babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » rabble content   » babble book lounge   » The Man Who Loved China

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: The Man Who Loved China
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 30 June 2008 08:18 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Simon Winchester's account of how the brilliant Cambridge scholar, Joseph Needham, brought enlightenment to the Western World about Chinese science and custom down through the millenia, is itself brilliantly written.

Halfway through this brand new publication (off a library shelf), one is left amazed at the hubris of the West in its (continuing) ignorance of eastern history and equally amazed that it took a genius from Cambridge to present a holistic picture to the Chinese people themselves - until one gets into the book.

But "inscrutable" doesn't have a place in our lexicon anymore in association with the "far east", and can be relegated to memories of Hollywood's Charlie Chan? Needham banished such myopic racist language with publication of the multi-volume Science and Civilization in China, and Winchester has brought it to us, the unscholarly.

But where DO we turn for factual news to knowingly discuss events there? Our own media present a biased, business oriented picture of the world.

I will be visiting long-time friends in a Chinese immigrant family in July, with a gift to them of Winchester's book, and will have lots of questions for them about our need to incorporate their homeland in political discussion. Can't wait to hear their response!


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 30 June 2008 03:21 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
1.Have you checked out Needham's volumes?

2.Have you seen Gavin Menzies book 1421? He now has a sequel out called 1434 claiming that the Chinese sparked the renaissance.

Apparently Needham's encyclopedia is somewhere in the Kwantlen College Library, but I haven't seen.


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 30 June 2008 04:34 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Winchester quotes extensively from Needham's work, but that is all that I have seen so far.

Should I have been reading National Geographic - or what could explain the apparent cultural silence (for me) about Needham before this? Or were the scholars out there aware of him before Winchester the great popularize got his teeth into the story?

Are we too full of ourselves and the mantra of our forbears with their pre-occupation with the classics of our Mediterranean beginning overlaid by the Judaeo/Christian tradition?


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 01 July 2008 06:02 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Winchester quotes extensively from Needham's work, but that is all that I have seen so far.

Should I have been reading National Geographic - or what could explain the apparent cultural silence (for me) about Needham before this? Or were the scholars out there aware of him before Winchester the great popularize got his teeth into the story?

Are we too full of ourselves and the mantra of our forbears with their pre-occupation with the classics of our Mediterranean beginning overlaid by the Judaeo/Christian tradition?


Generally people are interested in their family history or the history of their country. I think it's natural for people to prefer the study of their origins and that of their society because it answers questions relevant to their existence which is more fulfilling and practical. Even if Needham and his work is popularized, Pierre Berton will likely remain more popular.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 01 July 2008 09:01 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Quote

Generally people are interested in their family history or the history of their country. I think it's natural for people to prefer the study of their origins and that of their society because it answers questions relevant to their existence which is more fulfilling and practical. Even if Needham and his work is popularized, Pierre Berton will likely remain more popular.

_______________

I believe, Jiajie, that the works of the late Pierre Berton were a necessary addition to our knowledge. People are more and more playing "catchup" in that old sociological game of "cultural lag", where technology leads us into rather abrupt, even violent departure from earlier customs and mores. But then, folk in Nanjing, Jiangsu, have to know all about that, these days.

Then along comes an eccentric Englishman who breaks all the moulds of convention, and by fluke,financed by prime minister in wartime, finds himself surrounded by an ancient culture that is almost unknown to his world.

In fact, not so much is known by the people whom he has come to study. Which puzzles him to the extent that he spends the rest of his life absorbed in the "Needham question": "why, if the Chinese were so clever and so endlessly inquisitive, inventive and creative, had they for so long been so poor and scientifically backward?"

I am anxious to know - halfway through the book -if Needham came to some conclusion on this. And I want to know why it's taken someone like Winchester to break it to me.

And I think time is running out on Homo sapiens' if we don't find some way out of the "old" nationalisms that worked so well to end the "old" imperialisms. "Questions relative to their "continued" existence" is what people must be looking for now, I believe.

At this moment, I'm wondering if my language is too apocalyptic, is dissuading someone from following up the Needham question - which has to do, obviously, not only with the governance of a country, but the expectations and self image of its people at the same time. This mutuality of governed and governing which is not understood, but which will have to be very well understood.

I look forward to more revelations in the last half of the book.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 01 July 2008 01:25 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm taking my second course in Chinese history this semester.

Chinese scholars knew about Needham and his work for a long time. If you search sites about ancient technology you will find his work sited.

quote:
Which puzzles him to the extent that he spends the rest of his life absorbed in the "Needham question": "why, if the Chinese were so clever and so endlessly inquisitive, inventive and creative, had they for so long been so poor and scientifically backward?"

Well, the "Needham question" has been debated long before Needham.

The generally accepted answer, which New Democrats won't like, is that in China businesspeople and merchants were looked down upon by government and society as the lowest level of society, they were the 'money changers' who did nothing but buy low and sell high and added nothing to society. These negative sentiments go back to at least the time of Confucious and probably earlier. The merchants had no protection whatsoever and could have their wealth confiscated at any time.

Consequently, the primary goal of the merchant wasn't to build the business over the long term, but to make enough money to be able to afford tutors for their son(s) so that they could take the government exams and become part of the civil service, which was the most exalted segment of Chinese society.

Without the incentive to build businesses over the long term, there was no incentive to create products that would increase productivity. There were similar problems for farmers with their difficulty of getting financing to invest in labor saving technologies.

The moral of the story is that without protections for private property and legal protections from confiscatory governments, as Adam Smith said, civilizations are unlikely to develop technologically.

The real surprise about China isn't that they didn't advance technologically, but that there were as many inventions as there were. The important point though, is that much of what was invented was never put into general use.

[ 01 July 2008: Message edited by: Adam T ]


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 01 July 2008 02:59 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Without making this into another of the tiresome debates about the origins of economic waywardness, no doubt Adam Smith's denunciation of mercantalism would fit the picture once there was a trading kingdom that depended heavily on building trade.

But surely, the merchant was a bit hobbled by some extraordinary (in the European sense) customs? You hint at some historical factors.

And that poor fellow who was "naturally" executed for inventing a "flying machine", might have been excused for stepping out of line elsewhere? Perhaps not, if there is no tolerance for the nuttiness and eccentricity. Was there? Is there now? Do your studies take you far into Chinese culture, or just to knowledge of the niceties?

It may be that partial enlightenment comes only with reading the Wealth of Nations. God knows old Karl said that radical historical change in human freedom only awaited a material perspective on that change.

But I was hoping that Adam Smith's FINAL earthly concerns from moral philosophy about the potential dangers (to people, of all things) attached to his enterprise might be grafted to some ancient wisdom from a far older culture and save us from another - far more destructive - industrial revolution in a star wars setting.

Anyway, that is my interest in reading The Man who Loved China, and if you have some nuggets of info to impart, I'd love to hear them. Even an examination of the parallels between the west and east (or variations, of course) in the level of development of other factors as well as science.

But if you cannot resist the ideological urge to offer up a baiting phrase again - know now that it won't get answered by George from Coventry, a place to which I retreated some weeks ago to escape the nasties. Tell me about what you read in your studies and why, please, and present some thoughts.
p.s. Needham's Science and Civilisation in China, first proposed to Cambridge University Press in May, 1948, apparently runs to 24 volumes, and more are in the works.

[ 01 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stephen Gordon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4600

posted 01 July 2008 03:05 PM      Profile for Stephen Gordon        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Adam Smith's denunciation of mercantalism...

There are passages where Adam Smith noted the folly of protectionism, but it was David Ricardo who performed this particular smackdown. Credit where credit is due.


From: . | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 01 July 2008 03:18 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wasn't trying to bait anyone or anything. You asked for the reason why China never developed technologically as the west did and I gave you the theory agreed to by most mainstream economists and historians.

1.For what it's worth, Adam Smith didn't develop the theory, he merely observed what he saw was already going on and fought to have it codified in law.

2.I don't think mercantilism has anything to do with it. Mercantilism is macroeconomics and the reasons I've explained are more to do with micoeconomics.

3.As I said above, the problem was in China merchants were taxed arbitrarily by either the state or the local government officials or they could have their businesses simply taken away at any time. It would not surprise me, though I don't know of it, if inventions could simply be confiscated by the state.

All of this created a disincentive for people to grow businesses beyond, as I said above, the size required to hire good tutors to help their sons pass the state exams that would allow them to enter the civil service. Certainly it is probably extremely rare for businesses to pass down through generations. Why bother to invest in devising practical uses for new inventions or to develop markets for the inventions if you only plan on owning the business for a small numbers of years, have no plan to sell it and are aware that if your business gets too large it will be seen as a threat to the government and get confiscated.

As I said, the real surprise isn't that China didn't develop technologically, it's really that there was as much science as there was.

As I also said above, this prejudice in Chinese society against 'merchants' the 'goods traders who do nothing buy buy low and sell high' went back at least as far as Confucious and probably much further.

The Chinese hierarchy is generally considered to have been:
1.(civil) servants
2.peasants
3.artisans
4.merchants/landowners

Historians of China refer to this as SPAM.

This attitude does still exist in China even with the Communist Party's new ironic attitude towards making money. Chinese businesspeople today have far more legal protection if they enter into partnerships with western businesspeople than if they enter into business on their own.

It would be incorrect though to say that Chinese society was static for basically 2,000 years after Confucious. In addition to the theories of Gavin Menzies that the Chinese sailed the world, there were improvements in agriculture. They learned in parts of China to develop more than one growing season in China, as well they developed foodstuffs that could grow on previously marginally land like hills. All of this allowed for the population to boom to about 300 million by the early 19th century.

Of course, the large population does lead to the second reason given as to why China never developed technologically: with the large population there wasn't a great need to invest in labour saving devices. Personally I've always found this argument to be a bit weak. For instance, I'm sure the peasant farmers wouldn't have minded additional labour saving devices.

quote:
Anyway, that is my interest in reading The Man who Loved China, and if you have some nuggets of info to impart, I'd love to hear them. Even an examination of the parallels between the west and east (or variations, of course) in the level of development of other factors as well as science.

Tell me about what you read in your studies and why, please, and present some thoughts.


As you are no doubt aware, the main philosophical schools in China are the Confucious/Mencius, the Legalists and the Taoists. The Buddhists, imported from India come in there about 1,000 or so years later and seem to have mostly mingled with the taoists.

All these were mainly concerned with legal issues/government relations with people, psychology and proper relations between people. The Legalists could be fairly easily compared to Machiavelli while the Taoists, believed in the notion of "do nothing and all will be done." Which is not meant to be a joke or dadism, but is actually meant to mean that the minimum amount of action required to complete something is the best course of action to take. The western comparison would be to the idea of "the government that governs least governs best."

The leading western writer on China is a man named Jonathon Spence. Although a historian, he actually writes his books for the mass market.

Spence argues that Chinese philosophers did not add theories of the natural sciences/rationalism into their arguments until shown them by western Jesuit scholars in the 17th and 18th centuries.

The first course I took was called Ancient and Imperial China which is basically 5,000 years of Chinese history in one 4 month course. Other than learning about the philosophies, it was basically a blur. There were something like 20 different empires over the 3,500 or so years where recorded history is researched and verified. The instructor also complained greatly about it: "20th century European history alone is split into two sections and I have to teach 5,000 years in one 3 credit course."

The present course is much more compressed: Modern Chinese History Part 1. It covers from 1640 or so to 1912, the fall of the last Emporer. It covers the fall of the Ming Dynasty and the concurrent rise of the Manchu Qings, the Opium Wars and the Taiping Rebellion and concludes with the fall of the Qing.

[ 01 July 2008: Message edited by: Adam T ]

[ 01 July 2008: Message edited by: Adam T ]


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 01 July 2008 05:50 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Thank you for a wonderfully condensed overview.

I'll be on the lookout for Jonathan Spence...I'm certainly your mass market sort right now. Pre-digested is good from the perspective of a sponge. Times a-flyin' for this old fart.( And Gavin Menzies too, I guess.)

And I hope that our interlocutor from Nanjing, Jiangsu comes aboard this thread again with some reflections on the intellectual approach to Chinese history presented above. Or anything that he would care to comment on.

Right next to one-on-one conversation, I consider this to be, in Jack Nicholson's phrase, "As good as it gets."
(Oh, and New Democrats, by the way, cover an amazin' spread of ideological ground these days - warranted, I think, by the desperate search for a way out of our frightening existential dilemma. Open-minded is "good" in such a search).

[ 13 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 02 July 2008 11:49 AM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Menzies book is fiction without any scientific basis. Anyway, I hardly think that Chinese civilization ought to be measured by whether or not it got to North America-- and there is no evidence that it did other than fanciful interpretations by non-scientists.

I would not accept a country's view of itself without question. While it may be wrong for a western perspective to be used to represent China, a country's view of itself is not necessarily a lot more accurate than that of another although we should be looking to Chinese sources for non-prevailing opinions. My point is clearer when we consider Canadian perceptions about ourselves and our role in the world-- and how nationalistic and fanciful they often are.

Differences of perception between countries are not just factual either. They rely on cultural constructs that include value judgments as well as perspective. And usually only those of a given country are equipped well enough to consider these - or even recognize them

On any topic it is hard to find anyone BOTH knowledgeable and unbiased. Knowledge, even limited gets sorted into a person through bias and western people are notoriously unable to recognize this.

I guess the point is that learning is an individual thing and any one perception of anything should be open to criticism regardless of the source including local ones. Naturally, the more distant that perspective is the greater the suspicion ought to be.

The difficulty by many to face uncomfortable truths makes the process of understanding even more difficult since the distant perceptions are coloured by biases and a lack of understanding while the local ones may be influenced by wishful thinking. Simple answers are nowhere to be found.

I have found that often those who can be trusted the most are people who are close to something and have then moved away-- with respect to countries I am speaking of ex-pats but even they have biases.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 02 July 2008 02:16 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Menzies claims that his book is backed by significant prior scholarly research. I don't know if his book has any factual basis or not, but to declare definatively that it is 'pure fiction' is certainly going way too far.

The significance for China isn't just whether they reached North America but that, if it is true, for this brief period 1.China was entirely open to the world and 2.the superiority of technology the Chinese would have showed.

I made a couple errors in my previous post, upon further reflection.
1.Confucious was also interested in personal development and personal morality, though much of that was how it was to be expressed through proper dealings with other people.

2.SPAM is actually
1.Scholars (not civil servants)
and the rest is correct
In practice though, the distinction is non existent because all civil servants (except the eunichs and others finding personal favor with the emperor) had to be scholars and had to pass the civil service exams.

The primary positive of China was the degree it was a meritocracy and had no hierarchy based on birth (except for the Emperor himself). Even the landowners for the most part did not have the powers they had in Europe.

Not that I'm in a position to judge an entire society, but the main weaknesses are generally considered to be:

1.The lack of development technologically, which I've already mentioned. Some people may argue that technology is overrated, but as difficult as life is for small farmers now days, you can just imagine what it is what like for the peasant farmers of China who had to do practically everything by hand (they may have had the odd beast of burden).

2.The totalitarian society. This degree of totalitarianism kind of waxed and waned dependeing on the strengths of the various emperors. It was based on the notion that everybody was grouped into communities of around 10 people and was responsible for everybody else, which sounds nice until you know exactly what it means. Essentially, if one person broke the law and was caught, the entire group of ten would be held responsible if none of them had informed on the law breaker. It was essentially an early form of the secret police. As I said, not every emperor employed such a system.

3.The horrendous treatment of women. Confucious, for all his positives, taught that wives should be subservient to husbands, and women should have no role in official Chinese society. That is not an entirely complete picture because some women were treated better. They weren't allowed to take the civil service exams but some women were still taught alongside their brothers and became respected as tutors or as authors. Older women, especially grand mothers were especially revered.

The worst part of the treatment of women though was the horrific foot binding which essentially broke off the feet and left them with stubs to walk on.

4.The Insularity of Chinese society. They regarded everybody outside of China as 'barbarians'. Now, many of the people outside China were actual 'barbarians' nomads like the Mongols. However, they thought everybody else in the world was like that. They even referred in writing to the English as barbarians. Naturally not every Chinese person was like this, and there was some curiosity and decent treatment of foreigners when they first arrived, but there was also a view of Chinese being superior to the rest of the world and a large element of racism.

Of course, the English also saw themselves like that, and that culture clash was part of what led to the Opium Wars.


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 02 July 2008 02:26 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Yes indeed Sean, between ethnocentricity and racism it's hard to get a handle on what is really going on. Can't depend on mainstream, even in old Canada - although Mike Valpy's reading of things in the Globe this past week, is an optimistic take on our current openess eh?

But that is why Needham is so wonderfully helpful. You must read him to appreciate my eureka reaction. Sort of like the moment when I came to understand Marx's idea of history, in real time. Our forbears were lied to a lot.

Then all that is left is trying to understand the roots of our ethnocentricity, going back many moons, and institutions like Macleans, still stirring the residual poison out there.

The media, of course, are central to an understanding. And its ownership.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 02 July 2008 08:50 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Read about menzies here:
http://thehallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=91/
and here
http://www.kenspy.com/Menzies/

Yes I read his book and then moved on to read the responses. To describe the evidence as thin would be to suggest that there was anything in there at all. The book is instead a fanciful come-on for sales made up. There is not a single archaeologist willing to comment who does not scoff at what passes for research in that volume. Outside of speculation there is nothing. That Zheng He made it to Africa and up the Western Coast almost to Europe does not seem to be enough for Menzies in spite of the fact that the distance traveled dwarfs Columbus' trek.

Menzies bases his claim of a North American Chinese presence on a ruined windmill actually built in the 17th century.

Not content with fabricating past Chinese history Menzies claims he was born in China although it was proven that he was born in England.

Historians don't like him or the book:
FELIPE FERNANDEZ-ARMESTO, PROFESSOR OF HISTORY: To say that it as devoid of evidence, logic, scholarship and sense was just about the nicest thing one could say about it. Because, I mean, you've got to be either a charlatan or a cretin, you've got to be either, you know, a kind of con man, or an innocent idiot in order to produce a book which is so lacking in any intelligence or accuracy whatever.
BILL RICHARDSON, HISTORIAN OF CARTOGRAPHY: Personally, I think that it's quite disgraceful that publishers anywhere should con the public by producing such material which - without finding out whether there is any basis for its truth or not. Any investigation of historians of cartography could prove that a vast proportion of what Menzies uses is a fabrication, from his own interpretation.
DR ROBIN WATT, FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST: The fact that they are supposed to be 35 Chinese junks washed up on the west coast of the South Island - There was supposed to have been a small town of something like 28,000 on the South Island, Chinese town. That type of evidence is just too fantastic. In fact, I think it's quite silly. It's a load of bollocks.
DR JAMES CHIN, CHINESE HISTORY SCHOLAR: Yeah, we just treat it as it's a novel - not the real history.
CAPT PHIL RIVERS, MASTER MARINER: It's just fiction, an - an historical romance.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 03 July 2008 03:02 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Okay Sean, I won't rush out and pick up Menzies' work.I remember the reviews from a couple of years back.

But please read The Man Who Loved China before dissing all work - even the scholarly - about early Chinese inventiveness! I'm near the last chapter, and will give a bit of a wrapup.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 07 July 2008 08:43 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
A bit of history for review context:

In 1946, Theodore H. White and Annalee Jacoby’s Thunder Out of China attempted to explain social conditions and events for American readers just as nationalist and communist forces prepared for the struggle that saw Mao triumph in 1949.

Thunder was the last published work in book form to come out of China from a perspective sympathetic to Mao. Beginning in 1954, the academic, Joseph Needham - who got himself into very hot water among academics and the U.S. administration for his naïve take on the Korean War in 1951 - began publishing for a scholarly readership.

In the early 1970s, we students of the left found White and Jacoby’s take on things in 1946 just fine: Some people estimated “very roughly - that 30 per cent of China’s peasants are part tenants and part freeholders, another 30 per cent are tenants or landless farm hands, and 40 per cent own the land they till.

“Chinese landlords rackrent their fields to the last possible grain. On good lands they demand from 50 to 60 per cent of the crops; in some areas, including Chunking (Chongqing) they take up to 80 per cent of the cash crops.”

Few of the larger landlords lived into the 1950s, which we thought a not unjust outcome, and 25 years later, although we had some idea of the terrible effects of the Great Leap Forward, we were largely in the dark regarding the atrocities of the Cultural Revolution. A bit more came out in the 80s, and then there was Tiananmen … and then the economy began to produce for we consumers.

In 1991, setting up a clothesline over the back deck, I purchased some “made in China” clothespins, some of which still survive. By the end of that decade, the clothing hanging on that line was made in China or somewhere close by. (Still holding out for Stanfield’s underwear and socks with a maple leaf label and other items where possible).

Now, Chongqing boasts 38 million people, the most populous city in China and probably the world, with changes “of a scale and sweep that Needham could never have imagined. Sixty years in the life of a city that , like Chongqing , is 1,500 years old might seem like nothing - London has changed dramatically in its past six decades, as have Paris, Cairo, Moscow, and Rome: yet in their essence these western cities are still today much the same as they always were “ ; but Chongqing, says Winchester, has become a “future world, part Blade Runner, part Shinjuku, part Dickensian London, that is profoundly unrecognizable, a place to take away one’s breath.”

Late in the Ming dynasty when Henry 8th was pursuing wives and emptying monasteries throughout England, Chinese cooks in a couple of geographically strategic areas found “cooking with gas” to be just the ticket. And the scholars of their area would have been able to print up a book with scientific notations about such phenomena some seven centuries before that. Go figure, Gutenberg. And there are many pages filled with such revelations.

As his books rolled off the presses, Needham’s name was restored, to the point where he was elected master of his college, “not merely a force to be reckoned with in the academic and literary worlds, but a figure of stature and power in one of the greatest universities in the world - and so a force in the realm as well.”

And a committed socialist through his time there, living and dining with both his wife Dorothy and his Chinese-born mistress, Lu Gwei-djen, (whom he married after Dorothy’s death in 1987) through more than half a century, Needham unveiled the Middle Kingdom to an amazed world where Western scribes still struggle to adapt to both the old and the new reality of China.

And now, the importance of this in 2008? Well, some of us became environmentally conscious in the 1970s. And that has grown to mean that works like this one are evaluated for any thread of hope that they might contain, a bolt of rational lightning!

There were no serendipitous bolts of enlightenment coming out of The Man Who Loved China. Just the sort of brilliance and tolerance that overawes and causes all doors to open for the individual, and leaves hope that such openness can be reciprocated and reproduced on the scale of whole societies.

But right now, China is an excuse for the neo-cons and we the not-so-neo-con to do diddly-squat, collectively, about reducing carbon emissions. Margaret Wente can prattle on with impunity about Canada’s 2 per cent contribution to the global problem being nothing in the face of China’s yatata yatata, ad infinitum. And it’s an excuse for us all, right across the political spectrum.

Margaret knows we are all too “human” in our weakness, our love of the late George Carlin’s “stuff”(He, too, knew us, but we could laugh at his stuff).

I think that it is a huge mistake to let China off the Tibetan hook. That’s just international capital (which includes our pensions, of course) pandering to a terrifying nationalism that is now just about capable of anything. Oh, we can hunker down and tell ourselves that it is just a phase of development that will cool out and we will somehow all live happily ever after. But I think that is the stuff of fairy tales.

We have to do with less and show China that we can do with less ,and we have to do it for the kids, who have no idea what we are preparing to leave them. And if the Chinese so love the few children they are allowed by law, they should begin, any time now, to act out of that sentiment - those who are not having to go through a period of denial in their media similar to the Exxon-sponsored effort here. That should be the line in the sand that we expect our elected representatives to put forward at international gatherings.

It’s about all that we might have in common, enabling us to rationally adjust our consumption to fit Earth’s capacity, far as I can see. But I have no idea what the take on environmental destruction is among the 1.3 billion people surrounded by it, how it is explained to them, what it might mean through the smog.

Perhaps much like Steve’s consumer/taxpayer minions on this patch of planet where such news (and thought) is avoided like the plague?


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 07 July 2008 09:06 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:

In fact, not so much is known by the people whom he has come to study. Which puzzles him to the extent that he spends the rest of his life absorbed in the "Needham question": "why, if the Chinese were so clever and so endlessly inquisitive, inventive and creative, had they for so long been so poor and scientifically backward?"

I am anxious to know - halfway through the book -if Needham came to some conclusion on this. And I want to know why it's taken someone like Winchester to break it to me.


I'm assuming you've finished reading the book. Needham never reached a definite conclusion to the above question despite having gathered a vast amount of empirical evidence to prove his hypothesis that Chinese science and technology was surpassed by that of Europe in the seventeenth century because capitalism never completely developed in China. Is that what the author of your book writes regarding your question?

Needham is famous in sinology which is a natural consequence among people who are passionate about China. That said, if one isn't passionate about China, Needham isn't required knowledge and no fault or moralizing should be assigned to those ignorant of him and his work. Needham himself knew nothing about China until he met persons from that country and such lived experience that initiate an interest or passion still works today in spite of the much larger body of knowledge of China to which foreigners have access. I don't think ethnocentrism or arrogance explains Needham's obscurity outside the world of sinology.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 07 July 2008 10:19 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
"I don't think ethnocentrism or arrogance explain Needham's obscurity outside the world of sinology."

I agree.
But I believe there are huge ideological reasons for his obscurity, as you can see from the formulations coming out of schools of economics, a discipline and science that must be seen to explain all variations from the pattern of development that was laid down by Scottish philosophers in the eighteenth century.

It has always been a matter of keeping certain historical truths from the "great unwashed" that has allowed them to be made malleable and manageable. And so the great silence, even in this oh so democratic part of the world with all of its freedoms, for the last half of the 20th Century.

As I say above, Needham is an example of what might be accomplished in a new enlightenment - one that is going to be necessary, in my estimation.

But, again, I do not know whether my babblings about the condition of spaceship Earth following a review of a book about a Chinese scholar, make any sense to you. I do not know your background, your interest outside of sinology, your concerns for environmental conditions there and here, or your thoughts on the chances for future generations - which motivate this grandfather!

Clearly, I'm not reading just out of a concern for the accuracy of Needham's findings. In fact, I'm more taken by the fact that he lived as a communist supporter through a Cold War that darn near did us all in!

But please, could you answer some of my questions about how the people of your region feel about these questions of our existence, our shared existential concerns? My immigrant Chinese friends may not have the same understanding.

I do hope that you can find a copy of Winchester's work and so better understand my concerns...a fairly well-read fellow for whom Needham's revelations only suggest a continuing suppression of knowledge. And there is nothing worse than being kept in the dark, about anything, but particularly as we work out new paradigm(s) for survival of the species, including ours, right?

Thank you.

[ 07 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 07 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 07 July 2008 06:58 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I want to be sure I'm reading your posts correctly.

quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:

But I believe there are huge ideological reasons for his obscurity, as you can see from the formulations coming out of schools of economics, a discipline and science that must be seen to explain all variations from the pattern of development that was laid down by Scottish philosophers in the eighteenth century.

You mean that he was obscured because he was a Marxist?

quote:
And now, the importance of this in 2008? Well, some of us became environmentally conscious in the 1970s. And that has grown to mean that works like this one are evaluated for any thread of hope that they might contain, a bolt of rational lightning!

There were no serendipitous bolts of enlightenment coming out of The Man Who Loved China. Just the sort of brilliance and tolerance that overawes and causes all doors to open for the individual, and leaves hope that such openness can be reciprocated and reproduced on the scale of whole societies.


You're essentially inspired by Needham's universalism which led him to reorient the history of science? And you think that his brand of universalism, his attitude toward a foreign culture, his willingness to question accepted knowledge and methodology, can guide the present and future generations toward a philosophy and methodoloy which will solve our environmental problems?

quote:
We have to do with less and show China that we can do with less [...] But I have no idea what the take on environmental destruction is among the 1.3 billion people surrounded by it, how it is explained to them, what it might mean through the smog.

Chinese workers and intellectuals learned about Marxism, Communism, and communist organization from Europeans at a time when they sought to explain China's technological backwardness. Consider the impact those philosophies had on twentieth-century China. Perhaps the Chinese studying and living in countries where the environment has become a significant political or social issue will import their experiences and knowledge back to China, as their predecessors did with Marxism, with a similar effect.

Chinese in the middle- and upper-classes are generally more patriotic than protective of the environment. Environmental pollution in the past and the present is regarded as a necessity towards economic modernization which is considered a part of building a super powerful China. Factories in Beijing were not temporarily closed to protect the environment. They were closed to prevent complaints from athletes about poor air quality which would embarass Chinese for whom the Olympics are a status symbol.

Another factor in the formulation of environmental policy is the authoritarian nature of the central and provincial governments. There is an environmental movement in China, but it's practically non-existent in the consultation and formulation of policy, therefore its role is limited to public education. Policy is directed by the bureaucratic elite which must simultaneously consider economic development and environmental protection.

[ 07 July 2008: Message edited by: Liang Jiajie ]


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 07 July 2008 07:04 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
There is an environmental movement in China, but it's practically non-existent in the consultation and formulation of policy

Here we pretend there is consultation in the formulation of policy.

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 07 July 2008 08:42 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
]But, again, I do not know whether my babblings about the condition of spaceship Earth following a review of a book about a Chinese scholar, make any sense to you. I do not know your background, your interest outside of sinology, your concerns for environmental conditions there and here, or your thoughts on the chances for future generations - which motivate this grandfather!

I forgot to reply to this. Yes, of course, I can relate to your "babbling." One conviction that I have acquired as a student of history and of foreign cultures is that there is nothing absolute about the pattern of political, social, and economic development of the civilization through which I came into this world. The present state of my civilization (and the world) was not delivered to us in a misty realm of genesis -- we made it what it is. I believe in the human agency to create, destroy, and rebuild social institutions. I have also learned that societies will always have segments that will resist change but that change eventually occurs when people realize that it is either necessary or inevitable, when the conscious or unconscious preferences of the masses dictate to the powerful or, better, steamroll over them. Those are the convictions that underpin my prudent optimism for the future environment and that guide me through the study of the past.

But I worry too much about the future despite my awareness of the great capacity of our species to identify problems and find solutions. This is simply my nature.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 07 July 2008 11:26 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Re Needham's previous obscurity. My guess would be:
First, I don't know if he's all that obscure anymore. "The Man Who Loved China" has been on the bestseller list for many weeks.

Prior to this book I would guess:
1.His work is too expensive and probably just too much for most people. It encompases several volumes.

2.It might be written in a very academic style. I have no idea if it is, but it sounds like it might be.

3.He likely just didn't popularize it. As I said, I'm a regular listen of Coast to Coast and they often have guests on who speak of ancient technology. Michael Cremo the author of Forbidden Archaelogy is a regular.

I'm sure there are people here who will say Forbidden Archaelogy is all garbage as well.


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 08 July 2008 07:34 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
May I first say how reassuring it is to have you, a self-confessed “prudent optimist”, also say that you “worry too much about the future”. I do hope that there are many, many more of your “nature”.

And secondly, Jiajie (if I may properly address you this way?), your reformulation of my questions bring a coherence to our exchange of thoughts that confirm for me we are on the same track. I’m not being oppressively “apocalyptic”, my July 1st posting concern.

Not so reassuring is the thought that your “middle and upper classes (are) more patriotic than protective of the environment”. This is not the commonly expressed view of our class situation vis a vis the environment - but it is the understood situation: those who have the most to lose, are last over the top (to use an expression from trench warfare a while back). They are also the readers and the most manipulative of the great unread.

And, of course, all security is at stake if the corporations in which we invest are at risk in some total retreat to an agrarian past.

We, Homo sapiens, do indeed “make it what it is” as you put it, a materialist understanding that bothers more than a few of the churchgoers over here; an element that has reached miniscule proportions in your country, I believe? (Although there is definitely a Calvinist factor in that sentiment, and behind our own early “conquest of nature”, as Weber has pointed out.)It’s not the thought but what you DO in nature that counts, as far as our environmental “footprint” is concerned. Praxis?

But is the “bureaucratic elite which must simultaneously consider economic development and environmental protection” in China, more slanted toward the “development” side of things, like our own Alberta, which, in terms of economic growth and enormous consumption of energy resources, is the closest thing we have to your own situation? Do they just dispense thoughts or edicts on what is (or should be) “proper” in attitude and environmental action? What is the bureaucrat’s training and education today. Heavy on the math?

Given our understanding of what peasant life was like in 1946, and, indeed, the contrasts between city and rural life in 2008, one could understand the tendency toward the development side of things. We have the same “tendency” at each election . Your “Authoritarian central and provincial governments” apparently do not necessarily lead to solution of the problem - stark need to protect the biosphere. J

Your re-statement of my immediate question, can Needham’s universalism, knowledge and approach be used to “guide the present and future generations toward a philosophy and methodology which will solve our environmental problems” is accurately put, but, I hope, understood as something of a straw to clutch at in a sometimes seemingly hopeless pursuit. It’s really a question to you, a sort of “What do you think?” poser. And frankly, your relativity, clearly stated, twice, while a necessary position for the study of other cultures, makes me uneasy in repeating my earlier statements, but I must, because I have to find a political position that I think will help your politicians and bureaucrats decide in favour of the environmental considerations:

Quoting myself:

I think that it is a huge mistake to let China off the Tibetan hook. That’s just international capital (which includes our pensions, of course) pandering to a terrifying nationalism that is now just about capable of anything. Oh, we can hunker down and tell ourselves that it is just a phase of development that will cool out and we will somehow all live happily ever after. But I think that is the stuff of fairy tales.

We have to do with less and show China that we can do with less ,and we have to do it for the kids, who have no idea what we are preparing to leave them. And if the Chinese so love the few children they are allowed by law, they should begin, any time now, to act out of that sentiment ( those who are not having to go through a period of denial in their media similar to the Exxon-sponsored effort here).

That should be the line in the sand that we expect our elected representatives to put forward at international gatherings.

It’s about all that we might have in common, enabling us to rationally adjust our consumption to fit Earth’s capacity, far as I can see. But I have no idea what the take on environmental destruction is among the 1.3 billion people surrounded by it, how it is explained to them, what it might mean through the smog.
Perhaps much like Steve’s consumer/taxpayer minions on this patch of planet where such news (and thought) is avoided like the plague?
Edit: Sorry I've used a narrow colloquialism here in talking about "Steve". Ever since George Bush told the world how much he liked Canada's prime minister, and called him "Steve" a year or two back, I've always referred to Prime Minister Stephen Harper as Steve. Not an endearment on my part!
(end of quote)

I appreciate your patience, and ask for it again, if you could tell me what you think of my strategic concern, a Canadian position, out there in the world.

If that is something that could “get you in hot water”, please leave it simmering on the political fire, unanswered.

George

[ 08 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 08 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 08 July 2008 08:05 AM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Thunder was the last published work in book form to come out of China from a perspective sympathetic to Mao. Beginning in 1954, the academic, Joseph Needham - who got himself into very hot water among academics and the U.S. administration for his naïve take on the Korean War in 1951 - began publishing for a scholarly readership.
If you want a book about the rise of the Communist Party I think you might want to read Red Star OVer China. An excellent historical piece of journalism.

Red Star Over China


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 08 July 2008 08:13 AM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And if the Chinese so love the few children they are allowed by law, they should begin, any time now, to act out of that sentiment ( those who are not having to go through a period of denial in their media similar to the Exxon-sponsored effort here).

That should be the line in the sand that we expect our elected representatives to put forward at international gatherings.

It’s about all that we might have in common, enabling us to rationally adjust our consumption to fit Earth’s capacity, far as I can see. But I have no idea what the take on environmental destruction is among the 1.3 billion people surrounded by it, how it is explained to them, what it might mean through the smog.


You tell them. Euro-centric ideas are all the planet needs.

How is the environmental destruction Fort McMurray is undergoing being explained to us. What bureaucrats are making the decisions that are so critical. Are they corporate bureaucrats only or are they from the Alberta civil service. Why will they not release the details of the contracts that allow this devastation?

If you loved your children those are the questions you might want to ask?


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 08 July 2008 05:27 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
"You tell them. Euro-centric ideas are all the planet needs." (end of quote).

Wish ideas had that impact. They usually have to be accompanied by something more concrete - and in China's example, something phoenix-like every couple of decades. That is one of the aspects of that society that puzzles the heck out of me. How can a society be upended so often and then rise from the ashes and overnight perform miracles?

Part of it, of course, depends on starting from nothing - the historical condition of the peasant. Anything is better than what is left behind.

And then there are the numbers! Not only of labourers, but of any profession you want to name. All familiar with an IT world where tradition means boo-all. Instant gratification.

And there's a leadership that does not let little things like peasant dislocation stand in the way of the bulldozer. The peasant may have "traditionally" been no. 1 in some idealized, historical ranking, but convention has obviously gone by the board with local administrations.

It seems to me we are looking at a growth of productive capacity and use of resources approaching that of wartime mobilization.

And the U.S. has gladly sold its budget and the dollar in the name of globalization (stopping short of selling out resources, an act in which Canada excels).

Think back to the late Pierre Trudeau's concerns for "rising expectations" in Canadian society of the 1970s. Then multiply that a thousandfold.

But more than new expectations, I'm concerned about new "dependencies" - particularly energy.

Any way you cut it, logic says speak up now or think Gotterdammerung. But speak up and do what?


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 08 July 2008 09:43 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
But is the “bureaucratic elite which must simultaneously consider economic development and environmental protection” in China, more slanted toward the “development” side of things, like our own Alberta, which, in terms of economic growth and enormous consumption of energy resources, is the closest thing we have to your own situation?

The most recent research on your question concluded that the concern of pollution among policymakers rises in proportion to the level of pollution in their localities provided that the locality has reached a good level of development. The other conclusion is that policymakers in less developed areas are more reluctant to implement environmental regulation if it will hinder economic development. The article is entitled Bureaucracy Meets the Environment: elite perceptions in six Chinese cities by Yanqi Tong in The China Quarterly (2007).

quote:
Do they just dispense thoughts or edicts on what is (or should be) “proper” in attitude and environmental action?

NGOs and each level of government have make public relations campaigns in the past similar to what there is in Canada on television, billboards, and on the radio.

quote:
What is the bureaucrat’s training and education today. Heavy on the math?

Similar to Canadian bureaucrats. The training is diverse.

quote:
We have to do with less and show China that we can do with less [...] It’s about all that we might have in common, enabling us to rationally adjust our consumption to fit Earth’s capacity, far as I can see.

You want the Canadian government and people to lead by example and you want to convince the Chinese government that protecting the natural environment serves a common interest, namely humanity. There is no disagreement here. But remember that many Chinese are already trying to protect the environment.

quote:
I think that it is a huge mistake to let China off the Tibetan hook.

How would you characterize the Chinese presence in Tibet? How would you characterize the response of Tibetans to that presence?


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 09 July 2008 07:10 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Hello

I get the feeling that we have just about completed our discussion on matters environmental , one is to “remember that many Chinese are already trying to protect the environment,” and perhaps that is about all that can be hoped for at the moment?

Okay, but I believe reformers everywhere need some outside help in the form of pressure to increase the tempo of reforms. Just as we of the environmental set in Canada look forward to European pressure on our ruling neo-cons to get real. And now the U.S. government is preparing (we hope) a hard line on Alberta’s tar sands product. Even the modestly aware editorial page editor of our local news sheet says in an editorial today that the “G-8 blows hot air” from the Hokkaido gathering.

My personal hobbyhorse in matters of energy follows the path of one James Lovelock, whom you have perhaps read (the Ages of Gaia ) and whose theory of how Earth (as a living entity) maintains thermal balance for current life forms, involves naturally adjusting biological control of greenhouse gases, etc. Note: I believe we may expect entry of someone else on this thread with the name Lovelock now in view.

Lovelock advocates nuclear energy to “keep the lights of civilization burning” while we come to a new understanding of our place in the great biological scheme of things.

China is doing this, and I hope there is enough uranium (along with wind turbines, etc.) for the period of re-adjustment away from the industrial world…which is happening over here through globalization, and which is greeted enthusiastically by the wishful set’s mantra about a post-industrial nirvana, something about the blackberry itself saving the day, even in the face of rising joblessness.

And, of course, the one-child policy, first advocated, I understand, by the late Dr. Ma, is clearly an absolute necessity. Here, the Canadian religious right is fulminating about a medal of honour just bestowed on a humanitarian doctor who forced legal acceptance of the early termination of pregnancy only one generation ago. We will have to break with many more old taboos in years to come, as Thorstein Veblen advocated 100 years back. (Is he on any reading lists with his Theory of the Leisure Class, etc., over there? His concept of “conspicuous consumption” certainly fits all cultures.)


But now, “How would (I) characterize the Chinese presence in Tibet? How would (I) characterize the response of Tibetans to that presence?”

In carefully nuanced language.

First, a little backgrounder for some understanding of my position. I’m a Canadian nationalist who, in his lifetime, also has come to accept the nationalism of French-speaking Quebec. So, I certainly understand China’s nationalist assertions - up until 1954.

It is my understanding that the Panchsheel Agreement of that year, negotiated by Nehru and Zhou Enlai , included India’s recognition of Tibet as a part of China.

I also am told - without any research on my part - that an independent Tibet had functioned as a “buffer state” between its neighbors for 2,000 years.

My new, revised view of “legitimate” nationalisms does not encapsulate the violence that has been visited on the people of Tibet, or the program of emigration from east to west that will obviously end in the sort of balkanized settlement that has marked Europe and the middle east since 1919.

And I believe it is incumbent on the international community, through an assembly of all the nations, to state just that, and to institute meaningful economic pressures. They’ll soon be needed anyway as China emulates the west in its hunt for resources in Africa.


The Tibetan response? Seems sort of Ghandian to me. Blood largely on the faces of fellows in long robes and sandals.

But, then, perhaps your news sources are better than mine (which have been kept in the dark in recent weeks).

Postscript on the environment:

Originally posted by Wilf Day:

If I was in China, and people in Canada asked me "why do you not conserve energy more, or use solar power or wind power, and cut back on your use of fossil fuels?" I think I would try to answer politely, but it might be hard.

I would answer that the central government has greatly increased its committment to the environment since the early 1990s by legislating an impressive regulatory framework to protect the environment and that its implementation is mostly dependent on provinical and local governments, that Wen Jiabao recently admitted that what his government, and its predecessors, has legislated is still not enough to protect the environment, and that the central government has initiated projects to rejuvenate grasslands and forests. I would admit that more needs to be done such as clarity and public input in the decision-making process regarding environmental policy at each level of government.
I would speak about the public education campaigns initiated by NGOs and government-regulated environmental groups.
I would finish by saying that it takes time.
I would not answer from within an oppositional frame of mind by summarizing the environmental damage caused by industrialization in Canada. That position is outdated, unproductive and, at this point in the history of China's natural environment, hypocritical.


Again, you employ the relativism of the scholar, but I believe we need to take positions and action, ASAP, given our new, necessarily supranational understanding of Homo sapiens place in nature, without borders, in situ.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 09 July 2008 08:46 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
the concern of pollution among policymakers rises in proportion to the level of pollution in their localities provided that the locality has reached a good level of development. The other conclusion is that policymakers in less developed areas are more reluctant to implement environmental regulation if it will hinder economic development.

Which would surely be true the world over. Those who prattle about "the mysterious Orient" should consider this obvious point.

However, it is interesting that Yanqi Tong seems to have found some policymakers satisfied that their locality "has reached a good level of development." My quick impression was that all localities are ambitious for a lot higher level of development. But I didn't see any northern cities like Shenyang or Harbin. Have they really reached the point where pollution is more important than development?

quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
How would you characterize the Chinese presence in Tibet? How would you characterize the response of Tibetans to that presence?

My impression is that all the noise has been made by the "Tibetan government in exile" and those living in western countries who have links to it. I can understand the feelings of those who fled Tibet in 1959 and their descendants, just as I understand the feelings of Kashmiri Muslims, Palestinian refugees and their descendants, and any other group that has been fighting a losing battle since 1947 or 1959. But I have no real evidence that a large number of current residents of Tibet share those feelings. I would guess that current residents have different concerns: the influx of new residents, mainly Han Chinese, that came with the railway. This of course was predictable and inevitable, which is why China postponed building that railway for so long. I don't know whether anything can be done to improve that concern in the short run. I would guess that there is more discontent among Uighurs than among Tibetans in China.

All of which is written in ignorance, simply because you asked.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 09 July 2008 10:54 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Again, you employ the relativism of the scholar, but I believe we need to take positions and action, ASAP, given our new, necessarily supranational understanding of Homo sapiens place in nature, without borders, in situ.

My relativism is not merely bookish. It has also developed from my life experience and that of my family. It has been however tempered by a few absolutes to which I have subscribed for a long time, one of which is that there can be no economy without the natural environment. I therefore share and appreciate your sense of urgency, and I agree and support your call to encourage the government of China to participate wholeheartedly in international institutions designed to advance practical efforts to protect our natural environment. Even the central government shares some your sentiments.

But your position seems to assume that all conditions of life in the world are equal while they are not so. Our supranational absolutes could easily be applied if all the world's conditions were equal, but the governments of China and Canada face different barriers when planning and implementing their environmental policies, and I would argue that China has more barriers to overcome. Even those conditions within China are not equal. The central government is authoritarian, but it cannot control every member of the massive bureaucracy required to govern the world's largest population which has diverse local interests. It is therefore much more difficult to uniformely apply a policy across China when there is corruption and when some localities produce relatively no pollution but have no access to clean technology as they develop their local economies. The central government will have to partly rely on the importation of clean technology by foreign governments and private companies, a process that has already begun, to clean the environment and prevent more degradation. The effort and implementation cannot only come from the central government. Every level of government and every citizen must contribute. There is more work to be done in China than in Canada.

quote:
I would not answer from within an oppositional frame of mind by summarizing the environmental damage caused by industrialization in Canada. That position is outdated, unproductive and, at this point in the history of China's natural environment, hypocritical.

The central government's habit of deflecting foreign criticism regarding its policies suggested that two wrongs can make a right. It suggests that unchecked pollution from development in China is justified because pollution was also a part of Canada's economic development. I want to turn away from that. It is time to find as much common ground as we can while taking into account our real and practical differences.

quote:
My new, revised view of “legitimate” nationalisms does not encapsulate the violence that has been visited on the people of Tibet, or the program of emigration from east to west that will obviously end in the sort of balkanized settlement that has marked Europe and the middle east since 1919.

I have accepted as fact that the central government will not abandon Tibet. I have accepted as fact that the international community cannot, and is not capable, to force the central government to grant independence to Tibet. And I have accepted as a fact that most Chinese would not support a central government willing to succumb to international pressure on such an emotional issue. I therefore work with those assumptions while contemplating the Tibet question.

At the moment, it would be much more fruitful to lobby the central government to protect and encourage Tibetan culture. The immediate concern for those animated by this issue should be the sinonization of the economy of Tibet. One of the characteristics of the modern economy is that you must speak Mandarin to participate in it because its leaders and its majority are Han Chinese. This could compel Tibetans to relegate their languge to the private sphere, which has already begun, where it can petrify. It would be difficult to protect the language through literature because the resources to do so may be difficult to access. Implementing a policy that would permit access to the resources required for the protection and flourishing of Tibetan culture should not be a threat to the central government's interest in the region. At least this program of action would provide for the dignity that the flourishing of culture gives its people. In the long term, perhaps it would satisfy a significant enough segment of the Tibetan population that will remain nationalist but accept that Tibet is a part of China. A situation that should be acceptable to the central government.

[ 09 July 2008: Message edited by: Liang Jiajie ]


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 09 July 2008 10:58 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Yes Wilf, no assumptions about mysterious east.

The concept "inscrutable" was laid to rest along with Charlie Chan in an earlier post. No heavy ethno stuff being traded in this thread.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 09 July 2008 11:26 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I am looking at a philosophical position in your last response that is new to me. I can see it now in your earlier postings.

Please give me an evening to mull over your response - chiefly to do with its sense of "inevitability". I'm quite floored.

The Chinese political situation is obviously much more complex than that of staid old Canada -but we would lose Alberta from confederation, and perhaps Saskatchewan and British Columbia as well i our central government in Ottawa again attempted to control the fossil fuel market and maintain reserves for our rainy future.

They (Alberta certainly) would become part of the great republic to the south in a heartbeat.

George


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 09 July 2008 12:14 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
One of the characteristics of the modern economy is that you must speak Mandarin to participate in it because its leaders and its majority are Han Chinese. This could compel Tibetans to relegate their languge to the private sphere, which has already begun, where it can petrify.

Can you explore this further, please?

A lawyer from Shanghai tells me that the working language of court sittings in Shanghai is Wu. Not exactly "the private sphere." Of course everyone needs to speak Mandarin, but can also speak their local language, as I understand it.

Of course Shanghai has at least 13 million Wu-speakers, and there were 77,175,000 of them in 1984, says Ethnologue, in Shanghai, in Jiangsu and in Zhejiang. Wikipedia says it had at least 77 million speakers as of 1991:

quote:
making it the second most populous Chinese language after Mandarin, and the 10th most populous language in the world.

But Central Tibetan had only 1,066,200 speakers in China (1990 census). So it might be a lot harder to keep it viable? But Wikipedia quotes a 2003 report that
quote:
none of the many recent studies of endangered languages deems Tibetan to be imperiled, and language maintenance among Tibetans contrasts with language loss even in the remote areas of Western states renowned for liberal policies ... claims that primary schools in Tibet teach putonghua are in error. Tibetan was the main language of instruction in 98% of TAR primary schools in 1996; today, putonghua is introduced in early grades only in urban schools ... Because less than four out of ten TAR Tibetans reach secondary school, primary school matters most for their cultural formation.

So it's not clear to me what is needed for Tibetan to survive.

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 09 July 2008 04:03 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
[QUOTE]"You tell them. Euro-centric ideas are all the planet needs." (end of quote).

Wish ideas had that impact.

This seems not a bad sentiment to use as a jumping off point for the thoughts that follow. In retrospect, I'm not sure that our "philosophies" are so much at variance (love to see something on Darwin) as explanations for changes occurring in both of our societies. We're far from the end of history, hopefully.

Well, let me see how it looks on the screen:

I’m going to pose this all as a rather large - and probably unfair - question: Which approach or understanding, yours or mine, is most likely to arrive at a solution to this world-encompassing problem, which, to me, boils down to the creation of a human society that can survive its collective effect on nature (environment, ecosystems). Differences in levels of development and scale aside, what philosophical position must underpin any reform action?

Turning in desperation to my “The Oxford Companion to Philosophy” (Ted Honderich, ed.) I read: “Chinese philosophy. Philosophical thought in China has a predominantly practical character, being motivated primarily by a concern with the ideal way of life for human beings and, for some schools of thought, also by a concern to maintain social and political order.”

There is far more about “reflectivity”, etc., and you may find it comically simplistic, simply another “western take on the east”, but that opening statement seems to be where you are “coming from” in our discussion so far.

And it invites the question: When you say we create our world, just where do “we” fit in. That is, I see “Darwin’s discovery”, Homo sapiens, as a species whose failure to recognize limitations has always been a result of hubris - but in the past we could fault the gods. And you don’t subscribe to “genesis” (above).

But, then, mustn’t we point out as the holders of wisdom (the old problem of the role of the - gasp, here goes that word - intelligentsia) that, before Chinese and Canadian there came just biological old “us”?

Perusing Jonathan Spence’s The Gate of Heavenly Peace: The Chinese and Their Revolution, 1895-1980, we see, fundamentally, a list of people fitting that elite category, Mao, Zhou, etc., a list of well-to-do people who fought, really fought, for the material betterment of the common people. There is a picture of Mao Zedong’s first wife, Yang Kaihui, who was “arrested and shot in 1930”. Their two sons, a baby and a toddler, are in the picture.

And the people, who had little to lose, came out.

Today’s “revolutionary”, there and here, is faced with telling the commoner and elite alike that that material carrot of a better life means death of a habitable world. What a downer! And what a task it poses for they who want to mobilize for action!

Yesterday, the fellow who created Canada’s first mutual fund (1954) died, and was eulogized in our national newspapers as the one who opened up the investment world to our common man. And, of course, a “worker’s” investment in the market does conflict with Marx’s idea of class struggle.

A half-century after investing was made easy for us - possible for some - the political implications of this are still not understood. Capitalism remains “the enemy” for we of the left, here , but the 2001 Nobel Prize winner for economics can write in the same newspaper about market failure: “One senior Chinese official was quoted as saying that the problem was that the U.S. government should have done more to help low-income Americans with their housing.”

Now it’s not a people thing, it’s just bad economics.J

The economist, Joseph Stiglitz, says its just a failure of this economic aberration , neo-liberalism, a throwback to early 19th Century Britain.

“Neo-liberal market fundamentalism was always a political doctrine serving certain interests. It was never supported by economic theory. Nor, it should now be clear, is it supported by historical experience. Learning this lesson may be the silver lining in the cloud now handing over the global economy.”

Wise men, but for their ilk, in China or the U.S., environmental matters are still “externalities”. My, how nice it must be so see the world’s problems from the wrong end of a telescope. You just narrow the perspective to a dimension that is capable of solution by logico-scientific method.

James Lovelock found mainstream biology wanting because of an ever narrower disciplinary focus demanded by institutions of high learning. By making enough money from his scientific inventions (working for NASA and later) he could live and write independently, creating a new explanation for Earth’s current atmospheric temperature(s) and composition of atmospheric gases. And giving us the means to understand why we must reform.

In China, as here, the sky has to darken with effluent before the local higher life forms begin to agitate for action.

Canada’s best known political philosopher, Charles Taylor, who was once a student activist and member of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, the more fundamentally socialist predecessor to our New Democratic Party , wrote an important paper in 1974. I was a graduate student at U. of T. looking, unsuccessfully, for a way out of the economic growth dilemma.

The need for zero economic growth was last seriously debated in public then, and was laughed off the news pages with the onset of stagflation. But Taylor left a parting thought that I have clung to since. Perhaps, he wrote, all sides and viewpoints will coalesce when things become bad enough and the need for action is clear. We might then all row together in the spirit of Dunkirk (where a third of a million soldiers were taken off a French beach in spring of 1940 by a flotilla of pleasure craft that came out of every port and estuary of southern England’s coasts).

[ 10 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 10 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 10 July 2008 10:42 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:

Can you explore this further, please?

The modern economy in Tibet was created by Han government workers and Sichuanese immigrants in search of opportunities for a better life. When I write modern economy, I refer to the many small businesses such as kioskes and restaurants and the companies that are part of the central government's development initiatives such as the construction of new infrastructure. Many of those businesses are owned by Sichuanese, particularly in Lhasa, and are often linked by familial relationships and friendships which has led to some city streets and blocs of cities to be dominated by Sichuanese businesses. So a pattern has developed where Sichuanese immigrants find work or start a small business with the support of family members or friends already established in Tibet without having to know Tibetan.

Also, the language of government is not Tibetan. Han government employees sent from the interior such as clerks, who must interact with the public, and teachers, who are there to increase the number of teacher, are not required to learn Tibetan, and the civil service examination emphasizes Mandarin.

The official curriculum states that Mandarin should be the language of instruction for all high school students but, as your source states, primary schools are not teaching enough Mandarin. (A situation that will change as more Han teachers settle in Tibet.) Moreover, that source claims that most Tibetan youths leave school before middle school, so not enough Tibetans are learning Mandarin, a situation that leaves them with poor prospects for a career in a new economy dominated by a foreign language and will demand more education from its workers in the future.

My concern is that Tibetans will be marginalized from the new economy and that their language is being placed on a course towards endangerment. A significant problem for us is that we do not have reliable statistics for the number of Han of have settled in Tibet, so it is difficult to quantify the situation.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 10 July 2008 08:52 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I’m going to pose this all as a rather large - and probably unfair - question: Which approach or understanding, yours or mine, is most likely to arrive at a solution to this world-encompassing problem, which, to me, boils down to the creation of a human society that can survive its collective effect on nature (environment, ecosystems). Differences in levels of development and scale aside, what philosophical position must underpin any reform action?

Turning in desperation to my “The Oxford Companion to Philosophy” (Ted Honderich, ed.) I read: “Chinese philosophy. Philosophical thought in China has a predominantly practical character, being motivated primarily by a concern with the ideal way of life for human beings and, for some schools of thought, also by a concern to maintain social and political order.”

There is far more about “reflectivity”, etc., and you may find it comically simplistic, simply another “western take on the east”, but that opening statement seems to be where you are “coming from” in our discussion so far.

And it invites the question: When you say we create our world, just where do “we” fit in. That is, I see “Darwin’s discovery”, Homo sapiens, as a species whose failure to recognize limitations has always been a result of hubris - but in the past we could fault the gods. And you don’t subscribe to “genesis” (above).


I think the hubris proceeded our perceived separation from our natural environment which began with agriculture and urbanization, but I think our ancestors had been aware of their limitations long after agriculture and urbanization began. They understood the fragility of crops and irrigation and they recognized that the natural environment dominated them despite their harnessing of, for example, water for irrigation. Perhaps the end of recognition began with mass industrialization where many of our ancestors no longer had to grow and hunt for food and fabricate their clothing. Most of what was needed to survive began to be done by others where our ancestors could not see them, a way of life that has become completely realized today for most of us.

I do not have a systematic philosophy to offer, but I think we should accept the following: 1) the natural environment mostly dominates and controls us 2) we may dominate and control some of our natural environment for survival provided that it is done sustainably 3) and we need the natural environment but it does not need us.

I have to respond to your second paragraph in the above quotation at a later time.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 11 July 2008 01:40 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Thank you. I look forward to your evaluation of that second paragraph.

I find that I am benefitting most from the clarity of your explanations of a proper position for Homo sapiens in relation to nature.
However, while a materialist position must begin with means of production, in a historical context, the sociiologist in me cries out for its expansion into the cultural events that parallel material "progress" (using the old Scottish assumption - and my own view of human progress until halfway through my life.For instance we began, early on, doing very painful things to other animals, four legged and two, to appease the gods that would guarantee good weather, fertility etc.?

Mark Twain was probably the earliest one over here (an early George Carlin, with whom he has been compared) to point to religious foibles, and the hypocrisy of Christian racism, before and after the U.S.Civil War.

I very seldom look at Time magazine, but came across the July 14 Canadian edition featuring the Annual Making of America Issue which, after several years of famous presidents, features Mark Twain: "How he changed the way we view politics, Why he was ahead of his time on race, What his writing can teach America today."

The essays on Twain are stunning, showing his travels around the world helped enlighten his world view.

But in addition, Time's Global Businesss section looks closely at attempts by the Sino-Japan Friendship Center for Environmental Protection, whose officials in Beijing are concerned with bringing Japanese technology to China. There are now 18 "model projects" in China, sponsored by this - obviously Japanese trade-centered - undertaking.

The comparative statistics: Japan produces eight times more GDP value per unit of energy consumed.

Now, if they can just break free of measuring "progress" in terms of GDP?

[ 11 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 11 July 2008 01:43 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Some support for Gavin Menzies

Georgia Straight

Actually, Menzies is hardly mentioned at all, but:
1.They do criticize the criticism of him: "Menzies is a liar, they said. Worse, he’s a charlatan. What often got lost in the tirades against Menzies and his mistaken predecessor Heyerdahl—they did get important things wrong—was this increasingly accepted premise: early Asian and, perhaps, American peoples had been crossing the Pacific for centuries, perhaps for millennia, before Europeans appeared on the scene."

2.There is support for the idea of the 'increasingly accepted premise': "B.C. archaeologist George MacDonald, 70, director emeritus of the Bill Reid Foundation, is one of those who didn’t succumb to the scientific conceit of the Americas’ isolation from Asia. He has believed all along that Asian traders and ideas have come to these shores since… well, forever.

“It’s harder to explain why they did not come than why they did. The first emperor,” he says, referring to a different Chinese myth dating to 210 BC, “sent his fleet across the Pacific to find the ‘land of immortality’. Those ships disappeared. Then came Fu Sang. There had to be Chinese ships that came here!”

[ 11 July 2008: Message edited by: Adam T ]


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 11 July 2008 08:21 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here's a remarkable chronology of Asian maritime history to 1700 AD published by a maritime musuem in Kuala Lumpur. Although they note:
quote:
Not all of this information is reliable - but a few decades ago, perhaps very little of the early history would have been believed by the cynical and Euro-centric, and archaeological discoveries since then have so often validated or exceeded legend that we are not inclined to be too dismissive. There is an extraordinary volume of documentary evidence in Asian and Middle Eastern languages not directly accessible to us. Also, the combination of snippets of varying quality, and from different cultures, may sometimes build up to an overall impression more convincing than the individual parts.

Sources are of very variable quality - sometimes tertiary or even more distant from the first hand accounts, but we have tended to include interesting assertions, using the best references to hand, and allow the reader to discriminate.



It seems the Maritime Silk Route was quite important. I found this bit fascinating:
quote:
24 BCE: Augustus Caesar sent an army to capture Aden. Thereafter, the Romans opened sea routes to India, where they could buy Chinese silk, bypassing war-torn areas and diminishing the role of Persians and Arabs who previously dominated the trade.

early C1st CE: Strabo described the expansion of Asian trade under the Roman emperor Augustus (27BCE-14CE); previously 20 ships a year passed from the Red Sea into the Indian ocean; now ships were departing in convoys of 120 from the upper Red Sea port of Myos Hormos alone.

23 CE: Chinese emperor Wang Mang died, after amassing a vast percentage of the world's gold reserves - which caused disruption in Rome, where emperor Tiberius banned the wearing of silk. Tiberius is deemed to have been worried about the trade deficit and the outflow of hard currency.

Roman coin finds in India are predominantly in the south and suggest the use of an overland route from the Malabar to the Coromandel coast. The coins all have gold or silver content, and are predominantly from the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius (14-37 CE) - the two sound-money emperors. Fewer ships sailed around south India, but C1st Roman coins were found at Kadmat in the Lakshadweep islands.

Arikamedu near Pondicherry in southeast India was a thriving port, peaking in 23-96 CE (the Roman trade between 30 & 50 CE), and a permanent base for western merchants known in Indian literature as yavana.

c.45 CE: Buddhist monks from Sri Lanka visited Emperor Claudius in Rome. Trade subsequently improved.

52 CE: The Roman chronicler Pliny complained about India's trade surplus. He also described a kingdom in the south of Sri Lanka, probably Tissamaharama.

54-68 CE: The Roman emperor Nero debased the currency, which rapidly became unacceptable. Few Roman coins are found in India from Nero's reign onwards. Indian traders started to take more interest in opportunities to the east.



Americans wondering why their dollar's value is dropping should take note.

[ 11 July 2008: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 12 July 2008 02:45 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
The 2,000-year-old "China syndrome" currency factor strikes again,aided by George "Nero" Bush, who isn't about to ban the importation of anything that might hurt his standing among Walmart consumers, his last bastion of electoral support.


But then, who is going to do a Tiberius in the land of consumer/taxpayers ?
(I still think self image of the masses has a great deal to do with social change - or lack of it)!

Of course, Tiberius came out of the army and had the legions for support, so didn't have to give a damn about the masses - for whom old Nero fiddled. And John McCain was (is) a guy who might have that sort of military support...so...hmmmm.

[ 12 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 12 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 12 July 2008 10:03 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Turning in desperation to my “The Oxford Companion to Philosophy” (Ted Honderich, ed.) I read: “Chinese philosophy. Philosophical thought in China has a predominantly practical character, being motivated primarily by a concern with the ideal way of life for human beings and, for some schools of thought, also by a concern to maintain social and political order.”

There is far more about “reflectivity”, etc., and you may find it comically simplistic, simply another “western take on the east”, but that opening statement seems to be where you are “coming from” in our discussion so far.


So perhaps I have inherited Confucian principles which are operating at the level of the unconscious? I do not subcribe to Confucianism or any other ancient philosophy, but I accept that modern cultures often contain residual elements of their predecessors, and China is a very good example of that process.

Yes, social stability or order is very important in a society, especially if that society is preparing for change. If change is needed, stability is required because it provides the necessary conditions to start the process of renewal, a process that cannot be violent and sudden because it causes disruptions that often make life unworthy of living for too many except those leading the renewal. If their is a general consensus among a society's prominent leaders that a general renewal is necessary, or that a particular change should take place, the process of change should be prioritized so that the disruption is minimum. Prioritization is crucial because it compels activists to set realistic goals that each build a step towards the ultimate goal. This process strengthens a movement because each step of the process builds a section of a foundation on which the movement's inheritors can focus on immediate, attainable goals, thanks to their predecessors, and build their section of the foundation until one group of inheritors completes the new structure.

Consultation of opposing, viable viewpoints is another crucial element in this process so that uneducated and unthoughtful plans pressed and completed under coercion are avoided.

quote:

However, while a materialist position must begin with means of production, in a historical context, the sociiologist in me cries out for its expansion into the cultural events that parallel material "progress" (using the old Scottish assumption - and my own view of human progress until halfway through my life.For instance we began, early on, doing very painful things to other animals, four legged and two, to appease the gods that would guarantee good weather, fertility etc.?

I considered including religion in my previous post to you, but I lack detailed knowledge of the relationship between religions and nature, and theology in general, past and present. However, I think spirituality has an essential place in whatever philosophy of environment and theology is developed. In this regard, the indigenous religions of Canada may have something to teach us. Whatever theologies or philosophies are developed, it should be assumed that the environment educates us regarding our place on this planet and in the universe and that our planet is not a mere brutish transit station to a better place.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 12 July 2008 01:27 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
China's leaders and the Internet, by Li Datong: Hu Jintao has a "webchat" with members of the public
quote:
This was the first time that a senior party official had publicly engaged with internet users. There was no real substance to the online conversation, but it was symbolic: it showed that the party has finally and formally acknowledged that the internet is an important source of public information and opinion.

Indeed, there has been a sudden increase recently in the number of senior officials claiming to be regular net-surfers. Wen Jiabao says he goes online everyday; Hu Jintao himself said during his webchat that "through the web I want to know what netizens are thinking about and what their opinions are" and that "we pay great attention to suggestions and advice from our netizens".

As the nature of the technology makes control of the internet difficult, the net has became the most effective arena for the Chinese public to comment on national affairs.

This freedom is now under threat. China has established a huge online police force, which patrols the net, issuing orders for removal of all information or opinions that it believes to be "harmful". The police do not have the resources to inspect all of the vast mass of online information, so they make use of modern technology which will not allow posts containing "sensitive" words to be published. The list of sensitive words changes constantly, and posts containing the words are automatically blocked. Hu Jintao is probably not aware that his own name is often classified as sensitive.

The government has also employed large numbers of "internet commentators": people who pose as ordinary internet users and post comments aimed at "guiding public opinion". These people are paid per post, earning themselves the nickname "the fifty-cent party."

. . the people who chatted to Hu Jintao were in fact stooges. Hu himself was tricked by the internet police, and only saw two or three sycophantic questions from planted sources. I have seen many of the questions from internet users that did not reach Hu, and can confirm that many contain sharp criticism. These questions represent true public opinion, but did Hu ever get to see them? I strongly doubt it.

As soon as local officials hear that national leaders are coming to visit, they carefully plan every last detail of the trip. They make sure that all locals are singing from the same song-sheet, and sometimes officials even camouflage themselves as members of the public.

Almost every member of the current leadership has been tricked in this way. The only way around it is to unleash "surprise attacks". Wen Jiabao has been known to tell drivers that he needs to use the toilet so that he can be let out of the car and walk to poverty-stricken villages which have had no time to prepare for his visit.

If the government gave the media the right to report and investigate effectively, leaders could read the truth in the newspapers while sitting in their offices. This would be far easier and more accurate than making hurried trips to areas where a veil of obfuscation is drawn over the truth.

For China's leaders to go from seeing the internet as a dangerous "unstable element" which needs to be tightly controlled, to seeing it as a source of truthful information on public opinion, is a form of progress. But there is a paradox here: leaders are aware that a clear understanding of public opinion improves their legitimacy, while at the same time their own censorship departments are twisting or shutting out true public opinion. If this paradox is not reolved, the authorities will never really know what the public thinks, and will become an object of public ridicule again and again.



From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 12 July 2008 05:41 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Turning in desperation to my “The Oxford Companion to Philosophy” (Ted Honderich, ed.) I read: “Chinese philosophy. Philosophical thought in China has a predominantly practical character, being motivated primarily by a concern with the ideal way of life for human beings and, for some schools of thought, also by a concern to maintain social and political order.”

This isn't an area I'm an expert on (not that I'm really an expert on China at all) but there clearly were a number of philosophical/religious factions that veered off into the mystic. I'm not quite sure what happened, but after Taoism mixed with Buddhism some of the adherents became fixated on the Jade Record, which has major parallels with the western ideas of heaven and hell and devils and gods.

That said, and again I'm not 100% sure of all this, the Taoist religion maybe isn't the same as Taoist philosophy.

There were also a number of what are known as 'millenarial movements' in China that started off as kind of religious cults and ended up trying to overthrow the government. The most famous of these were the Taoist influenced White Lotus socieities and the Biblical influenced Taiping Rebellion. Of course, part of this is due to China, as we see from Tibet, not being solely a homogenous country made up of Han Chinese, but a multi ethnic country with (now) Tibetans, Hakka Chinese (who were the major faction in the Taiping Rebellion), Muslims up primarily in the North West, Mongols, and presumably as well now converted Christians, Buddhists and probably several more.

So, it would probably be accurate to say that Confucian (and Legalist) ideas and ideals were a major influence on all the Han Chinese, but it should be remembered that at the time of Confucious (5th Century B.C) neither Tibet nor what is now Northwestern China were part of what was then China. It would I think make sense to assume that Confucian Legalist ideals had less of an impact in those areas.

[ 12 July 2008: Message edited by: Adam T ]


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 13 July 2008 04:21 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Mornin' Wilf

I wonder at the use of "paradox", a term from literary evaluation to describe police action by the state to end open discussion. The word is often associated with accidental and means for me a more subtle distinction.

Even the Marxist idea of "contradiction" suggests a more subtle understanding of two things in opposition, intentionally or not.

Paradox does not describe a sort of Goebbels gone IT situation (although, of course, his would have been only a 1984, one-way device).

[ 13 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 13 July 2008 04:37 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
H'lo Adam T

Your scholarly input continues to be instructive.Thanks.

What I'm hunting around for in that Oxford companion right now is a reply to Jiajie that can perhaps give a name to a philosophy we perhaps share - but which has been buried at this end under the less than subtle, all-encompassing name, humanism (right next to our friend David Hume oddly enough, or paradoxically)!


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 13 July 2008 05:45 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:

What I'm hunting around for in that Oxford companion right now is a reply to Jiajie that can perhaps give a name to a philosophy we perhaps share - but which has been buried at this end under the less than subtle, all-encompassing name, humanism (right next to our friend David Hume oddly enough, or paradoxically)!


I simply considered myself a realist.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 13 July 2008 06:01 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Ah.

But that also smacks of fatalist. And I wonder if that really fits?

It certainly does NOT describe the position, philosophy, worldview or whatever of those in power at ANY time, eh? (Just had to add that little Canadianism at the end for a light touch to a very serious subject).


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 13 July 2008 07:29 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
A bit of history and a position:


If Rachel Carson had not written her 1962 work, Silent Spring, she would have been acting as a realist, accepting the effect of industrialization, chemical invention in the pay of that industrialization, and simple population growth as inevitable.

Her instant following of thousands and even millions also did not accept the situation.

Just finished reading a piece in our absolutely necessary national newspaper, the Globe and Mail, about the production of Agent Orange in the late 60s at a little chemical plant just a few kilometers from where I’m writing. The waste destroyed the groundwater sources for the town of Elmira, and folks came to my water bottling operation (the first in the region) for help. One of them told me of a conversation some time earlier with the widow of the plant manager responsible, Louis Klink. Old Louis, it turned out, was afraid of not being able to retire on the income he expected if he had complained to the board.

It had seemed to me that a correspondence course in water chemistry would pay off by the late 80s, having read Carson 25 years before - and I had sampled industrial effluent for the first Pollution Probe in 1970. Acting responsibly with realistic expectations - that’s the hard part. Oh, and yes, we produced only the 18 liter , returnable bottle. Still great to avoid the swimming pool effect of chlorine in drinking water as well as biological bits, despite the possible ramifications of drinking water from #7 plastic. Should be healthier bottles available soon (we live in hope).

I’m afraid most educated people go “realist” out of a desire to feed their family and themselves and out of concern for their old age. Heck, university students today can get worked up about control of the operations at their school’s pub, but the days when two busloads would come from that institution (University of Waterloo) to help editorial staff on strike picket a newspaper in Peterborough are history.

Silent Spring brought focus and a scientific explanation to all those whose experience of their natural world was being changed, degraded by the inroads of the productive system that had brought a plethora of consumer goods to the post-war citizen. Even poor old Malcolm Lowry (Under the Volcano) ruminated about the replacement of God by the American washing machine, from the isolation of his Vancouver area beach just after the war (Hear Us O Lord From Heaven Thy Dwelling Place).

Obviously, the hold of “materialism” broke the old mould in the western, liberal understanding of the word, a turning away from the ideational world with its roots in religion - and governance aided by the mindless suppression of thought among the masses. At least, that how I’ve always read the thoughts of everyone from Marx to Mao on the subject of subjugation. In praxis, enlightenment seems to be more useful before the revolution than after.

Unfortunately, Canada’s famous philosopher is quite Hegelian and religious, and although he is active politically as a progressive (60 years) - like his onetime CCF fellow sympathizer and prime minister in the making, the late Pierre Trudeau - can marvelously summarize our environmental dilemma, has “contributed to the theory of responsibility”, and posed the timing of a solution, he sharply criticizes “naturalism”. I’ve tried reading his work, but am not up to the mental footwork, need it partly digested.

By the way, Taylor was one of two eminent and learned people who toured Quebec recently to listen to complaints about the inroads, not of materialism but of multiculturalist (my American spell check won’t accept that word!) inroads in the province. You may well be very aware of the fellow through your own studies?

Anyway, that’s what “realist” means to me. Avoidance of responsibility, finally. And I still don’t believe you fit that category of thought.

Anyone who is worried about the future “too much” and identifies with nature instead of creatons of the mind, fits the category of naturalism, which is where I’m at, I guess. Thought you might have fit in there also.

[ 13 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 13 July 2008 02:35 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
Another factor in the formulation of environmental policy is the authoritarian nature of the central and provincial governments. There is an environmental movement in China, but it's practically non-existent in the consultation and formulation of policy, therefore its role is limited to public education. Policy is directed by the bureaucratic elite which must simultaneously consider economic development and environmental protection.

The central government is authoritarian, but it cannot control every member of the massive bureaucracy required to govern the world's largest population which has diverse local interests. It is therefore much more difficult to uniformely apply a policy across China when there is corruption and when some localities produce relatively no pollution but have no access to clean technology as they develop their local economies. The central government will have to partly rely on the importation of clean technology by foreign governments and private companies, a process that has already begun, to clean the environment and prevent more degradation. The effort and implementation cannot only come from the central government. Every level of government and every citizen must contribute.

I have also learned that societies will always have segments that will resist change but that change eventually occurs when people realize that it is either necessary or inevitable, when the conscious or unconscious preferences of the masses dictate to the powerful or, better, steamroll over them.



I am very interested in local and regional government in China. If even provincial governments are too remote and unaccountable, change will start at the local and regional level. This has often been the case in many cultures.

So let's look at Nánjīng. I realize Nánjīng (Nan = southern, Jing = capital) has been the educational center in southern China for more than 1700 years, but most Canadians know nothing about it. (I just learned Xi River is the oldest man-made canal in the world, constructed before 484 B.C.)

Nánjīng Shì is what Canadians would call a Regional Government or Regional District, which is often translated as a "prefecture-level city" although prefecture-level cities are so large that they are not cities in the traditional sense of the word at all. The whole province of Jiangsu has only 13 prefecture-level regions.

The Region contains the Nánjīng metropolitan area and 2 counties. It has an area of 6 501 square kilometers and a population of 6 126 165 in the 2000 census.

At the next lower level, it is divided into 11 urban county-level districts ("qū") which Canadians might call "boroughs" or "cities," as well as the two counties ("xiàn").

At the lowest level, in the "city" of Nánjīng the 11 urban districts are further divided into 57 "street committees" ("shìchù") which Canadians might call "neighbourhood councils", 9 urban townships ("zhèn"), and about 46 various other subdivisions. The two counties comprise 17 satellite towns ("zhèn", also translated as urban townships.) The total Nánjīng region has 129 "township-level units" including the street committees.

As I understand it, those "township-level units" have contested elections, making their councils somewhat accountable. Deputies to people's congresses of township-level units are elected directly by their constituencies to five-year terms. Does this also apply to people's congresses of the next level, the 11 urban county-level districts ("qū") and the two counties?

And how much power does the Jiangsu CPC Party Chief have over the party chiefs at the Region (Shì), the middle level (qū and xiàn), and the lowest level?

Are decisions like building Nánjīng Metro Line 2 taken at the Region (Shì) level, or the provincial level?

Nánjīng Region runs right up to Zhenjiang Region, the prefecture-level region to the east which has 2 841 856 people. It also abuts on the southeast Changzhou Region (population 3 776 270) and on the northeast Yangzhou Region (population 4 588 554). It also runs up to Mǎ'ānshān Region in Ānhuī province (pop. 1,243,900.) Do each of these regions have their own daily newspapers? (I don't know any way to hold a level of government accountable without a daily newspaper reporting on it.)

[ 13 July 2008: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 15 July 2008 05:14 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Four summers ago, during a federal election, I wrote a column for The Record, a subsidiary of Torstar, one of Canada's big newspaper chains, that began: "If a working democracy is founded on an enlightened electorate, we are in big trouble."
The article was headed "An uninformed electorate is a dangerous thing."

It ran, in 2004, but the current editorial staff would never allow its publication.

Its theme was the political ignorance of the electorate in the middle of a federal election in which the media were egging on voters to be angry, but not informing them about the choices they had.

That paper no longer allows such self-critical assessment, its opinion page sanitized. Our "democratic freedoms" have retreated, even as the newspaper becomes, editorially, a staunch proponent of conservative values, opposed to government intervention. It is reacting to the need for more income - trying to attract more advertising, reflecting the capitalist malady, sharpened in this age of proletarian investots, of an insatiable need for improvements in the bottom line.

The post-modern distaste for history or anything outside of consumerism and contemporary mass communications is now acceptable opinion.

But it is still a far cry from the situation reported by Geoffrey York, a Globe and Mail correspondent in Beijing, reporting on July 7: "Although foreign journalists are often obstructed or pressured, the controls on the Chinese media are much stricter. The government sends weekly faxes to Chinese media outlets, announcing the laest restrictions on their coverage, the report (by Human Rights Watch) says.

"And at China's state television network, the computer terminals of all journalists are linked to an electronic system that tells them the latest decrees on issues that they are prohibited from covering."

God (that mythical creature) knows where the mind of the average Chinese citizen is "at", these days. But I would think not open to ideas about a growing environmental threat to the life of our species. Perhaps only at the pathetic level of understanding of George W. Bush some years ago?

But perhaps you do not know, really, about the level of thinking of the mainstream citizen of China, Jiajie, the potential for change? It is obviously more difficult to categorize 1.3 billion people in attempting to speculate on where we have to go next, politically, to improve chances of our success at survival?

All talk of confidence, ultimately, in the ability of "the people" to make the right decision, aside?

[ 15 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 15 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 16 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 16 July 2008 09:21 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As I understand it, those "township-level units" have contested elections, making their councils somewhat accountable. Deputies to people's congresses of township-level units are elected directly by their constituencies to five-year terms. Does this also apply to people's congresses of the next level, the 11 urban county-level districts ("qū") and the two counties?

The majority of elections take place at the village level in about 1 million villages which represent about 80 per cent of the population in the countryside. Some governments at the town level hold elections, but the number is far fewer (I do not know the number) than that of villages, and it is a recent development. Another recent development is the election of street committees in urban areas. In other words, elections are held at the lowest administrative level of local government.

quote:
Are decisions like building Nánjīng Metro Line 2 taken at the Region (Shì) level, or the provincial level?

I did not follow the debates behind the construction of that project, but local governments are responsible for the economic and social development of their jurisdictions, and the metro line is under the jurisdiction of Nanjing Shi, not the province. So, given the costs of this project, the final decision must have been taken at the prefecture level.

quote:
Do each of these regions have their own daily newspapers?

Party committees at each level of government publish their official newspapers, so the newspapers are essentially Party newsletters. Generally, people will hold public officials accountable when they independently take notice of problems in their surroundings that is affecting them.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 16 July 2008 09:38 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
God (that mythical creature) knows where the mind of the average Chinese citizen is "at", these days. But I would think not open to ideas about a growing environmental threat to the life of our species. Perhaps only at the pathetic level of understanding of George W. Bush some years ago?

But perhaps you do not know, really, about the level of thinking of the mainstream citizen of China, Jiajie, the potential for change? It is obviously more difficult to categorize 1.3 billion people in attempting to speculate on where we have to go next, politically, to improve chances of our success at survival?

All talk of confidence, ultimately, in the ability of "the people" to make the right decision, aside?


I can only write in generalities. People are aware of environmental degradation because it is directly affecting them, and some have thus launched unsuccessful lawsuits against corrupt local officials and business people who allow the pollution. Therefore, when their water source and food source of a village is polluted, the people understand that there is no choice but change.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 20 July 2008 04:34 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I have benefitted from our exchange, Jiajie,and the reading of The Man Who Loved China. Thank you for your patience, a primary requirement of a good teacher.

I hope that it has all been of some use to you. It would be reassuring to know that you represent the mainstream of Chinese intellectuals in your rational understanding of the situation. I was also reassured by my conversation with the good professor from Beijing so many years ago.

But I do not expect to ever understand realism, with its terrible implications for collective action - or non-action.
George


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 20 July 2008 09:15 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Our exchange rightfully placed under question some of my assumptions I had left undisturbed for too long. Thank you for that. Introverted reflection is fine but a dialogue obligates us to pause and to respond clearly and honestly to criticism, making us vulnerable to the ache felt at the realization that some of our assumptions are false, or to the long process of re-evaluation.

Now I have a question for you. When Needham began his research in China, he realized that most of the Chinese with whom he discussed Chinese history reflected back to him Marxist assumptions; he discovered that they had read the translated works of European Marxist theorists and that he would have to search somewhere else for a unique Chinese position regarding the history of China. It can be assumed that he arrived in China with a few expections. Following my post regarding Tibet, you felt “floored” and thus decided to look to Chinese philosophy to understand my position. I thought that perhaps you were going in the wrong direction because I am certain that your part of the world includes persons who think like me. And I am a product of the twentieth century. What did you expect as you began the exchange? Why were you confused?


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 20 July 2008 09:26 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
Following my post regarding Tibet, you felt “floored” and thus decided to look to Chinese philosophy to understand my position. I thought that perhaps you were going in the wrong direction because I am certain that your part of the world includes persons who think like me. And I am a product of the twentieth century. What did you expect as you began the exchange? Why were you confused?

I too am interested in the answer to this. The comment in question was:
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
I have accepted as fact that the central government will not abandon Tibet. I have accepted as fact that the international community cannot, and is not capable, to force the central government to grant independence to Tibet. And I have accepted as a fact that most Chinese would not support a central government willing to succumb to international pressure on such an emotional issue. I therefore work with those assumptions while contemplating the Tibet question.

But so do I, and so do most well-informed commentators I have read (which excludes 99% of American commentators.) I thought those statements were non-controversial. What am I missing?

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 21 July 2008 06:17 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Hello Jiajie and Wilf.

Here's the question:

Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
I have accepted as fact that the central government will not abandon Tibet. I have accepted as fact that the international community cannot, and is not capable, to force the central government to grant independence to Tibet. And I have accepted as a fact that most Chinese would not support a central government willing to succumb to international pressure on such an emotional issue. I therefore work with those assumptions while contemplating the Tibet question.

I have just learned (CBC) that the central government of China has agreed to again provide free education to the impoverished kids in those 1,000,000 villages.
On the same broadcast, I"m told that perhaps 200,000,000 rural folk are at various stages of transit into the cities to find employment.

"Most Chinese" would not accept that government "succumbing" to international pressure on Tibet?

But given their situation, to look to "most Chinese" would seem so 1930s.

It would seem that all there are in great fear of the people who made Mao possible. And while that may be a "realistic" understanding of the political situation, I would have thought some advice from the "new Confucians" would have brought some control to growth. Seen to it that village schools providing free education would have been erected as well as those "blade runner" structures witnessed by Winchester.

Our own "philosopher king" the late Pierre TRudeau, made our own multi-ethnic phenom possible by disavowing nationalism. Certainly the nationalism of the great unread, which he transcended in the 40s and 50s.

You have studied CAnadian history Jiajie, the conquest of the French by the British on the Plains of Abraham. And some of the French-speaking descendants objected to a Beatle being brought to that ancient battlefield to perform at a ceremony celebrating the 400th anniversary of France's settlement there. Paul is British, after all.

And no nationalist in Quebec has been jailed lately. Not even murder of a kidnapped British trade commissioner resulted in more than a short prison term a third of a century back.

But given that "most Chinese" are apparently onside with the government's treatment of Tibetan nationalists - and we have NO IDEA of their treatment - you wonder at my being "floored'?

Pardon me but this nationalist can't accommodate that polarity of action even in the name of cultural understanding.

Moreover, while "we" could once afford not to be concerned with the goings on over there in Africa, Asia, wherever, it seems to me that we must hold true to the sense of empathy that we have developed here since the death of Wolfe and Montcalm.

We don't "buy" the excuses given by our government for intervention in Afghanistan. It's basically oil-related. Can't justify all the death. But read Rory Stewart's The PLaces in Between to understand that it's also pure ignorance on our part to be there.

There's no attempt to modify Chinese nationalism now, on Tibet, because the nationalist fervour in 1954, the year of the pact with India, one year after the Korean War peace agreement, can't be rescinded.

And Tibet could not be allowed to pass laws, like Quebec, stipulating certain conditions that would insure cultural viability, language and beliefs? It's just ce serra, serra ? (with apologies to Italian-speaking Canadians for the spelling, etc.

My wife taught English as a second language to many 7 year olds coming to Mississauga from around the world, not as a specialist, but as a Grade 2 teacher. I got to help in her final couple of years (we both had B Ed.s) And by golly, even the newest newcomers could read the new language by year's end.

Again, surely the newly rich, the newly educated and well-to-do, can enter the contest there? It's not a matter of "don't buy Chinese" as we didn't "buy South African wine" or "California grapes" etc. etc. to force China's hand.

But when Chinese foreign policy starts emulating our own in Africa and elsewhere, it is time to start being at least as critical of made-in-China policy as we are of our own misbegotten ventures.

A July 22 footnote.

Yes, indeed, my "part of the world" does indeed include many who think like you. I believe Wilf, who also asks the question, is in line with your thinking.

But, then, I believe that that is how we have arrived at our present quandry. Today's intellectual is first a professional, someone who must fit into the society they have inherited, and which increasingly needs to change direction.

The change does not come about, because that would require your professional to step out of role and perform as the intellectual of old. Look at the hold of capital on the small investor and would-be comfortably retired, professional or not. How does that person perform the historic role of thoughtful critic?

This has not been a problem in the past because growth was not challenged on a planet with apparently infinite capacity to absorb growth.

In my view, the state must again intervene and provide the cushion, the controlled and safe investment opportunity, with zero growth in mind, and an eventual diminution of population.
That will all become all too clear in time, due to the effects of environmental overload, but I am afraid we don't have much of that most precious commodity left.

(30)

[ 21 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 22 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 22 July 2008 04:24 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Just so that "footnote" of today is not lost in passing, on re-reading your query, I now see it as central, and I'll repeat it.

It is a very radical position,( radical coming from the Greek "root"), and it's always brought forward by the establishment as thinking that must be suppressed. But then, if a radical change in understanding is not brought to our situation, I really don't see any way out!:


A July 22 footnote.

This footnote, Jiajie, is properly in response to your question. I'm sorry that I was diverted to answer the question posed by Wilf, which was not really your query from philosophy.

How, indeed, does thinking diverge across cultures in the age of capitalist hegemony?

Sadly, it does not, and apparently cannot, without understanding the dynamics, which, I think, can only be seen from economics AND sociology/social psychology.

Yes, indeed, my "part of the world" does indeed include many who think like you. I believe Wilf, who also asks the question, is in line with your thinking.

But, then, I believe that that is how we have arrived at our present quandry. Today's intellectual is first a professional, someone who must fit into the society they have inherited, and which increasingly needs to change direction.

The change does not come about, because that would require your professional to step out of role and perform as the intellectual of old. Look at the hold of capital on the small investor and would-be comfortably retired, professional or not. How does that person perform the historic role of thoughtful critic, the Greek citizen?

This has not been a problem in the past because growth was not challenged on a planet with apparently infinite capacity to absorb growth.

In my view, the state must again intervene and provide the cushion, the controlled and safe investment opportunity, with zero growth in mind, and an eventual diminution of population.
That will all become all too clear in time, due to the effects of environmental overload, but I am afraid we don't have much of that most precious commodity left.

I believed, fancifully, that you would have understood that motivation from a materialist perspective. But I was looking in a mirror. Somehow, Marxist principles help us to understand only up to the point of revolution, and not the contented society coming out the back end of it.

And what you see me doing in this is coming to grips with my own thoughts, giving them substance. We cannot expect the farmer to think except as a farmer, the worker as worker, or the professional elite to break out of their box. Not if they don't understand their motivation from their place in that society.

(30)

[ 22 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Panama Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6478

posted 22 July 2008 12:01 PM      Profile for Panama Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Interesting discussion, haven't had time to scour the entire thread but has anyone read the feature article in the July 10th Georgia Straight ?

Who were BC's first seafarers ?

Besides the bad title (apologies to the Haida who were most certainly sea faring), it discusses Menizes book and his critics.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 23 July 2008 04:58 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Yes PJ, it was offered to us further back on this thread, which looks like it might be at the end of its natural life.

I might have offended the "professionals" in China and Port Hope with my pronouncements - if they understood my babbling attempts at coming to grips with THE philosophical and existential problem of our age - and the book is now history.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 24 July 2008 07:13 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hi George,

I apologize for the lateness of my reply and I appreciate your patience. My computer breathed its last breath a few days ago, so I had to search for and buy a new computer. All is well now.

I have a brief remark regarding nationalism in China. Can you remember the demonstrations against the Beijing Olympics a few months ago? The most significant dynamic for me was the large number of overseas Chinese who supported the Olympics as they waved Chinese flags and defended China. Their response to the demonstrations is important because they live and work in liberal democracies, so one would expect them not to defend China as it is known in the Western media. That said, it was not a defence of the CCP. It was a defence of China as a nation and as an abstraction because their conception of China transcends the Party and whatever it represented in the past, whatever it represents today, and whatever it will represent in the future. In other words, for those overseas Chinese, China is a good place, with or without the Party, and its integrity must be defended. The same can be said of mainland Chinese.

So a Party administration buckling under international pressure by granting independence to Tibet would be, in the minds of too many Chinese, threatening the integrity of China. Since the 1950s, Tibet has been considered a part of China and that sentiment is stronger than ever among Chinese today.

quote:
But, then, I believe that that is how we have arrived at our present quandry. Today's intellectual is first a professional, someone who must fit into the society they have inherited, and which increasingly needs to change direction.

The change does not come about, because that would require your professional to step out of role and perform as the intellectual of old. Look at the hold of capital on the small investor and would-be comfortably retired, professional or not. How does that person perform the historic role of thoughtful critic, the Greek citizen?


You know that China's polity is very different than that of Canada. It is extremely difficult to become an activist in a country whose government suppresses challenges to the general order. However, if the Party, local governments, and citizens will not listen to environmental activists, it will have no other option but to listen to the environment and subscribe to a new attitude. My hope is that the universal nature of environmental degradation will reach beyond social distinctions and international borders to coerce an attitudinal change.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 24 July 2008 09:23 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
So a Party administration buckling under international pressure by granting independence to Tibet would be, in the minds of too many Chinese, threatening the integrity of China. Since the 1950s, Tibet has been considered a part of China and that sentiment is stronger than ever among Chinese today.

No doubt. However, I am not so certain about the Xinjiang Uygur province.

Recently shown on our TV screens was the movie On A Tightrope. "Director Petr Lom achieved the impossible. With official permission, over 18 months, he filmed an intimate story of everyday life, a rare and moving slice of contemporary life in one of the world’s most remote places. In a tender, touching account, four orphaned children attempt to learn Dawaz, the ancient Uyghur tradition of tightrope walking, as part of their training to earn their own living when they leave the orphanage."

The attitude of the teachers was remarkable. They were muslim Uygurs themselves, but they made the children recite daily chants against any religion. They explained "they are forbidden to follow the religion until they are 18." They clearly disbelieved what they preached, a dismal example of what Jean-Paul Sartre called "bad faith." They were living a lie. It seemed to me that such a culture could not long continue.

I have the impression that many Chinese do not trust most Uygurs to be sincere about being part of China, and I have the impression that such mistrust is well-founded.

But perhaps I am drawing too many conclusions from insufficient information?


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 25 July 2008 06:42 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Your return message was just what I needed to make my morning coffee satisfying, Jiajie.

As a Luddite, I have torn emotions at the news that your computer has been replaced. However, I always celebrate at news that the human factor remains a must!

Yes, the Chinese immigrant population of Canada is impressively on the side of China on the Tibet question. In fact, my friends in Mississauga were half-seriously considering returning there if the economy here "tanks". Only half-seriously, however, with one youngster now in university and the other, the really brilliant one, about to be.

I understand your position. As a retiree taken care of by insurance and pension in Canada, I can hold forth with all sorts of subversive thoughts, and be treated simply as an eccentric, even without the protection of Needham's superior intellect and accomplishments under that appellation.

But, as radically different as the polity of China is, ours is depressingly similar in the self image of its "citizens".

I no longer use "citizen" to describe the corrupted voter/taxpayer/consumer of goods, whose view of self is a product of a half-century of lifestyle and supporting propaganda by the admen and conservative intelligentsia who have had nothing to lose in the game.

I had a larger question for you, but must retreat into a second (or third) coffee first.

George


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 25 July 2008 04:25 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I have a date with the Mississauga family for noon, Saturday, and will have some questions and comments after that. Not sure if they could be described as an example of your typical Chinese immigrant to Canada. But they might have fun answering that question when I put it to them.

Until the weekend...


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 25 July 2008 08:44 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:

The attitude of the teachers was remarkable. They were muslim Uygurs themselves, but they made the children recite daily chants against any religion. They explained "they are forbidden to follow the religion until they are 18." They clearly disbelieved what they preached, a dismal example of what Jean-Paul Sartre called "bad faith." They were living a lie. It seemed to me that such a culture could not long continue.

I have the impression that many Chinese do not trust most Uygurs to be sincere about being part of China, and I have the impression that such mistrust is well-founded.

But perhaps I am drawing too many conclusions from insufficient information?


I should qualify the name Chinese because I use it often and because it is essential in the context of a discussion regarding nationalism. When I use it, I mean Han Chinese. The vast majority of people in China identify themselves as Han Chinese and some believe it is a distinct biological race.

I also probably lack the information required to offer a thoughtful conclusion regarding the situation in Xinjiang, but it is likely accurate to say that the average Chinese knows very little about that region of the country. If Chinese have put into question the loyalty of people in Xinjiang, their attitude is probably based on their understanding of the violent clashes between the army and separatists in 1999 in Xinjiang and Gansu. There were also violent demonstrations in Tibet in the 1990s. I think you are correct that many Chinese have a well-founded doubt, but it is difficult to form a personal opinion because I do not have enough knowledge, and the required information is difficult to find.

The life of those teachers is indeed tragic. Did the teachers explain why they taught those chants to the students?


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 25 July 2008 09:22 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally post by George Victor:

But, as radically different as the polity of China is, ours is depressingly similar in the self image of its "citizens".

I no longer use "citizen" to describe the corrupted voter/taxpayer/consumer of goods, whose view of self is a product of a half-century of lifestyle and supporting propaganda by the admen and conservative intelligentsia who have had nothing to lose in the game.


Can you characterize the "half-century of lifestyle"?


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 27 July 2008 02:52 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I see from your postings of April 28 on another thread, Jiajie, that "for the West to maintain its affluence, it needs Asian markets..."

That is what my friend in Mississauga also believes, as you will see, below. We have to be able to compete, as well.

But I believe that our speculations since April 28 may have inserted a mitigating factor into that materialist' assumption about the future?


Yes, Jiajie, to answer the question first, before reporting on that luch with my friends:


The improvements in the life of the majority of North American workers since the Second War - slowed since the early 1970s and now actually beginning to reverse - together with their investment opportunities, created the middle class to which most aspired.

This did not create a higher quality of political performance or expectations of higher performance from the politicians. In fact, since the California tax revolt of the late 70s, the great middle has been appealed to first by the siren song of lower taxes. Maintenance of a lifestyle unknown to any previous generation of working people has been pivotal in defining the nature of our polity, its goals.

Lifestyle corrupts, and it seems to me that a really cushy one corrupts completely (to fiddle with a verbal play on power).

Each generation is burped on the scene to learn (or not to learn) from scratch about our social and political institutions and cultural mores. And we’ve been taught by television and the admen. In the early 1970s, participating in a symposium at Trent University , I put forward the argument about the corrupting influence of advertising.

I shall never forget the advertising execs and flacks there arguing that they were not causing people to buy, only to understand the choices that advertising made clear. It was before the public confessions by the tobacco industry execs. It was a leading New Democrat and academic who brought the debate forward.

Some have been uncertain about the outcome of the “human experiment” since Rachel Carson. Our capacity to do ourselves in with our chosen lifestyle, bombs aside.

But to the “lunch” - a half dozen vegetable dishes and shrimp on rice - a Cantonese feast:

My hosts came to Canada in the middle Trudeau years, and were sure that they had found the promised land of freedoms.

By the middle years of Brian Mulroney, they were packing to return to China when Tienanmen happened. They unpacked their bags.

But now, they would again pack to return to China except for the kids - a son studying math and business, and a daughter who fully expects to enter U. of T. in a year’s time and study medicine. Her grades make that a more than likely outcome. She was the top student in Grade 2, and seems to have continued to excel through her third year in secondary school.

And dad - I cannot speak for mom - no longer believes Canada will be able to compete in a globalized world, or that its media are telling him the truth. In fact he’s sure that stories about China, reported in the media here from any western source, are biased and reports on events, beginning with Tienanmen, are exaggerated.

For me, this means that even a practicing scientist is vulnerable to nationalism’s corrupting, distorting effect and rational becomes rationalization to meet the desired object (Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia).

What is more, he cannot understand the laid-back attitude of Canadians toward the disappearance of their manufacturing base. Not just the “hollowing out” concerns about the transfer of control to other countries, but the actual loss of industry and its skills.

He is convinced that Canadian educational facilities are being degraded, comparing their product to those overseas.

And while he marveled at Canada’s capacity to absorb the greatest ethnic variety and number (relatively) of newcomers, the revelation that “that’s what Canada does” (if with somewhat narrower lenses in the past), led only to a cautionary note. Canada should beware because in the event of conflict with any of those countries of origin there would be a resident fifth column ready to do damage. And I thought that that, too, represents the position of a great many Chinese on the eve of the Olympics and with Tibet in the wings.

On Tibet and the Falun Gong…both people showing a tendency to “unnatural” practices in their customs, social structure, and treatment of people within their fold that rational people should suppress.

On the media…as much as I pointed out that from time to time the media will get it right, and I told him of Graeme Smith’s work for the Globe and Mail in Afghanistan, he would not concede, and does not try to find “the truth” out there in the aether. And since I was there on a fact-finding mission as well as to enjoy the company of friends, we will meet again.

But to me the severity of the grip of the materialist lifestyle - the reminder of the hold of Homo economicus - was again a huge downer.

But I believe the children are more complex and may break the mould. And the mother of the children, whose every action spells empathy for the other, wants to be able to again read Marx on Capital , the source of the ideas delivered by her father, the political officer in the peoples’ army. I believe that she represents exactly the human being that Marx envisioned.

She cannot yet read in the language of her adopted country, and wondered if she might find at least the introductory chapter, the one in which Marx described the lifestyle of people in the society he hoped might result from his work… published in the language of her birth. I believe she is her father’s daughter.

I said that I would inquire, but could only leave them with a copy of Winchester’s The Man Who Loved China.


v

[ 27 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 July 2008 06:11 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
The life of those teachers is indeed tragic. Did the teachers explain why they taught those chants to the students?

They said it was required. They were raising these orphans, and the policy of the orphanage was to raise them as good communist citizens of China, not as Muslims. It was part of their opening exercises each morning, along with the other recitals that one might expect.

This might have made more sense in a different context, but here they were living in an all-Muslim, all-Uygur community, and their Muslim teachers were ordered to teach them to fight against all superstition and religion. Or perhaps to pretend to fight, since the real message was "until you're 18."


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 27 July 2008 06:32 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
And dad - I cannot speak for mom - no longer believes Canada will be able to compete in a globalized world, or that its media are telling him the truth. In fact he’s sure that stories about China, reported in the media here from any western source, are biased and reports on events, beginning with Tienanmen, are exaggerated.

Even with only 22 days in China as my basis, I have no doubt your friend is correct.

I see two main reasons for this. First, simple ignorance of recent developments: too often the assignment editor assign a story based on his preconceptions, and tells his writer what spin -- sorry, perspective -- he expects. Second, what I might call western-centrism: we assume we are far more important to the Chinese than they actually consider us to be, and we assume they are doing things for reasons that relate to us, when in fact China spends 98% of its time thinking about China and doing things for their own reasons. When we judge them by our standards, we are not only biased but we miss the real story.

quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
What is more, he cannot understand the laid-back attitude of Canadians toward the disappearance of their manufacturing base. Not just the “hollowing out” concerns about the transfer of control to other countries, but the actual loss of industry and its skills.

I understand the American laid-back attitude to their decline: overconfidence. The Canadian attitude I find as puzzling as your friend does. I plan to make sure my granddaughter learns Mandarin. She'll need it.
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Canada should beware because in the event of conflict with any of those countries of origin there would be a resident fifth column ready to do damage. And I thought that that, too, represents the position of a great many Chinese on the eve of the Olympics and with Tibet in the wings.

I don't see any sign that a large enough number of non-Chinese are in China, large enough to be a danger they worry about. I imagine your friend might be saying "if China had such a vast number of non-Chinese residents, we would beware." But they didn't seem to be worried about a few Tibetans or a few foreigners. On the contrary, outside Shanghai and Beijing we were quite rare and they were extremely friendly.
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
On Tibet and the Falun Gong both people showing a tendency to “unnatural” practices in their customs, social structure, and treatment of people within their fold that rational people should suppress.

The only Falun Gong members I met on my trip were a couple of pitiable souls talking to themselves outside the Chinese Consulate in Toronto. Not to be compared with Tibetan Buddhists.

[ 27 July 2008: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 28 July 2008 01:06 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Quote from Wilf Day:


I don't see any sign that a large enough number of non-Chinese are in China, large enough to be a danger they worry about. I imagine your friend might be saying "if China had such a vast number of non-Chinese residents, we would beware." But they didn't seem to be worried about a few Tibetans or a few foreigners. On the contrary, outside Shanghai and Beijing we were quite rare and they were extremely friendly.


If you also believe that the western media largely distort (and lie a bit?) you will not believe the story that a half-million people have been mobilized in Beijing down to the neighbourhood watch level. There is a certain circularity there, a "can't lose" proposition if "stories" can be put down to media bias and distortion, but we'll perhaps learn more in ensuing weeks.


posted 27 July 2008 02:52 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see from your postings of April 28 on another thread, Jiajie, that "for the West to maintain its affluence, it needs Asian markets..."
That is what my friend in Mississauga also believes, as you will see, below. We have to be able to compete, as well.

But I believe that our speculations since April 28 may have inserted a mitigating factor into that materialist' assumption about the future


I had thought, Wilf, that some concessions about the perhaps problematic nature of our reaching a future point in some ongoing "competitive" future due to climate change and other environmental factors might have altered Jiajie assumptions there since the April postings.

I see that it has not caused much doubt in your own mind. Life in the future is an extension of 2008. And I guess I do not recall you ruminating on climate change - you'll correct me if I'm wrong.

But that is what I'm on about in the third paragraph, above.

I did not challenge my Mississauga friend on that point. One does not want to be a complete Jeremiad at your host's table. But out here, without our granddaughters present?

[ 28 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 28 July 2008 05:10 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
If you also believe that the western media largely distort (and lie a bit?) you will not believe the story that a half-million people have been mobilized in Beijing down to the neighbourhood watch level.

Sure I believe it. Clearly they are on the watch for any saboteurs, terrorists, pickpockets, and other hooligans and panhandlers attracted the world over to major sports events like the World Cup and the Olympics. And they will also be on the watch for any western tourist who gets lost and/or drunk and needs help, which would be lovely -- street signage in Beijing, although bilingual, is sparse, and finding a toilet is not always easy either. Since I saw few police officers in Beijing, neighbourhood watch volunteers are very appropriate. It all fits in nicely with the way they have spruced up the hutongs. They are making Beijing clean, safe and presentable for the Olympics. If we had the Olympics in Toronto, don't you think we would suddenly find shelter for all the homeless?

By shutting down all construction before and during the Olympics to cut pollution, they are also sending a vast number of migrant workers home, a handy by-product of the shutdown. Although I felt the presence of millions of migrant workers was most obvious in Shanghai, no doubt they contributed to over-crowding in Beijing as well.

As for climate change and other environmental factors, clearly the Chinese will tackle pollution as soon as they can -- but their first priority is the huge and worrying discrepancy between the urban rich and the rural poor. One sees many new factories in greenfield sites. As rural areas catch up, they will become more polluted. That is a major issue they are working on, but not by stopping development.

As to climate change, I am not qualified to assess Chinese attitudes to it, but I would speculate that they are like all developing countries, not keen on being told to stop catching up to the west while the west pretends to be addressing the issue. I mentioned earlier that Shanghai's Pudong is built on sand, and is sinking anyway. It is wonderfully impressive, but those buildings are not built to last a thousand years like classical Chinese buildings, which is just as well since Pudong will be under water long before that, climate change or no climate change. Their second generation of new development will have to be built on higher ground. If the icecaps melt, China will cope better than New York.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 28 July 2008 08:19 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I hope that Jiajie will tell me whether his concerns regarding our timeline - how much we have left to ward off a really miserable future - i.e. as the Gobi marches on them out of the west, the rivers coming off the glaciers above the Tibetan plateau lose their summer flow, wheatlands and rice paddies go barren, etc., etc....whether he sees any of that as being still "realistically" controllable.

We "rational" beings have long understood "point of no return" as a rather dangerous concept to play with.

From your end, Wilf, rather than your take on China,or suggestions for my self-analysis,i.e. put Toronto in the place of Beijing, etc., I would really appreciate hearing your thoughts on the environmental question. Are you, too, just being "realistic"?

And is it a sin to tell another natiion that, you know, we really, really, respect your need for independence to grow the life chances of the rural population, but, to stop just short of obsequiousness, we really, really don't want to see the grandkids suffer?

Surely there's a middle way? (That used to be a very acceptable position in Chinese philosophical circles).

Although I hope that bit about melting icecaps and "China" being better off than New York , and a second generation of construction allowing for adjustment to climate change is not your serious self.

[ 28 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 28 July 2008 08:36 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
as the Gobi marches on them out of the west, the rivers coming off the glaciers above the Tibetan plateau lose their summer flow, wheatlands and rice paddies go barren, etc., etc....whether he sees any of that as being still "realistically" controllable.

Controllable by treaty? Or only by a world government, which it may take such drastic events to create?

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 28 July 2008 08:39 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
George:

My comment of April 28 was aimed at those who believe China is a commercial threat and that the West can do without it. More important, as you pointed out, my comment is based on the assumption that Canadians (and Westerners generally) define affluence as materiel wealth and value it above all else. But some days I believe that countries like Canada can do without China's manufacturing capacity and exchange rate. After all, Canada's material affluence after the Second World War originated from the rise of the manufacturing sector in which many Canadians were factory workers who could afford a house and a car on a single income. Moreover, there was a time when Canadian businesses did not rely on Chinese factories to assemble their products at affordable prices -- that time only ended very recently.

The popular definition of affluence among well-to-do Canadians and Chinese must change. The definition must include the quality of the natural environment, literacy and numeracy, spirituality, the dignity of labour, aesthetics....

Regarding the meeting with your friend: His willingness to emigrate from one country to another over what he believes to be his country's future lack of global competitiveness reveals his good station in society. Our perceptions and our reasons for taking such life-altering decisions are relative to our position in a society so that, for example, one person's reason for emigrating is for another person an abstract and inconsequential reason. If your friend returned to China, I doubt he would find much difference in his material well-being. A Canadian from the middle- or upper-class can own a business in China, have access to mobile phones, flat screen televisions, mutual funds, credit, cars, nice apartments, and vacations. But if a Canadian wants to participate in politics and defeat certain ideas to change society for the better, China is the wrong place. A Chinese miner, on the other hand, would take the opportunity to work in Canada and throw aside as privileged speculation warnings that Canada's global competitiveness may decline or that its media is bias.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 28 July 2008 08:55 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
I hope that Jiajie will tell me whether his concerns regarding our timeline - how much we have left to ward off a really miserable future - i.e. as the Gobi marches on them out of the west, the rivers coming off the glaciers above the Tibetan plateau lose their summer flow, wheatlands and rice paddies go barren, etc., etc....whether he sees any of that as being still "realistically" controllable.

George: I am not an engineer or scientist, so I cannot offer original and practical thoughts on this subject. I can only repeat the projections of scientists that I have read. However, I am interested in what the natural environment can teach philosophy and how that experience can change human attitudes.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 01:19 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
posted 28 July 2008 08:36 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by George Victor:
as the Gobi marches on them out of the west, the rivers coming off the glaciers above the Tibetan plateau lose their summer flow, wheatlands and rice paddies go barren, etc., etc....whether he sees any of that as being still "realistically" controllable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wilf (quote):

Controllable by treaty? Or only by a world government, which it may take such drastic events to create?


Oh, I believe a "progressive" (to use the idiom of this venu) must demand a treaty that would bring all the U.N. members together as signatories to an agreement that forces us all to act as Homo sapiens, responsible for the terrible destruction of our biosphere, and not some corrupted, nationalist representation of "human beings" with all our "human failings" that will be forgiven by the gods, our children and grandkids, etc..You know, the world's wusses.


We have access to all the information needed to now declare the absolute need for such an agency and event. We must not continue to grovel before power and ignorance.

Others may plead ignorance, but we cannot - at least I hope that your New York/China comparison "apre le deluge" did not represent your true thoughts on possible future outcomes...

As to climate change, I am not qualified to assess Chinese attitudes to it, but ... climate change or no climate change. Their second generation of new development will have to be built on higher ground. If the icecaps melt, China will cope better than New York.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 01:35 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Quoting Jiajie:
The popular definition of affluence among well-to-do Canadians and Chinese must change. The definition must include the quality of the natural environment, literacy and numeracy, spirituality, the dignity of labour, aesthetics.... (end quote)

I desperately needed to hear that. Now all we have to do is overcome the reactionary forces that stand in the way, eh?

And for that reason, I cannot accept this reasoning:

George: I am not an engineer or scientist, so I cannot offer original and practical thoughts on this subject. I can only repeat the projections of scientists that I have read. However, I am interested in what the natural environment can teach philosophy and how that experience can change human attitudes.
(end quote)

The scientists that I have read, Jiajie, Tim Flannery and James Lovelock, plus those on the IPCC, convey a feeling of urgency that does not come from some sort of naturalistic "communing with nature".

You earlier suggested that the native peoples might have something to contribute regarding our attitude. But I read yesterday that, for instance, a couple of native-controlled logging operations at Clayoquot Sound, B.C. are determined to cut a few thousand metres of wood in old growth forest, fought for by environmentalists since the early 90s.

I had been through there in 1969, and took my family there in '94. Trees going to the sky, some there since an Arab culture saved the last vestiges of Greek and Roman culture from the Christians.

No, we're going to have to depend on science. And on honest reportage of events.

You and Wilf (and my Mississauga friend) tar all news outlets with the same brush.

But I've just now finished congratulating a friend of my daughter's from secondary school days for his continued success in bringing "another take" on the Afghanistan situation. A young guy who impressed the hell out of everyone for his honesty, brilliance and nerve...preferred the "older" girls.

He has already won the Amnesty International media award for his uncovering the ill-treatment of detainees handed over to the gentle mercies of Afghan police by Canadian forces there.(Dec. 07)His work forced the Canadian government to end the practice.

Beginning March 22 the Globe and Mail carried his interviews with the Taliban, relating why they fought. Which turned out to be for all the natural reasons... relatives killed by bombs, reduced to starvation by destruction of poppy crops, etc. You did not read it in the New York Times...

He was co-winner of Canada's most prestigious Michner Award for the same action.(April this year).

And now from China comes news of the "silencing" of Hu Jia, Yang Chunlin and Ye Guozhu for their human rights activity.Amnesty International has comdemned the suppression of rights activists and journalists "and the use of arbitrary imprisonment."

How we would ever bring off that project (above) for the survival of the species without some awareness on the part of China's people (and the people of Canada who also trust no media)I've no idea, Jiajie.

So I guess I would make that another, early project. Win freedom for ALL to tell it like it is. It might get a bit corrupted in some IT venues, as you witness here, from time to time. But I can't go along with the appeal for infinite patience while things work themselves out.

We've got to reconstruct an industrial base in Canada that is environmentally sustainable. And we have to expect the same from all, sooner rather than later.


[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 29 July 2008 04:21 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
We've got to reconstruct an industrial base in Canada that is environmentally sustainable. And we have to expect the same from all, sooner rather than later.

"If wishes were horses, beggars would ride."

I'm not convinced "expectations" will work any better than "wishes." I hope I'm wrong. After all, the west eventually abolished slavery even before the slaves had a vote on the matter. Was that just by application of Christian ethics, philosophy and expectations? Or was it because the industrial revolution made it possible to run profitable enterprises without slaves?


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 04:32 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
"If wishes were horses, beggars would ride."
I'm not convinced "expectations" will work any better than "wishes." I hope I'm wrong. After all, the west eventually abolished slavery even before the slaves had a vote on the matter. Was that just by application of Christian ethics, philosophy and expectations? Or was it because the industrial revolution made it possible to run profitable enterprises without slaves?
(end of Wilf's quote)


The expectations would, of course, have to be supported by something more than aphorisms.

But, again, Wilf. I have asked for your take on the science of climate change, folks you have read, anything to indicate that you see it in serious light. You have not replied to the question.

i.e."
From your end, Wilf, rather than your take on China,or suggestions for my self-analysis,i.e. put Toronto in the place of Beijing, etc., I would really appreciate hearing your thoughts on the environmental question. Are you, too, just being "realistic"?
(end of quote)


Howcum?

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 29 July 2008 04:56 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
I have asked for your take on the science of climate change.

The science of climate change is in no doubt at all.

What is in real doubt is the willingness of any single country's government to act ethically. Has any signatory to Kyoto actually cut their carbon emissions? I'm sure the Chinese are quietly pondering this question.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 05:20 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Realism has won the day.

So, since we do not try to pressure anyone to do anything "over there" , how about here in old Canady?

Like, what do you think of the idea of approaching Cambridge city council to request - fiollowing the lead of Toronto's planning agencies - abolishment of the Ontario Municipal Board because of its dead hand on any attempt to speed planning - for environmental reasons. No use? It's like they say, you can't fight city hall?

Think Ill try anyway. Just for fun, and at least raise some sign of life among the taxpaying/consuming citizenry.

You never know until you try.
Or, Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Had a soc. prof who had fun pointed to the contradictions like: Absence makes the heart grow fonder/ Out of sight, out of mind.

Anything for a laugh.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 29 July 2008 07:12 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Realism has won the day.

So, since we do not try to pressure anyone to do anything "over there" . . .



There was lots of "pressure" on China to sign on to Kyoto. Canada's ability to pressure China to do anything is slim to nil. Is that bad? Should 30 million pressure 1,300 million? Even if they should, they can't. Let alone you and me.

An interesting letter in the Globe this morning about Barack Obama's hubris in addressing a Berlin crowd as though he was already president. The letter made a wider point: if he becomes president, and his excessive pride promises so much to Americans when so little may be available, will such pride cause not only his own downfall but America's?

Recognizing limits to power is not only "realism" but much healthier than thinking someone appointed us God, or gave us power to know better than the Chinese what China should do.

Of course, as a democrat, I can imagine a democratic world government knowing better than any one nation. That would include a world cabinet of 20 containing one American, four Chinese, and sadly no Canadian.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 29 July 2008 07:47 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
The scientists that I have read, Jiajie, Tim Flannery and James Lovelock, plus those on the IPCC, convey a feeling of urgency that does not come from some sort of naturalistic "communing with nature".

You earlier suggested that the native peoples might have something to contribute regarding our attitude. But I read yesterday that, for instance, a couple of native-controlled logging operations at Clayoquot Sound, B.C. are determined to cut a few thousand metres of wood in old growth forest, fought for by environmentalists since the early 90s


My sense of urgency does come from the conclusions of scientific research; not from commuting with nature. Though I understand and accept the general conclusions of scientists, my position is based on an appeal to authorities and their consensus because I am not a scientist who can defend their research from those who deny the human factor in climate change and minimize environmental degradation. So when you ask me how much time we have until climate change in Asia begins to affect peoples, I can offer only academic articles which are not the result of my work.

I suppose not all First Nations subscribe to their ancestors' religions. But their traditional religions provided them with a conception of nature that helped to sustain their natural environment prior to the arrival of commercialization and Europeans. For example, generally the First Nations believed that the natural environment was imbued with spirits worthy of their respect and they acknowledged that humans required the natural environment to survive thus respected and lived by its patterns. Besides the conclusions of science, the history of First Nations is a good starting point for a change in attitude because it teaches that their attitude worked.

quote:
You and Wilf (and my Mississauga friend) tar all news outlets with the same brush.

I have tarred only Lou Dobbs, CNN, FOX News and single articles or features about China. In fact, I find generally Western media to be more trustworthy than the state-controlled media of China. All journalists have biases, but in Western media I find debate or opposing viewpoints.

quote:
So I guess I would make that another, early project. Win freedom for ALL to tell it like it is. It might get a bit corrupted in some IT venues, as you witness here, from time to time. But I can't go along with the appeal for infinite patience while things work themselves out.

Perhaps this is an unfair question. How do you think Chinese can win their freedom to tell it like it is?

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: Liang Jiajie ]


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 09:31 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
"Pride goeth before the fall", with Barack, Wilf?


Your position reminds me of "Saruman the White" in his capitulation (in that way only, of course, 'cause you impress the hell out of me otherwise. Always did).

I add (fresh from Kabul), the position of one less than half our age, that has the moxy and nerve I could only aspire to...


Hi George,

Lovely to hear from you! How's Melanie these days? And the rest of
that gang? I'm afraid I've lost touch ...

Rory is a wonderful guy. I've been drinking with him in Kabul several
times. And for a former British spy he's surprisingly
non-interventionist. We disagree about some things, but that's
alright. You should see the fortress he's refurbishing in Kabul - it's
beautiful.

Anyway, hope you're well.

All the best,
Graeme

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:51 AM,
> ----- Original Message -----

> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:06 AM
> Subject: From the Waterloo Region fraternity

> Hello Graeme
>
> You were one of the gang that went to Montreal for an Eastwood grads' outing
> - which I always thought took a lot of chutzpah on your part as the junior
> on the expedition.
>
> But then, those "girls" simply put your present exploits down to "well,
> that's Graeme". Having met you, that sort of resonated.
>
> Now that you are in Kabul, can you "do something" on Rory Stewart - or if
> he's not in town, on his project? A few of us think he understands, maybe
> has some answer(s).
>
> I hold your work up as the reason one has to read the Globe to have any idea
> of what in hell is happening there!
>
> Regards from Melanie's dad.


This was the first time that I made contact, because your position, Wilf, has left me wondering at my own "nerve" in daring to imagine a way out of Homo sapiens' mess. And then I read another piece from him in the Globe.


A few more like Graeme (and Rory, you hafta read him) in positions of authority "out there" and here, and "the world's our oyster". Anyway, I think so Wilf.

Chou en-lai always seemed what China needed, not that cult figure Mou. Too full of himself. Left a bad example.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 09:54 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Perhaps this is an unfair question. How do you think Chinese can win their freedom to tell it like it is?

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: Liang Jiajie ]

"All's fair in love and war."
Now Wilf's got me started and I can't stop.

That is definitely the place to start, Jiajie, and I have to regroup to bring forward all the hubris at my command to even think about that one.
George


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 29 July 2008 10:01 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
Chou en-lai always seemed what China needed, not that cult figure Mou. Too full of himself. Left a bad example.

Except that, like Churchill, he was a great war leader, apparently what China needed against the Japanese, more so than Chiang Kai-Shek was. I expect he did a few things (like Britain bombing Dresden) that we might not be proud of today. But when Deng Xiao Ping said Mao was 70% correct (and Zhou EnLai would have said the same thing) he was speaking of the wartime and post-war leader.
quote:
Originally posted by George Victor:
I don't remember Winifred being that accepting of fate.

Your position reminds me of "Saruman the White" in his capitulation (in that way only, of course, 'cause you impress the hell out of me otherwise. Always did).



You have the advantage of me, and your PMs are disabled. Just click on the second button in the top line of this post.

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 29 July 2008 10:04 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:

All journalists have biases, but in Western media I find debate or opposing viewpoints.


But they are barely distinct. It's as if you had people from different schools of marxism debating, except that what you have in the US is people from different schools of liberalism (in the philosophical sense) debating.

It's the kind of thing you do with children all the time: "do you want to take your nap now or do you want to play for 5 more minutes?" You give them a very small choice to disguise the fact that they don't get to decide the big questions. This is a good strategy in the case of children, who aren't ready yet to make those kinds of choices, but when it's done to adults, I don't know ....

ETA: I think the biases of journalists are less important than the interests of the media corporations that employ them.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 05:05 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Yep, they have to make a buck to meet payroll and investor expectations and that's where the trouble starts, Rosal.

In Canada, the Globe and Mail is the only one not experiencing declining readership (and hence,rates). And frankly, I don't know how anyone can understand Canadian politics and business without the Globe. But, of course, they mention the NDP as little as possible. Makes the corporate advertiser feel better.

But what do you know of France's support of the press (did in the past anyway) to maintain that balanced opinion in the republic. I'm desperately trying to answer Jiajie's question of how one would go about opning up opinion and reportage within China.

China has a state press now. But with support at arm's length, it could be different? Sort of a crown corporation in Canada's experience?


Here's a bit from 1998:


European Journal of Communication, Vol. 13, No. 3, 291-313 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0267323198013003001
© 1998 SAGE Publications

State Support for the Daily Press in Europe: A Critical Appraisal
Austria, France, Norway and Sweden Compared
Paul Murschetz
This article compares the subsidy schemes of the daily press in Austria, France, Norway and Sweden. In those countries, financial subsidy schemes to daily newspapers seek to balance the objective of promoting economic competitiveness in the national media grid with the wider objective of securing plurality of titles and diversity of views. This article locates financial subsidies within a broader framework of press regulation, looks into the instruments of public press intervention in the four countries and critically examines the results to safeguard economic competition and press diversity. In contrast to the Anglo-Saxon minimalist approach to press regulation which rejects the interventionist approach to providing cash injections to newspapers in need, the continental-style authorities in Austria, France, Norway and Sweden adhere to a public policy of granting subsidies to their press, according to which the democratic and political function — namely to guarantee that citizens have access to information, are accurately informed and actively take part in the political process — is promoted. However, public austerity programmes, increased commercial competition, shifting audience tastes of newspaper readers and the inherent weaknesses of the current instruments have forced all four countries to rethink their subsidy schemes. This article argues that government policies that aim at engendering economic opportunity and prosperity of daily newspapers, editorial pluralism and diversity of opinion need to respond adequately and effectively to these pressures of changing market conditions, which not only endanger the normal functioning of the press market but also a public service culture of newspapers.


Key Words: politics of subsidy • press diversity • press economics • press regulation • press subsidy


This article has been cited by other articles:




S. A. Gunaratne
Public Diplomacy, Global Communication and World Order: An Analysis Based on Theory of Living Systems
Current Sociology, September 1, 2005; 53(5): 749 - 772.
[Abstract] [PDF]

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 29 July 2008 05:14 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Mou played God, Wilf, and in that way the peasantry needed a cult figure to fight effectively. When he began to believe his image, things went downhill.

Zhou did all the work, and was quite intelligent enough to wage war. But he didn't represent God, (or smoke cigars with a victory sign from the free hand). To me, he always represented a sane presence on the international stage.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 29 July 2008 07:37 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by RosaL:

But they are barely distinct. It's as if you had people from different schools of marxism debating, except that what you have in the US is people from different schools of liberalism (in the philosophical sense) debating.

It's the kind of thing you do with children all the time: "do you want to take your nap now or do you want to play for 5 more minutes?" You give them a very small choice to disguise the fact that they don't get to decide the big questions. This is a good strategy in the case of children, who aren't ready yet to make those kinds of choices, but when it's done to adults, I don't know ....

ETA: I think the biases of journalists are less important than the interests of the media corporations that employ them.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]


That is the case with mainstream media, but I have found alternative media websites produced by Americans. (I do not remember the addresses.) And in France and Italy, I have found a variety of newspapers which offer different viewpoints from socialist to conservative.

In my previous post, I was referring to the coverage of China in the media. The coverage of China on the CBC and Radio-Canada is very different than that of Fox News and CNN. The latter provide news through the framework of China as a potential military and commercial threat insofar as it affects the position of the United States in the world and do not go beyond those two themes. However, though the former have covered the modernization of the military and of the economy, both networks have produced documentaries that examine other facets of Chinese society that revealed the complexity and diversity of China.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 30 July 2008 06:47 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I've just finished listening to a recorded CBC "Ideas" program from the University of Toronto in which two Canadian writers, now living in New York, debate the idea of "Canada, nation or notion".

The debate was put together by our now right-wing national news magazine, Maclean's, and one of the speakers, Malcolm Gladwell (Blink, Tipping Point, etc.) in explaining the (up to now) success of Canada on the international stage, put it down to our "unencumbered" status. And he used the success of Chinese business people everywhere in their adoptive countries, as an example - because they are on the "outside" of the adopted culture, they are "unencumbered".

Malcolm came out of that little town of Elmira, near here, where they produced agent orange and destroyed the aquafer while producing a poison aimed at stopping the spread of communism into former French Indo-China only a few short years ago.

We didn't know what was going on over in that sleepy little town on the edge of Mennonite country, until too late.

And your own assessment of the position of "news" out of the right-wing U.S. media, an exercise in nationalist rhetoric, compared to the reflective, broadly evaluative assessment of Canadian CBC programs, can be seen as partly due to our "unencumbered" position in the world.

A friend just e-omailed me this, as a case of an encumbered U.S.:

Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:06 PM
Subject: A new kind of Dollar Diplomacy


"It turns out the biggest supporter of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
bailouts has been the Chinese government. The Chinese own about half a
trillion dollars in Fannie and Freddie securities and they've put the
warning out to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson they expect to be repaid in
full. The fear among Mr. Paulson and other Treasury officials is that if
Fannie and Freddie debt isn't repaid at 100% par, the Chinese may start
dumping their hundreds of billions of dollars of Treasury securities,
possibly causing a run on U.S. government debt and sharply raising Uncle
Sam's borrowing costs."

- Political Diary
Wall Street Journal
July 29 2008

I'm not sure that China would endanger a couple of $trillion in securities. That might be "cutting off the nose to spite the face" (as Wilf might put it), but regardless, it displays the different "nationalisms" of Canada and the U.S.

I offer this start as a backdoor approach to further discussiion of the need for an informed Chinese population if ANYTHING progressive is to come out of its phenomenal material progress.

Challenged (above) to explain how the individual can turn around the juggernaut in that regard (the realist's position), I offer up the thought that "anything" is superior to remaining supine before the ideas of that central CCP official, who, not many weeks back, exclaimed (in more or less these words), that to be rich is glorious.

No, in the spirit of Malcolm and Graeme, I'd say we must shout from the rooftops that the Chinese people deserve to know more. And that the increasing censorship of the Olympic Games ("China hobbling internet at Games media centre", AP, July 30, Waterloo Region Record) is a criminal act carried out against its own people.

There, I had to say that.

There does not seem to be a rush out there to discover whether or not France, Austria, Sweden and Norway are, a decade later, still providing state assistance to journals in the name of electoral enlightenment.

Anything is superior to the U.S. model, of course, as explained by Al Gore in The Assault on Reason, and by Susan Jacoby in her The Age of American Unreason.

But Canada is slipping toward the same condition. In fact, I'm taking a copy of the late Val Ross's posthumously published biography on the late Robertson Davies, author and one-time editor of his father's newspaper, The Peterborough Examiner.

When Davies' daddy died, he sold out the paper and the city to a Lord Thomson of Fleet, whose son later sold out the whole shooting match to m' Lord Black of Crossharbour (and the Florida penal system). Ken Thomson partially redeemed himself and his old man for the sellout of several hundred Canadian communities by building the Globe and Mail to an information source capable of telling us about the world as it is.

And he fended off the attempt by the neocons to replace it with their house organ, The National Post. We would look and act much more like the Americans if that had not been done.

We certainly need state support of our other newspapers. The U.S. does also as advertising and readership declines (see Jacoby).

Perhaps those ubiquitous "authorities" in China might see their way clear to an arms-length support of an "almost free" news distribution system - no ads, just four pages of news, local, national and international, every morning.

I don't think I'm painting a utopian picture. I think it's the barest minimum step forward to our collective survival as a species. To hell with the nation-state.

The morning will find me heading north with a few ounces of Forty Creek in the saddlebags, bound to bunk in with a couple of fellow retreads. We'll dissect the new biography on Davies, his washroom motto "ne illegitimus carborundum" one to which we have always subscribed, but we had always placed Davies in the position of the bastard.

[ 30 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 30 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 31 July 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 31 July 2008 08:14 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I found a video of Malcolm Gladwell presenting his thesis, but the presentation was only 7 minutes long, so I feel that my response to his thesis may be unfair because more time could have given him the opportunity to present more evidence that could have had a different impression on me.

His example of successful overseas Chinese is not a good one. His explanation of why Chinese have been particularly successful in their adopted countries does not consider Chinatowns, created exactly because of a hostile environment and because of guanxi, which created local, private connections rather than regional connections. Within the boundaries of a Chinatown, family members lived closely together among other speakers of their dialects, and each member helped to operate the business rather than encumber themselves. Also, there was a hierarchy imposed on the immediate and extended family based on the family's lineage, so this allowed for disciplinary action or, as Gladwell says, being "mean." If his definition of hostile environment includes racism, then Chinatowns were a necessity to start businesses which were supported by mostly Chinese customers. The Chinese who emigrated to the United States and Canada were encumbered, but not by family members and the deep roots they set. So the answer to why overseas Chinese have been successful is found in China rather than in the adopted countries of overseas Chinese.

Even if the the example was true, could Canada be analogous to the successful overseas Chinese, unencumbered because he is an outsider? I do not know what he means by an actual unencumbered, successful Canada, so I will continue with the analogy. It would be difficult for Canada, a developed country, to be an outsider in a world in which the wealth of a developed country is largely dependent on international trade and cooperation, a healthy global economy and, in the case of the power states, imperialism. International trade and the diplomatic relationship between countries function mutually so that one can encumber or support the other. Consider the close relationship between the United States and Canada. Perhaps Canada is encumbered by the relationship because its wealth is so dependent on the health of the American economy as well as that of the international economy. That said, I doubt Canada can be "mean" to the United States or another country. The international financial markets would react negatively if Canada threatened to stop supplying oil to the world, making Canada a bully and damaging diplomatic relationships.

Malcolm's analogy is not helpful in understanding Canada's position in the world.

[ 31 July 2008: Message edited by: Liang Jiajie ]


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 03 August 2008 04:10 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I agree. Gladwell's presentation does nothing to explain Canada's position in the world. And I do not think that you are being unfair in commenting on a seven-minute slice. It does not get better over time.

I feel more comfortable with your own explanation:

His example of successful overseas Chinese is not a good one. His explanation of why Chinese have been particularly successful in their adopted countries does not consider Chinatowns, created exactly because of a hostile environment and because of guanxi, which created local, private connections rather than regional connections. Within the boundaries of a Chinatown, family members lived closely together among other speakers of their dialects, and each member helped to operate the business rather than encumber themselves. Also, there was a hierarchy imposed on the immediate and extended family based on the family's lineage, so this allowed for disciplinary action or, as Gladwell says, being "mean." If his definition of hostile environment includes racism, then Chinatowns were a necessity to start businesses which were supported by mostly Chinese customers. The Chinese who emigrated to the United States and Canada were encumbered, but not by family members and the deep roots they set. So the answer to why overseas Chinese have been successful is found in China rather than in the adopted countries of overseas Chinese.

It did not come to me immediately because out of my own experience, the individual did not need a "Chinatown". There were no such enclaves in small-town Canada.

Among my teenage hunting and fishing buddies in central Ontario, Kwong , whose parents hailed from Canton and who had established a restaurant in the small town of Lakefield, had only his family to support him.

I remember him having to surreptitiously visit the girl he was to marry - they celebrated their 50th anniversary a couple of months ago - because of some ancient custom that would have denied marriage across the two families. I drove the "getaway" car.

I'm afraid I have not been able to suggest the answer to your main question a couple of postings back. What DOES China do to break through official (and unofficial) resistance to media openness?

I believe that in the furor over the Olympics' revelations of broken promises of internet freedom etc. we are perhaps going to see just the slightest advance in that direction. But whether that can be parlayed into an expanding situation out of growing need to know the opinion of others within Chinese society (let alone the world's thoughts) is to be revealed.

I still think that the European idea of state support for an absolutely necessary source of opinion could be a point of entry.

But I just wish that I could find a group of people who did not equate admission of an imperfect system of public communications with a slippery slope that can only end with one group or the other kowtowing to the "winner".

I'm going to post something on Susan Jacoby's The Age of American Unreason to try to find my own footing again in a world apparently going paranoid.

[ 03 August 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 04 August 2008 06:06 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
I note, with regret, the violence and death in a northwest province of China.

And on the west coast of Canada, the PM "officially" apologizes to a gathering of Sikh-Canadians for Canada's turning back a shipload of their forbears from India on the eve of the First World War.

After polite applause, the crowd indicated after his leaving that they were not moved by an obsequious gesture from a master politician out gathering the ethnics.

One wonders, sometimes, how long the flanks of our world-famous multicultural experiment will hold.

Jacoby would describe it as a sign of more "unreason", flowing from the absence of information. Looking at the isolated, narrowly focused lives of most immigrant communities in the first generation, in the absence of informed opinion and discussion, causality boils down to simple ignorance.

And, again, sometimes religion demands a limited world view.Where it is an exacerbating factor, it's a potent despoiler of community, indeed. But you'll note, here, the difficulty in distinguishing the good from the bad, where the subject is the military or a faith. I can barely imagine the courage it would take to try to modify the muslim faith in so many situations today - including that of the Uighurs.

[ 04 August 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 05 August 2008 05:38 AM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
The "Books" section of the Aug. 2 Globe and Mail presents three works of recent Chinese literature aimed at the swelling interest in culture as well as Olympic sports in the West.

There's the Nobel Prize winner, Gao Xinjiang's Soul Mountain (first published in Taiwan in 1989 (English in 1999);

Ma Jian's Red Dust: A Path Through China (2001), and Xinran's The Good Women of China (2002).

The last work is the only one to appear in China, apparently. I'll see if any are contained in the public library system here.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 05 August 2008 09:29 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Chinese who have access to the Internet can view the webpages of some Western newspapers and news networks; they certainly have access to the CBC website. They can learn about significant events in China as they are reported outside of the country such as the controversial policies that have emerged out of the preparations for the Olympics. However, generally the persons who can access foreign viewpoints are often not affected by the reported abuses and will too often claim that the journalists are biased. Such reactions are rooted in a person's socialization which includes strong nationalism and exceptionalism, and placing the group before the individual. Even if it was a Chinese journalist reporting such events, he or she would be placed under suspicion by more than a few readers. All of this means that a free press, as essential to the birth and maintenance of democracy and pluralism, is useless if the privileged groups of a society are not willing to question or abandon their prejudices. So the obstacle toward a free press is not to convince only the government, but to convince privileged Chinese to at least be critical of their society and country.

How can outsiders help to convince privileged Chinese readers? First, societies with free presses should lead by example. Enough societies with free presses exist to accomplish that. For example, all the levels of government in China want to eliminate corruption and part of the solution is independent journalists who can expose corrupt bureaucrats and politicians, something that I have seen in the Canadian media. Second, foreign media should continue to critically assess their societies fairly. Third, foreign media must report fairly on events in China and demonstrate its complexity and normalcy. Hopefully the Chinese readers I described above will be engaged.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 05 August 2008 09:50 AM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
All of this means that a free press, as essential to the birth and maintenance of democracy and pluralism, is useless if the privileged groups of a society are not willing to question or abandon their prejudices. So the obstacle toward a free press is not to convince only the government, but to convince privileged Chinese to at least be critical of their society and country.

You are also describing Canadian media. One only has to look at the coverage given to democraticlly elected left wing governments to realize that our Corporate Press will never seriously challenge the status quo and ergo as in China we have no real free press only one which has been bought and paid for by the elite for the elite.

From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 05 August 2008 06:41 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
All of this means that a free press, as essential to the birth and maintenance of democracy and pluralism, is useless if the privileged groups of a society are not willing to question or abandon their prejudices. So the obstacle toward a free press is not to convince only the government, but to convince privileged Chinese to at least be critical of their society and country.

I cannot see that privileged groups are at all likely to be critical of the social system that privileges them . That doesn't seem realistic to me. I don't think relying on the beneficence of those who hold wealth and power has ever worked very well, historically

Why not try to have a system without "privileged groups" that control the media (and most other things).


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 05 August 2008 07:14 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Jiajie agrees with your position re the difficulty of moving the privileged group, R.

But I think that since it is a "learned" position, the enormity of so many of the changes demanded of society by just the very poisoning or their air, water and food, will have impact. This is unlike anything before, and I would think understandable within dialectical reasoning.

That is, they may indeed not act out of some sudden altruistic feeling - but only when their own butts are exposed.

I just hope that the synthesis to come out of this new understanding is not too bloody late in arriving and leaving us unable to act. The arrival of Charles Taylor's "spirit of Dunkirk"...

As for the power structure of the future...I hope that Rawi Hage is incorrect in saying we are all just territorial monkeys. And James Lovelock (sorry FM) has the remnants moving to the Arctic for relief from climate change.

What do they know, eh?

[ 05 August 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

[ 05 August 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
George Victor
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14683

posted 05 August 2008 07:32 PM      Profile for George Victor        Edit/Delete Post
Your second point about how "outsiders" can help is helpful, Jiajie. But I need some time to ruminate on my immediate silly thought that, by gosh, we had better see to it that your privileged group read The Globe and Mail and not the National Post.

Right.
How.


From: Cambridge, ON | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 05 August 2008 09:43 PM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
You are also describing Canadian media. One only has to look at the coverage given to democraticlly elected left wing governments to realize that our Corporate Press will never seriously challenge the status quo and ergo as in China we have no real free press only one which has been bought and paid for by the elite for the elite.

There is no free press in China because it is controlled by the government. But a press can be free of government control and not challenge the status quo. Canadians or Chinese can choose not to change the status quo despite what they read, hear, and see in a free media. Ultimately the decision to change lies with the majority. I think there a free press in Canada because I regularly read Canadian newspaper articles, editorials, and letters that independently challenge and embarass the 3 levels of government, their politicians and their institutions; that reveal poverty and social inequalities; and social movements that indeed challenge parts of the status quo. And the Canadian media may be dominated by wealthy families and their corporations, but their newspapers and television stations belong to them, not the government. They can broadcast their viewpoints and defend their interests like a leftist media network could do and would do. The problem is a lack of diversity of viewpoints but that is offset by a free flow of information that permits for critical assessments of media reports, such as the coverage of the elections of leftist governments which you cited.

[ 05 August 2008: Message edited by: Liang Jiajie ]


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
Liang Jiajie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14463

posted 06 August 2008 07:47 AM      Profile for Liang Jiajie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by RosaL:

I cannot see that privileged groups are at all likely to be critical of the social system that privileges them . That doesn't seem realistic to me. I don't think relying on the beneficence of those who hold wealth and power has ever worked very well, historically

Why not try to have a system without "privileged groups" that control the media (and most other things).


It is a nice ideal, but how do you do it? China made an attempt at that a long time ago and the results were catastrophic. I am imagining a less sudden and violent implementation. Expanding the middle-class is a good place to start. Criticizing the social system does not have to lead to a decrease in the quality of life of the middle-class. Persons have to be willing to understand that barriers prevent too many Chinese from entering the middle-class. The objective of criticizing the social system is to include more persons in that class.


From: Nanjing, Jiangsu | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
jrose
babble intern
Babbler # 13401

posted 06 August 2008 08:02 AM      Profile for jrose     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Liang Jiajie:
It is a nice ideal, but how do you do it?

We will have to answer that question in a new thread. Closing for length.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca