

Wang then moves on to football games and eventually the military:

quote:

The whole process of the game, from the playing of the national anthem to the ceremonies, to the game, to the performance at the break in the stadium, went beyond the game itself. For example, the event under the Statue of Liberty to celebrate the bicentennial of the country was lively and grand, and its nature was not an ordinary celebration, but some kind of sanctification. This is the work of the government. The government is often the promoter of sanctification, as in the case of the military, and the sanctification of the military is obvious. This is especially true of American attitudes toward military victories and those who have fallen in battle. There is a peculiar Vietnam War Memorial in Washington, D.C., where every fallen soldier has been named. For the fallen, official funerals are held with pomp and circumstance. The government's fondness for the space shuttle is also an excellent example. When the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded, the government gave the astronauts who died extremely high praise and honor, seeing them as dedicated men who pioneered the American spirit. The successful launch of the Space Shuttle Discovery, which the government viewed as a triumph of the American spirit, has taken on a significance beyond the technological breakthroughs of astronautics.

quote:

The process of sanctification is actually the process of elevating various phenomena that people believe in and choose into the American spirit, as well as the process of people accepting the American spirit. Society cultivates this mechanism, and people have a solid psychological deposit of hero-worship and achievement worship. The basic spirit depicted in the western goes against hero worship and achievement worship. [...] Today's heroes are not the cowboy images of yesteryear, and today's concept of achievement is also changing. However, the character of hero-worship and achievement worship still exists in the hearts of Americans. The American nation lacks the worship of ghosts and gods, and the first two worship instead.

These two kinds of worship are hidden in the hearts of people and will reveal themselves when given a strong and powerful call. The growth of egalitarianism, nihilism, and relativism in contemporary American culture has caused a deep suppression of this character. Under ordinary conditions, it is difficult to imagine that Americans would have such strong feelings of worship. The process of sanctification is, on the one hand, a process of social induction and, on the other hand, a process of self-release. A look at the frenzied emotions of the audience at ball games, venues, and concerts will show how they satisfy the two basic human needs mentioned above: a sense of worship and a sense of personal release.

[...] The non-mystical tendencies of the American nation make it difficult for them to produce deified worship, and the need for human worship turns to the secular. People look for worship in their own surroundings. Americans are a pragmatic people who find it difficult to worship abstract, legendary, and invisible objects, but they can worship success, bravery, adventure, and wisdom in their own surroundings. This worship carries with it a complex of elements, rational, irrational, emotional, non-emotional, conscious, and unconscious. The process of sanctification is not actually the sanctification of the individual, but the sanctification of a spirit. This spirit has constituted the tradition of culture and has become the gene of it. The process of sanctification of society in turn constantly consolidates it. [...]

The process of sanctification has a fundamentally social function, which is to maintain and transmit the core values of society. The process of sanctification of society plays an extraordinary role in spreading its spirit to all levels of society on the one hand and attracting people to join the process of sanctification on the other. I am reminded of Rousseau's argument that society must have a civil religion, and I feel that the process of sanctifying society is very much like the process of creating and spreading a civil religion. In such an individualistic, self-centered society, sanctification is the best mechanism for spreading core values.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) was a Genevan philosopher of the Enlightenment. In his book, The Social Contract, he defined civil religion as a group of beliefs that he believed were universal - belief in a diety, belief in an afterlife where the good are rewarded and the evil punished; and that government should uphold and maintain these views. Civil religion, to Rousseau, should be simple and without any complex interpretations.

quote:

A society cannot develop in a balanced manner without core values. The question is where do core values come from and how are they maintained. If they are extracted from people's surroundings, they are likely to be the most powerful mechanism if they are spread and maintained by the people themselves.

Kangxi fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Jan 20, 2021

# ? Jan 19, 2021 15:21

BrutalistMcDonalds: Oct 4, 2012; Lipstick Apathy

Kangxi posted:

Well, looks like this thing has caught some attention:

This thread has just been ahead of the curve. Smart ladies and fellas around these parts.

https://twitter.com/Ryan_J_Mitchell/status/1350330631796846592

BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 12:34 on Feb 25, 2021

# ? Jan 23, 2021 12:07

Glazius: Jul 22, 2007; Hail all those who are able,
any mouse can,
any mouse will,
but the Guard prevail.; Clapping Larry

Kangxi posted:

Chapter 3: A Colorful National Character

Part 4: Sanctification

Yeah, that's the flipside of demysticality. People need something to believe in.

And there's good money and/or power in pretending you're worth believing in, assuming you can keep it up for long enough.

# ? Jan 29, 2021 01:20

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

It also creates the opening for revolutionary romanticism, fascism to reconstruct incoherent myths to try to restore the demystified ones.

# ? Jan 29, 2021 01:28

GabenFoucaulf: Feb 26, 2017

Hi - long time lurker first time poster. I've downloaded the online scans of WHN's book myself but found the discussion here truly valuable. It gets at the higher goal of reading this book - as insight into how Wang perceived the evolution and pitfalls of modern American society, as well as interpreting this book just as a grand history of the US, a genre harder to find these days.

Here's some important news: someone on twitter actually machine translated the entire book already. He uses the DeepL software, which I can attest is much better than Google Translate. This versions will have errors due to transcription and translation, but I hope it could still help others engage with the text or to save time with the translation.

https://twitter.com/JaakWaller/status/1353100985325903872

I'm happy to do my part to help translate and commentate Ch. 5-7. My credentials are that I'm a native Chinese speaker and a PhD student in the social sciences. These chapters on US politics appear in demand and it's also something I can speak to as someone who refreshes political journalism twitter too much.

This book is also quite frustrating to read, because WHN hedges a lot in his preface about the book's themes. While more informed readers can disagree (please do), I think this book has a tight structure and WHN is defending some specific theses throughout but not straight up saying what they are. From start to finish, WHN wants to analyze the question of "why did a nascent country like America become the dominant world power" through what he calls the "historico-socio-cultural" framework. And very quickly in the preface and first chapter, I argue he starts to contemplate three themes that make up three distinct sections of the book:

1) He analyzes the American "national character" in a pretty old-fashioned way, much like the US military did after the war with their anthropological studies of other nations. It's interesting to note that the phrase "American dream" 美国梦 appears once in the whole book, while the phrase "American spirit" 美国精神 gets like 30+ hits across all the chapters. However, the bulk of his analysis on national character is in Ch. 1-3. The most important technique in this part is that he contrasts his own Marxist/historicist interpretation of how American society coalesced around certain ideas, with the "liberal consensus" he found in books like Commager, which asserts that a free people settling into America associated themselves around principles of freedom, pragmatism and human progress.

I think in Ch. 4 he discusses the stability of modern American society because its structure concords with the liberal consensus that is promoted in American civic education. In Ch. 11 he discusses political controversies and structural issues with American society by framing them as breakdowns in the American national character.

2) Ch. 5-7 are about the American political system. In the preface WHN asks "The economic decision-making power of the United States is mainly controlled by private consortia. Is this democracy? Is this undemocratic? I fear it cannot be answered so simply." WHN describes the structure of American government and of American policymaking, with a particular focus on how politicking is possible despite the weak party system of the United States, where it's obvious that political parties are not guiding institutions but rather a collection of interest groups jostling for power. This is where he also ties in his anecdotes from living in Iowa during the 1988 presidential campaign and seeing retail politics up close.

3) Ch. 8-10 seems to be focused on the nature of American capitalist institutions, and how American capitalism has been able to thrive, maintaining a prosperous society while also fueling the innovation that made the US as strong as it was then. (I haven't even skimmed this part so this is a total sketch. I might edit later.)

# ? Feb 4, 2021 21:31

BrutalistMcDonalds: Oct 4, 2012; Lipstick Apathy

bump

# ? Feb 25, 2021 12:10

BrutalistMcDonalds: Oct 4, 2012; Lipstick Apathy

Bar Ran Dun posted:

Now that�s interesting and reminds me of something in the socialist decision.

�Between the origin and the present stands tradition.�

So capitalism / modernity is always breaking myths of origin. But capitalism also needs myths of origin understood through tradition to support itself. So there is a fight between the between the bourgeoisie, the romantics (the conservatives) and the revolutionary romantics ( fascists) over tradition. One of arguments Tillich made was that socialism should also support itself through unbroken myths of origin by what eventually becomes his method of correlation (which is this applied to Christian theology).

Anyway it�s super interesting to see another tradition reaching the conclusion they should do that.

Kangxi posted:

First, I feel like I should add that there was a lot of pushback against the economic reforms over the 1980s at top levels. So if you want to talk about 'conservative' figures at the top levels of party leadership, this would lead to people such as Chen Yun, Li Xiannian, Li Peng who were cautious or openly skeptical about economic reforms. This resulted in such campaigns as the Anti-Spiritual Pollution campaign of late 1983, and the Anti-Bourgeois Liberalization campaign of 1986. So one meaning of 'conservative' might refer to this wing of the party.

But if we're talking about traditional culture, that's different. The Chinese Communist Party in the later Mao era had a combative relationship with much of traditional Chinese culture, and the extreme example is the Four Olds campaign. But by the 1980s, in the Deng era, you start to see more topics from the pre-Communist era allowed to be discussed. The publication of more scholarly works on Confucius began in the 1980s, the rehabilitation of various figures in non-Communist regimes started in the 1980s. But a lot of this really accelerated after 1989, after the student protests and the horrible tragedy of June 4th.

Excuse the brief answer without any citations, it's late and I've been F5'ing the results of the Georgia election constantly.

Knowing very little about Confucianism and knowing it's impossible to do justice to its complexity in a post, it's still interesting getting the undergrad philosophy 101 cliff notes version of its emphasis on tradition and rituals, in context of the CPC's language about building a "harmonious" and "beautiful" society. Now, rituals are a thing in all societies and political systems (just see the importance of the U.S. presidential inauguration and Trump's insult to it), either centrally or in part with varying intensity, of repeated patterns of traditional activity and pledges and oaths that give order and structure to the society and give people meaning. Now, Confucius can be thought of as a conservative and he was also big into a rigidly stratified and hierarchical society, although he was an ancient philosopher in same manner as Socrates and Plato and you could also argue that he was a radical in his time because he felt his society was just falling apart. And the yin to Confucius' yang would be the Daoists which is like "gently caress you I'll do what I want?" Or I'm just going to go hang out by a lake and go fishing.

But what's also interesting about Confucius is how he thinks it's important that people perform these social rituals, but be so good at it, and so perfect at it, that the performance of the ritual is also effortless and spontaneous. You've so embodied and internalized the social mores of your culture (along with being altruistic and treating people well) that your spontaneous desires sync up perfectly with them. And that's an amazing vision, really. But you can see this also in social rituals like handshakes that we learn and perform until it becomes natural to us.

Thinking about that while watching these videos which are all from the CPC, the first one being the military specifically showing training of the PLA honor guard, the second and third are from the party's "Don't Forget Your Original Heart, Keep Your Mission in Mind" campaign (wouldn't surprise me if Wang Huning was responsible). And all three videos are absolutely loaded with little rituals whether it's the children saluting statues of their elders or the party member pouring tea and arranging notebooks in a remote meeting hall. It creates some real Breakfast of Champions energy:

https://files.catbox.moe/9v6c6u.mp4

https://files.catbox.moe/w20mx6.mp4

https://files.catbox.moe/y05yf6.mp4

BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Mar 1, 2021

# ? Feb 25, 2021 12:25

BrutalistMcDonalds: Oct 4, 2012; Lipstick Apathy

BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Feb 25, 2021

# ? Feb 25, 2021 15:18

Orange Devil: Oct 1, 2010; Wullie's reign cannae smother the flames o' equality!

Having recently started dating a Chinese woman and getting a bit of an inside perspective on Chinese life and society that way, I am more and more concluding that China is currently the most successful capitalist country in the world. They appear to be straight up better at capitalism than Western countries because they actually understand it (ironically due to Marxism) and are not burdened by belief in their own bullshit liberal lies.

The results for regular people are of course exactly as disastrous as you'd expect from any capitalist economy. And also as usual nationalism is used to paper over that.

# ? Feb 25, 2021 15:22

BrutalistMcDonalds: Oct 4, 2012; Lipstick Apathy

I'm interested in the displays and aesthetics of power and of political regimes. This is one reason why I find Wang Huning so interesting as an ideologue. But I'll also watch CCTV music videos glorifying the party state, and it reminds me of Reagan America in some ways, or Van Halen with Sammy Hagar, which is all the more interesting because Wang was in the United States when that was going on.

This is like Top Gun stuff:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHsrbgZw7yc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siwpn14IE7E

There's an official optimism and the kid who wants to be a fighter pilot. There are astronauts and soldiers watching the skies. There are rituals like the Communist Youth League kids unfurling the flag and doing it correctly with the flick of the arm. We're gonna rock you like you a hurricane because it's all about love and pushin' it to the limit and it's just something you feel together.

Of course, I'm sure there are Chinese who look at this stuff cynically, but there are probably a lot of Chinese who like it, just like there are Americans such as my dad who likes Van Halen and The Right Stuff.

The relevance to socialism or Marxism, I suppose, is whether they feel they have to instill and encourage a communist culture, ethic and set of motivations in the same way capitalists do with their values (and not without reason), but that might be hard to do when there are material impediments to doing so, and whether that ideology will be derailed by an out-of-control consumer culture, which they can't exactly stamp out if they want to transition to a domestic consumption model. It's an interesting thing to think about.

There was something Mark Ames and John Dolan said recently on their podcast about the Reagan regime, in that unlike the American right today, it was more reserved back then and it didn't burn as hot, it was much more powerful, and felt much more inevitable as a political force. It's like a tectonic force or iceberg that is just gradually advancing, and that I think that's probably how power really works. It's a marathon, not a sprint. And you can see how people fail at political analysis in the U.S., just like how you see so many wrong predictions about Biden in 2020 and that the Democrats would just fail as opposed to succeeding while being slow, gradual and... inevitable. And also about the CPC, a lot of what passes for analysis in the west is that they're going to fall apart any minute now, but I've doubted that for awhile now and I haven't been proven wrong so far.

This year is the 100th anniversary of the CPC and if you see those tweets above, Wang Huning is telling people to go all out for the celebrations, so it'll be interesting to see.

BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Mar 1, 2021

# ? Mar 1, 2021 00:47

Fleetwood: Mar 26, 2010; biggest hochul head in china

just happy to be here lol

(who is the guy behind Wang Huning?)

This entire Standing Committee intro is funny to me because the image Party officials project runs contrary to the disposition of our American Congress-critters who love to cultivate unique personalities for the public.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSnsV5QXRCg&t=920s

# ? Mar 8, 2021 02:13

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

Deeply sorry for the delay and my total lack of substantial replies to the thread. Work, pandemic, etc., etc.

Fleetwood posted:

just happy to be here lol

(who is the guy behind Wang Huning?)

艾力更依明巴海, Arken Imirbaki, a Uyghur. US Treasury Department sanctioned him and other vice-chairs of the Standing Committee of the National Peoples Congress over Hong Kong in 2020.

Fleetwood posted:

This entire Standing Committee intro is funny to me because the image Party officials project runs contrary to the disposition of our American Congress-critters who love to cultivate unique personalities for the public.[/video]

The main exceptions to this are the most of the delegates from non-Han minorities, who show up in folk dress. I don't know if there is a legal mandate or not off the top of my head, but it's been the case for a while.

https://twitter.com/Jacob_T_Gunter/status/1367665876745392128

The guy with the cool hat is Oroqen.

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

And also about the CPC, a lot of what passes for analysis in the west is that they're going to fall apart any minute now, but I've doubted that for a while now and I haven't been proven wrong so far.

This year is the 100th anniversary of the CPC and if you see those tweets above, Wang Huning is telling people to go all out for the celebrations, so it'll be interesting to see.

You do get a few people who made the mistake of putting a year on when the decline and collapse would happen, like Gordon Chang. There are people who are pessimistic about how the CCP can deal with future issues, but the smarter ones know better than to put a date on anything.

It will also be of interest to see how the party + PLA react to events, how they present events, etc.

GabenFoucaulf posted:

Cool stuff

Thanks for posting the machine translation and the link. DeepL I've found can produce work that is slightly more accurate than Google Translate in some nontechnical fields but both have their flaws. If you're still out there I'd be very interested in having further discussion or commentary in the thread.

Any interest in a summary or looking at what the National Peoples' Congress is proposing this year? BrutalistMcDonalds has posted some of the speeches but the policy priorities and changes may also be of interest.

# ? Mar 8, 2021 03:00

BrutalistMcDonalds: Oct 4, 2012; Lipstick Apathy

Fleetwood posted:

just happy to be here lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbuJrK69x6g

"We've got some red flags to cover..." oh ho ho

BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Mar 11, 2021

# ? Mar 8, 2021 03:15

Fleetwood: Mar 26, 2010; biggest hochul head in china

^^^^ I was gonna say it looks like the same tie but Wang might be the kind of guy who gets extras when he finds something he likes

Kangxi posted:

艾力更依明巴海, Arken Imirbaki, a Uyghur. US Treasury Department sanctioned him and other vice-chairs of the Standing Committee of the National Peoples Congress over Hong Kong in 2020.

Thank you!

Kangxi posted:

Any interest in a summary or looking at what the National Peoples' Congress is proposing this year? BrutalistMcDonalds has posted some of the speeches but the policy priorities and changes may also be of interest.

Heck, yes. Stuff like that is great.

# ? Mar 8, 2021 06:31

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

The 2021 Two Sessions and the 14th Five-Year Plan

What are the Two Sessions?

The Two Sessions are the National Peoples Conference (NPC) and the Chinese People�s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC). They take place almost simultaneously, but they are separate events. This year, they started on March 4th and concluded on March 11th.

The NPC is de jure a unicameral legislature, composed of a majority of Chinese Communist Party members and a smaller minority of other parties. De facto, it is largely described outside of China as a 'rubber-stamp' legislature, which signs whatever it receives. While it has never vetoed a piece of legislation presented to it, the percentage of 'yes' and 'no' votes is often viewed as indicative of the party bureaucracy's opinions towards a piece of legislation. More contentious pieces of legislation may never reach the full NPC for a vote.

The CPPCC is de jure a political advisory body, consisting of delegates from the Chinese Communist Party, front organizations, the eight other legally recognized political parties, and delegates from civil society, academia, and the private sector. It is not a body of state power nor does it formally have the power to create laws. In practice, it is largely a means of communicating party goals to figures within civil society and in recent decades, major business leaders, although its actual influence is marginal.

Produced by the Harvard Fairbank Center, this image reflects an understanding of the party structure at around the close of 13th NPC and CPPCC in 2018. This is slightly out of date, and may not reflect current events.

In practice, however, most power is held by the seven-member Standing Committee of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party. Xi Jinping, who is General Secretary of the Party, Chief of the Central Military Commission, and President of the PRC, is easily the most powerful member of the standing committee, although the other members of the standing committee, including Wang Huning, have substantial responsibilities reflecting their formal assignments and roles. The South China Morning Post describes Xi as not being "first among equals", the other six are also important. The other members of the politburo, in addition to their formal areas of responsibility, can be organized into "leading small groups" which focus on specific issues across multiple bureaucratic areas.

These seven members are part of a twenty-five-member politburo, which represents the top leadership positions of the Chinese Communist Party - with all governmental institutions and the military reporting to party leadership.

So why even pay attention to these?

The two sessions are where the CCP unveils its long-term initiatives and goals for the next year. This usually includes targets for GDP growth, but also other policy issues such as pension and social welfare reform, environmental policy, poverty alleviation, industrial development, and scientific research funding priorities.

This year's two sessions have an additional importance because of the announcement of the 14th Five Year Plan, which covers the years 2021 to 2025. Students of Soviet policy might recognize the term 'Five Year Plan', but the similarities end there. The current 14th Five Year Plan includes targets for GDP per capita, a renewed focus on sustainable energy, and promotion of domestic consumption as a market for domestically produced products. This year's NPC also includes a "2035 China Standards" program, which lists targets for domestic investment and growth in addition to the manufacturing boom promoted by the "Made in China 2025" plan.

# ? Mar 17, 2021 02:59

jimmusmcbobbus: Aug 13, 2010

Hi, I would love to ask you a few questions about your translation in a private setting. I dont have a platinum account, and dont want to pay for one just to dm you haha. Please email me at al2337@cornell.edu if you are so inclined!

# ? Jun 9, 2021 16:04

jimmusmcbobbus: Aug 13, 2010

Kangxi posted:

The 2021 Two Sessions and the 14th Five-Year Plan

What are the Two Sessions?

The Two Sessions are the National Peoples Conference (NPC) and the Chinese People�s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC). They take place almost simultaneously, but they are separate events. This year, they started on March 4th and concluded on March 11th.

The NPC is de jure a unicameral legislature, composed of a majority of Chinese Communist Party members and a smaller minority of other parties. De facto, it is largely described outside of China as a 'rubber-stamp' legislature, which signs whatever it receives. While it has never vetoed a piece of legislation presented to it, the percentage of 'yes' and 'no' votes is often viewed as indicative of the party bureaucracy's opinions towards a piece of legislation. More contentious pieces of legislation may never reach the full NPC for a vote.

The CPPCC is de jure a political advisory body, consisting of delegates from the Chinese Communist Party, front organizations, the eight other legally recognized political parties, and delegates from civil society, academia, and the private sector. It is not a body of state power nor does it formally have the power to create laws. In practice, it is largely a means of communicating party goals to figures within civil society and in recent decades, major business leaders, although its actual influence is marginal.

Produced by the Harvard Fairbank Center, this image reflects an understanding of the party structure at around the close of 13th NPC and CPPCC in 2018. This is slightly out of date, and may not reflect current events.

In practice, however, most power is held by the seven-member Standing Committee of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party. Xi Jinping, who is General Secretary of the Party, Chief of the Central Military Commission, and President of the PRC, is easily the most powerful member of the standing committee, although the other members of the standing committee, including Wang Huning, have substantial responsibilities reflecting their formal assignments and roles. The South China Morning Post describes Xi as not being "first among equals", the other six are also important. The other members of the politburo, in addition to their formal areas of responsibility, can be organized into "leading small groups" which focus on specific issues across multiple bureaucratic areas.

These seven members are part of a twenty-five-member politburo, which represents the top leadership positions of the Chinese Communist Party - with all governmental institutions and the military reporting to party leadership.

So why even pay attention to these?

The two sessions are where the CCP unveils its long-term initiatives and goals for the next year. This usually includes targets for GDP growth, but also other policy issues such as pension and social welfare reform, environmental policy, poverty alleviation, industrial development, and scientific research funding priorities.

This year's two sessions have an additional importance because of the announcement of the 14th Five Year Plan, which covers the years 2021 to 2025. Students of Soviet policy might recognize the term 'Five Year Plan', but the similarities end there. The current 14th Five Year Plan includes targets for GDP per capita, a renewed focus on sustainable energy, and promotion of domestic consumption as a market for domestically produced products. This year's NPC also includes a "2035 China Standards" program, which lists targets for domestic investment and growth in addition to the manufacturing boom promoted by the "Made in China 2025" plan.

# ? Jun 11, 2021 03:06

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

Sorry for the delays, sent you an email

# ? Jun 11, 2021 05:22

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

Well, life has been a complete clusterfuck but I've had some time and built up a backlog.

Got to be honest, there's no way I can keep a consistent update schedule or do much of anything serious outside of my hobbies, but I will at least offer this up to the thread.

Chapter 3, Section 5: A Misguided Space Shuttle

Wang Huning posted:

The Discovery spacecraft is launched straight into the sky, Feihuang gallops.

This is an old and well-known idiom here, first cited from the early Tang dynasty poet Han Yu, and it refers to meteoric success.

Also, in a horrifying coincidence, when the TV show 'The Apprentice" was translated for the Hong Kong market, the same idiom was used instead of a direct translation of the title.

Wang Huning posted:

All television networks broadcast live footage of the launch. This was an extraordinary event for the United States, which had not launched a space shuttle since January 1986, in more than two years. That year, the world was rocked by the explosion of Challenger, which led to the death the astronauts. Two and a half years later, Discovery was launched, fulfilling the dreams of many.

His direct reference to the Shuttle Discovery and the first flight of the Space Shuttle after the Challenger disaster of 1986 make this a very easy point of reference. This is almost certainly referring to the launch of mission STS-26 on 29 September 1988.

Wang Huning posted:

The space shuttle program best exemplifies the American spirit, the American belief that nothing is impossible and that we will not rest until we have won. [Emphasis mine.] The exploration of space reflects this belief. The process of building, launching, and controlling a spacecraft is incredibly complex. Just look at the dizzying array of hundreds of computers in the control center and you can imagine the technological capabilities required. Since the Challenger disaster, the U.S. space agency has spent the last two and a half years improving the program, making more than 400 technical improvements.

The American belief is as described above, so they are convinced that they can find a way to persevere. This spirit prompted them to carry out many extremely daring imaginations, such as the Star Wars program, the space shuttle, etc., and also prompted them to accept many small and insignificant inventions, such as envelope opening machines, can openers, electric pencil sharpeners, etc.. It should be noted that this belief is a very important force in the development of society.

However, this belief can also be alienating. This belief has prompted Americans to come up with various solutions to the problems they face, resulting in a high level of scientific and technological development, but after the high level of science and technology, people often have the illusion that it is not people who ultimately solve the problem, but science and technology has become the ultimate power, and people have become its servants.

A professor and I discussed this issue and we shared similar impressions. This misconception dominates a large part of society. In the face of some tangled and complicated social and cultural problems, Americans tend to think of them as scientific and technological problems, or a financial problem (which is a result of the spirit of commercialism), rather than a humanistic problem, a problem of subjective feelings. This is also true in the political sphere. The way to deal with the increase in Soviet power was to desperately develop equipment superior to Soviet weapons systems, including the eventual Star Wars program. The way to deal with terrorism is to use advanced strike forces against the opponent. The way to deal with threats in international waters was a powerful and well-equipped fleet. The way to deal with regimes you don't like is to provide the opposition with a lot of advanced weaponry. The most typical illustration of this is the equipment that the disabled receive -- automatically guided wheelchairs, bedside service equipment that can follow orders today, and eyeglasses that can be guided. People with disabilities are free to move around. But as human beings, their problems are not completely solved. This is also true in the field of politics and international relations.

Wang Huning posted:

On the one hand, people have full faith in technology, and on the other hand, technology has become political. "After Discovery's successful launch, Kennedy Space Center Director Forrest McCartney said, "Everyone certainly stood tall today."

Forrest S. McCartney was a general of the United States Air Force who was selected to direct the Kennedy Space Center shortly after the Challenger disaster in 1986. He oversaw multiple successful launches and retired in 1991.

Wang Huning posted:

President Reagan watched the launch on television from Washington and said in a speech, America "returned to space." In fact, the space program has been a political weight from the beginning. In the 1960s, the Soviet Union succeeded in landing on the moon, and Americans were so enraged that President Kennedy ordered an all-out space program, followed by the Apollo moon landings, to overwhelm the Soviet Union by a mile. There is political competition behind technological competition. Political competition needs technological, and technological competition supports the political.

One of the important directions of humankind in the twentieth century is the high level integration of politics and technology. Politics without technology is weak, and of course, technology without politics cannot become great.

As a result of this combination of technology and politics, technology itself has been alienated. This phenomenon is particularly stark in the United States. Sometimes it is not the people who master the technology, but the technology that masters the people. If you want to overpower Americans, you must do one thing: surpass them in science and technology. For many peoples it is different; having technology does not work; there must also be cultural, psychological and sociological conditions. [Emphasis mine.]

quote:

Americans have been in a privileged position for a long time, almost since the First World War. There have been several generations of Americans in the past seven decades, and those born after World War II are now in their forties. This generation of Americans is in the atmosphere of "America First", and so an attitude has been formed. As a result, the United States is also a nation that cannot afford to lose. Their sense of technological superiority has gradually developed into a sense of national superiority, and they cannot imagine that any foreign nation can surpass them. Japan's rapid rise in the decades after the war, in the field of high-tech development is exceptionally fast - in some aspects Japan has surpassed the United States.

Do recall this was published in 1989, and the fear of a Japanese overtake of the United States had been pervasive since the 1970s.

quote:

Japan's rapid rise in the decades after the war, in the field of high-tech development is exceptionally fast, in some aspects has surpassed the United States. In some aspects, it has surpassed the United States, such as electronic products, automobile, and so on. Japanese products flooded into the U.S. market, and Japanese capital also flooded into the United States. Some people say that a lot of Hawaii's real estate has fallen into the hands of the Japanese, because the Japanese have come to buy houses, so that the land prices have increased. The Americans were not convinced, and were often disdainful of the Japanese, always talking about them with contempt. For a long time, Americans were reluctant to acknowledge Japan's success. Harvard University professor Ezra Vogel made a real effort to make Americans understand this point. His book "Japan as Number One" was a revelation to Americans. I think Americans will encounter a similar situation again.

Ezra Vogel (1930-2020) was a professor of Social Sciences at Harvard University. His PhD advisor was Talcott Parsons, and he held numerous scholarly positions including the director of the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies at Harvard. His book "Japan as Number One", first published in 1979, was written for a popular audience in the United States and encouraged readers to take positive examples and learn from specific examples of Japanese policing practices, education, and the role of the state in economic policy. He wrote an updated edition, Japan as Number One: Revisited in 1986, and Is Japan Still Number One? near the end of Japan's 'lost decade', of the years of stagnation after their 1991 economic crash.

Vogel was also notable his large volume of scholarly work across a wide variety of topics. He wrote a comparative study on industrialization of South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong, titled "Four Little Tigers". He also edited a volume on Park Chung-hee, president and military dictator of South Korea. More recently, he wrote an extensive and largely positive biography titled Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China. Deng was paramount leader of China from 1976 until 1989. The Chinese edition of the book was a massive seller in China, and won scholarly awards in both China and the United States.

Wang Huning posted:

This wonderful intersection of politics and technology also involved the space program. And this high technology is a concentrated reflection of that relationship. Some scholars have recognized this and have begun to criticize this "alienation". One physics professor, Allen [sic], argues that after the Challenger launch failure, NASA prioritized success in order to save face and for political motives. The misdirection of the space program is a metaphor for the misdirection of science and technology. It may take generations for Americans to recognize this "misdirection".

Allen here refers to Allan J. McDonald (1937-2021), an aerospace consultant and engineering at Morton Thiokol, a NASA contractor responsible for booster rockets. He had refused to sign off on the launch of the Challenger rocket, owing to freezing conditions which led to brittle components and the ultimate loss of the shuttle and the entire crew. McDonald's testimony during the hearings following the Challenger disaster marked a turning point in the investigation. He was sidelined within his company for years, but later worked as an engineering ethics consultant and speaker and wrote books on the Challenger disaster.

Kangxi fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Nov 25, 2022

# ? Dec 8, 2021 07:05

WAR CRIME GIGOLO: Oct 3, 2012; The Hague
tryna get me
for these glutes

On the first page I asked for page56 what chapter and page is page 56 so I can read the translation

# ? Dec 8, 2021 07:25

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:

On the first page I asked for page56 what chapter and page is page 56 so I can read the translation

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3903914&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=3#post503720780

# ? Dec 8, 2021 07:30

E Depois do Adeus: Jun 3, 2012; Nobody has better respect for intelligence than Donald Trump.

Just wanted to say thank you for putting in this effort to translate such an important text

# ? Dec 8, 2021 14:47

Baka-nin: Jan 25, 2015

I was listening to the Economists podcast series on Xi Jinping called The Prince, and Episode 4: Man enough touches on America Against America and the career of Wang Huning. It reminded me of this thread. Hope its finished one day.

Here it is

# ? Nov 25, 2022 09:20

Marenghi: Oct 16, 2008; Don't trust the liberals,
they will betray you

Yes I was enjoying this thread when it was.

Would love to see an English translation of the book but that doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar.

# ? Nov 25, 2022 13:21

Kangxi: Nov 12, 2016; "Too paranoid for you?"
"Not me, paranoia's the garlic in life's kitchen, right, you can never have too much."

Chapter 3, Section 6: Work Ethic

This chapter is largely about the discussion of the 'work ethic' or American attitudes towards work.

quote:

The American attitude toward work, naturally, cannot be said to be clear-cut and varies greatly. If we talk about the workforce of the whole society, the differences are enormous. I'm told that many people would rather receive government handouts than to get a job, and they don't do it even if they have one. This is a major problem in society, and many taxpayers complain: "Why is the government taking money out of our pockets and giving it to those who are idle?" The middle class especially is indignant about this.

Wang's discussion continues towards various attitudes or approaches towards the concept of working, noting that a 'work ethic' may be considered a major component of the economic development of Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Hong Kong, but a direct comparison to the United States may not be entirely apropos, as different systems of managerial control may not necessarily apply to the United States 'individualistic' society.

He emphasizes the individual work ethic of American people, ranging from the staff of the Congressman's office that he visited, academics, local government officials, and even the pizza delivery people, and workers at the airport - he describes all this with the term the 'tertiary sector".

quote:

The Japanese have a famous saying: "work until you piss red". Many people in the United States also work hard, but there is a substantial difference between them and the Japanese. Americans have a special word to describe such people, called workaholics [listed in English in the original] which is composed of the words "work" and "alcoholism". The question is, what are the things that make Americans work like this? In such a capitalist society, in such an individualistic society, what forces motivate them to do so? If work attitudes require large institutions to promote them, what are the implications for society? It would be an unbearable burden on the economic management of society if work attitudes required large organizations to actively promote them.

Wang then contrasts various possible explanations for American attitudes towards work, first starting with the Protestant work ethic:.

quote:

This spirit was brought to America from Europe by the early colonists and was based on the idea that material success was a sign of God's blessing and that those who achieved such success would be God's chosen ones and therefore enter heaven. Weber, who wrote a book analyzing the intrinsic relationship between the Puritan ethic and the development of capitalism, is a well-known theorist of this school. Today, this religious overtone has long since been watered down, but the spirit still exists to a limited extent. Most people can no longer be said to have been affected by this religious spirit. The development of culture has long since pushed aside this religious spirit to a distant place. If older generations still have this idea, the younger generation does not know what this religious belief is. So, it is obvious that religious feelings cannot be dumped to explain it. Religious feelings are, for the new generation, a distant story.

Max Weber is one of the most prominent social theorists of the 19th century, and one of the forefathers of modern sociology. The book that Wang is referring to is of course, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, where Weber proposed that the Protestant religion in northern Europe influenced large numbers of the people to work in the secular world, developing their own small businesses and the production of wealth for investment. It's interesting to note that Wang at least takes Weber's ideas on religious beliefs and ideas leading to material outcomes, instead of the usual Marxist supposition of the economic "base" being a causal factor for a belief "superstructure". But Weber himself did not mean to fully swap out material beliefs or the other way around; and while his specific thesis is not so highly regarded, his methodology has been foundational for multiple academic fields.

Wang then goes on to discuss other factors. First he cites the American Dream in and of itself, listing a desire to become independently wealthy and citing the miniseries Ellis Island, which was broadcast in 1984 and portrays the lives of immigrants in New York. Then, he moves on to psychology.

quote:

This [psychological] explanation is based on the belief that work can create a sense of satisfaction, such as in Maslow's systematic theoretical analysis. In fact, there are truly many Americans who seek psychological satisfaction in their work. This phenomenon is evidenced by the large number of volunteer workers. Voluntary workers are not paid, but they can shed their personal loneliness by their work, achieve social recognition, and find out the meaning of their existence. But after all, there are not many people who consider the problem from a purely psychological perspective.

Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) was an American psychologist who taught at various schools in the northeast. His doctoral advisor was Harry Harlow, who would later grow infamous for experiments causing despair and depression in monkeys and the effects of depriving them of paternal care. Maslow, by contrast, was a founder of "humanistic psychology", focusing on the achievement of personal self-actualization after achieving basic needs, and that a self-actualized person would achieve "peak experiences" more often than someone who is not; and that drugs are potentially a source of peak experiences under select circumstances. Maslow is best known today for his 'hierarchy of needs' schema, where a person needs several basic needs before (food, water, health) moving on to higher ones (safety, then love/belonging, then esteem, then self-actualization). He did not in fact use a pyramid diagram to describe all this, as that was developed by a psychology textbook.

Wang ultimately shifts to other explanations. First: that ones standard of living is determined entirely by personal income; and that there is no "lifetime employment" system in the United States as there is in Japan. Lifetime employment, or shūshin koyō was a major part of Japanese hiring practices throughout much of the 20th century, starting with the immediate hiring of new graduates after college and incorporating a strong feeling of company loyalty as part of the management culture. The practice has become less prevalent after the 2008 financial crisis, however.

quote:

On the one hand, people must work in order to survive or live a better life; on the other hand, if they want to continue working or get better pay, they must work hard, otherwise they lose their jobs. These two principles are the main driving force that drives most Americans to work hard at the present moment. Of course, other conditions are required for these two principles to work. Economically speaking, a sufficient flow of goods is a major component of this. A sufficient flow of goods allows everyone with money to buy anything for sale. Status, power and family are no longer restricted, so that everyone will pursue money instead of other factors. From a cultural point of view, since money is equal from of any job, the distinction between high and low in all walks of life is no longer important. The important thing is that with this money, one can achieve the goals one pursues. The money earned by people engaged in environmental sanitation does not stink, and it circulates in society just as well. When people's consumption desire is fully stimulated, as long as they have money, the difference in the nature of work is a secondary thing.

It can be said that this mechanism is coercive, that the capitalist way of operating includes all people, and everyone who enters the mechanism is forced to obey their rules, or it can be said that this is the coercion of private ownership. This mechanism can expel anyone who does not want to obey it. People get money here, and capital gets profit here. This is the basic mechanism that allows capitalist society to function. At the same time, this mechanism is outside the political system, and people's work ethic is ensured by this mechanism, not by the political system. The political system appears to be much more relaxed.

This is a summary. There are also anti-social and anti-systemic forces in society. Many people prefer to stay outside the system.

Americans work hard, but they are also the best at relaxation. In American terms, it means to "work hard and play hard" [English in original]. This is different from the Japanese, who are probably only the first half. Japanese people have recently been talking about a disease called "karoshi", that is, many people in middle age will die from long term overwork . Americans have the most ambitious plans on the weekends or during the holidays and are ready to spend a lot of money to do so. Students are also the craziest on weekends. Perhaps they have been forced and repressed too much at work and need to let off steam.

There is one prerequisite for a good work ethic in any society, and it is simple: find a way to make each person feel that they are working for themselves, not for others. For most people this is important. The way to make people feel this way can vary. This feeling is not necessarily created in the economic sphere alone, but also requires other conditions such as politics and culture. In fact social organizations, in any way, rarely allow everyone to work for themselves. This may not be considered a society [meaning unclear]. The key thing is to make people feelthis way, believe this way.

# ? Nov 25, 2022 18:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 27, 2024 16:37

Marenghi: Oct 16, 2008; Don't trust the liberals,
they will betray you

That's for continuing these. It's quite an interesting book and your commentary helps contextualize it.

The book itself must be a bit more popular now. I remember seeing it mentioned in the New Yorker earlier this year. And there's translated copies for sale on Amazon but they seem to be machine translated with all the problems that entails.

# ? Dec 2, 2022 00:30

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Let's Read America Against America

«‹›4 »