How long until honesty?

[Antares]

Well, for those curious as to the origin of my nerves to create this thread, I'm out of the country right now.

I just read that the internet restriction is stricter than ever upon the eve of Olympics in China. I'm just curious; do any of you think that CCP will ever own up to the 1989 fiasco? What about stop spreading cruel untruths about Falun Gong?

Since I'm at it, what do you think of the allegations of organ theft by the government?

[kevintr]

Have they tought you about the cultual revolution yet?

I think it's gonna be a long time but it could happen fast. Look at the USSR they slowly started making changes then things happend fast. Chekislovokia removed it's portion of the iron wall and east germans started going there to leave, the East German govermant cracked down some. I rember the day I turned on the news to see people walking on the wall in berlin, the communists were suddenly out. Then every day or two the communists were out of another country.

The USSR was the same way. There was a coup to reassert communism and a few days later the communist party was banned and the USSR rapidly fell apart.

It seems things evolve and cause pressure on a old system then the system abruptly breaks down under the built up pressure.

[stasis]

Wasn't the ultimate collapse of the old CCCP mostly bound up in economic crash? China seems to be going in the opposite direction economically; so, if the political culture of Chinese government does change radically in the near future, I doubt it would somehow cyclically mirror the changes ending the Soviet Union.

[SShack]

I wondered why the topic title was written so vaguely. Now I understand.

Wasn't the ultimate collapse of the old CCCP mostly bound up in economic crash? China seems to be going in the opposite direction economically; so, if the political culture of Chinese government does change radically in the near future, I doubt it would somehow cyclically mirror the changes ending the Soviet Union.

Yeah, it seems like China has figured out how to actually make a partly free market without actually giving citizens personal freedom. Very disturbing but quite inventive.

Sadly, I feel at this point that there's very little way to bring about real reform in China without a violent revolution. I have strong doubts that a peaceful revolution could ever work. The kind of decay present in the old Soviet Union is simply not there in China.

Worse, no other nation would be able to provide significant assistance to revolutionaries without some potentially severe consequences -- something that's a hallmark of many successful revolutions, so it's a really tough situation.

I hope I'm wrong, though.

[thod]

Well, for those curious as to the origin of my nerves to create this thread, I'm out of the country right now.

I just read that the internet restriction is stricter than ever upon the eve of Olympics in China. I'm just curious; do any of you think that CCP will ever own up to the 1989 fiasco? What about stop spreading cruel untruths about Falun Gong?


Yes in a hundred years time there will be apologies and admission of a mistake without specifying details. Just as the Japanese do now with their WW2 activities in China.


Since I'm at it, what do you think of the allegations of organ theft by the government?


I am for the private ownership of all musical instruments :)


Well the 广州 girls really knock me out
They leave the west behind
And 天津 girls make me sing and shout
They 成都 's always on my my my my my my my my my mind

[kevintr]

Alot of people think prosperity in China will cause pressure for a more liberal goverment. Once people aren't worried about food any more there attention will turn to other things.

I saw a documentary a few weeks ago about some Chinese who grew up in the in the west and returned to china to set up busnesses. One lady was a lawer who was taking the Chinese goverment to court over electro-magnetic pollution caused by some power lines set up for the olimpics. She's worried about the goverment craking down on her but it is a sighn that the Chinese are becoming interested in goverment accountability.

[Seppuku Savant]

Since I'm at it, what do you think of the allegations of organ theft by the government?

It depends on if it's true or not. Black market activity happens in every country of the world.

[Motor Jax]

except in the US...


ok, i'm kidding...

[Antares]

It depends on if it's true or not. Black market activity happens in every country of the world.

Exactly. That is why I ask the opinions of other members of the forum. If it is true, then this could very well cost China her rising status in the International Society. I'm not sure if similar things have been done in the past by other countries, but true or not, this notion is disturbing either way. If it is true, the barbaric nature of it would be appalling. If it is not, then we must ask ourselves who or which entity would slander the government with this, and what their intentions are.

[NephilimAzrael]

Read a very interesting article regarding China recently. Aside from the fact that the perspective of individual freedoms is due western individualist culture. They have a rather well structured and functional state that may soon drive other nations into high alert, militarily and economically.

The article was in Issue #193 of Focus.
It was regarding china and the ecological issues aroused by other nations. "...the Chinese are the world's biggest recyclers"

A vast amount of rubbish is sent to China for processing, this is because the nation is ..."desperate for raw materials to keep their industrial revolution going - and that includes our waste."

"Ten years ago when China stopped logging - (which America can not claim to have done) - Cheung Yan.. went to the US and drove around begging garbage dumps to sell her their wastepaper. Today, shipping more than 6m tonnes a year from Rotterdam and LA to its [China's] recycling plants and turning them into cardboard boxes, her company.. is the world's biggest manufacturer of packaging. And Cheung is the richest person in mainland China".
On those grounds there does appear to be a striving free economy within the country and allows for individual style progress. An additional interesting tidbit of knowledge is that in comparisons: the WWF reported "China consumes 15% of the world's resources. But then it has 20% of the world's population."

"It emits more CO2 than the US but only a quarter per head and only a third as the average European - and this is before we count the emissions made to produce for sale to other nations."

Though this is divergent of the initial point, it is on the grounds that biased information may produce an emotive response to the nation's ethics, but rather a practical economy and state does often produce ethical dilemmas that are a result of production oriented systems.

I believe the efficacy of Chinese economics outranks that of many other nations and has far more people to provide for. So in the animosity of such massive numbers, external influence is not a priority. The nation itself is due for superpower status, if some do not already recognize it as such.
It has come leaps and bounds from the old CCP rule and does not need to succumb to apologies at this stage in its development. I give the idea great consideration seeing as most great nations have travesties for which they are accountable. America, Britain, Russia and China in their superpower periods are just a few examples.

[athenian200]

I just read that the internet restriction is stricter than ever upon the eve of Olympics in China. I'm just curious; do any of you think that CCP will ever own up to the 1989 fiasco? What about stop spreading cruel untruths about Falun Gong?

I doubt they'll ever own up completely. What would they gain from doing so? It seems to me they have more to gain by denying it and making it look like it didn't happen the way we think. If I were in their position, I'd lie to save face as well.


Since I'm at it, what do you think of the allegations of organ theft by the government?

It would be hard to say. There's definitely a black market for organs in China, but there's no telling whether the government actually has its hand in it. There are probably corrupt government officials who deal in it, but that doesn't mean the government itself actually condones it covertly. It's hard to tell if it's just a number of corrupt officials dealing in it, or the government itself being involved in it covertly.

[Antares]

Athenian. They often say admission is the first step towards righting a wrong. As long as we stuff idealistic college graduates who cannot wait for liberty, then admission from the government is only a matter of time. Enough Chinese know about it without help from government anyway. My parents' generation bear witness to it. The international community, I think, just wants to hear it from the CCP that they screwed up.

[Henry]

Wasn't the ultimate collapse of the old CCCP mostly bound up in economic crash? China seems to be going in the opposite direction economically; so, if the political culture of Chinese government does change radically in the near future, I doubt it would somehow cyclically mirror the changes ending the Soviet Union.

Not really. "economic crash" is the wrong word. It was really more about people being fed up with incompetence, ridiculous military spending where leaders were deteremined to outspend the US...with 1/3rd of the US' GDP, and a growing quality of life disparity between the west and Russia.

Recall that when the communists took control of the economy, they experienced about 15 years of double-digit growth, from the late 1920s until the 2nd world war. Growth rates were as high as 20% because they basically took control of the economy, drove saving and investment through the roof, and kept military spending at a reasonable leve.

Sachs has an interesting perspective on the subject:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Anatares, the Chinese government has no power not granted to them by the Chinese people. Cooperating with a government is giving it power, and in doing so, you assume responsibility for what the governemnt actually is.

[Julien]

The Chinese (like their Korean and Japanese neighbors) value intelligence and efficiency, Americans value stupidity and waste.

I think INTJs would rather identify with Chinese culture and wish China prosperity. :)

[SShack]

The Chinese (like their Korean and Japanese neighbors) value intelligence and efficiency, Americans value stupidity and waste.

I think INTJs would rather identify with Chinese culture and wish China prosperity. :)

INTJs also value independence and nonconformity, so I don't think it's going to happen.

[NephilimAzrael]

INTJs also value independence and nonconformity, so I don't think it's going to happen.

Not neccessarily. It is more about the system of government and effieciency of the nations economy.

[SShack]

Not neccessarily. It is more about the system of government and effieciency of the nations economy.

And I imagine it won't take long for an INTJ to discover inefficiencies and waste in the Chinese government system, only to be unable to fix the problem because of the greater emphasis on conformity.

[Henry]

The Chinese (like their Korean and Japanese neighbors) value intelligence and efficiency, Americans value stupidity and waste.


Speaking of stupidity: Explain to me how being 300-20 years behind the US in economic development is a sign of greater intelligence.

US per capita income PPP - 45,800
Jap per capita income PPP - 33,600 - US was at this level in approximately 1980
Kor per capita income PPP - 24,800 - US was at this level in approximately 1965
Chi per capita income PPP - 5,300 - US was never really this low. Best estimates of early colonial incomes are about 6-8k per year.

...and the disparities are tied to rigid social/political strucutres, corruption, and a lack of significant innovation at any level.

[SShack]

Told you so. Three and a half hours. ;)

[NephilimAzrael]

Speaking of stupidity: Explain to me how being 300-20 years behind the US in economic development is a sign of greater intelligence.

US per capita income PPP - 45,800
Jap per capita income PPP - 33,600 - US was at this level in approximately 1980
Kor per capita income PPP - 24,800 - US was at this level in approximately 1965
Chi per capita income PPP - 5,300 - US was never really this low. Best estimates of early colonial incomes are about 6-8k per year.


You are in fact comparing high-level waste producers/Capitalist countries to an efficient, socialist country of greater populous on the grounds of intelligence being capital per capita? Your argument is not considering the basis of economy on the global populous, for if that were the referential system, then you have a flaw.

Capitalist states populations:
Japanese est.=127,433,494
US est.= 304,789,000
Korea (South)est. = 49,044,790..
Total = 481,267,284

compared to Communist/Socialist China est:1,321,851,888

The global population is estimated at 6.684 billion.
China = 19.84% approx.

The efficiency in question is that a near 20% of the planets population is efficient in a contained environment, whereas wasteful capitalist nations rely on global markets for economic stability.

The marketing of wasteful products that require vast amounts of resources but do not demand the reuse and recycling of the waste materials within its production lines but instead require a constant fresh source of resources.

...and the disparities are tied to rigid social/political strucutres, corruption, and a lack of significant innovation at any level.

Yet again you base this on a cultural bias. If you actually look to the Chinese and their VAST history, most of the innovations you speak of have foundations in Chinese innovation. In a modern context, the measures by which the Chinese state operates is of little influence externally, yet they are now making due efforts to open relations with other nations.

[Henry]

You are in fact comparing high-level waste producers/Capitalist countries to an efficient, socialist country of greater populous on the grounds of intelligence being capital per capita? Your argument is not considering the basis of economy on the global populous, for if that were the referential system, then you have a flaw.

Capital per capita? No - income per capita. Huge difference, and they're not strongly corellated for nations with more than 20 k in per capita incomes.


The efficiency in question is that a near 20% of the planets population is efficient in a contained environment,

Learn to write, or speak english. This is called a non-sequitir - there's not anything resembling coherence here.

Are you trying to say that because China has about 15% of US ppp, its as intelligent? I'm not sure that makes any sense. They're willingly giving up 40k per person per year in income for...?

whereas wasteful capitalist nations rely on global markets for economic stability.

orly?

China imports about 900bn per year in international goods, and exports about 1.2 tn. That's on a 3.5t dollar economy. The US imports about 1.9t and exports about 1.1t on a 13.5t dollar economy.

So China's "international dependence" is about 55% of its GDP versus the US ~20%.

And don't give me the "but the US needs cheap Chinese goods" argument. It may or may not be true, but no more true than the Chinese needing access to the US market.

The marketing of wasteful products that require vast amounts of resources but do not demand the reuse and recycling of the waste materials within its production lines but instead require a constant fresh source of resources.

This is an lolpoint.

1. China has the world's worst environmental record, which is doubly pathetic when you consider the fact that they only have about 15% of US ppp output.
2. Even if we assume that effecient, minimalist production is what's a strong sign of intelligence, look to Sweden.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Also, note that China is not a socialist state. Its a corrupt autocracy. Learn political terminology before you throw terms around. You can't credibly call the USSR a socialist state, and it was a comparative "workers' paradise".

Yet again you base this on a cultural bias. If you actually look to the Chinese and their VAST history, most of the innovations you speak of have foundations in Chinese innovation. In a modern context, the measures by which the Chinese state operates is of little influence externally, yet they are now making due efforts to open relations with other nations.

Lets trace the roots of every recent significant innovation:
1. The internet - the west
2. Cell phones - the west
3. Space travel - the west/Russia
4. Atomic manipulation - the west
5. Flight - the west
6. Telephone - the west
7. Steam-powered engine - the west

But I'm sure all of the credit for this goes to China, right?


Regarding China being a positive international player, there we have another lolpoint. Worst record on human rights, worst record on the environment, worst record among major economies on trade and cooperation, and supports terrorism. Call me back when you rebuild and liberate Tibet.

[NephilimAzrael]

Alright, I will not argue with you.
And commenting on a persons linguistics is a rather insecure argument. Thanks for the insight, I might as well argue semantics and grammar, also a non-sequitir I believe would entail that what i stated in the sentence was irrelevant to what preceded it, in the context of that particular sentence yes, in regard to the preceding argument, no.
As for the innovations you listed:
Steam-power, points east, flight maybe not, but aerodynamics - yes.
I presume it was Alexander graham bell who invented the telephone as well? You'll find he was a patent clerk who stole the idea from another westerner, though yes, still western.

The internet itself is a network system of computers, computers themselves are calculators, calculators including abacus can be traced far back in Chinese origins. As for terrorism, I find any country who uses counter-terrorism as an excuse for rendition, torture and subterfuge is just as guilty as any terrorist. China is not innocent, but neither is America. The argument of Tibet's right to sovereignty is a matter of opinion, if you state china as an autocracy you are mistaken, the government more resembles a totalitarian regime, with a democratic front.

But instead of pursing this I will bow out. It is not a matter of argument, more a matter of witnessing the unfurling events. Who knows, let us see how China's role plays out in world economy.
I was half-hearted entering this debate, I certainly don't need an individual like yourself berating me on that.

[mind_wander]

It depends on if it's true or not. Black market activity happens in every country of the world.

On National Geographic did talked about China did harvest organs from the deceased prisoners without permission, after being executed for their crimes [white-collar crimes and many long list] are used for organ transplants.

[ArchonAlarion]

The marketing of wasteful products that require vast amounts of resources but do not demand the reuse and recycling of the waste materials within its production lines but instead require a constant fresh source of resources.

In other words, things that people demand, but that you personally think are unworthy of production. Classic socialist.

[NephilimAzrael]

In other words, things that people demand, but that you personally think are unworthy of production. Classic socialist.

A difference here would come in light of creating similarly functional products which can be manufactured with re-use of waste materials, a recycling function that can minimise the demand for fresh sources of raw material.