Hope for a future democratic China

[Andy Nguyen]

As if on cue, the NYT has an interesting series about the relationship of China-world and the effort to build its image

At Book Fair, a Subplot About Chinese Rights

FRANKFURT — As China extends its economic reach, it has also increased efforts to promote its culture, or “soft power,” to counter Western influence and improve its image in the wider world.

Yet if Chinese goods are accepted everywhere, its arts and literature, embattled at home after decades of censorship and state control, are proving harder for the government to export.

After years of delicate preparations, China was the “honored guest” this past week at the Frankfurt Book Fair, the largest and most influential book trade event, based on the number of publishers represented. But what Beijing hoped would be a celebration of its cultural achievements turned into a tug of war between control and free speech, as much a showcase for Chinese dissidents as the state’s approved writers.

Mao Zedong said that power flowed from the “wielders of the pen,” not only from the gun. But the chairman would not be amused to find books like “Mao: The Unknown Story,” an indictment of his rule that is banned in China, displayed alongside the official Chinese exhibit at this year’s fair, which ended Sunday.

When the German organizers and diplomats urged the Chinese to allow a prominent storyteller and musician, Liao Yiwu, to come to Frankfurt, the authorities refused to lift his overseas travel ban, and told him to stop talking about it.

Uneasy Engagement - At Book Fair, a Subplot About Chinese Rights - Series - NYTimes.com

 

[JDMe]

In case of Stockholm Syndrome, a person is forced to do what the captors have required them to do. If they do what they are asked to do, everything is hunky dory and there will probably be rewards, etc.

Similarly, in case of China, the citizens do not have a choice. They have to do what the govt. (captor) asks them to do. There is no recourse in courts, media, etc. The alternative choices are torture, imprisonment or getting shot in the head. In return the citizens are given economic development (which is just peanuts compared to any standards of the first world countries).

However, in US you are not forced to do anything for that matter. If you feel you are under duress you can always go to the court and if your concern is that rational probably media as well. There is no fear of loss of life and property and this is what makes Stockholm Syndrome applicable to dictatorships like China and not in general to every government.

 

[Yan He]

Born & raised in China, I came to US after finished my first master's. It's the eight years I've been staying in USA. So I think I should be qualified as "brainwashed", "highly educated" Chinese living overseas.

(1) All these years I was first amazed and then got used to the freedom people in this county enjoy & also notice the changes China experienced-----indeed, China still has a long way to go in respect to the freedom of speech and other citizen rights. I believe most Chinese here are not "indifferent" to the issue, but too occupied and struggle for the tough life in this foreign country.

(2) To be clarify, United States of America never stop selling its idea of "democracy" to China ever since at least the 40s, when China was still in the war between Mao & Jiang. To me, what kind of policies & regulations the other countries adopt are their own business-----it's just like how the neighbors handle their domestic relationship, how they educate their own kids. I think movie is a right entertainment for me doesn't mean that I will force my neighbors to the movie theater instead of going to bar. It's none of my business.

(3) What makes me feel proud that this "autocratic" communist country succesfully support 1.3Billion of population and the efforts to improve quality of lives and infrastructure. It's that simple to feed one fourth on this earth yet keep growing at this speed. Yes, I never neglect or deny that there are way too much to improve for the government, but at least, we all witnessing the changes and moves.

(4) To whom that criticized on the high tariff of Chinese govrnment, can you please do your homework before blast here? Simply "google" with key words "USA, China, tire industry, tariff", you will see who started the tariff protection action.

(5) My whole point here is, Chinese government is not perfect, none of any as far as I can see now. But I am happy that it trying to improve gradually.

(6) Everyone is welcome to pay visit to China. Only after that you will come up with your own unbiased conclusion about China.

 

[GoIllini]

Western countries -- in particular the US -- have entrenched oligarchies masquerading as mass democracies. In both the US and UK, both of the two main parties are on the side of a moneyed elite which -- since it owns the mass media -- circumscribes the range of debate. Since the parties depend on financial contributions from this elite, they are beholden to it. "Freedom of speech" exists because the rulers know it will have no real impact on public sentiment, and even in the rare cases it does, public disquiet doesn't lead to shifts in policy. So, for example, when millions of protestors came out against the invasion of Iraq in early 2003, Bush stood briefly in front of the cameras, said politely that he respected the position of the demonstrators but disagreed with them -- and end of discussion (and look where the US is today ...).

But at the very least, Western "democracies" are libertarian states- that's the most important part. Americans are free to rally in support of Ahmadinejad if they want to, and some even do. Swedes are free to say that their moderate socialist system is stupid. Brits are even free to speak in support of Sharia law or a communist dictatorship without fear of retribution from the government if they so choose.

Whether or not China becomes a democracy, it's natural for an educated society with lots of ideas floating around to open up to the idea of freedom of conscience. The fact that my neighbor wants anarchy isn't much of a threat to me because he's outnumbered 100 to 1 by people who support order and he respects the law anyways.

Where mass protest might have an impact, the authorities stomp it out. Look, for example, at the measures taken at the recent G20 in Pittsburgh. Real methods of democratic expression are stifled while a sham formal "democratic process" (choosing between two almost indistinguishable candidates, vetted by the same elite) is pushed forward.

Even if that's true, you realize that if anybody is the elite, it's the finance-type people. I didn't choose Barack Obama- myself and most of the people I work with would have preferred Ron Paul. The "elite" in New York and Washington don't run the country. It's really a bunch of people who mostly lack college degrees, drink an average of 12 beers a weekend, and get angry about random things from wars to bonuses that run the country. Populism sells in the US, and the elite are merely rooks surrounded by pawns on the chessboard. The system is bigger than us and we (if a financial programmer can put himself in with this group), are merely one part of a system that is much bigger than we can control or even predict.

What you are saying might have been a whole lot more true prior to the Vietnam War. Fifty years ago, the public was a lot more predictable.

The "cultural arrogance" is usually a mask for imperial policies. In the old days it used to be known as the "white man's burden" and "educating the heathen." which as we know with hindsight was a thin pretext for colonialism and mass pillage. More on this topic can be found in Immanuel Wallerstein's "European Universalism."

What I find particularly annoying is the victim mentality you so often see when it comes to certain repressed countries' views of the US and the West. The US, outside of a few minor interventions in Latin America in the early '80s, hasn't been an imperial power for over a generation. Yet people continue to attack us as though we are somehow responsible for their problems or arrogant in some regard with them. Our only "colonies" in Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the Phillippines don't do much complaining about how we set them back. And Latin America, which was much more under the thumb of the US, doesn't complain either. They are too busy working their way into the post-industrial world to to have time to complain.

Instead, you find that certain anti-libertarian countries that haven't seen US troops, warships, bribes, or any other form of coercion for generations do the most complaining about the US. Why is that? Nobody who is alive in the US has done anything to hurt your country; please stop complaining about the fact that some of our dead ancestors hurt you. I honestly have no idea how 100-year-old mercantilist trade policies have anything to do with ideology and it is a shame that foreign governments can still use the excuse of "imperialism" to deflect blame for their own failures onto the West, which has undisputably left them alone for the past 50 years, and largely left them alone for the past 70 or 80.

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->dude, you just need to shut up sometimes because, frankly, you don't know what you are talking about most of the time.

I think he's referring to China's manipulation of its currency.

 

[GoIllini]

it seems that a lot of people arguing against the chinese government don't really know what its like. while there may be a certain degree of censorship, i don't think there's as much "torture, imprisonment or getting shot in the head" as some people would like to think. in fact with guantanamo bay its quite possible that there's more of it going on here with the u.s. government.
and JDMe, china is not a dictatorship

As long as you don't practice Falun Gong or belong to other "dangerous cults". Personally, I'd rather live in a society that sends suspected terrorists caught with weapons in Afghanistan or Iraq to Guantanamo than live in a society that sends cult members to re-education-by-work camps. Also, unlike China, the US is, arguably, in a state of war.

Guantanamo is a serious problem and should be closed, but it simply isn't on the order of a country that carries out the most executions, including executions of public officials for "corruption" (AKA, not toeing the party line.)

while i'm not suggesting changing our current system.. i think there are valid benefits of a not perfectly democratic government. sometimes listening to everyone just results in some pretty stupid decisions, case in point.. bush (haha sorry republicans) but in all seriousness our government ends up doing a lot of things to placate different groups of people even though it may not be in our country's best interest.

I'm still not sure about a democratic system, but I absolutely support a libertarian system that gives people the rights to say what they think and do what they please to the extent they're not hurting others.

 

[GoIllini]

yep all those poor misunderstood "dangerous cults" should come here since the U.S. is such a wonderfully tolerant place to all "dangerous cults" such as branch davidians, FLDS, religions that practice polygamy. which raises the question.. how do you define a dangerous cult? and how do you know that falun gong isn't one?

All of them were arrested for breaking other laws that exist in China regardless of religious affiliation. Luckily for the FLDS, however, statutory rape does not carry the death sentence like it does in China. If anything, these groups' religious status made the country take a lot more care in prosecuting them.

right.. and where exactly did you get the facts to support the idea that china executes public officials for not toeing the party line? please do share
anyone can make up these AKA reasons.. there are executions in the U.S. for "violent crimes" (AKA, not being white)

Name one Chinese economist who works for the Chinese government who believes that China should be able to consume more than it produces.

(before anyone jumps on me for this, i'm making this false allegation as a point.. not because i believe it to be true)

sure your libertarian system sounds great on paper.. but what constitutes hurting others?
physical pain? emotional pain? imaginary pain? who decides?

That's guided by deontological reason. Locke actually wrote a whole book on it and the English Common Law and US constitution are based on it.

sure assault is a crime but what if it was self defense? where do we cross the line from being justified to being criminal?

racial slurs? doesn't physically hurt anyone.. is it still wrong?

In the US, speech is NEVER defined as hurting other until the point that you give an order or suggestion to physically harm someone else.

what if i claim your reply has caused me emotional distress? should you cease and desist or compensate me for my suffering?

No; again, the US has freedom of speech, so it's pretty simple for us. Most other countries do to a large extent, as well. You are allowed to sue me if you can prove I knowingly and deliberately lied about you in an effort to harm your reputation (Slander), but it is not considered a crime- it is a civil matter that you're entitled to compensation for, and you can't send me to jail for lying about you.

the fact is no system of government is perfect, and if you took some time from your crusade to spin events into negativity towards the chinese government maybe you could see that for the majority of its citizen the government has done well over the last couple years and as a result has dramatically improved their lives

One of the things that I love is that some of the biggest spinners (Bill O'Reilly) are the ones accusing others of being spinners. Oh well. There is a rational and culturally independent notion of free speech, free religion, and freedom of the press, and there is no excuse for claiming that "it's all relative".

 

[Yan He]

While Chinese are indifferent of their own situation, why so many are so converning of our "democratic", "liberation", "freedom',"......"

Walk our own road, let others talk.

 

[Uncle Max]

Press Freedom Index 2009

I just found it while browsing the news. US is back to #20 this year.

 

[Alex Xie]

I am a Chinese native and currently pursuing my PhD degree in US.
As far as I know, tagging people criticizing Chinese government policy as "the few anti-government activists" and then argue in the name of the whole group, (ie. every well educated student is aware of the future of China, but in a different way...) instead of just in deputy of yourself, are significant signs of "brainwashed".
One frequently used trick by Chinese government is to blame disastrous results on the plot of "a handful of bad people" instead of looking inward to take their own responsibility. In the Tibetan Unrest last year, Chinese government pointed its finger at "a handful of evil people", the old and armless monk Da Lai Lama and his followers. In Xinjiang's bloody ethnic conflict in which over 200 civilian were killed overnight on the street, the government propaganda said only a handful of bad people tried to destroy China's great and fruitful ethnic policy.
That's a very ridiculous government. Chinese people in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and even in Flushing St, New York achieved their economic properity without the "great leadership" of Chinese comunist part, as they always self boasted. There's no reason to attribute the current economic progress to the Chinese government. Even under the leadership of Chiang's KMT government in 1930's, China got a chance to achieve a golden decade of economic development before Japanese invasion.
It's off the fact that Chinese people chose the Chinese government or the current regime. That's a very vague argument that depends on how you defined "people's choice". Were Chinese ordinary people not stupid enough, I think not, and given the freedom of "choice", which I think they don't have under the current regime, there was no reason for Mao to stay in power after he committed such serious crime against his own people by starving over 30 million to death around 1960. I think even the chinese government itself does not believe it's in fact the choice of the people. Or else, why not give people opportunity to choose their leadership but instead spend billions of dollars to block twitter, youtube, etc in China?

i am a new generation of Chinese and i think im rich in both western and Chinese politics and history. let me give u my viewpoints.

First, ur viewpoint is typically not welcomed by any class of Chinese, except the few anti-government activists, most of whom finally and ironically become Americans. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Second, every well educated student is aware of the future of China, but in a different way. What u said about democracy makes sense to some degree, however, u ( inlcluding most of westerners ) just cant understand the impact of recent one hundred years of Chinese history, a history of total humiliation, has let most of people on this land potentially have the mind that the foremost thing is to make this country as great as it used to be, like Tang Dynasty(around1200ys ago), or Ming Dynasty(around 500 yrs ago), a country has superior power in almost every aspect and then democratic as well. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
For such a country, it has its own values in how to construct a state and let its people recover. And Chinese dislike the political suggestion from western world for many reasons. Apart from the history of socialism and capitalism, what Europeans did last year during Olympic torch delay or Tibet issues, made most of Chinese(even common people) lost the trust on so called those democratic countries, because it offends the baseline that every Chinese has. If u understand the idea of my second paragraph, u can understand this also.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
When a new power is rising, it must grow up with problems, and after 30 years of struggle after communist China is built, everyone( almost surely, excepted the null set) there agree that it is a better way to have progress reform on economics and politics. My grandparents risk their lives working secretly for communist party in WW2 and China civil war, they r still alive and is very happy to see the current situation, and believe it will get better, progressively. When I studied in college, many students were active in the same topics u apparently interested and they also know what u see on western media. I wouldnt say everything u pointed or see doesnt make any sense, rather u should respect the choice made by people on the other side of pacific and then maybe u can make better and acceptable suggestions, and I think thats what Obama is aware of now. There are fewer and fewer nonsense fights between US and China nowadays than in Bush and Clinton administration.

 

[Vic_Siqiao]

ahh...u can just join them and green card is waiting for you.

I am a Chinese native and currently pursuing my PhD degree in US.
As far as I know, tagging people criticizing Chinese government policy as "the few anti-government activists" and then argue in the name of the whole group, (ie. every well educated student is aware of the future of China, but in a different way...) instead of just in deputy of yourself, are significant signs of "brainwashed".

 

[Yan He]

Opinions here always represent personal perspective. Feel free to blast, no one meant to label you to any category.

I am "brainwashed" and I am fine with the progress the Communist party making and I do have faith with it.
-----I do see & hear more negative side of stories about Chinese government, but that won't change my stand: China need time to make its own system better or least more reasonable.
----Any country has thees groups of dissidants: Dalai Lama, Fa lun Kong and some other rebelious ehtnic group. (I am from minority ethnic group in China. I think the efforts the government put to help & and try to keep the society stable are well seen.)
----KMT might bring some "order" and "prosperity" in the 30s with the help of US government, unfortunately, it was out----by natural competition, by Communism or the people.
----A long way for the Chinese government to go & always impossible to make everyone happy.

 

[Tigga]

Interesting discussion so far. One thing I have noticed recently: unlike past generations of oversea Chinese students, recent graduates vocally express a desire to go back to China for better future. I don't know if because of recent growth in China or an over optimism, or because of lack of employment in the US, but it's very noticeable.

So a million dollar question is: are they genuinely believing that going back to China would be a better option than working in the US, getting a GC and pursue American dream. Given a choice of American dream and Chinese dream, what would you choose?

 

[Yan He]

Interesting discussion so far. One thing I have noticed recently: unlike past generations of oversea Chinese students, recent graduates vocally express a desire to go back to China for better future. I don't know if because of recent growth in China or an over optimism, or because of lack of employment in the US, but it's very noticeable.

------Young generations have different reason for going back China:
(1) Truely believe they can be better off;
(2) No choice at all: no H1B sposor, high unemployment in USA, I think is the main reason for these two years.
So a million dollar question is: are they genuinely believing that going back to China would be a better option than working in the US, getting a GC and pursue American dream. Given a choice of American dream and Chinese dream, what would you choose?

------With my GC, I am accumulating more experiences now and Asia will eventually be my destination. Not simply believe I can get better life, but different life style and less cultural conflicting in my case.

 

[zhouxing]

Interesting discussion so far. One thing I have noticed recently: unlike past generations of oversea Chinese students, recent graduates vocally express a desire to go back to China for better future. I don't know if because of recent growth in China or an over optimism, or because of lack of employment in the US, but it's very noticeable.

So a million dollar question is: are they genuinely believing that going back to China would be a better option than working in the US, getting a GC and pursue American dream. Given a choice of American dream and Chinese dream, what would you choose?

For old generations, the reality is it's difficult for them to move back because many of them don't have the locally relevant skills that matches the seniority they desire.

If you believe people tend to do whatever they think is good for them, you should believe at least a portion of these returners genuinely believe returning is a better choices. In fact, I know in person quite a lot of people who either resigned or go back directly after graduations from top companies/schools. Some of them even effectively gave up their GCs. I guess many people in US may over-estimate the attractions of American Dreams for many especially top-quality immigrations.

There is a similar discussion here. If this topic is so hot these days, I guess sooner or later people will move on from the stage of denial to acceptance when thinking/talking whether China will be a desirable destination.

---------- Post added at 11:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:27 AM ----------

------With my GC, I am accumulating more experiences now and Asia will eventually be my destination. Not simply believe I can get better life, but different life style and less cultural conflicting in my case.

GC (and USC) may cause some "inconvenience" and/or disadvantages when you move back

 

[Andy Nguyen]

I'm curious if you mean "move back" as in back to China or back to US if the experience does not work out?
And what kind of inconvenience/disadvantage for GC/USC? You may lose your GC if you stay in oversea too long without reentry permit/proof of permanent residency in the US. Taking a job oversea will be seen by immigration as an intent to abandon your GC.

 

[zhouxing]

I'm curious if you mean "move back" as in back to China or back to US if the experience does not work out?
And what kind of inconvenience/disadvantage for GC/USC? You may lose your GC if you stay in oversea too long without reentry permit/proof of permanent residency in the US. Taking a job oversea will be seen by immigration as an intent to abandon your GC.

I meant "move back to China". Among others, the biggest hassle will be global tax and the need to maintain GC if you want.

Personally I think it's often better to be a permanent resident and/or citizen of where you intend to live/retire. People tends to over-estimate the "insurance" value of having a GC or foreign citizenship. And in fact, if one just wants an "insurance, it is much cheaper to acquire it from somewhere else.

 

[Andy Nguyen]

One may need to read all the technical documents about US-China tax treaty to see the complication of the tax issue
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/international/article/0,,id=169483,00.html

It would make better sense if one intents to move back permanently. Trying to keep a GC working oversea is a big hassle.

 

[zhouxing]

My prediction: there will be less and less highly educated Chinese immigrants who will settle down in US.

One observation I shared with my friends is "even though there are many Mexicans in US, it is actually harder to find lots of highly educated Mexicans in Wall St firms and other Big Corps". (if you don't believe it, look around and count among your colleagues/friends) Given the geographical distance and NAFTA, one can argue it's much easier/more convenient for highly educated Mexicans to come / settle in US. If my observation is indeed held, two legitimate questions will be (1) what attracted those educated Mexicans to stay in Mexico? and, (2) why more and more educated Chinese will not chose to stay in China? (especially given economy booming and more open/flexible policies endorsed there, v.s. more restrictive policies endorsed in US)

 

[alain]

One observation I shared with my friends is "even though there are many Mexicans in US, it is actually harder to find lots of highly educated Mexicans in Wall St firms and other Big Corps". (if you don't believe it, look around and count among your colleagues/friends) Given the geographical distance and NAFTA, one can argue it's much easier/more convenient for highly educated Mexicans to come / settle in US. If my observation is indeed held, two legitimate questions will be (1) what attracted those educated Mexicans to stay in Mexico?

Usually highly educated people in Mexico are extremely wealthy and comfortable. The incentive to move to US is not as high.

 

[zhouxing]

Usually highly educated people in Mexico are extremely wealthy and comfortable. The incentive to move to US is not as high.

This is what I will guess too. It is also the case for highly educated Chinese.