Free Republic

By this logic I should judge the possible actions of the American government by what happened during Bush Sr's administration. So I guess America will pull out of Iraq and leave Sadam in power.

As a matter of fact I talked to someone yesterday that was student at Tiananmen in 1989. Where do you get your information?

I am not saying it is good or bad. I am simply saying that portraying the Chinese government as a monolithic entity which moves in an easily predictable fashion is not a good idea. The country and government is vast. Perhaps near Mao's old hometown the government officials still behave like the old fashioned party members of yesteryear but most of the coutry is not like that. Talking about the Chinese in sweeping generalities is like talking about Americans in sweeping generalities. It will mostly lead to incorrect conclusions.

The Chinese haven't forgotten the "forgotten war."

"The red chinese communist leaders are not going to let us "train them" to make it better for us."

The leadership of the party and the government is by no means as monolithic in thought or action as this comment suggests it is just as fractured as most governments. The politicians in China are also on the left right and center of the political spectrum just like in other countries.

Ignore the previous post I misread yours earlier. "The groping man in Washington." I misread thought it said nanrenmin not nanren men. "The men in Washington."

If that is the case I think that I do not understand. shenme nan he shenme men? Argh! I wish I could just use characters here. It would simplify things so much.

Sorry to interrupt, but I have a question. I am curious what your definition of neo-conservative is. Do you consider President Reagan the first neo-conservative president? Do you also consider George Bush Sr. a neo-conservative?

"Not nanren men zai hua sheng tun, by any chance?"


Who in Washington are you refering to? Any men there, or is it someone in particular?

Seven years ago this was true but no longer. Tour guides are still a respected position but no longer the elite of society. The elite consist of upper party members as usual and now businessmen. No longer do most of them wish to leave. The party members of course do not wish to go. The businessmen see where the action is and also wish to stay. I think it is interesting to note that businessmen were officially granted membership in the proletariat about four years ago. The new course for the party seems to be very inclusive; they want all the money makers in their corner. I went on a tour a couple of weeks ago and that tour guide did not wish to leave the country. Instead she went on and on about how much better things had been getting over the past few years.

Appeal2 where in and when in China did you encounter this. I have heard this same story before but it has always been from people who were in China ten or more years ago. Most young people I talk to here now all want to stay. No one I have met talks of escape at all. Some of the English majors are very interested in spending a semester in New Zealand or Canada but that is all just one semester. Most plan to go for a short time and return. And unlike years past now they are returning in droves.

fat city I wouldn't hold my breath. Although the western media is focusing on the launch, here in China it is seen as cool but not that exciting. Most people I have talked to are still more excited about the olympics coming in 2008. The big news this year, outside of SARS, has and continues to be the government's focus on aiding the interior. Yes the interior is behind the costal areas but not that far behind. In addition, the government is continuing to poor money and manpower into the interior. The local press continually laud the new college graduates that have volunteered to go serve in Xinjiang or other western states for a year to help them out. If you wish to find comfort for yourself with dreams of internal collapse that is fine but I think that is all they will be dreams.

I am here studying the Chinese language. It is a daunting task but I am having fun doing it.

I am posting this from China. Next week I am getting highspeed access. It has been available for over a year but I am just now getting it. I live in Liangcun. I doubt you can find it on an English language map. It is a tiny little country village in Hebei province about 45 minutes east of the provincial capitol Shijiazhuang.

On a side note back in my home state, New Mexico, broadband still isn't available in most rural towns.

Shen has several meanings divine, god, deity, spirit, mind, supernatural, magical, etc... Zhou though means boat, ship or vessel nothing like wind. Kami is indeed the same character as Shen. Zhou however is not the same as Kaze. Kaze means wind. In Mandarin it is pronounced Feng. Most sources have been translating Shenzhou as Divine Vessel. I though like a more whimsical translation 'Chariot of the Gods.'

In addition I highly doubt the Chinese would ever adopt a Japanese term for any major project. Right now the space launch is still almost over shadowed by the report of an over 400 person orgy Japanese businessmen had in China on the aniversary of the Japanese invasion of China. There is still alot of bad feeling towards Japan.

As an intersting aside the first major use of the term Kamikaze was during the two attempted invasions of Japan by the Mongols. Both times they were hit by hurricanes after they landed on the beaches and were wiped out. The huricanes were then called Divine Winds. Personally I think that sea sick ponies had more to do with it as the Mongols also failed to invade Java and a few other island nations. Good riders but very bad sailors and I think the ponies surely hated boats.

Sorry but I think he is more correct than incorrect. First China does have the rule of law yes it is not as strong as in the US right now but neither was it as strong in the US then. Right now it is becoming stronger in China as two recent intellectual property decisions (One in Shanghai and the other in Beijing) in favor of US companies show.

I will give you the democracy bit although there were still many voting problems in a large portiion of America that would not be straightened out until the Civil Rights movement. The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was and is so vague that its use and misuse has plagued America since its inception. Just look at Microsoft now.

In China there are also some safety rules in place. In fact the governement recently decided that the death penalty should apply to the use and distribution of a particular rat poison. The US had recently gone off the gold standard 100 years ago which I think qualifies as direct control of the economy. In addition with the 1920 Transportation Act the government kept alive the railroad. If those don't qualify then surely the "new deal" does. I think that the Teapot Dome Scandal of the 1920s does show that their also was control of government by business.

I think the impending launch into space of a manned rocket the first step on the way to moon (something the US space program has admitted that they cannot now do) and later mars is definitely a hotbed of discovery. As to innovation building the two fastest train lines in the world is only one of the ongoing innovations the Chinese are working on.

Finally, yes there is no first ammendment in China but at this time they are actually moving toward greater freedom of speech and the press (a condition of their entry into the WTO) while in 1919 the US Supreme Court decided that all speech is not free with the famous shouting fire in a crowded theater decision.

Where in Asia do our exports go? I know it is not South Korea, having witnessed the incredible protectionism there. Just look at how they managed to actually compete with Japan and America in the automotive market. But, I do not know if it is the other cheaper labor markets or if it is the rich countries like Japan (or as I like to call it the wolf in a kimono.)

If it is just corn then I do not mourn. Already the single largest subsidy in America is for corn more than $10 billion a year. Of course this is said to be hurting Mexican farmers who have seen 1/3 of the market place taken over by American corn since the advent of NAFTA. I hardly think that our highest single subsidy can be dwarfed by the Chinese. If this is the case the US really needs to rethink its spending, there is no country in the world that should be able to out spend us on anything. Once again though I do not think I am arguing with you so much as the article you linked to. The article to me sounds too much like one of those "free trade will solve everything articles." When it is not free trade that we want but to hold onto the advantage. Perhaps just a question of semantics but it is one that drives me nuts.

I have to respectfully continue to disagree that jobs will return to America. I have yet to see any hard evidence of this and believe that in fact no one will know unless something is changed. I just know that for the last half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st the continuing trend has been for corporations to go global finding cheap labor, land and goods. I believe this will continue to be the case. Just as trade imbalance figures often do not contain the fact that many goods bought in America from China are actually being produced and sold by American companies. I feel that often these China trade discussions continue to focus on China and not on the Corporations that are get rich at both ends at the expense of Chinese cheap laborers and American unemployed.

One last thing that I wonder on the job front is are Americans victims of our own success. We have a continually increasing productivity rating if I understand this correctly doesn't that mean that as we get better at our jobs we need demand to rise that much faster in order to continue to employ people. If demand does not rise fast enough but our efficiency continues to rise that means we produce enough but then have fewer jobs to go around.

I am curious what agricultural products are they concerned about? I understand that China is taking the lion's share of manufacturing jobs in the world but I find it hard to believe that any significant portion of the highly subsidized U.S. agribusiness is being hurt. The only one I could conceivably see being hurt is tobacco. I also don't believe that if a tarrif is imposed suddenly global corporations will choose to move their factories to America. The previous poster who mentioned the buying up of dollars as being the problem is correct. The continuing focus on China by cold warriors however ignores Japan, and South Korea both of whom engage in the same practice. Additionaly, in Japan's case, the Japanese have proven they can sustain this practice for a very long time. (Personally I blame America's love affair with Japan on "I Love Lucy" but that is another rant entirely.) Most of the economic articles I have read say they do not think that China can sustain this for much longer.

I also find the continuing arguement of there go American jobs to be mostly ridiculous. Sure there they go but if not to China they will go somewhere else. Right now the majority of jobs that are being taken by China are not American jobs rather they are Mexican jobs, which were taken from South Korea, which were taken from Taiwan, which were taken from some other location with cheap labor. If a high tariff is imposed I simply see the majority of these plants moving on to greener pastures none of which are located in America. The American economy has become largely a service economy. These jobs are also disappearing, but right now the service jobs are going to countries like India that have a longer tradition of English education, and not China. China is getting high tech manufacturing jobs but these jobs were already gone or would be moving to anywhere they could get cheap labor and dodge safety and environmental legislation.

Finally, since when has the U.S. ever engaged in true free trade or fair trade. I certainly hope we don't start now. It is only through engaging in protectionism and other non-free and non-fair trade practices that America has come out on top. No country on earth to my knowledge has ever come out ahead practicing strict free or fair trade. Frankly I don't think anyone has ever even tried maybe some libertarian reading this knows of an example. So, I really wish people would stop asking for free or fair trade as I think it is this rhetoric that gave us such wonderful legislation as NAFTA.

I don't think that this analysis is very good. I admit that I started to question the validity of his analysis when he noted that the yuan was pegged at 'about 8.5-1.' Now this is close to the truth but why hedge is it so hard to type 'about 8.2-1.' This is quibbling though so I gave him the benefit of the doubt and kept reading.

This analysis ends up much too soft on the current administration though. Snow mishandled this summit before he even arrived. I think everyone can agree that this problem is larger in relation to China than Japan but Snow visited Japan first. The Chinese since the end of WWII have been confused by the United States' actions in Japan. Why did the United States aid the enemy after WWII, rebuilding Japan, and allow China, the Ally, to fall further apart. By visiting Japan first Snow made this a matter of face. It is no wonder that he only was met by minor funtionaries like, "the top leadership at the People's Bank of China and the Finance Ministry." In Japan he was meeting with the President, who incidently ticks off every nation in Asia by visiting the shrine for Japanese soldiers every VJ-Day, not bank and treasury officials who only can do what the administration tells them to do and cannot make real decisions of this magnitude.

The author continues noting that an aide said the meeting was like a scene from Star Wars? Obviously this aide is bucking for a promotion from Snow with a little flattery. Please, this is ridiculous. Snow did not go over there as a tough guy and posing as one would be a charade that anyone would see through. At the same time this meeting was going on there was speculation that Bush needs and is going to ask for help in Iraq. In addition where was the recent summit with North Korea? The Chinese know the current administration needs their help and the administration is offering nothing in return. The Chinese, along with most of the rest of the world have been complaining about and fighting against Bush's steel subsidies. Almost since FDR started them the entire world has complained about farm subsidies but this hasn't changed either. And there does not appear to be any change on the horizon. In other words this administration really is not going to try to change anything.

The author is right, this is a major problem. As an earlier poster noted though, he is dead wrong about awakening a giant. The Chinese see this administration with its hand out and its head in the sand. This administration is not looking for agreement but a handout. On September 10th When asked about requesting troops and money from other countries Bush noted at a recent press conference that "I will once again make that plea." This statement came through to Beijing loud and clear they know what 'plea' means and guess who holds the IOUs and is ready to buy up some more. The sword isn't just dangling over this administrations heads it has already fallen and they just can't figure out where their headache came from.

The characters next to Mao's head say the amount and Yuan. Nowhere on the note does it say Renminbi. On the back side it does say Zhounguo Renmin Yinhang but this is not the name of the currency either it is the name of the bank, China's People's Bank. Finally if you are interested in changing your notes back to dollars while in Beijing you can easily do it at the Holiday Inn Lido, I doubt this is the only hotel you can do it at but have not checked any others as I like to stay there.

While I don't dispute the ongoing attempt to censor the internet in China I do not think it is as effective as this author reports. I imagine that the ministry of information would like people to believe they are this effective but from my experience there is more of a problem simply timing out because of the number of users in China and the limited infrastructure than there is of being blocked by the Great Firewall.

As an example of this while writing this reply I wanted to go back and review the original article but kept timing out. Meanwhile I was still able to search lexis-nexis for "taiwan democracy" and able to find and get an article about from the BBC, which is supposedly completely blocked by the Great Firewall. The Article contained a quote that I am sure would be something they want blocked, "It proves beyond any doubt that the people of Taiwan are committed to, and sincere about, functional democracy, and demonstrates that if mainland China throws off its straightjacket of communism and authoritarianism, it too can implement democratic change," said Tsai Yang, vice-chairman of the Research and Planning Board of Taiwan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Copyright 2003 British Broadcasting Corporation
BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific - Political
Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring
March 21, 2003, Friday
LENGTH: 771 words
HEADLINE: Taiwan wants to share "its democratic experience" with China says official
SOURCE: Central News Agency web site, Taipei, in English 0327 gmt 21 Mar 03

Of course this is in English not Chinese. I have found that the blocking is a little bit more effective in Chinese than in English. This only goes to show how silly the whole thing is considering that every single child in school in China now studies English. I am sure that they will keep trying but I also believe they will continue to be ineffective.

Dongguang is in the Pearl River Delta halfway between Shenzhen and Guangzhou.