Global Times' popularity - social outlet, propaganda or conscience of the people - frank and outspoken Hu Xijin demolishes myth of simplistic China - meaning of democracy, human rights, sovereignty

Hu Xijin is the editor-in-chief of Global Times, often regarded as one of the "mouthpieces" of the Chinese government (aka communist party in western press). 


China is a huge multicultural country with wide economic and social disparities which need to be addressed efficiently. It is easy to point fingers especially coming from those who do not know Chinese history and local conditions well. China is more complex than outsider's simplistic viewpoint.  Development takes time - this is nothing compared to the thousands of years of Chinese history. It pays to be patient is the wise message to hot heads. 


This is a frank interview with Hu Xijin. No political rhetoric, just plain words from the heart of a Chinese. 

Quote :


Hu: I respect the voices on weibo, but I don’t think the voices on weibo represent the whole of China. Weibo only gathers people of the same mind. These people are active but they are not the mainstream. If the majority of Chinese society thought I was wrong, then I would think carefully if I should change. The Global Times is doing better and better, and its influence is getting bigger and bigger. People are still buying it even at 1.2 yuan. The circulation is huge. It means people are reading our newspaper, they agree with our position. Most people are still on my side. 

We have been touching sensitive topics in recent years, which laid the groundwork for our prompt comment on the Ai Weiwei case.

There are diverse public opinions in China. Some people try to label everything and everyone. This is not healthy. I think GT has been trying to take an impartial position on sensitive issues. But I have to admit, it’s difficult. Take Ai’s case for example. 

We wrote four editorials about Ai in a row. Maybe not every word was accurate, but the overall message was not wrong. If you have to pick a particular sentence and ask me what it means, then it’s like punishing people for their words. We can’t take things out of context. Any article would be problematic if taken out of context. 

We wrote those editorials out of China’s interest. The articles reflect our overall understanding of the world. I don’t think we should single out the government. The Chinese government is part of China. Under most circumstances, the interest of the government is the same as the interest of the people and the nation. I don’t believe the US government cares more about the well being of the Chinese people than the Chinese government does. I don’t believe that.


 It’s a simple way of putting things. The key is to understand the word “rise.” The authorities do not like this word; they prefer “development.” The foreign media like to say “China rise” and many Chinese people followed suit and grew used to it. It’s a reality for China. There are good things, such as rapid economic development, but there are weaknesses and problems too, such as the income gap. And we haven’t completely solved the theoretical questions; such as how do we connect the superiority of socialism with economic development and the fruits of a market economy. These haven’t yet been solved. The rise of China is complicated.


The China consensus is not mature, neither is the China model. At least we haven’t figured it out ourselves.
But we do walk on a different path than the West. 


We shouldn’t be obsessed with the question of whether this path is unique to China or not. That’s meaningless. No society develops completely isolated from the rest of the world. It’s impossible. In this age of globalization, we most definitely have been influenced by the West. We can’t develop without the West. Our opening up, to a large extent, has been toward the US. All kinds of Western thoughts and good things have had a positive impact on us. China can’t develop in isolation. No doubt about it. 

Yet China can’t simply copy the US or the UK. That can’t be done. China takes all the good things from different countries, puts them together, remixes them in China, and moves on from there. That’s a fact. And that’s the way it should be. What’s the population of most Western countries, tens of millions? That’s just a small province or a city in China. China is a huge truck, and the West is a go-cart. If you put someone who’s used to driving a go-cart behind the wheels of a big truck, they will feel completely different. 


 I agree that there are common universal values; human rights, freedom and democracy. Call them universal values and I agree. But the West has made these words political. The meaning of those words have gone far beyond their original concept. The situation changes when the West uses them as diplomatic tools to pressure China. In fact most Chinese people have the same understanding about whether we should have democracy and freedom. It’s just that we don’t have a consensus on how to get there. 

China is moving forward. You’d be a fool to deny it. But we can’t equate democracy with votes, one person one vote. That’s too narrow an understanding of democracy, and that’s a path designed by the West. Chinese people aren’t that stupid. We should call a spade a spade, and continue to promote democracy. 

I think human rights and sovereignty are consistent. Separating the two is the Western discourse. How can human rights in China be separated from sovereignty? Hasn’t China suffered enough throughout history over issues of sovereignty? How many people were killed by foreigners? In the past, when sovereignty was weak, the country had little say in the world. Today every country is competing to develop. The stronger their sovereignty, the bigger say the country will have. This is directly connected to human rights. Why do we set them up against each other? That’s Western discourse and Chinese intellectuals who believe it are either not thinking for themselves and following the West, or doing so deliberately out of personal interest. 


China’s national strength is still weak when compared to the West, so stressing no interference in the country’s domestic affairs is in line with China’s national interest. It’s also against China’s interest to intrude on other country’s domestic affairs.

There is only one China, there is nothing wrong with loving the country and doing one’s best to help push it forward. A friend of mine told me another story. One of his friends was rich and wanted to go to the US, so my friend said, “You will always be Chinese even in America, and you will always rely on China. If China gets better your status will rise, if not, you will be more miserable, as you won’t be accepted in that society.


The country may not be perfect but why belittle it?

This is how I feel. The US doesn’t need us to defend its interest as other people do. China has finally grabbed the chance to develop and is very likely to succeed. There are people saying online that China is messy, I agree and I have said so in an editorial. Sometimes we don’t know whether to love or hate the country seeing all the problems, but once I see hope and the progress that’s been made, I choose to love it and protect it.


Full report of the interview with Hu Xijin :
http://www.globaltimes.cn/NEWS/tabid/99/ID/663853/China-is-complicated.aspx

The fact is that majority of people do not want to rock the boat does not mean that they are ignorant or have been subdued or brainwashed. 


Self-righteous humanists, please give more respect and credit to the intelligence of Chinese people. 

Thanksgiving - repaying gratitude with revenge? What Tibet rebels could teach native Americans about autonomy and freedom

Stories of two huge landmass : North America and China.

Pilgrims who could not adapt to the harsh winter conditions were helped by native American Indians. Thanksgiving was a gesture of gratitude. However, pilgrims decided to stay on in the land of milk and honey, and European migrants flocked to America to seize, plunder, steal from Native Indians and did not spare killing those who stood in their way.

Tibet was ruled by theocratic monastery and majority who were serfs suffered inhuman treatment.  Local feudalist lama-abbot controlled government was concerned that post-war revolutionary fervour will spread to disgruntled serfs.  There were indications of planned uprisings and internal dissension.

Following negotiations, Dalai Lama invited the People's Liberation Army to get the house in order. His Holiness was seen taking photos with Mao and attendance of plenary sessions of the national assembly during happier times.

Census showed that the population of Tibetan Autonomous increased due to stability, decline in starvation and better medical facilities, amenities and general living conditions. The slaves were freed, liberated and enjoyed equality with former serf owners.

However, Dalai Lama's inner circle and revisionists discontent with the erosion of their powers conspired to revolt against Beijing and regain power with the help of Uncle Sam. Thanks to the help of CIA, the Dalai Lama ended up in exile and could not return to his homeland which has since changed by leaps and bounds, materially and spiritually.

http://www.american-buddha.com/cia.secret.war.TIGHT.htm

http://www.reality-choice.org/134/how-cia-helped-dalai-lama-to-end-up-in-exile

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

http://www.rense.com/general81/faeeof.htm

http://ciaintibet.com/about_project.php

The whole of China, not only Tibet and inner provinces suffered from the devastation of failed economic management and the political "cultural" revolution. Tibet was not singled out. However, for the last two decades, economic growth and policies to develop remote areas has brought about improvements and uplifting of conditions for growing numbers of people. Better communication links, infrastructure, health facilities, However, superstition and accessibility remain major obstacles to reach out to every family living in the Tibetan region.

On the other side of the globe, native American Indians live in poverty and could not get out of the rut.  But in a democracy, the government does not want to interfere in the lives of its people who should enjoy all the freedom they want. The capitalist Darwinian system does not require intervention . American presidents are more interested in garnering national support to fund democratisation of other countries. In a system where majority rules (tyranny?), the aspirations of remnant native Americans are ignored.

More than two centuries on, why don't Indians learn from dissident Tibetan Buddhist monks to exercise freedom and agitate for more help by burning themselves to have their voices heard?  Some say native Indians have pride and honour or perhaps are they are not very politicised and assertive.

Does the Dalai Lama have in mind some sort of native reserves for Tibetans?  If Americans can't redress inequalities within their own country, how could they hope to champion human rights for Tibetans unless there is a prize at the end of the tunnel.

Guo Mingyi - the modern Lei Feng, a model for Chinese people

This is a model selfless Chinese. It is very rare in today's materialistic world. Most people are too busy chasing after material wealth and neglect social and spiritual development.

More people should follow his example and come forth to serve the community. Don't give excuses, procrastinate or wait till you are rich.  There is never enough wealth for some to amass and  they don't know where is the limit.

Guo Mingyi is just an ordinary worker. But he has done many charitable, commendable and admirable deeds from whatever he could offer - blood donation and money for the needy. A humble quiet achiever is worth much more than self-serving and short-sighted arrogant individuals who only talk about great ideas but fail to achieve any common good. 

http://www.chinahumanrights.org/Messages/Focus/056/7/t20110719_770323.htm

Tibetan Monks' Suicide Mission - marginal sect's interpretation of Buddhism and politics

Monks from Kriti monastery have burnt themselves to send a message to Beijing.  They are said to be close and sympathetic to the exiled Dalai Lama and the controversial anti-government Kriti Rinpoche.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5geqMJgfzWImzR1kzZ-sA7cPamEQg?docId=CNG.85d6efd89b39fb7853a1eb4f76261036.431


Self immolation is unheard of in Tibet until recently. It is also discouraged in Buddhist teachings.

It is assumed that His Highness condones such behaviour. Tibetan monks are willing suicide burners to pressure Beijing.

It is a reminder of inferno monks during the Vietnam War which caught media attention. But it was the cost of the war that led to the withdrawal, not protests.

Majority of Tibetans are now enjoying a higher standard of living, modern universal multilingual education and  temples receive huge amounts of funding from the government as well as other ethnic followers of Tibetan Buddhism. The cultural genocide charges levelled against Beijing by the Dalai Lama could not be proven or substantiated. Instead, exiled Tibetans have lost much of their cultural heritage compared to their cousins living in mainland China.

The Dalai Lama has been accused of human rights abuses, nepotism and hypocrisy by the Western Dorje Shugden. But victims endured discrimination and harassment and had not resorted to burning themselves to seek attention.

http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/files/tibetan_situation.pdf

China's Humanist Approach to Long-term Victory

How China Can Defeat America


by Yan Xuetong

Quotes :

The key to international influence was political power, and the central attribute of political power was morally informed leadership. Rulers who acted in accordance with moral norms whenever possible tended to win the race for leadership over the long term.


According to the ancient Chinese philosopher Xunzi, there were three types of leadership: humane authority, hegemony and tyranny. Humane authority won the hearts and minds of the people at home and abroad. Tyranny — based on military force — inevitably created enemies. Hegemonic powers lay in between: they did not cheat the people at home or cheat allies abroad. But they were frequently indifferent to moral concerns and often used violence against non-allies. The philosophers generally agreed that humane authority would win in any competition with hegemony or tyranny.

Unfortunately, such views are not so influential in this age of economic determinism, even if governments often pay lip service to them. The Chinese government claims that the political leadership of the Communist Party is the basis of China’s economic miracle, but it often acts as though competition with the United States will be played out on the economic field alone. And in America, politicians regularly attribute progress, but never failure, to their own leadership.

Both governments must understand that political leadership, rather than throwing money at problems, will determine who wins the race for global supremacy.

How, then, can China win people’s hearts across the world? According to ancient Chinese philosophers, it must start at home. Humane authority begins by creating a desirable model at home that inspires people abroad.

This means China must shift its priorities away from economic development to establishing a harmonious society free of today’s huge gaps between rich and poor. It needs to replace money worship with traditional morality and weed out political corruption in favor of social justice and fairness.

In other countries, China must display humane authority in order to compete with the United States, which remains the world’s pre-eminent hegemonic power. Military strength underpins hegemony and helps to explain why the United States has so many allies. President Obama has made strategic mistakes in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, but his actions also demonstrate that Washington is capable of leading three foreign wars simultaneously. By contrast, China’s army has not been involved in any war since 1984, with Vietnam, and very few of its high-ranking officers, let alone its soldiers, have any battlefield experience.

America enjoys much better relations with the rest of the world than China in terms of both quantity and quality. America has more than 50 formal military allies, while China has none. North Korea and Pakistan are only quasi-allies of China. The former established a formal alliance with China in 1961, but there have been no joint military maneuvers and no arms sales for decades. China and Pakistan have substantial military cooperation, but they have no formal military alliance binding them together.

To shape a friendly international environment for its rise, Beijing needs to develop more high-quality diplomatic and military relationships than Washington. No leading power is able to have friendly relations with every country in the world, thus the core of competition between China and the United States will be to see who has more high-quality friends. And in order to achieve that goal, China has to provide higher-quality moral leadership than the United States.

China must also recognize that it is a rising power and assume the responsibilities that come with that status. For example, when it comes to providing protection for weaker powers, as the United States has done in Europe and the Persian Gulf, China needs to create additional regional security arrangements with surrounding countries according to the model of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization — a regional forum that includes China, Russia and several central Asian countries.

And politically, China should draw on its tradition of meritocracy. Top government officials should be chosen according to their virtue and wisdom, and not simply technical and administrative ability. China should also open up and choose officials from across the world who meet its standards, so as to improve its governance.

The Tang dynasty — which lasted from the 7th century to the 10th and was perhaps China’s most glorious period — employed a great number of foreigners as high-ranking officials. China should do the same today and compete with America to attract talented immigrants.

OVER the next decade, China’s new leaders will be drawn from a generation that experienced the hardships of the Cultural Revolution. They are resolute and will most likely value political principles more than material benefits. These leaders must play a larger role on the world stage and offer more security protection and economic support to less powerful countries.

This will mean competing with the United States politically, economically and technologically. Such competition may cause diplomatic tensions, but there is little danger of military clashes.

That’s because future Chinese-American competition will differ from that between the United States and the Soviet Union during the cold war. Neither China nor America needs proxy wars to protect its strategic interests or to gain access to natural resources and technology.

China’s quest to enhance its world leadership status and America’s effort to maintain its present position is a zero-sum game. It is the battle for people’s hearts and minds that will determine who eventually prevails. And, as China’s ancient philosophers predicted, the country that displays more humane authority will win.

Full article : 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/opinion/how-china-can-defeat-america.html?_r=1

Why Chinese are called "Tang Ren" - the integration of multicultural and cosmopolitan China of four thousand years

Wonder why Chinatowns all over the world are called "tang ren jie" -- Chinese people's street but
not zhongguoren cheng (middle country people town)?

The word Tang 唐 (ph : pinyin: táng, Cantonese: tong)   refers to the Tang Dynasty  (618 - 907)  which was the zenith of Chinese history.

The administration flourished under a well established meritocracy-based public service, enlightened Emperors ( including a female - Empress Wu Zetian) and large-scale assimilation of Chinese peoples regardless of ethnicities.

There were well documented archives, poetry and anecdotal references to mixed bloodlines which Hans carried from their ancestors intermarriage with Hu, Tibetan, Caucasian and many "Others".  Foreign physical features such as high nose, blue eyes, bushy brows, sideburns, beard, large ears, fair skin complexion were noted among senior bureaucrats and military leaders of the time. The erosion of pure Han ethnicity which began in earlier dynasties during wars and migration, was accelerated during the Tang dynasty. The Han today is an integrated culture rather than a race or ethnicity.

It was said that members of the Tang royal family, which continued to practise diplomatic marriages, had high nose bridge.

A well known general An Lushan was a Turk who later revolted against the Emperor.

Emperor Gaozong built the first mosque after meeting Prophet Mohamed's envoy.

The famous poet Li Bai who was described as having exotic physical features was possibly of Central Asian ancestry.

Read more in :

Ethnic identity in Tang China

 By Marc Samuel Abramson

Chinese history has been interrupted with variations of protectionist and seclusionist policies such warding off hostile "barbarian" invaders by building the Great Wall of China. Intrusions  and infighting among warring states were were common at times when China was devoid of a central authority.

The greatness and glory of Tang was its ability to utilise the best talents possible. Power did not come through military conquests and coercion of its people. Sincization was voluntary and sought after by the minorities.

http://www.chinavoc.com

China has come a long way. I believe and truly that Chinese leaders people will learn from history and continue to uphold the virtues and values of Tang.

Update on con artist Ai Wei Wei, how about social conscience of the US -

Majority of Chinese people don't care or recognise western Chinese hero Ai Wei Wei who f* his motherland with no end of trouble by knowingly and defiantly breaking the laws. Ai earns his living by creating anarchy and upheavals.  


Perhaps the Chinese government need not pay too much attention to Ai Wei Wei. They don't deserve it. 


Ai Wei Wei's latest publicity stunt is unimpressive. Considering the  mainland and overseas Chinese population, tens of thousands of claimed online supporters and donors are a drop of water in the ocean. Despite the outcry, people get on with their daily lives.  


What a company name Beijing Fake Cultural Development Ltd!!!
Did any investigative journalist try to find out if this is a money-laundering set up that has evaded huge taxes? Social causes are noble. But politicised fund raising coming from one who has not been truthful and clean with his past claims should not be encouraged. 


No, any Chinese dissident's words must be trusted as the gospel truth. 


As expected, search engine results display quotes of Ai Wei Wei and his supporters. 


Ai Wei Wei was even thinking of keeping the donations instead of paying the back taxes and fines for fear that he won't be able to recover them from the authorities!  If you are a legal and tax expert, please explain the reasons given which do not make sense at all whether one pays it directly or not if they imagine the government to be despicable and deplorable.


Disorderly behaviour in public would be sufficient grounds to remove someone from harming himself and others, even in democratic FBI protected America.  This deranged hobo would be nothing without the backing of other dissidents and western financiers behind them. Foreign instigation should not be dismissed as it is a game that has been practised to the highest level. 


Politics aside.  Seriously, I am not an artist but I do appreciate good art. Anyone with an eye for art, please tell me honestly whether the works of self-centred Ai Wei Wei qualifies him as a great "artist". His negative "activism" has probably earned more than he deserves.  


The free wheeling western media (mainstream and tabloid alike) has chosen to sensationalise anti-Chinese heroes than getting their facts right. 


http://www.bearcanada.com/china/aiaiai.html


Would we show the same level of support for freedom of speech and compassion to Julian Assange of Wikileak fame and conscience representation?  


What about the Wall Street protestors? Does China or other authoritarian states play up or give moral and financial support to disrupt  capitalist / democratic governments? 


Some things have not changed, since my previous post on Ai Wei Wei.


http://chinainformzen.blogspot.com/2011/04/anxiety-about-ai-weiwei-who-is-he.html