After 4 days on hunger strike Maajid Nawaz secures debate about Uyghar Muslims

2u2me

Deleted User wrote: »

The CCP hates religion because it holds authority outside of their control.

Exactly this is the very problem with the CCP. They hate anything that could threaten their authority. The most dissenters I've ever seen in a vote held by them is 1. Often times 0. This problem will not end until the CCP ends.

The problem was perfectly highlighted in the series "Chernobyl". It becomes more about saving face, not admitting to facts, not admitting to ownership, thus endangering many more people. Little to no reflection, constant changing of history, constant editing of what has just happened. Look at how they continually try to scrub Tiananmen Square from their history.

There has been reports of all sorts of words and Chinese characters being banned that the CCP don't like from the likes of Youtube comments, to Basketball jersies in the US. Everytime one of these were found the response was "Oh this was just a mistake, look it's fixed now".

Recently an Australian undergraduate, Drew Pavlou was suspended from his university; many fearing it had to do with his outspokenness against the CCP.

It's not just religion that they hate; it's any dissenter at all.

2u2me

2u2me wrote: »

Exactly this is the very problem with the CCP. They hate anything that could threaten their authority. The most dissenters I've ever seen in a vote held by them is 1. Often times 0. This problem will not end until the CCP ends.

The problem was perfectly highlighted in the series "Chernobyl". It becomes more about saving face, not admitting to facts, not admitting to ownership, thus endangering many more people. Little to no reflection, constant changing of history, constant editing of what has just happened.

It's not purely the CCP. It's a part of their cultural history going back thousands of years. These things are not going to be removed with the disappearance of the CCP. The Chinese crave authoritarian leadership, because their culture is based on the avoidance of taking responsibility. Nobody admits to making mistakes, and good ideas are always to be stolen from someone else. If you look at when the Imperial court encountered the European powers, the exact same things occurred. The avoidance of responsibility, the changing of what happened to save face, etc. because it's a core part of their culture.

I see it when I catch my students plagiarizing, or cheating in exams. They know that they've been caught, but they're only sorry that they were caught. I can explain why such behavior is wrong, but they don't fully comprehend why it is wrong to do... and given a little amount of time, they'll try to blame someone else for what happened. It is what it is.

Look at how they continually try to scrub Tiananmen Square from their history.

No. They scrub it from the view of foreigners. All Chinese people know about Tiananmen square, and what happened. The official version finds excuses, but everyone has heard something from friends or family. They're not trying to delete it from history, and the CCP has admitted some negligence for what happened (by using scapegoats within the party).. the focus is on removing it as ammo for foreigners to use against the CCP or Chinese people. It's considered an internal issue, and not something for foreigners to discuss. You get the same thing about Mao's Cultural revolution... Shame, guilt, anger but also a very strong belief that it's nothing for foreigners to talk about.

There has been reports of all sorts of words and Chinese characters being banned that the CCP don't like from the likes of Youtube comments, to Basketball jersies in the US. Everytime one of these were found the response was "Oh this was just a mistake, look it's fixed now".

Recently an Australian undergraduate, Drew Pavlou was suspended from his university; many fearing it had to do with his outspokenness against the CCP.

It's not just religion that they hate; it's any dissenter at all.

We're seeing changes to the English language with the censoring of many words for many reasons. This is another case of the hypocrisy of Western culture (in the eyes of many Chinese). We'll point out the censoring of Chinese people, and then, ignore how we do it to our language. As for dissenters... China is, and always has been (in modern times) a police state. It's never pretended otherwise. They call themselves a democracy but their own language describes the CCP as being guardians with ultimate power to protect and to dispense justice.

The CCP has always hated anyone who disagrees with the party line. The nationalists were the same. As was Imperial China before them. It's part of their traditional culture to treat dissent harshly. They have their own systems in place to allow criticism to occur, and it's never done in public.... those who voice their criticisms in public know that they're going against traditional culture, and they're setting themselves up to be martyrs.

I'm not excusing it, but there's little point applying western standards to a culture that has been following the same set of standards for thousands of years....

MrMusician18

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's not purely the CCP. It's a part of their cultural history going back thousands of years. These things are not going to be removed with the disappearance of the CCP. The Chinese crave authoritarian leadership, because their culture is based on the avoidance of taking responsibility. Nobody admits to making mistakes, and good ideas are always to be stolen from someone else. If you look at when the Imperial court encountered the European powers, the exact same things occurred. The avoidance of responsibility, the changing of what happened to save face, etc. because it's a core part of their culture.

I see it when I catch my students plagiarizing, or cheating in exams. They know that they've been caught, but they're only sorry that they were caught. I can explain why such behavior is wrong, but they don't fully comprehend why it is wrong to do... and given a little amount of time, they'll try to blame someone else for what happened. It is what it is.



No. They scrub it from the view of foreigners. All Chinese people know about Tiananmen square, and what happened. The official version finds excuses, but everyone has heard something from friends or family. They're not trying to delete it from history, and the CCP has admitted some negligence for what happened (by using scapegoats within the party).. the focus is on removing it as ammo for foreigners to use against the CCP or Chinese people. It's considered an internal issue, and not something for foreigners to discuss. You get the same thing about Mao's Cultural revolution... Shame, guilt, anger but also a very strong belief that it's nothing for foreigners to talk about.



We're seeing changes to the English language with the censoring of many words for many reasons. This is another one of the hypocrisy of Western culture. We'll point out the censoring of Chinese people, and then, ignore how we do it to our language. As for dissenters... China is, and always has been (in modern times) a police state. It's never pretended otherwise. They call themselves a democracy but their own language describes the CCP as being guardians with ultimate power to protect and to dispense justice.

The CCP has always hated anyone who disagrees with the party line. The nationalists were the same. As was Imperial China before them. It's part of their traditional culture to treat dissent harshly. They have their own systems in place to allow criticism to occur, and it's never done in public.... those who voice their criticisms in public know that they're going against traditional culture, and they're setting themselves up to be martyrs.

I'm not excusing it, but there's little point applying western standards to a culture that has been following the same set of standards for thousands of years....

That in bold makes absolutely no sense. No foreigner is looking to the CCP for information on Tiananmen Square, western media was present at the time and the story was well documented. The suppression of the story is entirely within China's borders with the idea that while it can live on in folk memory - if it's not documented critically for Chinese to read then it can be forgotten about and/or spun to suit the CCP narrative.

The great firewall of China is about managing the information the masses of the Chinese receive in order to prevent opposition forming. CCP know that opposition and dissent can crystalize around an event (death of George Floyd is a good example), so all information around events which could potentially threaten the party are controlled.

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

That in bold makes absolutely no sense. No foreigner is looking to the CCP for information on Tiananmen Square, western media was present at the time and the story was well documented. The suppression of the story is entirely within China's borders with the idea that while it can live on in folk memory - if it's not documented critically for Chinese to read then it can be forgotten about and/or spun to suit the CCP narrative.

Its the difference between the Chinese perception of what happened vs the Western version of events. And I have seen university papers/presentations written by Chinese professors talking about Tiananmen square, and the effects of what happened on Chinese society. It's hasn't been removed from their history. It's simply been discouraged as a common conversational topic. To add with dozens of other topics that Chinese people typically avoid discussing.

The great firewall of China is about managing the information the masses of the Chinese receive in order to prevent opposition forming. CCP know that opposition and dissent can crystalize around an event (death of George Floyd is a good example), so all information around events which could potentially threaten the party are controlled.

The great firewall of China is mostly a face-saving exercise. It's only really US based websites along with a few major sites that are blocked... or those who directly compete with Chinese business or Chinese Social media. I can view RTE in China... or most European news sites. All without a VPN. The vast majority of my students have a VPN though, and they're not special in being that way... VPNs are common throughout China... and even without a VPN (I didn't use one until my last two years there), you can find many workarounds. It's only during the security council periods, that they crack down hard... and again, there's many ways around it (although Youtube/Facebook are typically really difficult to get working)

2u2me

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not purely the CCP. It's a part of their cultural history going back thousands of years. These things are not going to be removed with the disappearance of the CCP. The Chinese crave authoritarian leadership, because their culture is based on the avoidance of taking responsibility. Nobody admits to making mistakes, and good ideas are always to be stolen from someone else. If you look at when the Imperial court encountered the European powers, the exact same things occurred. The avoidance of responsibility, the changing of what happened to save face, etc. because it's a core part of their culture.

But their culture went through a cultural revolution as you admit later in this post. Anyway I don't see how the CCP and Chinese culture at present are so interlinked, apart from the Uyghurs they've also crushed the Falun Gong movement. Surely Falun Gong was much closer related to their cultural past then the current incarnation of the CCP.

We're seeing changes to the English language with the censoring of many words for many reasons. This is another case of the hypocrisy of Western culture (in the eyes of many Chinese). We'll point out the censoring of Chinese people, and then, ignore how we do it to our language. As for dissenters... China is, and always has been (in modern times) a police state. It's never pretended otherwise. They call themselves a democracy but their own language describes the CCP as being guardians with ultimate power to protect and to dispense justice.

You're right, we've lost the moral highground by giving into the cancel culture, banning of words, taking of offence, hate-speech laws etc.. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't stop fighting. Where as we might apply these things at a cultural level the CCP enforce theirs with the full authority of government.

I'm not excusing it, but there's little point applying western standards to a culture that has been following the same set of standards for thousands of years....

Some standards aren't western standards. They're just human standards. Like the standard of not being harvested for your organs.

Yurt2

2u2me wrote: »

Some standards aren't western standards. They're just human standards. Like the standard of not being harvested for your organs.

There's a really tyranny of low expectations around the behavior of the CCP, and people shrug their shoulders as if mass-sterilization, arresting dissenting academics and journalists and gulags for Muslims are an essential part of Chinese culture since antiquity. And it's all shrouded in some pseudo-Orientalist nonsense about 'Asian values' and 'Western lenses.' I've posted before about Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore using this guff as a pretext to deflect criticism of his authoritarianism, and the CCP have very deliberately copied his playbook. Sadly, some foreigners parrot this nonsense. 你不了解中国 "You don't understand China"

Oh well, our western lenses couldn't possibly understand your ancient and oh so mysterious culture, so we'll just ignore the litany of human rights abuses. It would be a more credible arguement if the CCP didn't spend the best part of the last century attempting to erase what underpinned Chinese culture for millenia.

If all this illiberalism was such an essential part of Chinese culture, how can the Taiwanese sustain their democracy and why hasn't it all fallen apart with their free press and commitment to improving human rights standards?

Irish Praetorian

Yurt! wrote: »

There's a really tyranny of low expectations around the behavior of the CCP, and people shrug their shoulders as if mass-sterilization, arresting dissenting academics and journalists and gulags for Muslims are an essential part of Chinese culture since antiquity. And it's all shrouded in some pseudo-Orientalist nonsense about 'Asian values' and 'Western lenses.' I've posted before about Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore using this guff as a pretext to deflect criticism of his authoritarianism, and the CCP have very deliberately copied his playbook. Sadly, some foreigners parrot this nonsense. 你不了解中国 "You don't understand China"

Oh well, our western lenses couldn't possibly understand your ancient and oh so mysterious culture, so we'll just ignore the litany of human rights abuses. It would be a more credible arguement if the CCP didn't spend the best part of the last century attempting to erase what underpinned Chinese culture for millenia.

If all this illiberalism was such an essential part of Chinese culture, how can the Taiwanese sustain their democracy and why hasn't it all fallen apart with their free press and commitment to improving human rights standards?

Indeed, the famous soft bigotry of low expectations appear to be very much at play when it comes to China, but I've also found it applied to pretty much any non-Western state that engages in behaviour which would be sufficient to trigger riots and protests in a Western country. One would have thought, for example, that Russia invading Ukraine would have been a simple open and shut case of something we could all agree was wrong, but no, we had to see useful idiots obsequiously making representations on the part of 'Russian fear of invasion' and 'trauma over the fall of the USSR'. Its shameful to see the same lines trotted out by the same suspects when it comes to China.

2u2me

This video just released by the NYT a few minutes ago shows how the masks we are now wearing may have been produced in forced concentration camps by the Uyghars in China. "Which experts say often are put to work against their will"

2u2me

Pinned comment by one of the producers of this investigation/video.

Hi, I’m Haley, one of the producers on this investigation. Thanks for watching. Our team spent months trawling through Chinese state media, government documents, satellite images and shipping data to establish how Uighur labor is being used to produce P.P.E. and where that equipment is ending up. We started with a list of companies producing medical grade equipment, then went digging to see if any had connections to the labor transfer program. Shipments from some of the companies we identified led us around the world — from a medical supply distributor in Brazil to a Georgia-based company in the U.S. Leave a comment below if you have any questions about this investigation, and I’ll do my best to answer.

Danzy

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

and the authoritarian dystopian dictatorship it has become though.

Since 1949 it has been an authoritarian dystopian dictatorship.

It's not new, for the first 20 years, it was the most murderous regime in history. It's just returning to a more hardline position.

Danzy

sweet_trip wrote: »

The CCP is state capitalism fyi.
There's nothing communist about it other than the name.

It followed the same path every Communist revolution took.

The mindset of the faithful and coupled with an unworkable ideology will always lead to the same.

Ultimately it is the belief system that is the problem.

Danzy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

For the most part, yes, although on a local level, some provinces/districts still hold on to their communist past. It's rare though. There was a change in the 70s to put communism behind them, and embrace something different. State Capitalism with superficial overtones of communism.

The pre 70s, the lets give Communism a serious go era, saw the entire population in some years on rations equal to Belsen.

2u2me

2u2me wrote: »

But their culture went through a cultural revolution as you admit later in this post.

The cultural revolution wasn't any kind of development. It was a program by Mao to hunt down and destroy his paranoid fantasies about spies and disloyal elements within Chinese society. It severely damaged the community aspect of Chinese neighborhoods, with families turning on each other... It was an incredibly fcuked up movement.

Anyway I don't see how the CCP and Chinese culture at present are so interlinked, apart from the Uyghurs they've also crushed the Falun Gong movement. Surely Falun Gong was much closer related to their cultural past then the current incarnation of the CCP.

That's because you want to understand Chinese culture through the lens of western values. You're not trying to see them as being different. The CCP reflects the inner core principles within traditional Chinese culture... I mentioned them earlier.

You're right, we've lost the moral highground by giving into the cancel culture, banning of words, taking of offence, hate-speech laws etc.. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't stop fighting. Where as we might apply these things at a cultural level the CCP enforce theirs with the full authority of government.

We have governmental censorship too... it's already happening in the US.. it happened with their needs for national security, it happened with feminism, and now it's happening with race.

I'm not saying we shouldn't object to China's behavior. Never that. I merely pointed out what Chinese people often feel about the west...

Some standards aren't western standards. They're just human standards. Like the standard of not being harvested for your organs.

Which is a western standard applied internationally... Many countries engage in all manner of activities which aren't accepted under human rights, but human rights is a western concept... just as the UN was a western concept.

Yurt2

Deleted User wrote: »

That's because you want to understand Chinese culture through the lens of western values. You're not trying to see them as being different. The CCP reflects the inner core principles within traditional Chinese culture... I mentioned them earlier.

??? Ah here

Honestly klaz, you're doing the Marco Polo thing again. Interpreter of the inscrutable and unknowable Orient.

Sometimes an absolutist dictatorship is just an absolutist dictatorship, and not about the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Laozi, the Anelects or Pei Mei stroking his beard on a misty mountaintop.

4068ac1elhodqr

Is the recent spin from uk's Raab, and even Europe all just hype n' bluster?

Huawei has been embedded in their telecom systems already for a fair while, then there's the small, slow and expensive issue (in the uk) of building nuclear plants.

If they were really serious about blocking Chinese sensitive tech, they have to complile a very long list, and start with tetra radio systems, then facial recognition systems, and who knows what ever else.

Odhinn

Yurt! wrote: »

??? Ah here

Honestly klaz, you're doing the Marco Polo thing again. Interpreter of the inscrutable and unknowable Orient.

Sometimes an absolutist dictatorship is just an absolutist dictatorship, and not about the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Laozi, the Anelects or Pei Mei stroking his beard on a misty mountaintop.

A lot of it - AFAIK - goes back to the teachings of Confucius, with regard to the respect of elders, keeping society in harmony, not rocking the boat and so on.

Danzy

I agree with Klaz on human rights being actually Western rights.

What we view as universal human rights are largely a product of Europe.

As that fades so will those human rights and democracy.

I agree that China has largely been the same in mindset, whatever the system.

.
The question I feel is did that exacerbate the inevitable savagery that Communism or those striving for it always end up going to. It did but the practical nature of their society also ended it ina way that avoided conflict.

The zealotry of the righteous hunts out Internal heretics and sinners in Society when reality does not bend to expectation and analysis. That happens from micro groups like PbP all the way to the CPC.

Yurt2

Odhinn wrote: »

A lot of it - AFAIK - goes back to the teachings of Confucius, with regard to the respect of elders, keeping society in harmony, not rocking the boat and so on.

To be honest, that's like ascribing Greek political developments to Homer's Odyssey. The link between ancient China and what we see today is threadbare indeed.

Taiwan, South Korea and to a lesser extent Japan are all derived from the same cultural wellspring, and manage to hold together fairly liberal democracies.

Statues of Confucius were torn down all over the country during the cultural revolution (he's only very recently back in favour as some fuzzy national symbol), and the Chinese reformers of the late Qing in the 19th century pinned the rot in the nation on the 'olds' in Chinese society such as Confucianism and it went over the bow of the ship a while back.

Closer to the truth is that China is run by a paranoid clique still traumatized by the Cultural Revolution. Goodies and business opportunities are handed out by the party and the state run banks, and they'll do anything to keep the circus rolling.

Yurt2

Danzy wrote: »

I agree with Klaz on human rights being actually Western rights.

What we view as universal human rights are largely a product of Europe.

As that fades so will those human rights and democracy.

I agree that China has largely been the same in mindset, whatever the system.

Basically the following...


By Kim Dae Jung, now deceased President of South Korea, arguing that 'Asian values' are a fig-leaf for prickly authoritarians that don't like criticism. Illiberal leaders like Park Chung-hee and Lee Kuan Yew suddenly had a new found love for Confucius (neo-Confucianism) and repackaged surface level interpretations of 'the ancient' as an ethical justification for retaining power and acting like potenates.


https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/southeast-asia/1994-11-01/culture-destiny-myth-asias-anti-democratic-values

Yurt!

Yurt! wrote: »

There's a really tyranny of low expectations around the behavior of the CCP, and people shrug their shoulders as if mass-sterilization, arresting dissenting academics and journalists and gulags for Muslims are an essential part of Chinese culture since antiquity.

I don't agree. There is a expectation that China should be something more than it is. It is a totalitarian state that engages in horrible behavior. The point is that few countries cared enough to do anything about it, fearing the backlash in diplomatic, or economic terms.

And I don't think anyone is trying to pass off their extreme behavior as being part of ancient culture. At least I wasn't. I spoke about their culture for specific examples, and none included their human rights abuses.

And it's all shrouded in some pseudo-Orientalist nonsense about 'Asian values' and 'Western lenses.' I've posted before about Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore using this guff as a pretext to deflect criticism of his authoritarianism, and the CCP have very deliberately copied his playbook. Sadly, some foreigners parrot this nonsense. 你不了解中国 "You don't understand China"

That would be me then? Sure, I'll go with you don't want to attempt to understand China.

Oh well, our western lenses couldn't possibly understand your ancient and oh so mysterious culture, so we'll just ignore the litany of human rights abuses. It would be a more credible arguement if the CCP didn't spend the best part of the last century attempting to erase what underpinned Chinese culture for millenia.

True enough. Although you're lumping in every aspect of Chinese culture, history and behavior together and saying that Westerners understand it all completely.... Which I don't agree with.

Some aspects of Chinese culture and behavior is understandable and should be openly criticised... the detention camps, the ethnic cleansing, etc. All of which China should be taken to account for. However, there are aspects of Chinese culture which have little resemblance to Western culture, or experiences, and so, trying to understand it from a western perspective is flawed.

If all this illiberalism was such an essential part of Chinese culture, how can the Taiwanese sustain their democracy and why hasn't it all fallen apart with their free press and commitment to improving human rights standards?

Because Taiwan made a switch, for it's own survival. They were a hardline totalitarian state for a time, with clear divisions as to who had the power and those who didn't. They made the switch because they didn't want to be taken back into the fold by the CCP, and were willing to accept drastic changes to ensure their own survival. You're being awfully selective about Taiwans history and how their society evolved... It's a great country now, but it wasn't always that way.

Yurt!

Yurt! wrote: »

??? Ah here

Honestly klaz, you're doing the Marco Polo thing again. Interpreter of the inscrutable and unknowable Orient.

Sometimes an absolutist dictatorship is just an absolutist dictatorship, and not about the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Laozi, the Anelects or Pei Mei stroking his beard on a misty mountaintop.

I'm genuinely not trying to do that. I've lived there and there are aspects to their culture I haven't fully gotten a grasp on.... on the other hand though... I've seen many westerners come to China, convinced of their superiority in applying western standards to China, and leaving confused/angry because their understanding didn't secure prosperity for them.

Why? because they didn't try to understand the system that exists, the cultural norms, and expected their past experiences to be enough.

There are strong differences between western and Chinese perspectives. Just as there are differences between Irish and Spanish perspectives. There will be some similarities because of shared culture/religion/history, but there are differences all the same. With China, there are far fewer similarities, and so a greater divide in perspectives.

Danzy

Danzy wrote: »

I agree with Klaz on human rights being actually Western rights.

What we view as universal human rights are largely a product of Europe.

As that fades so will those human rights and democracy.

I agree that China has largely been the same in mindset, whatever the system.

.
The question I feel is did that exacerbate the inevitable savagery that Communism or those striving for it always end up going to. It did but the practical nature of their society also ended it ina way that avoided conflict.

The zealotry of the righteous hunts out Internal heretics and sinners in Society when reality does not bend to expectation and analysis. That happens from micro groups like PbP all the way to the CPC.

I feel it comes down to the "life is cheap" perspective. Historically, China experienced huge famines, floods, etc which caused massive loss of life fairly often. With such a large population, they looked at death (beyond the personal experience of family) in harder terms. So, the PRC treatment of minorities and abuse of human rights reflects the belief that "life is cheap". You see similar in Africa with regards to behavior during civil wars, genocides, famines, etc.

I don't think Communism made them any worse than they were before. Imperial China massacred huge groups of people in rebellions, and other ventures, along with the deaths caused by corruption or negligence. It's just a continuance of not caring about people who are not already part of your personal circle.

Communism is just another face for them to show. Just as the Nationalists behaved the same, or the imperials. Just another face of not caring about how many people die or how they die.

Yurt2

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't agree. There is a expectation that China should be something more than it is. It is a totalitarian state that engages in horrible behavior. The point is that few countries cared enough to do anything about it, fearing the backlash in diplomatic, or economic terms.

And I don't think anyone is trying to pass off their extreme behavior as being part of ancient culture. At least I wasn't. I spoke about their culture for specific examples, and none included their human rights abuses.

That would be me then? Sure, I'll go with you don't want to attempt to understand China.



True enough. Although you're lumping in every aspect of Chinese culture, history and behavior together and saying that Westerners understand it all completely.... Which I don't agree with.

Some aspects of Chinese culture and behavior is understandable and should be openly criticised... the detention camps, the ethnic cleansing, etc. All of which China should be taken to account for. However, there are aspects of Chinese culture which have little resemblance to Western culture, or experiences, and so, trying to understand it from a western perspective is flawed.



Because Taiwan made a switch, for it's own survival. They were a hardline totalitarian state for a time, with clear divisions as to who had the power and those who didn't. They made the switch because they didn't want to be taken back into the fold by the CCP, and were willing to accept drastic changes to ensure their own survival. You're being awfully selective about Taiwans history and how their society evolved... It's a great country now, but it wasn't always that way.

On the highlighted bit; to ascribe what we see in China today as some sort of vague expression of Confucianism is to quite simply, misunderstand contemporary China. I cringe when I see people invoke Confucius when they talk about modern China. It's used to explain everything from the price of dumplings to Deng Xiaoping's haircut, and 99 times out of 100, it's just lazy and wrong.

How the CCP conducts itself has almost nothing to do with traditional Chinese culture. The CCP would love Johnny foreigner to think so as it would lend some sort of legitimacy to their carry on.

On Taiwan, the people of Taiwan seized democracy for its own sake. I'd take issue with how you characterize their democracy movement, but we'd be here all night.

Yurt!

Yurt! wrote: »

To be honest, that's like ascribing Greek political developments to Homer's Odyssey. The link between ancient China and what we see today is threadbare indeed.

Not really. Confucius has remained a major rolemodel within Chinese society throughout the history of the PRC because it reinforces obedience. Oh, i get that the PRC sought to destroy their historical culture, before and during the cultural revolution, but the excesses of the Cultural revolution, have allowed a lot of breathing space for it to return. Once Mao and his immediate cronies, left power, there was more tolerance towards traditional beliefs.

The Chinese have put far more effort into connecting with their ancient cultures than any westerner population has about theirs. But then, it makes sense. Chinese culture is very backward looking, seeking to promote when they were successful and powerful. Western culture tends to (at least it used to) look to the future for new adventures.

Taiwan, South Korea and to a lesser extent Japan are all derived from the same cultural wellspring, and manage to hold together fairly liberal democracies.

All of which had American military bases, and direct contact with western nations. There's no comparison with China.

Statues of Confucius were torn down all over the country during the cultural revolution (he's only very recently back in favour as some fuzzy national symbol), and the Chinese reformers of the late Qing in the 19th century pinned the rot in the nation on the 'olds' in Chinese society such as Confucianism and it went over the bow of the ship a while back.

My university has compulsory classes exploring Confucius's teachings. All freshman students need to attend two semesters of these classes. In addition to their politics class.

Confucius has an extremely strong influence over China's filial culture, and the place of individuals within society. You're dismissing one of the strongest influences within their society.....

Closer to the truth is that China is run by a paranoid clique still traumatized by the Cultural Revolution. Goodies and business opportunities are handed out by the party and the state run banks, and they'll do anything to keep the circus rolling.

All true.

Yurt!

Yurt! wrote: »

On the highlighted bit; to ascribe what we see in China today as some sort of vague expression of Confucianism is to quite simply, misunderstand contemporary China. I cringe when I see people invoke Confucius when they talk about modern China. It's used to explain everything from the price of dumplings to Deng Xiaoping's haircut, and 99 times out of 100, it's just lazy and wrong.

Sure. I get that. I've invested the time to read the majority of his teachings. Not because I agree with him, but because it comes up so often in China... more importantly though, I see the effect of his teachings on young people.

Chinese people are very conditioned... with Confucius being one of the prime examples of conditioning.

How the CCP conducts itself has almost nothing to do with traditional Chinese culture. The CCP would love Johnny foreigner to think so as it would lend some sort of legitimacy to their carry on.

No, I agree with you. However I said it reflects the traditional principles. The CCP isn't any different from the nationalist government, nor the Empire before... an expression of total power, and a complete unwillingness to allow anything to threaten that powerbase.

On Taiwan, the people of Taiwan seized democracy for its own sake. I'd take issue with how you characterize their democracy movement, but we'd be here all night.

True enough...

Yurt2

To be polite about it, they're learning about Confucius with CCP characteristics, and the party's new found love for a figure that they spent decades trying to scrub from modern China is surface level. It serves the new red-nationalist agenda, and I doubt we're getting much in the way of discussion on how many other Asian scholars see the seeds of democracy in the Analects (see Kim Dae Jung again) as opposed to a crude justification why the party is the sun and the moon.

It's the equivilent of a college class titled "Why The Cantebury Tales tells us the Tory Party should Rule Britain Forever." You'll get some Chaucer in there sure, but it's not the point of the class.

Yurt!

Yurt! wrote: »

To be polite about it, they're learning about Confucius with CCP characteristics, and the party's new found love for a figure that they spent decades trying to scrub from modern China is surface level.

Sure they are. The CCP is very good with propaganda and pointing the mob in any particular direction. However, it's not simply the teachings of Confucius being distorted by the CCP, but older generations also teach these values to their children and grandchildren. In many country districts, there are no formal schools for everyone, and the education is done by community teachers, who are local, and who teach all the traditional things they learned from their parents or grandparents.

The CCP doesn't control everything... because it doesn't need to. There's nothing in Confucius's teachings to drive people away from the values that the CCP wants Chinese people to have.

You seem to see the CCP as a constant force endlessly enforcing past directives. It's not that way at all. With the removal of Mao, many former policies were scrapped entirely, with gradual freedoms being given to the people, especially in the countryside. The Cities less so. But the CCP decided to use a lighter hand in controlling its population (although that's changing again now).

It serves the new red-nationalist agenda, and I doubt we're getting much in the way of discussion on how many other Asian scholars see the seeds of democracy in the Analects (see Kim Dae Jung again) as opposed to a crude justification why the party is the sun and the moon.

It's the equivilent of a college class titled "Why The Cantebury Tales tells us the Tory Party should Rule Britain Forever."

All traditional culture reinforces the legitimacy of the CCP because traditional culture reinforced the need for respect of hierarchy, and almost a caste system. The traditional culture that Mao wanted to destroy is being used to encourage Chinese people to see themselves as culturally superior to their neighbors, which feeds into the nationalism that's being promoted... but TBH that's been going on since the 80s with the Chinese movie/tv industry producing movies (or KTV Videos) showing traditional aspects mixed with the great strides achieved by the CCP and the PRC.

China is likely to be a superpower if they don't go to war for the next two decades. If they manage to rein in their aggressiveness, and allow themselves time to build up their internal economy, and resolve some internal issues, they'll be in a seriously strong position.. However, that's unlikely since Xi, needs to regain Taiwan to appease the military, and justify his position as "supreme" leader.

Sand

When push comes to shove, the UK is a regional power which seems determined to pick a fight with a superpower with absolutely no benefit to the people of the UK. It is baffling why they persist with this policy of aggravation with a country on the other side of the world.

Regardless of the rights and the wrongs of Chinese internal policies, in a real diplomatic and economic conflict with China, the UK - outside the EU security blanket - will very quickly find its not the 19th century anymore.

I get why Maajid Nawaz cares, but I'd really like to see the Tories explain how aggravating the Chinese government, violating international treaties and transferring 3 million hong kong residents to the UK helps people in the UK. If nothing else, Iraq and Afghanistan should have taught the UK that it has no business intervening in Asia. Least of all when Brexit Britain will need every bit of good will and co-operation that they can muster from potential trade partners.

MontgomeryClift

Sand wrote: »

I get why Maajid Nawaz cares, but I'd really like to see the Tories explain how aggravating the Chinese government, violating international treaties and transferring 3 million hong kong residents to the UK helps people in the UK.

That's the important question. It all begs the question is anybody in power there actually working on behalf of the people of the UK.

This record of Maajid Nawaz' conversion to Zionism and his links with Quilliam from an Islamocentric site called Loonwatch makes for interesting reading.

It seems that Quilliam got into financial trouble and was saved by Zionist money.

I haven't checked out the stuff this site links to for information, so caution is advised, but it's worth reading:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2017/03/06/maajid-nawaz-and-quilliam-the-money-trail-behind-the-propaganda/

Sand

Sand wrote: »

When push comes to shove, the UK is a regional power which seems determined to pick a fight with a superpower with absolutely no benefit to the people of the UK. It is baffling why they persist with this policy of aggravation with a country on the other side of the world.

Regardless of the rights and the wrongs of Chinese internal policies, in a real diplomatic and economic conflict with China, the UK - outside the EU security blanket - will very quickly find its not the 19th century anymore.

I get why Maajid Nawaz cares, but I'd really like to see the Tories explain how aggravating the Chinese government, violating international treaties and transferring 3 million hong kong residents to the UK helps people in the UK. If nothing else, Iraq and Afghanistan should have taught the UK that it has no business intervening in Asia. Least of all when Brexit Britain will need every bit of good will and co-operation that they can muster from potential trade partners.

Personally, I suspect it's a way to huddling up to the US, since they've lost the support of the EU. It's likely some backroom deals were suggested that the UK would receive some preferential treatment, due to their actions with Huawei, and HK.

As for benefits, they gain a highly educated and skilled workforce although they;ll also be burdened with many HKers who are poor/uneducated. The other advantage is the financial/economic relationships that those HK professionals had worldwide, possibly being transferred to London, along with whatever wealth they had. Really depends on who gets to go to the UK...

I agree though that it's extremely risky. China owns (leased) most of the worlds major ports for shipping, and has extensive investments in trading companies. The UK could end up hurting really bad, especially if China does some kind of deal with the EU. The US isn't in any position yet to make up the difference that would be lost from trade with China or Chinese companies.