Jiang's era went out with Clinton (China, Taiwan)

Taipei Times ^ | 6-13-02 | Ruan Ming

[tallhappy]

Describes Clinton and his spineless corrupt sycophantic team well.

One thing also to keep in mind is who Ruan is (or was). He was at a high level in China's government in the 1980's before Tiananmen square.

He and all his kind were purged. He's exiled to Taiwan.

There are so many who parrot the ChiCom line that only the ChiComs can run China. They claim no one could take their place -- dissidents couldn't etc...

But Ruan and others who were purged prove them wrong. There were and could be a group of experienced competent people who would be able to govern a free China.

But they are neutralized.

[weikel]

Chinese history does show that when one dynasty loses power( the Chicom Dynasty in this case) ussually rival warlords battle for supremacy for a while. The problem now is that Jiang is really still a communist at heart( which means anti American, conquer the world, militaristic) while his predeccesor Deng wasn't.

[tallhappy]

Deng was too. Fascist through and through.

[weikel]

A strongman perhaps but a believer in the free market and was generally very pro American and Anti Soviet( if you look at the way he dealt with commie hardliners within China and his foreign policy you could almost say he was anti communist). He was probably the best ruler China has had since the Tang dynasty. You have to give him credit Mao totally destroyed an already impoverished country after Deng it was pretty close to 1st world status and a great power. Not only that its population from what I hear( from people who have traveled there) is the most capitalistic in their thinking of any in the world( travellers get mobbed immediately by people trying to sell them things).

[maui_hawaii]

The problem now is that Jiang is really still a communist at heart( which means anti American, conquer the world, militaristic) while his predeccesor Deng wasn't.

Say what?????!!!!

[weikel]

Dengs foreign policy was pro American and anti Soviet his domestic policy was free market. Jiang wants to keep whats left of the inefficient socialist enterprises and has been very anti American.

[Quix]

Hmmmmm. Anyone who thinks THEY REALLY understand China is probably delusional. . . even Mao. . . especially Mao . . .

Howsomever, I'd place my bets much more on Chen than on any U.S. power structure elite analysts. Bush Sr certainly didn't have much of a clue--thinking his hothouse 2 years as pampered and very carefully and cleverly managed Ambassador made him a grand expert.

It may be that Chen is merely aware that it's not over until it's over and Jiang still has plenty of power to cause trouble. But he'd be unwise to denigrate Hu. Doesn't sound very Chinese. It would be more Chinese to keep both as held in at least illusory esteem.

Of course, who knows what data is flowing at secret levels and which of that has any real foundation.

[Quix]

There ARE many skillful people very competent to run China. MANY are TRULY puzzled as to precisely the best ways to do it. They see, quite rationally, many flaws in the U.S. system. They are not thrilled with the European system. They want the blessings of the best of all systems. Formulating that, codifying it, systemizing it has so far eluded virtually everyone. It will take some very creative thinking to achieve it.

I did what I could to seed some thoughts to some key party members. I know many are certainly searching, learning, biding their time waiting for an opportunity to rise to the occasion and increase freedoms dramatically.

But fear of chaos is virtually genetic. No one wants death and chaos. Yet there's lots of seeting buried anger over Tienanmen. And yet there's plenty of youth who seem to have bought the party line and have a growing hostility to the U.S. and western ways. It's a troublesome mixture of things.

I suspect God will manage the forces very creatively to HIS ENDS.

[DoughtyOne]

[Lake]

>>And yet there's plenty of youth who seem to have bought the party line and have a growing hostility to the U.S. and western ways.

That's interesting. They were born after the cultural revolution. They eat big Macs, drink coke, watch Disney's and American movies, learn English. Soe of them are even fluent in Amercian slang. BUT they hate America. The majority of the Chinese population who are hostile to America are under 30.

[Quix]

Agree. The Chinese are, if anything, VERY ethnocentric.

Playing Chinese chess, the half game, when my student friend was teaching me, we'd be playing along and a friend would come up. . . another Chinese student.

Now, understand that his is a game which has written on the paper that comes with the chess pieces--two cardinal rules--one of which is--NO TALKING from onlookers--no assisting etc.

Anyway--I'd think that given that they'd both played all their lives and I was just learning, the newcomer would help me. WRONG!

A 3rd Chinese student friend would come up who'd also played all his life. . . I thought--wonderful, two against two. WRONG! it was 3 lifelong players aiding each other against the beginner. As many as 6 or 7 friends or even mere countrymen would end up colluding together against the western barbarian.

I've asked why in many different groups, contexts. It's like why is almost an incomprehensible question. It's like asking why there's a sky or why water is wet to them. It's like, there's no other option, OF COURSE Chinese would aid one another against the westerner. Fairness--which Chinese have a very KEEN and supersensitivity about if it involves others being fair to THEM--fairness just doesn't enter into that FROM THEIR ETHNOCENTRIC perspective.

One benefit, I'm now pretty good. Only about 3% of the students at the university can routinely beat me. Old men experts in the park won't play me unless they have no fear of losing face.

But this compulsion to help one another against the foreigner is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO INTENSE AND SEEMINGLY GENETIC. It's quite a phenomenon for a shrink and sociologist to observe.

I think the youth in the Mainland who are somewhat cheekily hostile to the U.S. do it as a kind of ethnocentric pride mixed with rebellion against the world authority of the U.S. But MOST adults of any age maturity at all are keenly appreciative of American blessings to China in WWII AND currently. Certainly there is jealousy at many levels over the wealth and progress America represents.

[tallhappy]

I think you are full of fang pi.

Hot air, blather.

Thanks for your comments. I do appreciate them. But you sound like one of the Clinton people or ChiCom PR agents.

I could hear some stupid "expert" parroting the ChiCom talking points and get the same contentless meaningless remarks you made.

And the Almighty can and does speak for Himself.

[tallhappy]

(Lake to Quix):That's interesting

ChiCom Propaganda vaudeville show starts up.

[Quix]

Color me exceedingly mystified at your response.

I'm about as hostile as you can get to BILLDO AND SHRILLERY AND THEIR ILK AND TEAM AND IDIOLOGY.

I deplore the Beijing commies who are still entrenched and regret ever loosening anything in the way of less totalitarianism. I was there during the democracy demonstrations. I know the ruthlessness and the fear and the suffering if only 2nd hand on the part of the suffering. Your allegations are about as off the wall about me as I've experienced in a while. But I'm stilly mystified and curious as to how and where from you came up with them from any of my post. Sheesh.

My post was merely from the heart more or less off the top of my head from my memories and experiences and associations there. I happened to have had some very well connected close friends. I also happened to have the ear a number of times of a significant group of rising stars in the government.

You can blackwash all that and form delusional constructions on it until the cows come home but it won't change the realities I lived with and know about as well as I know myself or anything else.

[tallhappy]

You play up the negative and fatalistic thoughts and analysis that play right in to the ChiCom hands.

Given that Lake, a total ChiCom propagandist praises your coments, you should re-evaluate your view or perhaps how you present it.

I am glad to see your response and believe you and take you at your word. It's just that saying acquiesence to totalitarian is genetic is essentially what the ChiComs want you to believe. They also like the hostility to the US played up as if it is universal as well.

[Quix]

You're a very interesting critter.
. . .
Which part of: I suspect God will manage the forces very creatively to HIS ENDS. TROUBLED YOU SOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH?

Father seems to do enormously better with my "speaking for Him" than you do. Perhaps you have an inferior perspective than His. . . but your tone was much more superior. . . interesting.

[Mo1]

SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

Thank you Registered!

[Quix]

It's just that saying acquiesence to totalitarian is genetic is essentially what the ChiComs want you to believe. They also like the hostility to the US played up as if it is universal as well.

I don't recall saying anything close to "acquiesence to totalitarianism is genetic"

I think I noted that their ethnocentrism approaches, seems like,is virtually genetic. That's a very different statement.

Of course hostility to the use is not universal. But it's evidently much above what it was when I was there in terms of percentage of youth feeling that way. When I lived there, a very small minority ever evidenced such feelings at all--a VERY small minority out of 1,000. Now, the percentages seem significantly higher. That's sad and disturbing even if the percentages are from 1% changing now to 8% or even 12 or 15% or more.

I have no idea what it really is as I haven't systematically queried my loved ones living there now.

[latourette]

Third World democracies are a dysfunctional, chaotic joke. Just look around the globe. If democracy is so wonderful, why are all these Third World democracies such basketcases while China and the rest of one-party E. Asia all raced ahead? Hmm? It's also not some simple matter to change a government and automatically assume whatever follows will work smoothly or predictably, as you blithely believe. Indians are some of the smartest, most capable people in the world and many Indians recognize India desperately needs economic reforms like land and labor reform, but India's entrenched majority-poor population, who have the power of the vote since India is a democracy, always block such economic reforms. So any developing country needs to develop a majority-middle class population first through long experience with capitalism before adopting democracy. This was the case for America and Europe itself around 200 years ago (American and French Revolutions were led by "bourgeoisie") and formerly one-party Korea, Taiwan, etc. over just the past several years. They only adopted democracy after they developed middle-classes and no longer needed the services of 18th-century "enlightened despots" in the case of the West or garden-variety one-party authoritarian leaders in E. Asia's case.

[Lake]

>>The Chinese are, if anything, VERY ethnocentric.

Well, maybe they behave like that when they are in a group, but individuallly they may not be ethnocentric. They hate America while they admire the American advancement.

>>As many as 6 or 7 friends or even mere countrymen would end up colluding together against the western barbarian.

It's the bad part of the Chinese culture. They tend to believe in power and you were in the weak side. That explains why China needs a strong, powerful leader.

>>OF COURSE Chinese would aid one another against the westerner.

I don't think so. If the westner is powerful enough, they might aid him. The Chinese people is not a people of unity. They have been fighting among themselves for 5,000 years. Of course aiding foreigners is not popular in China because you are taking the risk of being called "traitor". When it goes to the nationalistic sentiment, no rationale works.

>>But this compulsion to help one another against the foreigner is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO INTENSE AND SEEMINGLY GENETIC.

Because of the history.

>>I think the youth in the Mainland who are somewhat cheekily hostile to the U.S. do it as a kind of ethnocentric pride mixed with rebellion against the world authority of the U.S.

Also because they don't know the US. They don't know the hardship of the cultural revolution and they take the American culture they enjoyed for granted.