|
This is a fascinating read! "The changes in nature cannot be avoided" is a pretty good turn of phrase for the things a farmer has to take care of without machines. Was migrant work a huge factor in American farming at the time? Is that going to be brought up in a later chapter?
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2019 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
Of course America had a history before Plymouth Rock. We just threw it out because it wasn't a "civilized" history. Coming in right after its apocalypse didn't help. China didn't get that option, but seeing a perspective on American patriotism from the outside is a real eye-opener.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:I assume he means how a lot of these sites are carefully manufactured to present a specific historical ideal to visitors, something you don't think about as an American like, ever. Right. I got my "American history" in bits and pieces through my actual history, from formal schooling and casual interest, from a lot of perspectives. I can't turn all of that off to look at just the manufactured ideal, so it's interesting to read a thoughtful analysis from someone who takes that ideal as their primary experience.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2020 15:17
|
|
|
Kangxi posted:This could be why Wang was so interested in the questions of local government in the United States - it was something that the PRC was experimenting with at this time; not necessarily from an ideological commitment to liberalism, but as a means of addressing local issues where it lacked the state capacity to do so. There's something I am curious about, political science-wise; if you hold local elections just to make things responsive enough to avoid revolt, doesn't suborning local elections when you have enough power carry a greater risk? Or is that just factored into the cost?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2020 04:53
|
|
|
Kangxi posted:Translators' Note: Wang's preoccupation here is the transfer of power. This is not exclusively an issue with the People's Republic of China, of course, but I'm adding it as this is the most relevant example from Wang Huning's own experience. Yeah, that's the trick, isn't it? Finding someone who's both willing to use that power and willing to give it up. It'll be a good day when someone works that one out. Searching "takes off his armor and returns to the farm" brings up the Anabasis. Is that the source of it? It's a simple but evocative phrase.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
As far as I'm concerned there might be interesting stuff anywhere in this book, so why not go straight through, but the translation's all on you so go where your heart leads. Does the book have anything to say about the gold standard and the Bretton Woods system, as far as impacts to the economy go? The Great Depression was a demand crisis, largely caused by economies operating on the gold standard not wanting to issue the currency they were entitled to in case they needed to trade for something later. The US malaise of the 70s was a supply crisis, caused first by an abrupt withdrawal from the Bretton Woods system, which resulted in a rapid fall of the dollar against other currencies (protip: don't become the world's central banker under the assumption everyone else's economies will be devastated by war forever, also protip: WHY ARE YOU STILL ON THE GOLD STANDARD THAT poo poo CAUSED THE GREAT DEPRESSION) and second by OPEC increasing its prices in the wake of the Bretton Woods collapse, which wreaked further havoc with the oil-dependent production chains in most economies. In both cases it wasn't necessarily the action of the United States on its own that managed things, but rather how the United States was able or unable to react to the operation of international systems.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
Attracting international professors is probably one of those unequal advantages - an already wealthy country is willing to pay well and part ways on amicable terms.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 02:03
|
|
|
Just to reaffirm, it was a going concern at the time in China to ground the administrative changes of Communism in the national tradition, right? Because it seems a lot like the author is seeing what he wants to see here. It's not like Americans don't make extensive appeals to the national tradition at pretty much all times, that much tracks completely. It's just that despite what Mr. Lincoln had to say, America actually has endured as half slave and half free, from the beginning times all up to the present day, if you just qualify "half slave" as "half aspirational slaveholders". The "national tradition" is so vast that you can ground anything in it and have that resonate because the perception of the national tradition is unfairly narrow. For a practical example of this, look at noted wasp hive/tub of butter hybrid Ted Cruz attempting to ground the objection to the electoral vote in the American national tradition, conveniently omitting "you know, that one year where Southern militias massacred black voters in the streets and traded lasting disenfranchisement of them for a temporary electoral setback".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
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. This is good information, thank you! I probably shouldn't suppose there's that motivation, then; as I've said earlier, a running theme through this book is that the author is analyzing more how America presents its history than the actual American history.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2021 23:33
|
|
|
Kangxi posted:Short thoughts: 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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
Kangxi posted:Chapter 3: A Colorful National Character 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
|
|