Just like mainland china's "cultural revolution" and "great step forward", Mr. Mao and his goons never really "think it through" before doing something. They ran changes just for the sake of changes. Just to be different, to be new, to create his "own" dynasty. Too bad his son got killed by the Americans during Korean War or we will see junior Mao running mainland china and china devolved back to the stone ages. By then, they don't even need the "simplified chinese" since most people would be illiterate and don't need to write or read anyway. I remember my friends in mainland china told me, during the cultural revolution, if you get a 0 in your exams in school, you would be prasied highly by the chinese communist goverment...
10 defects of Chinese simplified characters
Back then, the kids of high officers had no place to go.
If you look at today's political situation in China and Taiwan, you'll find something interesting. All the daughters of Ma Ying-jeou (President of Taiwan), Wen Jiabao (Premier of China), Hu Jintao (President of China), all live in the U.S.A. They may preach one ideology to their people, but when it comes to their own kids, it's a different matter.
Otto von Bismarck said once: "Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others." But when it comes to China, there is really no choice: you have to let them go through their own mistakes, it's the only way they know how to learn. In Great Leap Forward 30 million people died simply because the government refused to ask for food assistance (a lesson that North Korea learnt very well: you can ask for help even to your enemies like the U.S.A. for food assistance, if you have a famine). In Henan they concealed the outbreak of AIDS in whole villages. During SARS scare they shuttled patients in ambulances in Beijing so to hide them from the international health inspectors. I wish all these were just bad jokes. But no, they were all real-life nightmares. There is no point in lecturing the Chinese, they simply don't listen. You have to let them walk through the mistakes by themselves, and then they will get better by themselves. So, instead of lecturing China, what you really need to do is to create conditions for them to make mistakes faster. Only by making mistakes will they learn. You may say: but 30 million people died in vain. No, they did not. China is better today because of those 30 million deaths. They did not die in vain. Look at Sichuan earthquake today: they asked immediately for international assistance. China is better today. The world is better today.
If you look at today's political situation in China and Taiwan, you'll find something interesting. All the daughters of Ma Ying-jeou (President of Taiwan), Wen Jiabao (Premier of China), Hu Jintao (President of China), all live in the U.S.A. They may preach one ideology to their people, but when it comes to their own kids, it's a different matter.
Otto von Bismarck said once: "Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others." But when it comes to China, there is really no choice: you have to let them go through their own mistakes, it's the only way they know how to learn. In Great Leap Forward 30 million people died simply because the government refused to ask for food assistance (a lesson that North Korea learnt very well: you can ask for help even to your enemies like the U.S.A. for food assistance, if you have a famine). In Henan they concealed the outbreak of AIDS in whole villages. During SARS scare they shuttled patients in ambulances in Beijing so to hide them from the international health inspectors. I wish all these were just bad jokes. But no, they were all real-life nightmares. There is no point in lecturing the Chinese, they simply don't listen. You have to let them walk through the mistakes by themselves, and then they will get better by themselves. So, instead of lecturing China, what you really need to do is to create conditions for them to make mistakes faster. Only by making mistakes will they learn. You may say: but 30 million people died in vain. No, they did not. China is better today because of those 30 million deaths. They did not die in vain. Look at Sichuan earthquake today: they asked immediately for international assistance. China is better today. The world is better today.
This thread is fascinatingly bizarre. Pro-simplification Taiwanese vs. Pro-traditional Mainlanders. I'm sure the allegiances in this thread aren't representative of popular opinion!
To Tai-oan-lang:
(1) There's a fundamental flaw to the argument that Taiwan is more "multilingual" than China. The legal differences you cited are an artefact of Taiwanese democracy vs. Chinese autocracy and hence reflect the political situation, NOT the linguistic situation. As many posters have already stated, politics has no role to play in a discussion on the merits of Traditional vs. Simplified characters. (If political arguments are anything to go by, then I could argue that Taiwan under the KMT dictatorship was entirely monolingual... a completely false statement.)
Politics aside, the proportion of the population which is Han ("ethnic Chinese") is actually higher in Taiwan than in the PRC.
(2) Chinese characters should not be exclusively associated with Mandarin. This association is, again, a result of politics and not linguistics. Mandarin is no more "Chinese" than Taiwanese/Minnan. The only reason why Mandarin writing is considered "proper" is because a committee standardised it in the early ROC era (before which "proper writing" was 文言文). It is equally possible for a committee of Taiwanese+Mainland scholars to standardise Taiwanese/Minnan writing using Chinese characters.
(3) Most Taiwanese I know - including my Japanese-educated 本省人 maternal grandparents - are fond of traditional characters. After all, Japan still used traditional characters during colonisation period. And even before that, educated Taiwanese obviously wrote using traditional characters during the Qing Dynasty. So I really don't understand your argument that the Taiwanese are *supposed to be* more in favour of simplification than the Chinese and Japanese.
To Tai-oan-lang:
(1) There's a fundamental flaw to the argument that Taiwan is more "multilingual" than China. The legal differences you cited are an artefact of Taiwanese democracy vs. Chinese autocracy and hence reflect the political situation, NOT the linguistic situation. As many posters have already stated, politics has no role to play in a discussion on the merits of Traditional vs. Simplified characters. (If political arguments are anything to go by, then I could argue that Taiwan under the KMT dictatorship was entirely monolingual... a completely false statement.)
Politics aside, the proportion of the population which is Han ("ethnic Chinese") is actually higher in Taiwan than in the PRC.
(2) Chinese characters should not be exclusively associated with Mandarin. This association is, again, a result of politics and not linguistics. Mandarin is no more "Chinese" than Taiwanese/Minnan. The only reason why Mandarin writing is considered "proper" is because a committee standardised it in the early ROC era (before which "proper writing" was 文言文). It is equally possible for a committee of Taiwanese+Mainland scholars to standardise Taiwanese/Minnan writing using Chinese characters.
(3) Most Taiwanese I know - including my Japanese-educated 本省人 maternal grandparents - are fond of traditional characters. After all, Japan still used traditional characters during colonisation period. And even before that, educated Taiwanese obviously wrote using traditional characters during the Qing Dynasty. So I really don't understand your argument that the Taiwanese are *supposed to be* more in favour of simplification than the Chinese and Japanese.
> Edinburgh Medic Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:42 am GMT
> Han ("ethnic Chinese")
This term "ethnic Chinese groups" is better than "ethnic Chinese". The Mandarins, Wunese, Cantonese, Hakkanese, Mins, Gans, Hsings, etc., are different "ethnic groups" of Chinese. In native language, the Mandarins names himself the "Han people" (Northern Chinese). But the Cantonese, Mins and Hakkanese are usually name themselves the "Tang people" (Southern Chinese).
> Han ("ethnic Chinese")
This term "ethnic Chinese groups" is better than "ethnic Chinese". The Mandarins, Wunese, Cantonese, Hakkanese, Mins, Gans, Hsings, etc., are different "ethnic groups" of Chinese. In native language, the Mandarins names himself the "Han people" (Northern Chinese). But the Cantonese, Mins and Hakkanese are usually name themselves the "Tang people" (Southern Chinese).
"But the Cantonese, Mins and Hakkanese are usually name themselves the 'Tang people' (Southern Chinese)."
I should probably let you know that I am 100% Southern Chinese: Hong Kong father (Cantonese), Taiwanese mother (1/2 Minnan 1/2 Hakka), myself born and bred in Hong Kong. Yes, we do say "Tang people" in colloquial speech, but in official, academic, linguistic and cultural contexts, we are always "Han people". We don't take offence to being called "Han" and we certainly don't see ourselves as being a separate ethnic group from our Northern brothers and sisters.
I should probably let you know that I am 100% Southern Chinese: Hong Kong father (Cantonese), Taiwanese mother (1/2 Minnan 1/2 Hakka), myself born and bred in Hong Kong. Yes, we do say "Tang people" in colloquial speech, but in official, academic, linguistic and cultural contexts, we are always "Han people". We don't take offence to being called "Han" and we certainly don't see ourselves as being a separate ethnic group from our Northern brothers and sisters.
That said, I do see what Forward is getting at and I partially agree with him (though more in terms of language than ethnicity). I just wanted to avoid a possible misconception that we Southern Chinese somehow think of ourselves as "non-Han" or wish to dissociate ourselves from the Han.
> Edinburgh Medic Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:03 pm GMT
We don't take offence to being called "Han" and we certainly don't see ourselves as being a separate ethnic group from our Northern brothers and sisters. <
> Edinburgh Medic Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:10 pm GMT
That said, I do see what Forward is getting at and I partially agree with him (though more in terms of language than ethnicity). <
nationality (民族):
e.g. Manchurian, Tibetan, Mongolian, etc., are different nationality.
ethnicity (族群):
e.g. Mandarins, Wunese, Cantonese, Hakkanese, Mins, Gans, Hsiangs etc., are different ethnicity.
We don't take offence to being called "Han" and we certainly don't see ourselves as being a separate ethnic group from our Northern brothers and sisters. <
> Edinburgh Medic Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:10 pm GMT
That said, I do see what Forward is getting at and I partially agree with him (though more in terms of language than ethnicity). <
nationality (民族):
e.g. Manchurian, Tibetan, Mongolian, etc., are different nationality.
ethnicity (族群):
e.g. Mandarins, Wunese, Cantonese, Hakkanese, Mins, Gans, Hsiangs etc., are different ethnicity.
Edinburgh Medic: "Chinese characters should not be exclusively associated with Mandarin."
I also believed this lie when I was a little kid.
But after decades of listening to the Chinese that their "languages" are "dialects", you start to find out that the only thing linking these languages together is the Hanzi characters at the literary layer. How did the literary layer get into all the Han languages? Now, look around the world, there is only one single language that truly can use Hanzi characters to write: Mandarin. Not even Cantonese can be really written with Hanzi characters.
Then I woke up. The truth is: dialects speakers have the illusion (or dream) that their languages can be written with Hanzi characters, just Mandarin. But in reality, it never has been, and never will be. They are sold a dream, a lie.
And I looked at the intellectual level of those "scholars" working at the Ministry of Education in Taiwan to find the suitable Hanzi characters for Taiwanese Hoklo, and it made me want to puke.
If you have looked even just a tiny bit into another real ideographic writing system (Chu Nom for Vietnamese), you will immediately realize that Hanzi is a colonialist's favorite tool. Why? Because all the simple characters have been used up for the literary Chinese layer. As for the daily colloquial dialectal words, they all acquired extremely complicated characters, often with one component to match the semantic meaning and another component to match the colonial ruler's closest pronunciation. That renders the writing of dialects (or Vietnamese in this case) extremely cumbersome. And at the end of the day, makes the dialectal (or Vietnamese in this case) writing with Chinese characters impractical. While the dialectal speakers (or Vietnamese speakers) have to juggle two things at the same time (semantic meaning and pronunciation), the colonial rulers don't have to, because Hanzi characters were tailor made to them in the first place.
That was how China absorbed its South into the empire, and successfully brainwashed its population into being Chinese.
I also believed this lie when I was a little kid.
But after decades of listening to the Chinese that their "languages" are "dialects", you start to find out that the only thing linking these languages together is the Hanzi characters at the literary layer. How did the literary layer get into all the Han languages? Now, look around the world, there is only one single language that truly can use Hanzi characters to write: Mandarin. Not even Cantonese can be really written with Hanzi characters.
Then I woke up. The truth is: dialects speakers have the illusion (or dream) that their languages can be written with Hanzi characters, just Mandarin. But in reality, it never has been, and never will be. They are sold a dream, a lie.
And I looked at the intellectual level of those "scholars" working at the Ministry of Education in Taiwan to find the suitable Hanzi characters for Taiwanese Hoklo, and it made me want to puke.
If you have looked even just a tiny bit into another real ideographic writing system (Chu Nom for Vietnamese), you will immediately realize that Hanzi is a colonialist's favorite tool. Why? Because all the simple characters have been used up for the literary Chinese layer. As for the daily colloquial dialectal words, they all acquired extremely complicated characters, often with one component to match the semantic meaning and another component to match the colonial ruler's closest pronunciation. That renders the writing of dialects (or Vietnamese in this case) extremely cumbersome. And at the end of the day, makes the dialectal (or Vietnamese in this case) writing with Chinese characters impractical. While the dialectal speakers (or Vietnamese speakers) have to juggle two things at the same time (semantic meaning and pronunciation), the colonial rulers don't have to, because Hanzi characters were tailor made to them in the first place.
That was how China absorbed its South into the empire, and successfully brainwashed its population into being Chinese.
> Yes, we do say "Tang people" in colloquial speech, but in official, academic, linguistic and cultural contexts, we are always "Han people".
The Han people including Cantonese, Hakkanese and Mins is a very modern concept. The native speaking old persons of Southern Chinese whom are educated group or belong to uneducated group don't understand what are the meaning of Han people, but they understand the Tang people. The Cantonese, Hakkanese and Mins also have their own Written Language before 1950s. In their native written form, the word of Tang people were written in there.
In the eastern, official articles defined the Han people including all ethnic groups of Chinese. The academic researches about the modern concept of ethnicity always give a conclusion as the standard official viewpoint. At linguistic parts, the Han people in Wenyanwen (Literary Chinese) was mean Northern Chinese, but in Written Mandarin that is include all ethnic groups. The similar matters in cultural contexts that because the ancestors of ethnic Chinese groups adopted sinification from the time of Qin Empire (221 bc - 206 bc) and Han Empire (206 bc - 220 ad), as like as the European peoples under latinization in the time of Roman Empire (ancient) and Roman Catholic Church (middle age).
The Han people including Cantonese, Hakkanese and Mins is a very modern concept. The native speaking old persons of Southern Chinese whom are educated group or belong to uneducated group don't understand what are the meaning of Han people, but they understand the Tang people. The Cantonese, Hakkanese and Mins also have their own Written Language before 1950s. In their native written form, the word of Tang people were written in there.
In the eastern, official articles defined the Han people including all ethnic groups of Chinese. The academic researches about the modern concept of ethnicity always give a conclusion as the standard official viewpoint. At linguistic parts, the Han people in Wenyanwen (Literary Chinese) was mean Northern Chinese, but in Written Mandarin that is include all ethnic groups. The similar matters in cultural contexts that because the ancestors of ethnic Chinese groups adopted sinification from the time of Qin Empire (221 bc - 206 bc) and Han Empire (206 bc - 220 ad), as like as the European peoples under latinization in the time of Roman Empire (ancient) and Roman Catholic Church (middle age).
[轉] 漢族的稱謂
“漢人” 一詞真正賦予 “漢族” 之義，指稱漢民族是在 “南北朝” (386 a.d. - 581 a.d.) 之時。
北魏、東魏和北周 (北方)：
南北朝，正是北方少數民族入主中原之時。北方少數民族所建之割據政權，特別是北朝的北魏、東魏和北周的統治者都是鮮卑族，他們對所統治的 “中原居民”，統稱爲 “漢人” 或 “漢兒”。
遼國 (北方)：
(1)《五代史四夷附錄一》在記述阿保機建國過程中漢人所起的作用時說：阿保機起家于漢人的生産和技術不爲過譽。
(2)《遼史地理志一》載：遼遷扶余人于京西與漢人雜處，遷勃海人於京西北與漢民雜處。
(3)《遼史刑法志上》載：由於漢人居被統治地位，因此 “契丹及漢人相毆致死，其法輕重不均”。由於遼王朝時漢人用漢法，使得 “漢人” 始具有血統編民的法律意義，這時漢民族族稱的確定有著一定的意義。
(4) 特別值得注意的是《舊五代史張礪傳》載，張礪在被契丹虜獲後說：“礪，漢人也！衣服飲食與此不同，生不如死，請速就刃！” 張礪自稱爲 “漢人”，民族自我意識感躍然紙上。
金國 (北方)：
(1) 阿骨打令完顔希尹創文字，“希尹乃依仿漢人楷字，因契丹字制度，合本國語制女真字。”
(2)《金史張亨傳》載：世宗謂宰臣：“漢人三品以上官常少得人，如張亨近令補外，頗爲衆議所歸”。
(3)《金史賀楊庭傳》載：世宗喜其剛果，謂揚庭曰：“南人礦直敢爲，漢人性奸，臨事多避難。異時南人不習詞賦，故中第者少，近年河南、山東人中第者多，殆勝漢人爲官。”此所謂 “漢人” 者，乃故遼境內的漢人及已漢化了的渤海人、契丹人；“南人” 者，乃河南、山東之漢人。
(4) 又特別值得注意的是《金史盧彥倫傳》載臨潢留守耶律赤狗兒雲：“契丹、漢人久爲一家”，“番漢之民皆赤子也。” “漢人” 作爲族稱之意不言而喻。
西夏 (北方)：
成書於西元1190年，至今保存完好的西夏文漢語對照詞典《番漢合時堂中珠》中說：“不這番語，則豈和番人之衆；不會漢語，則豈入漢人之情。番有智者，漢人不敬；漢有賢者，番人不崇，若此者，由語言不通故也。” 在這裏，“漢人” 一詞指稱漢民族是再明白不過的了。
大元：
元王朝將全國人分爲蒙古人、色目人、漢人、南人、4等。此所謂 “漢人”、“南人” 之分以宋、金疆哉爲界，實承襲金代的傳統說法。
大清：
清王朝將全國分爲滿、蒙、漢三等，而漢人又分爲隸屬八旗的 “漢軍” 和普通 “漢人” 兩等。《池北偶談漢軍漢人》中謂：“本朝制以八旗遼東人號爲漢軍，以直省人爲漢人。” 康熙實行 “滿漢一體” 的民族政策，下令 “各省督、撫，不論滿洲、漢軍、漢人，應選賢能推用。”
近代：
近代以來，由於 “民族” 一詞科學含義的傳入和影響的擴大，“漢人” 之稱漸轉爲 “漢族” 之稱，如：
(1) 1901年，梁啓超在《亡國篇》說：“悲夫悲夫，吾漢人之有兮日也，雖然則亦幸矣。……皇皇種族，乃使之永遠沈淪，其非人心也哉！夫駐防雲者，則豈不以防我漢族哉！”
(2) 1903年，鄒容在《革命軍》雲：“漢族者，東洋史上最特色之人種……，自古司東亞文化之木鐸者，實惟我皇漢民族焉。”
(3) 孫中山在《民族主義》中也說：“象亞洲的民族，著名的有蒙古族、巫來族、日本族、滿族、漢族。”
這樣，中華民國成立後，申明漢、滿、蒙、回、藏是民國的五大民族，即 “五族共和” 之說，“漢人” 正式成爲具有近代西方意義的 “漢族”，至此，漢民族族稱最後確定。
“漢人” 一詞真正賦予 “漢族” 之義，指稱漢民族是在 “南北朝” (386 a.d. - 581 a.d.) 之時。
北魏、東魏和北周 (北方)：
南北朝，正是北方少數民族入主中原之時。北方少數民族所建之割據政權，特別是北朝的北魏、東魏和北周的統治者都是鮮卑族，他們對所統治的 “中原居民”，統稱爲 “漢人” 或 “漢兒”。
遼國 (北方)：
(1)《五代史四夷附錄一》在記述阿保機建國過程中漢人所起的作用時說：阿保機起家于漢人的生産和技術不爲過譽。
(2)《遼史地理志一》載：遼遷扶余人于京西與漢人雜處，遷勃海人於京西北與漢民雜處。
(3)《遼史刑法志上》載：由於漢人居被統治地位，因此 “契丹及漢人相毆致死，其法輕重不均”。由於遼王朝時漢人用漢法，使得 “漢人” 始具有血統編民的法律意義，這時漢民族族稱的確定有著一定的意義。
(4) 特別值得注意的是《舊五代史張礪傳》載，張礪在被契丹虜獲後說：“礪，漢人也！衣服飲食與此不同，生不如死，請速就刃！” 張礪自稱爲 “漢人”，民族自我意識感躍然紙上。
金國 (北方)：
(1) 阿骨打令完顔希尹創文字，“希尹乃依仿漢人楷字，因契丹字制度，合本國語制女真字。”
(2)《金史張亨傳》載：世宗謂宰臣：“漢人三品以上官常少得人，如張亨近令補外，頗爲衆議所歸”。
(3)《金史賀楊庭傳》載：世宗喜其剛果，謂揚庭曰：“南人礦直敢爲，漢人性奸，臨事多避難。異時南人不習詞賦，故中第者少，近年河南、山東人中第者多，殆勝漢人爲官。”此所謂 “漢人” 者，乃故遼境內的漢人及已漢化了的渤海人、契丹人；“南人” 者，乃河南、山東之漢人。
(4) 又特別值得注意的是《金史盧彥倫傳》載臨潢留守耶律赤狗兒雲：“契丹、漢人久爲一家”，“番漢之民皆赤子也。” “漢人” 作爲族稱之意不言而喻。
西夏 (北方)：
成書於西元1190年，至今保存完好的西夏文漢語對照詞典《番漢合時堂中珠》中說：“不這番語，則豈和番人之衆；不會漢語，則豈入漢人之情。番有智者，漢人不敬；漢有賢者，番人不崇，若此者，由語言不通故也。” 在這裏，“漢人” 一詞指稱漢民族是再明白不過的了。
大元：
元王朝將全國人分爲蒙古人、色目人、漢人、南人、4等。此所謂 “漢人”、“南人” 之分以宋、金疆哉爲界，實承襲金代的傳統說法。
大清：
清王朝將全國分爲滿、蒙、漢三等，而漢人又分爲隸屬八旗的 “漢軍” 和普通 “漢人” 兩等。《池北偶談漢軍漢人》中謂：“本朝制以八旗遼東人號爲漢軍，以直省人爲漢人。” 康熙實行 “滿漢一體” 的民族政策，下令 “各省督、撫，不論滿洲、漢軍、漢人，應選賢能推用。”
近代：
近代以來，由於 “民族” 一詞科學含義的傳入和影響的擴大，“漢人” 之稱漸轉爲 “漢族” 之稱，如：
(1) 1901年，梁啓超在《亡國篇》說：“悲夫悲夫，吾漢人之有兮日也，雖然則亦幸矣。……皇皇種族，乃使之永遠沈淪，其非人心也哉！夫駐防雲者，則豈不以防我漢族哉！”
(2) 1903年，鄒容在《革命軍》雲：“漢族者，東洋史上最特色之人種……，自古司東亞文化之木鐸者，實惟我皇漢民族焉。”
(3) 孫中山在《民族主義》中也說：“象亞洲的民族，著名的有蒙古族、巫來族、日本族、滿族、漢族。”
這樣，中華民國成立後，申明漢、滿、蒙、回、藏是民國的五大民族，即 “五族共和” 之說，“漢人” 正式成爲具有近代西方意義的 “漢族”，至此，漢民族族稱最後確定。
your reader: "merry chrismas!"
Merry Xmas to you, too. Salaam aleikum, as Obama would say.
I was reading about the overseas Chinese democracy movement. A whole bunch of hooligans and thieves receiving money from Taiwan and U.S. government. I understand that for all organizations, you need money. Money is the fuel to get things going, to make things happen. But if you are a decent person, you'd better watch out for where money comes from. Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in Beijing, on Xmas day. He has my sympathy, but I can read much more from his activities and words, and frankly I do not have a lot of respect for any of the Chinese democracy movement leaders.
Why is China failing to produce any real, decent democracy leader? Why are they bribed so easily by money?
Even Liu Xiaobo himself said that China would become democratic if it can undergo 300 years of western colonialism. But I think the root of all evils is not in dictatorship, in lack of democracy, lack of freedom, etc.
In Great Leap Forward 30 million people died from hunger, simply because China refused to acknowledge there was a famine, and did not seek food assistance from the world.
The root of all evils in China is inferiority complex. You don't solve that problem, nothing is solved. You may see new generations of "democracy" standard bearers, but at the end of the day they are just as brutal and corrupt as those people whom they criticize. Different brand names, same hooligans, same corruption, same dictatorial style. They are different only in their brands, underneath their skins, their substances are pretty much the same.
From linguistics issues to 30 million dead bodies to shuttling SARS patients in ambulances in Beijing to today's lack of freedom and to ethnic minority riots, China actually has one and one single underlying problem: inferiority complex. You solve the inferiority complex problem, everything else falls in place. It won't take 300 years. It takes only one single generation: 30 years.
Merry Xmas to you, too. Salaam aleikum, as Obama would say.
I was reading about the overseas Chinese democracy movement. A whole bunch of hooligans and thieves receiving money from Taiwan and U.S. government. I understand that for all organizations, you need money. Money is the fuel to get things going, to make things happen. But if you are a decent person, you'd better watch out for where money comes from. Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in Beijing, on Xmas day. He has my sympathy, but I can read much more from his activities and words, and frankly I do not have a lot of respect for any of the Chinese democracy movement leaders.
Why is China failing to produce any real, decent democracy leader? Why are they bribed so easily by money?
Even Liu Xiaobo himself said that China would become democratic if it can undergo 300 years of western colonialism. But I think the root of all evils is not in dictatorship, in lack of democracy, lack of freedom, etc.
In Great Leap Forward 30 million people died from hunger, simply because China refused to acknowledge there was a famine, and did not seek food assistance from the world.
The root of all evils in China is inferiority complex. You don't solve that problem, nothing is solved. You may see new generations of "democracy" standard bearers, but at the end of the day they are just as brutal and corrupt as those people whom they criticize. Different brand names, same hooligans, same corruption, same dictatorial style. They are different only in their brands, underneath their skins, their substances are pretty much the same.
From linguistics issues to 30 million dead bodies to shuttling SARS patients in ambulances in Beijing to today's lack of freedom and to ethnic minority riots, China actually has one and one single underlying problem: inferiority complex. You solve the inferiority complex problem, everything else falls in place. It won't take 300 years. It takes only one single generation: 30 years.
Little Tadpole Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:03 pm GMT
your reader: "merry chrismas!"
Merry Xmas to you, too. Salaam aleikum, as Obama would say.
I was reading about the overseas Chinese democracy movement. A whole bunch of hooligans and thieves receiving money from Taiwan and U.S. government. I understand that for all organizations, you need money. Money is the fuel to get things going, to make things happen. But if you are a decent person, you'd better watch out for where money comes from. Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in Beijing, on Xmas day. He has my sympathy, but I can read much more from his activities and words, and frankly I do not have a lot of respect for any of the Chinese democracy movement leaders.
Why is China failing to produce any real, decent democracy leader? Why are they bribed so easily by money?
Even Liu Xiaobo himself said that China would become democratic if it can undergo 300 years of western colonialism. But I think the root of all evils is not in dictatorship, in lack of democracy, lack of freedom, etc.
In Great Leap Forward 30 million people died from hunger, simply because China refused to acknowledge there was a famine, and did not seek food assistance from the world.
The root of all evils in China is inferiority complex. You don't solve that problem, nothing is solved. You may see new generations of "democracy" standard bearers, but at the end of the day they are just as brutal and corrupt as those people whom they criticize. Different brand names, same hooligans, same corruption, same dictatorial style. They are different only in their brands, underneath their skins, their substances are pretty much the same.
From linguistics issues to 30 million dead bodies to shuttling SARS patients in ambulances in Beijing to today's lack of freedom and to ethnic minority riots, China actually has one and one single underlying problem: inferiority complex. You solve the inferiority complex problem, everything else falls in place. It won't take 300 years. It takes only one single generation: 30 years.
--------------------------------------------------
Little Tadpole, yr understanding of Chinese conditions and probs is funny!Surely just a symptom of yr own prob in sofar as the inferiority complex thing is concerned?! I am sure it surey is!
The root of big Chinese probs lies in this---Let Shuimo tell you unexplicitly: 900 million peasants living in rural China!
Got it?
BTW: Shuimo is glad to see you keeping such close watch over China affairs, my Beijing in particular!LOL GOOD!
your reader: "merry chrismas!"
Merry Xmas to you, too. Salaam aleikum, as Obama would say.
I was reading about the overseas Chinese democracy movement. A whole bunch of hooligans and thieves receiving money from Taiwan and U.S. government. I understand that for all organizations, you need money. Money is the fuel to get things going, to make things happen. But if you are a decent person, you'd better watch out for where money comes from. Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in Beijing, on Xmas day. He has my sympathy, but I can read much more from his activities and words, and frankly I do not have a lot of respect for any of the Chinese democracy movement leaders.
Why is China failing to produce any real, decent democracy leader? Why are they bribed so easily by money?
Even Liu Xiaobo himself said that China would become democratic if it can undergo 300 years of western colonialism. But I think the root of all evils is not in dictatorship, in lack of democracy, lack of freedom, etc.
In Great Leap Forward 30 million people died from hunger, simply because China refused to acknowledge there was a famine, and did not seek food assistance from the world.
The root of all evils in China is inferiority complex. You don't solve that problem, nothing is solved. You may see new generations of "democracy" standard bearers, but at the end of the day they are just as brutal and corrupt as those people whom they criticize. Different brand names, same hooligans, same corruption, same dictatorial style. They are different only in their brands, underneath their skins, their substances are pretty much the same.
From linguistics issues to 30 million dead bodies to shuttling SARS patients in ambulances in Beijing to today's lack of freedom and to ethnic minority riots, China actually has one and one single underlying problem: inferiority complex. You solve the inferiority complex problem, everything else falls in place. It won't take 300 years. It takes only one single generation: 30 years.
--------------------------------------------------
Little Tadpole, yr understanding of Chinese conditions and probs is funny!Surely just a symptom of yr own prob in sofar as the inferiority complex thing is concerned?! I am sure it surey is!
The root of big Chinese probs lies in this---Let Shuimo tell you unexplicitly: 900 million peasants living in rural China!
Got it?
BTW: Shuimo is glad to see you keeping such close watch over China affairs, my Beijing in particular!LOL GOOD!
That little tadpole is so morbidly obsessed with this "inferiority complex" concept that he can wait to conclude that every unpleasant thing under the sun arises because of "inferiority complex". LOL