Ocober 1: the morning after from the Granite Studio
Posted by stuart on Oct 3rd, 2009
2009
Oct 3
Go and read Jeremiah’s review of the October 1 fest over at Granite Studio. Pity we can’t comment there any more. Or is it?
Here’s a tiny snippet:
Did anybody else consider the possibility that Hu Jintao was pantless during his limo ride? Mao would have been. Count on it.
That made me laugh; and there’s a lot more to enjoy as Jeremiah takes apart the paranoia and the propaganda of last Thursday’s grand production. Go take a look.
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:55 pm
I can’t make up mind mind…should I be horrified that the national parade is being described as thus, or roll on the floor laughing…
The review aside, I liked the parade well enough.
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:56 pm
I can’t make up “my” mind = =
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:24 pm
I watched the kitschfest alone on my sofa, but I am told that the typical response of most Beijingers was to wolf-whistle the maidens in uniform, jeer at most of the leaders on the platform, and snigger at the tackiness of the floats. There may have been a few moments of reverential silence when the tanks and ICBMs trundled past, but nobody was running around afterwards frothing, “Let’s reunify Taiwan right now.”
I fear this might not have been so with all constituencies: there probably was a fair amount of patriotic frothing at the mouth from our young fenqing friends (most of whom seem to be in North America, funnily enough); but middle-aged Beijingers tend to be a feisty and irreverent bunch.
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:49 pm
@ ph
“should I be horrified that the national parade is being described as thus, or roll on the floor laughing…”
I can see no reason why you can’t do both.
@ Froog
“but middle-aged Beijingers tend to be a feisty and irreverent bunch.”
I guess that’s why they were threatened with a hail of bullets should they venture onto their balconies.
October 16th, 2009 at 7:47 am
What a tasteless piece from Jeremiah. ” The troops still look like they were wearing their older brother’s hand-me-down military surplus”? Yeah right. And if the Chinese were to spend more equipping their soldiers with flashier and fancier outfits as the nasty GIs have on, the west would guarantee to bitch about it.
Hangover? What a dumb movie.
October 16th, 2009 at 8:04 am
Froog, they look gay to you? Come on, if the PLA soldiers look gay to you, what are these buffoons to you? Shabi?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Queens.guard.buck.palace.arp.jpg
http://blog4china.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Sandhurst-2-300×214.png
http://www.bbc.co.uk/somerset/content/images/2009/05/29/parade20_470×350.jpg
http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/01/12/PH2009011203385.jpg
http://pro.corbis.com/images/HU051280.jpg?size=67&uid=84B58C4A-B413-42C9-9819-168A63D14B1E
http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/217276.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=F77A167428EBE2BD760AD96EE04373E9E30A760B0D811297
You people will never be pleased. One wonder why you don’t put yourself out of misery. Idiots.
October 16th, 2009 at 8:04 am
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Queens.guard.buck.palace.arp.jpg
October 16th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Relax, pffef
The parade is over now and Beijing residents can return to their balconies without fear of coming under gunfire.
October 17th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Dear Stuart,
If Beijing residents had been in any danger (for example being hit by CCP gunfire) you would have witnessed a mass exodus of western expats and cynics alike leaving Beijing and the rest of China, instead of outstaying their welcome by making some sour-grape, cheesy and idiotic comments. Right?
I just don’t get certain people. If I were to spend everyday complaining about the place where I am at I would be insanely pathetic. It’s not like that I am a prisoner here, I have the freedom to leave, right? I just don’t get certain people. Sigh.
October 17th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Who’s complaining?
October 21st, 2009 at 3:48 am
Not you, Stuart. And I appreciate you leaving China. By no means does my above comment apply to you.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:23 am
Don’t worry pffefer, I’ll be back. My students need me.
All I ask is an apartment with a safe balcony and a free-expression newspaper to read over my morning coffee on said balcony.
October 21st, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Ah, Pffef, you’re back!
I don’t follow your logic there, Mr P: why is it OK to complain about a country you don’t live in, but not OK to complain about the country you do live in? Surely you tend to have more personal knowledge of the place you actually live – both of the good and the bad in the country.
Notice also that ‘complaining’ is not quite the same as ‘criticizing’, nor as ‘making fun of’ something.
And most of us foreigners who write about China do not complain about or criticize every aspect of it. Only those aspects of it deserving of criticism – which is to say, mostly, emanations of Communist Party rule.
There is lots here that I feel very positive about; but it would be rather dull to just write happy-happy-happy pieces all the time; our Western culture teaches us to focus on the negative, to identify those things which could be improved.
I do write a lot of positive opinions on aspects of China too: ordinary people are mostly very friendly, the street food is great, there’s a fantastic live music scene here in Beijing, and I love watching the old folks doing their early morning exercises or joining in their weekend activities in the parks. And so on.
But I also think CCTV is amateurish, that parade was naff, the one-party-state system needs to change. I’m entitled to my opinions – both positive and negative, on China and any other country (and you should not suppose that I am any less scathing in my analyses or ruthless in my mockery of the US, the UK, and many other places; I could give you a very long list of ‘complaints’ about Canada!).
October 22nd, 2009 at 2:52 am
Fat chance Stuart. You’d better off staying in the UK. Maybe you should consider teaching an online course.
Froog, not that I am saying one should not complain, not at all. You can certainly complain about the place you don’t live in (as many people do today, for example some westerners and Indians complain about China; some Chinese complain about Japan etc., which is very odd) and you can complain about the place you live in. But if you complain all the time about the place you live in, it is only natural for others to wonder why you are still there, right?
There is a difference between “criticizing” and “making fun of”. There are a lot of things about China (or any other place) that one can criticize; however allowing cynicism to take the better of you is just unfortunate. I understand many of you westerners are no fan of the CCP, however letting the mistrust and disgust to take over and extrapolate and thus getting overly critical and cynical of everything associated with the CCP or the Chinese state is plain pathetic. I understand your anxiety over seeing the PLA soldiers marching (as we have discussed before, you have a problem with the Chinese doing military parades), but calling them gay-looking?
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I am not with the Wangguan, or Wangjing or the 50 cents party, I am not here to shut you down. I am just honestly perplexed by some of you folks. Genuinely.
October 22nd, 2009 at 3:42 am
Oh, lighten up, Pffef. Cynicism is great. Cynicism is FUN.
There is a danger in denigrating ‘cynicism’. Many Chinese commenters choose to regard ‘cynicism’ as being invariably a bad thing, and so labelling an observation ‘cynical’ becomes just a way of dismissing it. Classic fenqing mindclose again.
We’re just taking the piss.
Sorry you don’t get it. One day you will.
We (Stuart, Jeremiah, me, etc, etc) grew up in an environment where we take the piss out of everything, all the time. Yes, the jokes are cheap, the jokes are crap, the jokes are cynical. But this can be a very fertile mode of discourse. Within the jokes there are often a lot of worthwhile points being made. And the very fact that we’re willing to make silly jokes about stuff demonstrates that we’re not hidebound by conformity, decency, reverence, fear – or whatever else might stop us being critical of something.
Being critical of things is an absolute good – even if the criticisms generated are not always apposite.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:12 am
Hold on Froog, are you equating being cynical to being critical now? Two completely different things. It is of course OK to be critical, but to be constantly cynical and taking pride in being so is what’s so wrong with many of you folks. Worse than fenqings.
“Within the jokes there are often a lot of worthwhile points being made”? So what worthwhile points have you made about the PLA soldiers being gay-looking? Clean-shaven is gayish? Sorry we are not the Afghan or the British army here.
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:11 am
Different but related, Pffef. I prefer the original ‘cynicism’ of Antisthenes and his followers, but the modern conception of the word is not without its uses. Difficult to be properly critical, I think, without also being – at times, at least – cynical.
The point of the ‘gay’ joke is mainly about how sensitive folks like you are about it. Ha, ha! What is it exactly you don’t like about the suggestion? It is just that I was being ‘critical’ of the parade, or have I touched on a homophobic nerve as well?
If I’d said the parade struck me as ‘Martian’, would you have been more or less distressed?
The point of the humour here is that this parade was so far outside of our Western aesthetic (and political) parameters that it just seemed ridiculous. All of it was naff (but that’s probably not a word you’re familiar with); and most of it was very, very camp (which is a concept closely aligned with but not identical to gay).
Goosestepping is very camp. The attenuated goosestep Chinese soldiers do is particularly camp. The fixed smiles and clenched buttocks look most of them had is somewhere beyond camp. And the fact that most of them are very young, and hairless, and rather good-looking (probably part of the selection process) certainly adds to the impression of gayness.
What I really thought rather fun was the possibility that the parade had been secretly subverted by Chinese homosexuals. There does tend to be a preponderance of gays – in China as everywhere else – in certain creative areas, particularly the theatrical; and so it did seem quite likely that one or more of the people involved in designing the parade would have been gay.
And there was a very prominent rainbow emblem at the top of Tiananmen Square: an odd thing to include in the National Day celebrations; and something that most of the aging CCP leadership would probably not recognise as a symbol of the gay rights movement.
So, you see, there was a point – a whole little nexus of points – to the silly joke after all.
It’s a great shame that most Chinese commenters on blogs like this are locked in the cycle of reject, take offence, go on the offensive…. without ever having taken the basic first step of trying to really understand what’s being said.
October 23rd, 2009 at 8:23 am
What a fantastic idea – a gay pride march in Tiananmen Square. Now that would be some coming out party!
October 24th, 2009 at 3:02 am
“without ever having taken the basic first step of trying to really understand what’s being said”? Oh now you are talking, Froog? What a load of BS. It is certainly understandable that the parade “was so far outside of our Western aesthetic (and political) parameters” (more political if you ask me, if China were just another “democratic”, Judeo-Christian western country or an obedient ally like the Indians you would have viewed the whole thing differently, I have no doubt)”, after all it was a “Chinese” event not a “British” one, it was not aimed to pleasing the westerners. And please, goose-stepping? I don’t know how you British march (extremely sloppy and crappy to me from what I have seen) but that was not goose-stepping. Check out how the Russians, especially the North Koreans march. THAT is goose-stepping. Or perhaps you have never seen a goose crossing the road?
Ah, being young and being hairless (again, we are not the Afghan or the British army here) makes them gayish? You are the one who is the real homophobic here, I think. You are associating such characteristics with being gay, I am not. Do you see every young, clean-shaven, nice looking man gay by the way? I know we have different aesthetic standards, I just can’t imagine how anyone would find a bunch of old, hairy and sorry-ass soldiers appealing. Not even in the UK I think.
Hey Froog, what would you call those marching British soldiers in the pictures that I provided?
On a side note: I have been wondering what you people actually do for a living in China. Many of you struck me as some sort of lame-ass dummies who went to China for some easy money (by doing trivial stuff such as teaching English etc.) because you couldn’t find a job in your home country. Well?
October 24th, 2009 at 3:34 am
Pffef, soldiers are not supposed to look appealing; they are supposed to look scary.
I would guess that the average age of soldiers in the UK is maybe a little bit older than in China. And we would tend to use the older, more experienced soldiers for ceremonial duties. And, yes, we do tend to have facial hair and saggy jowls, rather than chiselled cheekbones and shiny-smooth adolescent skin. The latter is a look which – I’m told – is rather appealing to male homosexuals. The former, rather less so – although there is a whole sub-culture about moustaches that I don’t begin to understand.
Moving on….
My main questions for you here,Pffef, are, did the soldiers look gay?
Yes, they did. Not all of them, maybe. But a significant number of them. And it was more about the context and what they were being asked to do than their actual appearance. But just about everyone I’ve chatted to about this – Chinese and foreign, gay and straight – has said, yes, a lot of them looked pretty gay.
Did the parade look camp?
Yes, it did. You’re maybe not familiar with the concept, and it’s difficult to explain, but….. many aspects of that parade encapsulated it rather well.
I don’t know what the Chinese call that marching step, but I called it an attenuated goosestep. Which it is. The fact that it’s not quite a proper goosestep doesn’t make it any less camp, or any less ridiculous, or any less obnoxiously reminiscent of the Nazi regime.
The parade wasn’t aimed at “pleasing foreigners”, but was it consciously aimed at offending them, or provoking their derision? If you aspire to create an event that will be broadcast on the evening news all around the world, you need to take some thought for how it will be received in other countries. And if you take that “we don’t give a damn what others think, this is all for us Chinese” kind of attitude, you create an international impression of both arrogance and stupidity. Is that really what you want?
I’m not convinced that the parade even pleased or impressed the Chinese very much. Certainly in Beijing the dominant reaction seems to have been that it was mostly pretty laughable, and a criminal waste of money.
This was a pure vanity project to make the CCP leadership feel good about themselves. As a PR exercise – if it was ever really conceived as such – it was largely irrelevant or ineffective within China, and hugely detrimental outside of China.
And it was very, very GAY.
But I liked that aspect of it. That was the one saving grace for me.
If you’re not happy about the gayness, Pffef, then you’re the homophobe. You may not agree with me that it was gay, but – supposing that it was, or that some people could perceive it that way – how would that be a bad thing? If we’re having a cavalcade of how open and progressive New China is, there really should have been a Gay Pride float. But I think having a couple of thousand gay-looking soldiers was a great substitute for that!
October 24th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Froog,
You are really a load of BS. “The dominant reaction in Beijing”? @#$%, exactly how does a British guy know what “the dominant reaction in Beijing” about the parade is? According to what? Online surveys? Show me the stuff, Froog. Sounds like you pulled that one straight out of your ass again, Froog. “Just about everyone I’ve chatted to”? Sure, less than 10 people I suppose, with the majority of them being cynical westerners of your ilk. (Gosh, why does China attract the worst of you people? That does say something about China. There IS something wrong with China!)
“irrelevant or ineffective within China, and hugely detrimental outside of China”. Since when did you become the spokeperson for the CFM? Again, what do YOU know?
And you just can’t go on one day without being hypocritical, can you Froog? You are exactly right, why should the Chinese give a damn about what you think? Do you give a damn about what others think, when you people invaded Iraq? If the world leading powers, the “democratic” and “free” countries like the UK are not concerned about displaying “arrogance and stupidity” , why should a third-world developing country like China care?
Talk about being gayish, I present you this: http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/01/12/PH2009011203385.jpg
October 24th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Stuart,
Please kindly remove the last paragraph of my comment dated October 24th, 2009 at 3:02 am, it is uncalled for. Danke.
October 24th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Keine probleme
October 24th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Way to go, Pffef, just veering wildly off topic all over the place.
Asking whether the Chinese government should be concerned about the PR messages it gives to the outside world has absolutely nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq.
Photos of British Guardsmen (admittedly somewhat silly looking) doing their thing outside Buck House has absolutely nothing to do with whether Chinese ceremonial marching is unfortunately reminiscent of the Nazis.
You’re right: I largely speculate, using observation and native intelligence – rather than pulling irrelevant Internet citations from all over the place. It is difficult to conceive of how anyone could take any very positive or comforting impression from that parade – unless they are very, stupid and/or very, very militaristic. I hope that isn’t true of a significant number of the Chinese people.
I did see several dozens of people watching various parts of the parade in bars and restaurants, and they all seemed amused (or, sometimes, bored) rather than reverential. And, of course, my key litmus test is the ever-reliable Voice of the Common Man, the Beijing cab driver. One Beijing cab driver is worth a poll sample of thousands!
October 24th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Do you accept that some aspects of the parade were a bit gay, Pffef?
Or can you at least understand why they might strike some people that way?
And can you see why that’s not a negative thing?
Are you opposed to the notion of including gays in the parade? Or do you just not like the fact that I’m being so irreverent about the parade?
That’s what we were discussing here. NOT Iraq.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:39 am
OK Froog,
I do accept the fact that you didn’t like the parade. You didn’t like it even before it started. The fact is, no matter what they did, you wouldn’t have liked it anyway. The thought that the Chinese are doing a military parade is just too much for you. The actual substance doesn’t matter.
I also accept the fact that you thought it was gay. It is what you think and I am not the thought police. However I vehemently disagree. Nothing against the gays even I don’t approve of their lifestyle (actually I wish more Chinese men would be gay so we can solve our gender imbalance problem), I just thought equating the National Day parade to a gay pride parade is an insult. Perhaps not in the UK and other western countries but after all this is China and I wish you would understand that your western values, views and aesthetics are not universal.
I appreciate that you back-peddled and retracted what you said about knowing “the dominant reaction in Beijing”. The fact is you don’t and you are pretty clueless. I don’t know where you dined in Beijing (serious Froog, please point out those bars and restaurants and I want to see what kind of people frequent these places as I am trying to learn how you folks get together, perhaps I can even meet you in person to continue our fight/exchange) and I don’t know how many Beijing taxi drivers that you have talked to, my impression has been that many, if not most Chinese enjoyed the parade (the military part, not the mass dancing part), which was echoed by opinions expressed and online polls that I saw on Chinese language websites. I guess you just can’t fathom the notion that many many Chinese actually find this very appealing. Sure, call us stupid and militaristic. Call us whatever you want.
At the end of the day Froog you need to understand, once again that your and your western view is not the universal, not even the dominant view of the world. The world is too big, too diverse to have you tell us how to feel.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:36 am
pffefer:
“…that your and your western view is not the universal, not even the dominant view of the world”
I think the greater problem in the coming years (as has been evidenced many times over), is going to be China’s struggle to accept that increasing economic and military clout doesn’t give them the right to impose their ideas on the world. I fear, however, that the intoxication of power will prove too much for Beijing in this regard. Dictatorial habits die hard.
“many many Chinese actually find this very appealing.”
My sense, and I hope I’m wrong, is that a lot of those people would like to see some of that hardware in action. If and when that happens, who among them will question what their government is doing?
October 25th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Living in Beijing are you now, Pffef? I have my doubts about that.
Sounds like your only experience of reaction in Beijing or China at large is from the online community – which is very much skewed towards the young, and towards the more rabidly nationalistic.
We all tend to over-extrapolate from our limited personal experience, but at least I’m living here, seeing what happens with my own eyes, sensing the mood, interacting with dozens of different people in all sorts of ways – people from all walks of life, not just online chatroom denizens – every single day. You do get a pretty good idea of how people are reacting from that; probably a much fuller and more balanced idea than you get from just reading stuff online.
I suspect your underlying prejudice here, Pffef, is the common Chinese belief that foreigners can never understand anything about China.
Saying I thought some of the soldiers looked a bit gay is an opinion, an observation, fair comment – not an insult.
Saying I thought the parade might have been hijacked by gays on the organizing team secretly infiltrating a lot of gay imagery into it was a joke (but a joke with serious satirical intent) – not an insult.
Too many Chinese claim to feel “insulted” by anything they don’t understand or don’t agree with. It’s the ‘victim mentality’ again, a passive-agressive behaviour aimed at the suppression of unwelcome opinions.
But you know what, if you feel “insulted” by my opinions, well, f*** you – get used to it! This is the real world. Not the ‘Western’ world. Just the world. Everywhere outside of China. China cannot remake the rest of the world in its own image (and god forbid that it should even try); China needs to adapt itself to the rest of the world. Realising that having goosestepping soldiers involved in the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games is deeply distasteful to anyone who lived through the 2nd World War in Europe (or anyone whose relatives were killed by the Nazis) would be a start.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
There’s a difference between “enjoying” something and being inspired or impressed by, or retaining an overall positive impression of it in retrospect.
Hell, I enjoyed the parade. I found it pant-wettingly funny. And I know a significant number of Chinese also found parts of it quite amusing – not so hilarious as we cynical foreigners did, but definitely amusing (come on, even Comrade Hu smirked at the militia girls in their kinky air stewardess uniforms).
And most of us are unfortunately a bit susceptible to the glamour of warfare, and to hi-tech hardware fetishism. I used to love going to displays of military equipment when I was a kid, and I acknowledge there’s still a little of that unhealthy fascination in me – I was quite interested to see the tanks and so. But for me, it was an awkward and guilty pleasure, and very transient. I didn’t get any lasting elation from the experience. And I really hope most Chinese people didn’t either. If you really find that kind of thing “appealing”, then I’m afraid you are either desperately naive or a full-on militaristic nut-job.
As I think I’ve said in a number of earlier comments on another post of Stuart’s a little while ago, there’s a big difference between taking an interest in seeing some of the military hardware in isolation, being demonstrated, and having it all roll down Chang’an Dajie. Seeing jet fighters doing aerobatics over an airfield is exciting; seeing them flying through the centre of the capital is sinister. Putting that much military hardware on the streets of Beijing was militaristic posturing that does send very negative, very aggressive messages to other countries. It was inappropriate. It was childish. And I think many Chinese realise that too.
Also – here in Beijing, at least – there was a lot of resentment of the huge disruption it caused (not just the parade itself, but the weeks of rehearsals leading up to it); and, within a few days, people started grumping about how much money it cost (I think there have even been a few mentions of this in the Chinese media now).
We might have “enjoyed” it at the time, on many different levels. But, on slightly more mature reflection, most of us – Chinese and foreign alike – should surely realise that it was a massive waste of time and money. I sincerely hope that it will be the very last event of its kind in China.
October 26th, 2009 at 7:06 am
Stuart,
“China’s struggle to accept that increasing economic and military clout doesn’t give them the right to impose their ideas on the world”
Nah, the Chinese will never be as instrusive, assertive and self-righteous as the westerners have been. Doesn’t the exchange here showcase this? You and Froog are the typical westerners who think you know what’s the best for China and her people and you are telling us what we should do, how we should think, how we should feel, correct? I am here telling you “F@#$ off!” and “mind your own business!”. Since when have you seen me telling you what I think the UK should do etc.?
“a lot of those people would like to see some of that hardware in action. If and when that happens, who among them will question what their government is doing?”
Unfortunately or fortunately (I have not made up my mind), they will not see them in action as nobody, not even the US and the UK, is that stupid to mount an attack on China. Over Taiwan province? Nah, not gonna happen.
October 26th, 2009 at 7:25 am
Cut your BS, Froog. “People from all walks of life”? Seriously, how many Chinese people do you interact on a daily basis, other than your students(I don’t know what you do for a living, I’d think you are just like stuart, teaching English as this is the only way for you to make money)? And those Chinese who could stand your self-righteousness, who befriend you despite all your flaws might be some sort of outliers. Who is to say you can get the idea by simply talking to the limited number of people you know? Hell, do you even speak Chinese? If not, I suppose the people you talk to are probably some young, materialistic and pro-western zombies who would do anything to hook up with a freakin’ foreigner. Am I right? So please, don’t tell me that you know what the dominant reaction in Beijing is better than me!
FYI, I don’t subscribe to the “foreigners can never understand anything about China” BS. Everyone has the right to feel how he/she feels. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. However I think what you foreigners conceive and “understand” might not agree with what the Chinese think of their country and themselves. Both are valid. Just don’t have one party force their own opionions and “understandings” upon the other. Often we see foreigners (mostly westerners) lecturing the Chinese as if they somehow held the closer-to-the-truth understanding of China and they want the Chinese to see things their way. For example you want the Chinese to “realize that having goosestepping soldiers involved in the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games is deeply distasteful to anyone who lived through the 2nd World War in Europe (or anyone whose relatives were killed by the Nazis) would be a start”, that is just bullshit. If that’s how you feel about it, great, don’t ask the others, especially people in a foreign country where you are to subscribe to your views. Just like you would not expect the British to change how they do things or see things just to please a bunch of yakking foreigners who have nothing better to do.
The bottom line is Froog, you and I are both entitled to our opinions, thoughts, feelings etc. I am not asking you to change yours and please don’t expect me to change mine. Why can’t we just get along? Why can’t we just have our differences? Why must the whole world be exactly like the f@#$ing west?
October 26th, 2009 at 7:38 am
“And I really hope most Chinese people didn’t either. If you really find that kind of thing “appealing”, then I’m afraid you are either desperately naive or a full-on militaristic nut-job.”
This is what I am talking about, Froog. Why do you have to impose your own opinions on other people, especially people in a foreign country? What, if they don’t feel how you feel about it, they are either naive or some nut-jobs? F@#$ you, Froog! F@#$ you for your obnoxious, disgusting arrogance!
You don’t like the parade for this and that reason? OK, like I said, I already knew that you wouldn’t have liked it anyway no matter what they did. You hated the whole thing even before it started. I have come to the understanding that you and I have foundamentally different opinions on this subject matter, I will not try to convince you why I thought it was great, I will just leave it at this. We just have to agree to disagree. But don’t give me this kind of bull shit again: “most of us – Chinese and foreign alike – should surely realise that it was a massive waste of time and money”. Sorry mister. You DON’T get to impose your OWN opinions upon other people. Period.
Sorry, I can’t help saying this place has gotten the better part of me a long time ago: The parade sent a negative and aggressive message? Coming from a Brit, whose country is fighting two wars in two foreign countries, this is so hilarious. Do you have no shame, Froog? Once again apparently they don’t teach you what “hypocrisy” means in the UK. Piss off!
October 26th, 2009 at 10:49 am
“Nah, the Chinese will never be as instrusive, assertive and self-righteous as the westerners have been.”
Two points. First, evidence indicates the contrary – just look at the manner in which they go about setting up shop in Africa, or the unbelievably petty squabbles they initiate every time the Dalai Lama has a bowel movement in a foreign country. Second, the argument that the extent of China’s global arrogance will fall short of past colonial transgressors is not very reassuring.
“typical westerners who think you know what’s the best for China and her people and you are telling us what we should do”
This is a really tiresome mantra. It has a lot to do with the institutionalised nationalism that results from a paranoid dictatorship having control of the media and education. The questions fostered by such a regime sound something like this: “why do foreigners hate China?” or “why does the west always criticize China?” or “why are westerners so aggressive?”
Do you see the problem? The premise of each question is always that the framer is seeking to understand the reasons behind an established fact. Thus, the premise upon which the question is based becomes hard-wired, and no amount of evidence to the contrary will shift that thinking; but every time there is criticism of China a neural red flag is raised and a voice inside the head tells you: “there they go again – always telling China what to do”.
It’s a fallacy.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:06 am
“…whose country is fighting two wars in two foreign countries, this is so hilarious. Do you have no shame”
Pffefer, have you any idea what the fate of Afghanistan would be if all forces withdrew? It would precipitate something unimaginable on China’s doorstep.
Everyday Hu Jintao and the boys slap each other on the back and have a good chuckle to themselves that other countries are clearing up a mess in their own backyard, while they wait in the wings to move in for the resources once the job is done.
Certainly can’t fault their pragmatic game plan – which brings us right back to the question of China’s moral fortitude as a global player. In other words, where the hell is China on Afghanistan?
To everyone: I don’t mind the bad language as tool for emphasis or humour, but let’s trade opinions not insults.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Do you suppose Pffef gets paid by the word, Stuart?
I’m afraid you don’t deserve any detailed response, Pffef, because you’re too long-winded, and too dyspeptic, and you disqualify yourself from any serious consideration by trotting out that tired old ‘hypocrisy’ line again. They do teach us what it means in the UK. You are evidently still having a problem with it.
I have only one point I wish to make to you, Pffef, before retiring from this thread. Well, two closely related points.
People like Stuart and myself and other foreign bloggers – “critics of China”, if you like – are mostly only critical of China as a political entity, of the Chinese government, not usually of the Chinese people in general nor of Chinese individuals.
Anti-foreign Chinese commentators like you are mostly critical of bloggers like us as individuals… and as somehow representative of our entire people (“you’re all the same, you foreigners”)…. and as directly identified with our national governments (“why don’t you admit the Iraq war is your fault?”). This is both ridiculous and objectionable. And it prevents any useful debate from getting off the ground.
No-one is trying to “impose” their opinions on anyone else. We are merely stating our opinions. Some opinions and viewpoints can be recognised as objectively more valid or correct than others, and it is through comparison, discussion, and critical analysis of competing opinions that we aim to refine our understanding of the world. We naturally believe that our opinions are correct, and would hope that others might accept this too; we may try to persuade others to accept them. But we are open to the value of contrary opinions (even if they are ultimately wrong, they can still give us fresh insights into the situation, and modify our own opinions or increase our confidence in them), we are prepared to be persuaded ourselves that our opinions should be changed. It’s an open process of dialectic.
It’s a process that you seem to be incapable of engaging in, Pffefer – at least, for more than a few brief moments. Your mind seems to be completely closed on so many issues. And you seldom if ever actually engage relevantly with the points we’re making. You tend often to accuse us of having a “we’re right, you’re wrong” attitude – which only goes to suggest the same attitude in yourself. Lately you’ve adopted instead a culturally relativist stance of “maybe we’re both right; agree to disagree” – which is just a cop-out. Maybe we’re both wrong; but probably one of us is right, or more right than the other, about most of the points we’re examining. It might be you, on some points at least; but unless you are willing to engage in a genuine debate, you’re never going to reach a full understanding of where you’re right, where you’re wrong, and why.
One example to leave you with: lots of people around the world, especially in Europe, being offended by strutting, pointy-stepped marching because it is an image intimately associated with Nazi Germany is not really an opinion, it is an obvious and incontestable fact. If the Chinese are unaware of this, or unconcerned about it, that is not a clash or opinions or cultures, it is a case of the Chinese (and I would hope, yet again, that it is the Chinese government rather than the Chinese people themselves) choosing to be wilfully ignorant of or insensitive to an important fact about the world outside of China.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Stuart, sorry to lob an f-bomb at Pffef. I did ponder the courtesy angle, and hoped that reducing it to asterisks would take the sting out of it. I was trying to make a point with it. He’d complained that he found our opinions “insulting”, and I just wanted to say, “No, this is an insult, you pillock!”
I’m going to try and redevelop my life offline now.
Thanks so much. It’s been emotional.
October 26th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
No problem, Froog.
You and Pffefer are the lifeblood of this sparsely inhabited corner of the blogosphere, so I hope you ‘redevelop’ quickly.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:32 am
“just look at the manner in which they go about setting up shop in Africa, or the unbelievably petty squabbles they initiate every time the Dalai Lama has a bowel movement in a foreign country.”
Note that I never said the Chinese will never be as arrogant as you people are, did I? The Chinese can be quite arrogant, yes, however they will not be assertive and self-righteous. These are very different things. Your(the west’s) obnoxious self-righteousness is rooted in your belief that your beliefs, your values are better, or closer to the truth and everyone else should just see eye to eye with you. You seek to impose your beliefs, values and BS upon other people, the Chinese don’t. The Chinese can be quite arrogant and ignorant in terms of not taking local customs in Africa into consideration (for example), but they will never try to tell the Africans how their country should be run, nor will the Chinese try to tell the Africans how to feel like that Froog is trying to impose his BS opinions upon the Chinese.
“Second, the argument that the extent of China’s global arrogance will fall short of past colonial transgressors is not very reassuring.”
I guess we will have to wait and see, right?
“This is a really tiresome mantra. It has a lot to do with the institutionalised nationalism that results from a paranoid dictatorship having control of the media and education. The questions fostered by such a regime sound something like this: “why do foreigners hate China?” or “why does the west always criticize China?” or “why are westerners so aggressive?”
That’s your BS, stuart. I don’t think foreigners hate China, I think many of them are just so f@#$%ing naive and clueless, and many of them are just disgustingly assertive (they think they are always right and know the answer). Again, you people can criticize China all you want, it is your damn rights, however don’t SEEK TO CHANGE HOW THE CHINESE DO and FEEL THINGS. Got it?
Stuart, I don’t get it why you people just don’t get it: In our diverse world there are many different cultures, many different values and beliefs, many different opinions and ways of doing things. Why is that you people constantly are trying to sell your BS (thoughts, values, ways of doing stuff) to us? They might work very well in your country, they might work very well in China or they might not. Don’t you think it is up to the Chinese etc. to decide what they want?
Gosh trying to get the message across to you people is so damn hard. Are your skulls made of British steel or what?
October 27th, 2009 at 7:37 am
“Certainly can’t fault their pragmatic game plan – which brings us right back to the question of China’s moral fortitude as a global player. In other words, where the hell is China on Afghanistan? ”
Stuart, I understand very well why it is vital to take care of Afghanistan and that it is in China’s interest to see the US and its sidekicks succeed there. However, I will bet my 100 Yuan that if China were to consider sending some sort of expedition army to Afghanistan the west would be up in arms. “The Chinese are coming!” Are you sure that’s what you people want? Please check with the Pentagon and your Defense Ministry first.
Let me ask you a question: If you were President Hu what would you do about Afghanistan?
October 27th, 2009 at 7:54 am
“No-one is trying to “impose” their opinions on anyone else. We are merely stating our opinions. Some opinions and viewpoints can be recognised as objectively more valid or correct than others, and it is through comparison, discussion, and critical analysis of competing opinions that we aim to refine our understanding of the world. We naturally believe that our opinions are correct, and would hope that others might accept this too; we may try to persuade others to accept them. But we are open to the value of contrary opinions (even if they are ultimately wrong, they can still give us fresh insights into the situation, and modify our own opinions or increase our confidence in them), we are prepared to be persuaded ourselves that our opinions should be changed. It’s an open process of dialectic.”
Froog, I hope you seriously meant it when you wrote the above.
It is not that I don’t want to engage in a genuine debate, I do, but often I find that you guys have completely shut off your brain, that you have pre-determined everything, that you would not open up your mind to different opinions. I am not seeking to change or influence you anyway, I am simply trying to say: If you don’t agree with me, fine, please don’t expect me to AGREE WITH YOU as it is natural for people from different countries, different cultures to see things differently. There is NOTHING WRONG with that. Perhaps both of us are not wrong, it is just that you need to give people some respect: Let them choose whatever they want. You guys are all about being “democratic”, aren’t you? So how come there is no room for democracy in terms of the opinions, ways of doing things, feelings that one can have or choose?
Back to the so-called “goose-stepping”. First I don’t think you are in any position to speak for all Europeans on this matter. Secondly I don’t think just because this kind of parade reminds certain Europeans of the Nazis the Chinese should stop it. One of the worst victims of the Nazis’ crimes, the Russians are even more fond of what I consider “real goose-stepping” than the Chinese. Should the Russians halt their military parades for the sake of “European sensitivity”? Should the Chinese and Koreans etc. stop eating dogs because it offends some people in the west? You correctly asked the Chinese to grow up, perhaps the Europeans should grow up too! Of course, I think your government can certainly convey these concerns to the Chinese government and it is up to the Chinese government to decide to shelve it or not, but for you to call those Chinese who genuinely enjoyed the parade “nut-jobs” is really out of line.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:30 am
“… seek to impose your beliefs, values and BS upon other people”
Sounds very much like the CCP to me.
“Let me ask you a question: If you were President Hu what would you do about Afghanistan?”
Next time the Americans urge his assistance over there, say ‘yes’.
“I don’t get it why you people just don’t get it”
I refer you to my previous reply about the way you frame your questions and statements. The premise in this instance is that we ‘don’t get it’, which is rejected for its absurdity.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Hey, Pffefer, if you ever return to this thread, here’s a suggestion for you.
Why don’t you start a blog of your own? About Iraq, Afghanistan, and any of your other favourite bugbears. If you like, you can write a post attempting to show how the behaviour of the US and UK governments in foreign policy areas like these disqualifies any citizen of those countries from making any criticisms of the Chinese government. Perhaps you could title it ‘My Concept of Hypocrisy’.
Then you can invite Stuart and me over there to leave our responses.
But PLEASE, don’t do it on here again – or we’ll just stop paying any attention to you at all.
October 27th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Sorry, Pffef, your latest comment was not displaying for me (Chinese Internet censorship!). A much more measured comment than most we’ve heard from you recently. Good to see.
A few responses.
If you’re not trying to change or influence us, then you’re not engaging in the debate; and you’re not helping yourself, or us. I think you disown seeking to influence others because you’re unwilling to accept the possibility of being influenced yourself – i.e. you are closed-minded.
I – and, I’m sure, Stuart as well – are perfectly open to a plurality of views. We’d like to see more relevant contrary opinions on here, expressed politely and cogently. We lose patience with you because you too easily veer off into irrelevance, illogic, or outright offensiveness. (I don’t want to dwell on this now, but… really, if you insult my Chinese friends – or any and all Chinese who are willing to socialise with foreigners – again, I am going to slap you down good and hard.)
I find goosestepping objectionable not only because of its association with the Nazis, but because it has only really been retained by those countries that are obnoxiously militaristic. It is a particularly flamboyant, assertive, and shameless form of display which appeals to the aggressively militaristic mindset. Hence they still like it in Russia, even though the link with Nazi Germany surely ought to be unpalatable to them.
Yes, I am pretty well qualified to speak for the majority of Europeans. Much better than you, anyway.
Should Russia abandon the goosestep in deference to the sensitivities of much of the rest of the world? Yes, absolutely. When it comes to the atrocities of the 2nd World War, I think sensitivity is absolutely in order. I don’t condone celebrating Hitler’s birthday or Holocaust denial either. And I sympathise with Chinese distress about the Yasakuni shrine. How extreme of a “live and let live, each to his own” position are you really espousing here, Pffef?
Putting something in inverted commas in an attempt to denature or belittle it is a much overused and ineffective Chinese stratagem, something of a national vice. I believe there are two pointed-toe, strutting marching steps the Chinese military uses. The shorter one used by the marching parade on October 1st, and a full-on goosetep with feet raised nearly to knee height – which was, if I recall correctly, used by the flag-raising party at both the Olympic Opening Ceremony and the October 1st celebrations. Both of these steps are a form of goosestep (without inverted commas). Both of them carry the unpleasant connotations outlined above and previously.
I am opposed to military parades for other reasons. As I have said before, I would hope that all countries would desist from them – because such swaggering displays of power express and foster a bad attitude (or a whole series of bad attitudes: insecurity, overcompensatory self-assertion, militaristic fetishism, aggression, seeking to intimidate neighbours).
I am opposed to goosestepping anywhere, at any time – but especially in international media events. Last year’s Olympics were not just China’s but the whole world’s. Including that stomping jackboot imagery into the opening ceremony didn’t just offend people, it harmed the image of China (which otherwise did extremely well out of the Olympics) – which is something I’d think you’d wish to avoid.
Your Korean dog-eating analogy is off point, because it concerns an area of morality – what it’s OK to eat – that, at present, is culturally relative. Having respect and sensitivity for the victims of war crimes is not, or should not be, culturally relative but an objective absolute. Any imagery which evokes the memory of the Third Reich – goosestepping, Swastikas, the SS emblem… maybe even jodhpurs and monocles – should be permanently off limits.
I did not suggest that anyone who enjoyed the October 1st parade was a nut-job. I acknowledged that there are many different levels on which it might have been “enjoyed”. Referring to your more specific suggestion that a lot of people found the displays of military hardware in particular “very appealing” (that implies not just a transient and superficial pleasure, but a more deep-seated and enduring attachment and approval), I responded that anyone who felt like that is either “a militaristic nut-job” (which is pretty much incontestable, in my view: it’s a simple matter of definition – it you approve of militaristic displays, then you are militaristic yourself, and being militaristic is not a healthy, rational state of mind), or “very naive” (maybe you wouldn’t condone militarism or like to think of yourself as a militarist, and you just don’t realise that you are implicitly doing so by applauding militaristic displays like this). Note also that ‘nut-job’ is deliberately chosen as a jokey slang term, in order to diminish any sense of offense. If I’d said ‘psychopath’ or ‘cretin’, you might have had some grounds for feeling insulted.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:22 am
“Sounds very much like the CCP to me.”
Other than force those countries that have diplomatic relations with the PRC not to recognize Taiwan Province and not to grant the Dalai Lama any official visit, something the CCP considers about China’s sovereignty, the CCP doesn’t really impose anything upon you.
“Next time the Americans urge his assistance over there, say ‘yes’.”
What does “yes” mean? What kind of assistance? What exactly should China do? It is always easy for you to “criticize” China while offering no solutions or alternatives. And are you sure the Americans are willing to see a Chinese presence in Afghanistan?
“I refer you to my previous reply about the way you frame your questions and statements. The premise in this instance is that we ‘don’t get it’, which is rejected for its absurdity.”
Perhaps you do get it, it is just that your belief that you are right and I am wrong is so firm, that your self-righteousness is so hard to get rid of, that you continue to try to convince me to adopt your thoughts/opinions/values etc.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:30 am
“About Iraq, Afghanistan, and any of your other favourite bugbears. If you like, you can write a post attempting to show how the behaviour of the US and UK governments in foreign policy areas like these disqualifies any citizen of those countries from making any criticisms of the Chinese government. Perhaps you could title it ‘My Concept of Hypocrisy’.”
I am really not interested in talking about Iraq, Afghanistan (stuart keeps talking about how China should help the US, I am simply following his lead to ask him what he expects China to do) or examining the behavior of the US and the UK government and their foreign policies. And again Froog, you CAN certainly criticize the Chinese government, I genuinely think you can and you should (as many Chinese themselves do it on a daily basis). I am simply asking you not to be so judgmental and expect others to see eye to eye with you. Simple enough?
The cry of hypocrisy is a legitimate reaction of anybody when he or she sees citizens of a certain country who does the exact same things telling others (including governments) not to do those very same things.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:37 am
“What exactly should China do?”
Act like a responsible grown up and help to stabilise its neighbour and assist in the security measures necessary to install a democratically elected government.
October 28th, 2009 at 8:09 am
Froog,
Before we talk about business let me say this: OK, I am going to tone it down and stop being so disgusted with you guys. After all this is just an online exchange involving us bunch of strangers (you don’t know me, I don’t know you). I will cut the insults. I do though want to see how you are going to slap me down good and hard. Cursing me in Greek or something?
OK, you are right, when two people engage in a debate, both of the, are trying to convince the other than he is right, both of them are seeking to influence how the other person thinks. So I suppose I did try to influence you (by telling you that for example why it is not so bad for the Chinese to like the parade etc.), I tried. I have come to the conclusion that you will not be persuaded and I am not going to be persuade by you either (even though I see where you are coming from). You and I, we simply disagree here. And that is OK, isn’t it?
Back to business. I see why you consider the so-called “goose-stepping” offensive for all those reasons (by the way, do you consider all types of military marching offensive, out of curiosity?); I see that you are a peace-activist type of a guy (I can picture you, Froog in a peace march holding the peace sign and the rainbow flag), which is not bad at all by any means; I see that you dislike military, I see all of that and I respect that. Seriously Froog, I respect all of that. I do. However, I am a little different from you, not that I am a nasty warmonger who wants to see countries attacking one another, I am a military buff (by the way I collect WWII German, Japanese and Chinese militaria. I have Wehrmacht and IJA visor caps, I even have a Waffen SS officer visor cap), I love seeing this type of parade, I love going to military shows and air shows. Can you say that you are right and I am wrong? I am not alone here, a lot of men, young and old like military stuff. Can you say we are all wrong and we should be just like you? I am totally OK with you holding your views regarding the parade, military in general and stuff, all I am asking from you Froog, is to respect my, and many Chinese’ right to have their own opinions and takes on things, is that understood, Froog?
Sensitivity. In general I agree we should be sensitive to other people’s sensitivities. But where will it stop? Take the parade for an example: I don’t know how representative you are of all Europeans (I have my doubts) on this issue, I for one can’t fathom the notion that this kind of marching (you call it goose-stepping) is automatically associated with the Nazis, I just can’t. I can understand that people should refrain from wearing say helmets that are reminiscent of the shape of German M35/M40/M42 helmets or Nazi-style uniforms and insignia, but completely abandon military marching? Sounds crazy to me. I wonder how the Jews see it. I am going to e-mail the Israeli embassy and see if I can get a response on this and I will keep you posted.
October 28th, 2009 at 8:14 am
“Act like a responsible grown up and help to stabilise its neighbour and assist in the security measures necessary to install a democratically elected government.”
You need to be more specific than that. What to do to stabilize Afghanistan? How to assist in security measures? Now, you are not naive enough to expect China to join the US-led NATO forces, do you? Should China advocate for some sort of UN Peace-keeping mission in which China could participate?
And don’t you think China exerting itself influence to install a democractically elected government is kind of funny, given that China herself doesn’t have one?
Stuart, you really need to provide China with some specific solutions/things to do before broadly “criticizing” China for not doing enough.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
“You need to be more specific than that. What to do to stabilize Afghanistan? How to assist in security measures?”
I’m glad to see that you have some grasp of the complexities involved (which is not to say that I’m fully congnizant).
This is why so many world leaders spend their day hammering away at US foreign policy in Iraq and Afghanistan then go to bed thanking God that America is doing something to prevent regional meltdown.
“And don’t you think China exerting itself influence to install a democratically elected government is kind of funny, given that China herself doesn’t have one?”
EXACTLY.
They can’t say so publicly, but they should appreciate that self-determination is the right way to go. Or else suggest an alternative that won’t see the Taliban in control of their backyard.
There’s going to come a point when China will have to dip her toe into the murky waters of foreign engagement. And when she does, there will be those that hammer the country for doing so.
Welcome to the world of global power politics.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:27 am
“There’s going to come a point when China will have to dip her toe into the murky waters of foreign engagement. And when she does, there will be those that hammer the country for doing so. ”
Exactly. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KJ28Ad01.html
Like I said, China just can’t win no matter what she does. I guess you are right, China is in the big league now!
October 29th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Well, Mr Pffefer, it’s nice to see you calming down a bit.
It’s good of you to be so frank about your fascination with militaria. I recognise the appeal, and have admitted to feeling something of the same weakness myself (I think most people do to some extent, or most males, anyway). However, I consider it to be a somewhat ‘immature’ taste, particularly when it becomes a dominating, obsessive kind of hobby – fine for a teenage boy, but a grown man really ought to “put away childish things”, I think.
If that’s the main or only reason why you “enjoyed” the Oct. 1st parade, we’re still talking rather at crossed purposes. The main danger of such a powerful fetish about the military is, as I suggested above, the ‘naivety’ that it can engender – a lack of awareness of or sensitivity to wider issues. The fact that you like looking at tanks has absolutely nothing to do with whether it is a good idea to have hundreds of tanks parading through the capital city. I don’t begrudge you your hobby; and I think there ought to be other opportunities for you to indulge it (it’s much better to view tanks at an army base, where you can get really close to them, maybe even climb aboard; or see them in action, charging over open ground or firing their guns at concrete blockhouses). But there’s a lot more to consider about the semiotics of a huge military parade in the middle of a city – what is the point of it, what messages is it intended to send out, and how will it actually be received and interpreted by various audiences?
I’m not really your typical peacenik. My father and grandfather both served in the army (indeed, my maternal grandfather served in the German army during WWI) and I was in the army reserve at university. I do accept that the use of military force is sometimes necessary and justified (resistance to German and Japanese aggression in WWII being a prime example). But, in the modern world, I’d like to see it restricted to humanitarian interventions – to suppress civil conflicts or genocide. I detest jingoistic sabre-rattling….. which is how events like the Oct. 1st parade tend to come across (although, in other circumstances, I like looking at tanks too).
[I don't think Stuart's blog supports Greek script either; but if you can find the word raphanizo, let it serve as a warning to you to stay on good behaviour, Pffef!]
October 29th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
I don’t really see anything in that article about ‘engagement’ – not in a military or even a big-hitting diplomatic sense. Most of this autumn’s foreign policy activities by the Chinese are, I would suggest, more about trying to impress the domestic audience with how much influence and respect China now commands around the world than with the real impact on relations with the countries concerned.
At present, outside of economic and cultural intiatives, China’s only tangible contribution to “making a better world” is continuing to prop up the DPRK, continuing to prop up Myanmar, and keeping well out of the struggle to contain instability and Islamic terrorism in Centra Asia. Not very positive contributions, these, most people would say.
October 30th, 2009 at 4:36 am
Froog,
You might be surprised to find out that the hobby of collecting militaria is somehow dominated by middle-age men. Not that I am that old, haha. Are we naive? I don’t think so, just like I don’t think collectors of anything else are naive. Of course, letting it become obsessive is quite naive and I don’t think the majority of us collectors are obsessive, yet.
Again I understand how you feel about military parades. Again I see your point of view. And again I can’t agree with you on this. You don’t like the show of foce, the message it might convey? We are all grown-ups and we all know why countries pay millions of dollars a year to maintain a military. We are humans and we humans have military for all sorts of purposes. Providing humanitarian relief? Sure, however the first and foremost a military acts as a deterrent to foreign invasion. That’s why we all have it. Until the day when communism comes military will stay with us.
With regard to that Atimes article, I think Stuart might be a better audience for your comments. If I am correct, he tends to exaggerate the influence of China and its intentions. Yes, China for the most part remains quite inward-looking. It is just not in our blood to act like the west to put our hands everywhere, for both good and bad reasons.
October 30th, 2009 at 11:20 am
I don’t say collecting militaria is itself naive, Pffef. I just think there’s a danger that it may make people naive about the semiotics of miltarism. If you feel such a strong “attraction” to guns and tanks and uniforms and marching soldiers, you’re not easily able to think about these things in any other terms, to consider the impact of military parades from anybody else’s point of view.
What did you mean by “when communism comes”? I assume you’re envisaging not a Marxist takeover, but some benign Star Trek future of a one-country world? I rather doubt that will ever happen. It’s certainly a very long way off.
I think I broadly share Stuart’s misgivings that China’s foreign policy lacks any moral dimension, and in many cases (DPRK and Myanmar certainly; and, at least until recently, Sudan) is downright irresponsible. As we’ve said on here before, the new colonialism/imperialism of China is being pursued through purely economic means rather than the 18th/19th century model of military conquest and occupation. Whilst not resorting to military force is certainly a good thing, this does not absolve the Chinese government from critical analysis of the motives and consequences of what it’s doing in other countries.
It would be good to see China becoming more willing to deploy its military in international peace-keeping operations, rather than just as a means of threatening its neighbours (especially Taiwan) and intimidating its own population (especially in Xinjiang and Tibet).
October 30th, 2009 at 11:31 am
I don’t like the genetic implication of “not in our blood”, but even as a statement about prevailing culture evidenced through history, your contention that China is purely inward-looking and “doesn’t put its hands everywhere” hardly holds up.
The original Chinese heartland was in the central eastern part of modern China. Successive dynasties expanded south into Yunnan, Thailand, and Vietnam, north into Mongolia, Manchuria, Siberia, and Korea, west into Xinjiang, Gansu, and Tibet, and east into Taiwan. Modern China is the product of more than a thousand years of imperialist expansion.
And today, China is “putting its hands” into as many places as it can – especially in SE Asia and Africa; S America up next – through economic and ’soft’ power.
I saw a presentation last night by a British academic called Martin Jacques who’s just written a book called When China Rules The World. He’s a (former?) Marxist, and most very positive about the rise of China. But he did suggest that China still has the paternalistic attitude of the Imperial era towards its South-East Asian neighbours, that it tends to view them as necessarily subservient, as ‘tributary states’.
October 31st, 2009 at 3:58 am
Froog,
Some people in the west are just so eager to brand China with labels such as “neo-colonialist” etc, particularly about China’s activities in Africa, without explaining why China is considered “imperialistic” or “neo-colonial”. China pays Africa and the rest of the world for what she wants with hard cash and China has not shortchanged anybody, has she? They have the right to not sell what they have to China, correct? China is not forcing them to sell China what they have, right? China is accused of squeezing local businesses in Africa and elsewhere with her cheap goods. Sorry but that’s how comparative advantage works. If you are able to make something that is equally good but a lot cheaper, you have the comparative advantage. So what’s wrong with that? If one day African merchants are able to deliver equally good stuff at a cheap price they will force many Chinese factories out of business and I see nothing wrong with that.
“It would be good to see China becoming more willing to deploy its military in international peace-keeping operations, rather than just as a means of threatening its neighbours”
China is already very willing. I have a feeling that if she were to be more willing, many in the west will be worried.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/23/AR2006112301007.html
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2009-05/2009-05-30-voa17.cfm?CFID=319306342&CFTOKEN=72985262&jsessionid=de30cbd04f55b2381aef423d183ea3a28017
October 31st, 2009 at 4:32 am
Froog,
Yes China has indeed expanded since the dawn of history, like many other countries have. I’d argue that only a few existing countries today (those civilizations that already vanished don’t count) are exceptions. However, having expanded doesn’t mean one tends to stick its hands everywhere like the west has been for centuries. Case in point: When China had the ability to sail and conquer parts of the world (the 15th and 16th century) it chose not to. A century later the Europeans came and the plight of the world began.
By “sticking its hands everywhere” I don’t mean having a presence everywhere. Of course, China, like other major powers of the world, is increasingly extending her presence to corners of the globe. There is nothing wrong with projecting some soft power, is there? What I meant was political intervention and interference such as the threat of “do what I say or else” or “if you want this you need to do what I say”.
I think I am already tired of discussing this China vs. the west on who is being more interventionist, I am sure Stuart agrees with me here.
October 31st, 2009 at 11:48 am
“…doesn’t mean one tends to stick its hands everywhere… ”
Which IS precisely what China is doing now – ’soft’ or otherwise.
“I think I am already tired of discussing this China vs. the west”
The discussion can get tiresome, but I don’t see it in China v west terms. My view is that the questions should keep coming because I have doubts about China’s long term intentions. Unfortunately, what she says those intentions are cannot be taken seriously, whether they turn out to be sincere or not.
“A century later the Europeans came and the plight of the world began.”
I refer you to my latest post.
October 31st, 2009 at 2:32 pm
I often sense a denial in the Chinese about the ‘imperialist’ nature of their past history, an attribute that defines the character of the country today. Just because China’s was a contiguous land empire rather than a far-flung and discontinuous overseas empire does not make it any less of an empire.
Aside from ‘vacant’ countries colonised by Europeans – America, Canada, Australia, South America – only Russia can be compared to China in its size and the extent of its expansion; the only other major land empire to survive into the modern era. But it should be noted that most of Russia is almost completely uninhabited; its eastward expansion through Siberia was essentially uncontested. Moreover, it has now been forced to relinquish most of the extended empire of the former USSR (which was mostly a legacy of Imperial Russia), and will probably have to cede even more (Chechnya) eventually. I think China will be have to accept similar changes one day: I just don’t think it’s feasible – or sensible, at any rate! – to found a unitary nation-state on such a large and disparate empire.
October 31st, 2009 at 2:37 pm
And your last comment, Pffef, was just staggeringly naive.
Of course China’s foreign interventions come with strings attached – almost invariably it’s preferential treatment or exclusive rights in regard to the exploitation of mineral resources. And then the expected shows of obeisance and gratitude – the equivalent of kowtowing – which are usually tied to requirements to make public endorsements of the ‘One China’ policy and to support China’s positions in the UN and other international forums. No ‘free lunches’ in Africa, I’m afraid.
October 31st, 2009 at 8:57 pm
What strikes me is how “China” is told here how it has to behave, what it “will have to accept”, etc. I’m certainly no panda-hugger, but I see no reason why the Chinese should heed such calls. If someone told me as a German what you are trying to tell the Chinese, I’d probably choose to politely ignore it – so long as it’s only words, not action against my people.
The CCP tells people in China all the time how to behave – I don’t think they’ve been waiting for a foreigner who sings similar tunes.
It is right to be aware that China is ruled by a totalitarian brotherhood, that this brotherhood is prepared to export censorship into the free world, and that there are individuals in China who suffer from its rule, and who deserve international solidarity.
But then, it doesn’t take a superpower to decline efforts from Beijing to undermine our liberties. It only takes functioning civil societies. And that is our task. If we know what we want, Beijing’s intentions become much less important.
October 31st, 2009 at 10:26 pm
“What strikes me is how “China” is told here how it has to behave…”
I’m sorry, justrecently, but I really fail to see where I’m telling anyone anything.
November 1st, 2009 at 9:39 pm
Maybe justrecently was talking to me, Stuart.
Just a slight misread of my remarks about China’s geographical over-extension probably proving untenable, I think. I was not making any demands, or even recommendations to the Chinese government, JR; it was just a prediction – “will have to” implying a recognition of practical realities and political necessities (at some point in the future, possibly the quite distant future), not any coercion or lobbying from foreign powers in the here-and-now.
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Justrecently, I also happen to think that you must have misread something.
That said, I have no problem with China being told, now and then, where to go and what to do there. You know, it is nice trying to be fair to everyone, but bullies do not understand that kind of language. I recommend reading Stuart’s latest about export of Chinese censorship; it is relevant to what I just said.
My thanks to Stuart (and Froog, of course) for a riveting thread.
Cheers
November 3rd, 2009 at 4:06 am
Neddy, I mean what I say. I mean it when it comes to how you, Stuart “blast” Beijing’s special relationship with Zimbabwe, and I mean it when Froog sending very negative, very aggressive messages to other countries with a military parade. I haven’t read all of Pffefer’s comments, but I’m surprised myself – I actually agree with several of them.
As for your comment 63, Froog, I can see your point, and as for exporting censorship, Neddy, I commented (@ 61) that China is trying it – sometimes successfully – and that it is right to point the nature of that out.
But much of foreign policy is catch-as-catch-can, as immoral as that may be, and much of what you, Stuart, point out, is what I consider biased. True: I’d still rather be a Cuban than a Tibetan – at least I could say that my country isn’t occupied. But that can’t be explained with American generosity.
Just my honest feedback, here and under #61 – and I won’t engage in a long discussion about it. Pffefer tried before, and it looks like a cycle to me, rather than like a thread.
Cheers, everyone.
November 3rd, 2009 at 4:08 am
correction:
… when Froog writes about Beijing sending very negative, very aggressive messages to other countries …
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:22 am
“…and much of what you, Stuart, point out, is what I consider biased.”
I’m not sure how the expression of opinions based on factual China-related events can be biased. And the input of those who disagree with my opinions is welcome.
It doesn’t make my China coverage ‘biased’ just because I choose not to write about Chinese children helping old ladies to cross the road.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:31 am
Well, you could try a ‘helping old ladies across the road’ post just once, for a bit of a laugh. When is Lei Feng Day?
November 4th, 2009 at 7:38 am
Stuart,
“My view is that the questions should keep coming because I have doubts about China’s long term intentions. Unfortunately, what she says those intentions are cannot be taken seriously, whether they turn out to be sincere or not.”
Your concerns are legitimate just like our concerns about the intentions of the west are legitimate. You have to be kidding me by implying somehow that the west is honest about its intentions and they should be taken at face value.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Froog,
You have yet to tell me why China was “imperialistic” or “colonial” in the sense of how the west had been. Just because China was an empire?
I highly doubt that Russia will give up anything more. The difference between Russia and China is, the population in Russia is dwindling or it is growing in China (albeit at a slower rate). Of course, one day when the central government of Russia or China becomes so weak and it can no longer hold the country together, anything can happen. But don’t expect a democratic Russia or China to vote for succession.
Of course there are no free lunches anywhere. I have been saying for a long time that other than issues concerning Taiwan Province etc., the PRC doesn’t really impose other things or “strings”. Exclusive rights to certain things? You don’t expect the Americans who give quite a lot to certain countries to ask for similar things? Even the Japanese ODA dictates that money has to be used to buy Japanese products and services.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:59 am
“That said, I have no problem with China being told, now and then, where to go and what to do there. You know, it is nice trying to be fair to everyone, but bullies do not understand that kind of language.”
The bullies? Who are the bullies? The self-righteous, obnoxious, pretentious and often hypocritical west of course. The problem with some of you people is that you can’t take what you shell out. Oh, you are telling me your country, your people love being told what to do? Great for you. Which country is that? Do you have room for one more?
November 4th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Pretty much a matter of definitions, Pffef.
‘Imperialist’ – seeking to acquire an empire. Since the character of the Chinese state throughout most of history was that it was an empire, and was almost constantly seeking to expand the scope of that empire, China was ‘imperialist’ in the past. New China has ‘reclaimed’ vast areas to the West (which historically had only been intermittently and often loosely under its control, and were not under its control when the modern state was formed in 1949); it continues to pursue vigorous border disputes with India, Russia, and Vietnam; it lays claim to vast areas of the sea; it probably aspires, from time to time at least, to reclaim Mongolia, and perhaps Korea also; it agressively seeks “reunification” with Taiwan; it has, within living memory, launched an invasion of Vietnam; and, as Martin Jacques observed, it appears to aspire to again become a regional hegemon upon the pattern of the Qing Dynasty, with its neighbour countries reduced to compliant ‘vassal states’. So, New China is pretty ‘imperialist’ too.
‘Colonialist’ – taking control of territory by implanting a new population. What has China been doing in Tibet and Xinjiang for the past 40 or 50 years?
Since, as you say, China’s population is still growing, further attempts at territorial expansion will, I fear, be inevitable at some point in this century. China is barely self-sufficient in food or water any more, and will cease to be so quite soon.
The word you’re looking for is ’secession’, Pffef; although that might arguably not be the appropriate word to describe the situation in Russia (or China). ‘Parent’ countries and imperial states are typically reluctant to allow their territories to repudiate their rule – but ultimately, there isn’t much they can do about it. The tide of history, and all that. Russia couldn’t do a damn thing to prevent the breakup of its former empire, and it can’t do much to hang on to Chechnya (and any other territories which are ethnically and culturally distinct enough to have their own sense of identity and to reject Russian rule), other than to prolong a futile war for a couple more decades.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:33 am
“You have to be kidding me by implying somehow that the west is honest about its intentions and they should be taken at face value.”
I implied no such thing; you perceived it.
That said, I believe it’s fundamentally true, culturally and socio-politically, that China’s intentions are less transparent.
Culturally, China loves its secrets. On an individual level people are taught to distrust anyone outside the family, and the art of strategic deception and misdirection are deeply embedded in the zero-sum mentality that persists in today’s China.
On the socio-political level, I don’t believe the Chinese people have the information, the will, the right, or the inclination to engage their government when Chinese foreign policy impacts negatively on the lives of people in other countries. The same is not true of multi-party, term-limited democracies, whatever their inadequacies may be.
On the other hand, American foreign policy (for example) is often shaped by public opposition to what’s going on overseas. In other words, they have the information, the will, the right, and the inclination to change things based – in part at least – on moral imperatives.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:12 am
Froog,
Out of curiosity, what is the difference between an empire and a kingdom?
You are speculating too much Froog. China does not have border disputes with Russia, it is all settled. And China wants to reclaim Mongolia and Korea? You saying that is about as serious as me saying the UK wants to reclaim the Republic of Ireland. You are basically saying that China is imperialist because you and another British guy think so. I am no fan of Jacques Martin as I think he overestimates the capabilities of China by too much and nobody should really take him seriously. Just because he thinks China wants to reduce her neighbors to “vassal states” doesn’t make it so. Again it is like me saying the evil UK aspires to recover its lost “empire dream” without providing any substantial proof or evidence. Come on Froog, you should be better than that.
China is colonial? Since when has planting population in your own country become act of colonialism? Would you consider the US colonial? Would you consider today’s UK colonial?
I bet on my precious Waffen SS visor cap that Russia will not lose Chechnya. Do you think one day the UK will lose Scotland?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:21 am
“I implied no such thing; you perceived it. That said, I believe it’s fundamentally true, culturally and socio-politically, that China’s intentions are less transparent. ”
And there is nothing wrong with that, is there? It is just that you and I we are very different. Again the western way is not the only way here.
OK then, you are worried about my intentions and I am worried about your intentions. And who is really in the position to worry? Certainly not you when you have a global presence everywhere and there is not a second gone by without you thinking about how to crush your enemies and rivals who might be perceived to challenge your global dominance and hegemony. Gee, I am really worried after writing that.
“On the socio-political level, I don’t believe the Chinese people have the information, the will, the right, or the inclination to engage their government when Chinese foreign policy impacts negatively on the lives of people in other countries. The same is not true of multi-party, term-limited democracies, whatever their inadequacies may be. ”
In case you haven’t noticed, there is such a thing as public opinion in China and it is somehow shaping the government policies. Remember “Duo Maomao”? And tell me, how do the British public care about lives of people in other countries? Examples?
“On the other hand, American foreign policy (for example) is often shaped by public opposition to what’s going on overseas. In other words, they have the information, the will, the right, and the inclination to change things based – in part at least – on moral imperatives.”
You are kidding me again Stuart. Exactly how is the American foreign policy shaped by public opinions? The Americans are overwhelmingly for pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan for years. Have they pulled out yet?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:55 am
You’re being very selective in your responses there, Pfeff.
China’s claim on Mongolia and Korea has roughly the same basis as its claim on Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan – so, there has to be some fear there that China might possibly one day seek to reclaim them (and Mongolia and DPRK are pretty much ‘vassal states’ already). China is trying to play nice with Russia now, but that may not last. It’s not being so nice with India and Vietnam.
Ask the Irish about British colonialism, Pffef.
It’s “our country” – because we say so. None of our people actually live there, but we’ll transplant a whole bunch of them, and then it’ll be even more our country. But that’s definitely not colonialism. Whatever the long-term indigenous population might think. Oh no.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
“Do you think one day the UK will lose Scotland?”
When I was in China I lost count of the number of times (quite literally hundreds) that students would ask me how I would feel if Scotland sought independence. They all seemed to think it was a clever counter-argument to the Tibet discussion, no doubt cooked up by the CCP’s Ministry for Illogical Counter-Arguments in Defence of the Motherland, and disseminated to the youth alongside Mao Zedong Thought and Military Theory as compulsory mantras.
The poor souls would beam with pride at what they had been told would be a debate-ending blow to the western splittist. Then the cruel reality would sink in: it’s really not anathema to a British citizen to contemplate Scottish independence. It’s not only an open topic for real debate but also considered a matter for the people of Scotland to ultimately decide which way they want to go. A referendum is welcome.
“You are kidding me again Stuart.”
No, really – American and UK citizens are able to freely voice their dissatisfaction with their own government’s policies. Imagine that!
November 8th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Froog,
haha, and you were never selective in your response? Give me a break.
On what grounds are you saying China might claim Mongolia and Korea? Both mainland China (PRC) and Taiwan Province(ROC) have constantly insisted that Taiwan Province is part of China. Tibet and Xinjiang are of course part of China. And they intend to keep it that way. Has the PRC ever claimed that Outer Mongolia and Korea part of China? Has the PRC ever insisted that they “return” to China one day?
Of course the Irish detest you people. No doubt about it.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Stuart,
Give me a f@#$ing break. Don’t give me the british queen shit that nobody in the UK gives a damn about the Scotts potentially seek independence. Even Gordon Brown, a Scotsman himself was treading carefully regarding this issue when he was vying for the PM job. I don’t think he would have been elected the PM if he were saying “sure, nobody cares, if the Scottish people want independence and they have voted for it in a referendum, we will let them be independent”.
Sure you and the Americans can “voice their dissatisfaction with their own government’s policies”. But I thought you were telling me how your opinions actually matter. I am telling you your opinions don’t matter, as shown in the Iraq and Afghanistan case all along.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:55 am
I can only assume, pffefer, that you’ve had a very stressful week.
“Don’t give me the british queen shit…”
On the throne?
November 9th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Well, Pffef, I think Iraq/Aghanistan is certainly enough of an ‘issue’ with British voters that our politicians have to pay a lot of attention to it.
It will probably be one of the reasons why Gordon Brown’s government eventually falls. It may have been one of the reasons why Tony Blair left office earlier than he might once have wanted to. And it is certainly the reason why his ambitions of winning the EU Presidency are being frustrated.
Similarly, in the US, public feeling against the wars is so strong that Obama will find it almost impossible to grant the increased troop deployments his field commanders there want.
The impact of public opinion in our countries might be limited, but it’s not the complete non-event it is in China.
On the Scottish independence point, Gordon Brown is circumspect about what he says about it because it’s a political hot potato in Scotland. For some years now, there’s been a small-ish but very vociferous independence movement in Scotland, and Gordon wouldn’t want to be seen to be endorsing or encouraging that.
It’s true that in any country there are going to be a few ultra-nationalists who stubbornly resist any perceived diminution of their country’s power or status. We have those nutjobs in the UK too, sure. But they are a minority. For most people, the debate is a purely practical one – what would be the social and economic impact of a split? England probably wouldn’t be much affected either way (at least, once the North Sea oil reserves are worked out); but Scotland is probably too small and too poor to be a viable country on its own – most Scots, whatever their emotional attachment to the idea of having their own country, probably recognise that it wouldn’t be in their best interests. And the Scots do now enjoy a considerable degree of autonomy through the Scottish Parliament.
Two things there’s not really any dispute about at all: almost all English people (people of any sense and education, at any rate) acknowledge the geographical and cultural distinctness of Scotland; and we accept that the Scottish people have a right to self-determination, if they should choose to use it.
That does make it very, very different from the China-Tibet situation.
Oh, also, Alex Salmond is a respected, mainstream politician, able to hold public office and travel where he likes; he is not reviled as a “splittist”. That’s a refreshing change also.
Scotland and England have been under unified rule for over 400 years now – but the possibility of their separating again is entirely thinkable, and it does not offend anyone.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:44 am
“he is not reviled as a “splittist””
Indeed. Nor Sean Connery. He’s always welcome to order a vodka-martini south of the border.