http://www.paulgravett.com/articles/133_china/133_china_1.htm

Warning: These comics are NOT for the faint of heart.

There is huge coverage here right now about this actress, Sharon Stone, and how she said that the earthquake which killed more than 70,000 was karma revenge for Chinese government treating Tibet badly.

I was surprised and angry when I first read the news. I think it's hard to not be when someone says that an earthquake that killed a lot of people was some 'due retribution' rather than a terrible tragedy that has affected many lives.

There have been calls for boycotts, stinging public condemnation, comments that she represents the main attitude of America or at least the upper class attitude of America since she is a Hollywood moviestar.

I must admit, I'd never heard of Sharon Stone before. After doing a bit more digging around on this moviestar, I'm getting the picture that she's not quite known for deep and intellectual roles. It seems her most famous movie involved her taking off her clothes and uncrossing her legs in Basic Instinct. She also played a bad guy in Catwoman. Maybe you have heard of these movies - I must admit I haven't watched either (though I'll probably go and look for the Basic Instinct DVD now that I know what it's about for research purposes. I'll need to find the uncensored version, it sounds like the censored version will be about 3 minutes long).

Based on the very limited I know, this semi-porn actress who is completely unknown in China makes one statement on the red carpet and commands Chinese media attention. After watching the youtube of her talking, she doesn't seem to be thinking so hard - as if making a deep political commentary. She's almost like talking about the weather.

I'm not sure if this makes her comment more or less offensive.

What I almost find more offensive than her remarks though, is that instead of discussing building standards, student safety and charity fund distribution, we're now devoting a lot of time to boycotting Sharon Stone (who nobody heard of before anyone). Ban her movies! Don't buy her perfume! Throw tomatoes at her poster!

It's obviously a passionate time here right now and a very passionate topic re: earthquake. I think we should be thinking of more important things and listening to more important people.

Lol yer...

I think Sharon may have gotten her definition of karma off a Corn Flakes packet. Someone should probably tell her that karmic retribution is a cul de sac for tired thinkers, let alone the idea that it gets doled out at a national level by mysterious karma police which skulk around in the shadows like the grail guardians from "Last Crusade."

Anyways, just a note to say I'm really enjoying your posts Zydor. You write with patience and a conceptual balance which I find refreshing.

the party has been alerted, your IP's have been recorded and ninja assassins will come to stuff peanuts up your butts then throw you to starving elephants. Your parents will be castrated to prevent further contamination of the gene pool, your family shamed publicly and possibly thrown in prison... also, Chinese agents are now replacing your porn with panda mating videos.

Ain't China great? jk

Ghostwes, I like the Pandas in that comic strip

I am chinese, and i feel so honoured and famous that so many foreigners love to talk about China. Wow...i know that as a chinese, we love to talk about the west and the good old U.S. Is that karmar or what.

From an earlier post of mine on this thread:



I smell some manipulation going on. However, be clear on my personal views on that clown:



You got that right - she was behind the door when the brains were given out. Its the old story, a large number of people in the public eye start to believe their own Manager's Marketing about themselves, they loose touch with reality. That individual is so dumb she believes that whatever she says people will listen because she is well known. It does not enter her head that she has to balance off cause and effect when she opens her mouth, much less actually having to know a little about what she is ranting about. Its the same silly syndrome as many Politicians - and dont get me started on those clowns

There's a flip side though, frankly we only have ourselves to blame. The Media create these iconic people because for some nutty reason a huge number of people want to see and hero worship someone. I've never understood why that urge overtakes commonsense. Ignore the idiot, its just the media going for circulation figures yet again.

With people like her, I just ignore the idiots, much less argue with them - argue with an idiot and you just create a second one .....

Regards
Zy

Wes,

those comics are evil

any political system that is not afraid to stand in the light of day, blemishes and all, and have the people who live under it tell others about what it’s short comings are and then allows them to do something about it is ok in my books!

mightygoobi, what I have learned from listining to you has had an effect on my additude toward the government of China!

I am still very anti-communist. what has changed is I don't think China is as communist as I thought it was.

Not the word I would use.

They certainly pack an emotional punch, however. I only wish we could get Sharon Stone to read them, assuming she knows how to read.

Spacepony said:



Thank you Spacepony - and before I am said to be TOO happy towards my government, here's two things that I should point out here that China will eventually need to consider changing:

1. The government philosophy of 'rights of the many outweigh rights of the few' is fine - but it's certainly difficult for "the few". Consider our 3 gorges dam. The basic idea is that it is to supply clean hydro power to the country and cut down our use of coal and oil. That's great. The down side is that a whole lot of people had to be move from their homes. Now, on math, 1.3 billion people getting hydro power is more greater than 60,000 people moving house (my numbers are wrong, but close sort of). However, there are still 60,000 people who had to be moved, unhappily and most likely with inadequate compensation (how do you compensate with money being moved from farm land that you've been on since your great grandfather? I could say I don't want any money or free apartment or TV set, I want my old home.)

Certainly, we could have had more committees, more impact studies, more assessments, more consultative talks, more compensations etc. And perhaps more would have been good. And the more time spent in talking, the less time spent in building. And the longer we burn coal.

There's no easy outcome and arguably the better choice for the country was made - to reducing national pollution and going clean energy over the homes and lifestyles of the 3 gorges residents. But it's very uncomfortable to be those who are suffering so that the rest of the country can benefit.

It's just one example. Similar comments can be made about shutting down coal factories (which employ a lot of people) and setting up wind farms (which employ a lot less people - many of whom come from overseas); or diverting rivers from low populated areas to high populated ones (bringing more fresh water to the big cities, but hurting the small villages) or building 20 subway stations in Beijing in two years (better public transport and reduced car/bus polution but requiring the demolition of heritage buildings).

2. Political change is slow here. In Western democracies, you change personnel every 4-8 years (though Ubernaught, I am thinking the ex-Prime Minister of Australia John Howard seemed to be in power a long time... do you have a time limit there?). We have a limit of 10 years as well. The difference is the replacement is of course elected by a small group here in China, as opposed to by national vote in the US and or by national referendums like in Canada, England and Australia (maybe the word referendum is wrong).

That means that government officials are keen on popularity in a western democracy. And I would say more keen on 'looking good to the boss' in China. Now, I'm not saying that 'popularity' means all good (it might be harder to make unpopular but necessary decisions in a western democracy) - and I would also say there are some disadvantages with our system. A key one being that the successor in power usually follows similarly the mindset of the predecessor. Hence, change is slow. It is possible in the US to have an entirely new set of personnel every 8 years (new cabinet, new ministers, new officials). That's impossible here.

Now, one advantage of our system is that things are relatively stable. There are not going to be massive flux in policy. Our foreign relations, economy, trade ideas are not massively changing. And given our bazillion civil wars and revolutions, perhaps that's intentional and a good thing.

The negative flipside to stability of course is slowness. It's easier for the 75 year retired judge who lived through the cultural revolution, famines, seperation of Taiwan from Mainland to preach patience and 'all good things come in time'. But for the younger generation growing up with internet, google and cable TV, waiting 10 years only to have a new leader who's a lot like the old one and just a bit different - can be seen as very very slow change.

I've said a few times in my postings - I think the government does a reasonable job here. Not perfect by any stretching imagination... but not quite too bad given the huge problems we face as a country growing up. And these two issues will slowly be addressed I suppose as we go from developing to developed country.

Oh, by the way Spacepony - you mentioned in the past that someone had called you a "neo-con". Despite my searchings, I can't find what that means. Can you help me?

I found this article in the New York times about increasingly wealthy Russians looking to travel overseas. To be honest, I was attracted by the RUSSIAN GIRLS POSING IN BIKINIS (capitalised in a blatant attempt to get your attention). But the article itself speaks about the growth in the Russian tourism market and how it has come with the rise in the Russian economy.

I can't help but see some similarities with China.

I also laughed at the comment about how Russian tourists used to be terrible but have improved. My experience of Chinese tourists so far is that many of us REALLY are terrible. I hope we get better soon - sometimes, it's pretty embarassing.

Anyway, here's the link (with photo of Russian bikinis...)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/world/europe/15russians.html?em&ex=1213675200&en=cf15a665a2cea8f9&ei=5087%0A

Democracy is about individual freedoms, Autocracy is about the demands of an individual(s) , is the way I have heard it best expressed - and therein lurks the problem. If the individual(s) who is(are) making the decisions is(are) a nutter(s), or some kind of megalomaniac, its a long term nightmare that takes explosive violent change to repeal, the latter being the ultimate end in all Autocracies throughout history. An Autocracy can force change relatively quickly when done at a macro level - the change in China in motion right now is a case in point - however, you think thats slow, it initially took "Democracy" itself, 800 years to evolve. So hang in there, there's a few years to go yet, no matter what yardstick you apply

Many people talk glibly about the "Magna Carta" when talking about freedom and democracy, but few really reflect on its huge significance as the real baseline of all democracies throughout the world today. It was from the declaration of the Magna Carta, that the "democracy" movement was born. Many point, and rightly so, to the huge significance of the US Declaration of Independence. That declaration was born from a movement started 550 years earlier when the Magna Carta was published by a group of English Barons who were disatisfied with the current state of the Monarchy and the principles of governance in England. King John agreed to it, signed it in the year 1215AD, and the rest- as they say - is history. It caught on like faster than a bushfire.

The best example of the impact of the Magna Carta is "Habeas Corpus" (thats the process whereby Authorities must state before a court of law, why they are holding someone against their will, and show just cause, or release the individual). The principle of "Habeas Corpus" originated with the Magna Carta, with its first recorded use in 1305AD, and is the bedrock of all Law in most democratic countries today.

There is a Site a few miles from where I live that was purchased by the American Bar Association, and where they built a commemorative site in acknowledgement of the huge significance of the Magna Carta. Many people in UK have not actually read it, but nearly all are aware it and its historical impact. Interestingly few seem to be aware of the Commemorative Site, and certainly of the fact that the American Bar Association paid for it. The reason for their kindness is obvious, the Magna Carta gave birth to the idea of individual freedom, and became the basis for all democratic law and institutions in the world ever since.

It will be worth your while going to read the translation of the Magna Carta if you have not read it, the translation is in an older form of English, but your English is good, so I think you will be fine. I am certain you will see many many parallels with the concerns you have expressed about your experiences living in China. The translation on the Site from the original Latin was based on the 1225AD version of the Magna Carta (it did in fact go through some changes after it was first published in 1215AD, but seemed to settle on the version extant in 1225AD).

Translation of the 1225 Version of the Magna Carta

The key parts are arguably the clauses below:


I chuckled about your tourist description, over here English and German Tourists have an, evolving shall we say , reputations for certain behaviors.

We also have a single minded view of a Japanese tourist, who is usually portrayed with a zillion cameras around their necks and pockets stuffed full of the latest gadgets

For those that may think its a little long and turgid, I urge you to read it in full, there are some real gems in there, eg Clause 54 (below) would have todays Feminists, not only utterly outraged, no doubt along with the rest of us, that they would probably start an armed rebellion - and a large number of todays husbands would gulp after reading it twice



Regards
Zy

Just replying so I don't lose this thread...
I am EXTREMELY enthralled by this thread.

MightyGoobi. After reading much of what you've talked of the Chinese and China, I feel proud.

Why? I am an ABC ( American Born Chinese ) full 100%, First Generation, and I've never felt anything close to "patriotic" or something to be proud of in the U.S.A. I'm pretty happy on how you boast how amazing China is, while also pointing out some flaws, some bad stuff.

Pretty much saying, That even though born and raised in the U.S, I feel proud to be chinese!

If anyones really curious to know about china, and you live in the U.S, Don't take the Media for anything that covers the whole story. Our news Media is censored, modified, and half-true.


Ah what am I saying, I just wanted to thank MightyGoobi for postin' so much, thats all.


Oh by the way, anyone who's never been to China and has the opportunity, do go visit! Like Mexico, bring your own water.

Zydor wrote:



Thank you for this link Zydor. I found it a very interesting read and it's the first time I've actually read this document. I note the regularly reference to God and Christianity in the document which I did not know of it before. I also found the two articles on 'owing money to Jews' a bit odd - not quite sure what to think of this.



To keep this post on topic, I thought I'd share the link to the English language version of the Chinese Constitution. Not quite the Magna Carta, but it's an important document for us.

http://english.people.com.cn/constitution/constitution.html

Now, a couple of things (I find myself always making lists when I post...)

1. Our Constitution is only 26 years old.

2. This is a translation of the Chinese text. The Chinese sounds beautiful - it's some of the best modern poetic Chinese I know. It does lose beauty in translation. Quoting from the English preamble:



Almost certainly, mother tongue English speakers will think this is awkward. I suggest that mother tongue Mandarin speakers will think the Chinese is beautiful.

3. Certainly, many people will look at our Constitution and say it's not true because things in the words are not true in real life. Usually, people refer to words like "democracy", "equality", "freedom from discrimination", "protection of rights" etc. all of which are used a lot.

And I think many Chinese people will agree. The words in our Constitution do not always reflect the reality of life. In fairness, I think many words in many Constitutions of countries around the world do not always reflect the realities in those countries.

What is happening though, is that there is slow but steady push towards making the Constitution more reflective of reality.

In recent legal challenges, citizens brought a suit against a company for refusing to hire people with sex diseases on the grounds that it was against the Constitution for non-discrimination. Citizens protested the demolition of houses by sticking Article 13 on the door (right of protection of private property). Government institutions have begun explicitly refer to Constitutional provisions in explaining a particular action. Legal academics are writing more and more on how the Constitution should impact judges, lawyers and government decision makers.

Does this mean that suddenly everything in the Constitution becomes true? Of course not. Long long way to go for that to come real. For myself, I see it as a document of ideals - a document that lists the things that we, as a country, want for our people. It is entirely possible that the document will never become perfectly true. And I think that it is still a document worth writing and working towards. I'm hopeful that slowly and surely we are getting there.

So I define the Chinese Constitution as "a document of ideals". I recognise that this is different to other countries' Constitutions that are seen as the 'highest law in the land'. And having a different attitude to a Constitutional document is something that doesn't necessarily make that attitude 'right' or 'wrong'. I do like the idea that we have a 'target' that we are working towards. I'm hoping it doesn't take us the 800 years that Democracy took to evolve as you say Zydor! Though one thing I learn in China is to be both proactive and patient about change.