The China Post

on May 26, 2008

One of the challenges we as a country must face is how to embrace the 'good' of the new form of society whilst doing our best to minimise the 'bad'. I don't have any simple answers for that.

There are no simple answers for that, and on many occasions there will be no answer - simple or otherwise. Many love to zoom in on those kinds of negative aspects - in any topic - highlighting obvious negatives, and throwing out bandwagon rolling comments and opinions (usually based on how many people will agree with them, despite "facts" as to outcomes). I always try to look behind such comments to see if they are in fact the main part of the picture, or just a peripheral. Often its the latter, because its easy to do.

In most scenarios, that have had serious conceptual thought applied to them, there is 99% good, and a consequential 1% bad. The latter should not stop the former, we dont live in Utopia, even though we should strive to be so, else we never move forward. No system or movement for change will ever be 100% perfect, or have 100% beneficial effects. There will always be winners and losers, and its a real bummer if an individual happens to be one of the losers. Is the latter a reason to stop that proposal/system/Change - frankly no.

If we expect 100% goodness and righteousness from everything we do, we live in a fools paradise. All we can do is try and ensure that what we give the go ahead and support for is arranged in the best possible way that practical measures at that time are capable of achieving for the overwhelming number of people that will be affected by it. If we did otherwise, we would still be puzzling our heads over what "Fire" was, and how to use it in the Stone Age.

We all want the best for ourselves and others, but we should never be afraid to take the Bold decisions just because in the short term some will yell and complain about it, they soon go very quiet without apology for past yelling when events pan out in the long term. Popular consent and mutual back slapping does not move events and Nations forward. Well considered and structured Strategic Thought does. We cannot and will not achieve 100% perfection, we should be happy with 99% whilst still striving for the 100%, and ignore the self seeking popularist moaners who contribute little to such a process.

Regards
Zy

107

Zydor

on May 26, 2008

I have just spent 30 mins going through an astonishing series of photos of the earthquake zone, a very sobering collection of images that really drive home the gargantuan scale of what happened, and what they are having to deal with. If you have not seen them, I would suggest having a look - there's dozens/hundreds, keep clicking the "more photos" option at the end of each series of photos. (The more graphic/ugly ones are pre-warned & sidelined as such, for those inclined to react badly to such images).

Its at Quake Photos, look centre right of the page for the "Slideshow" section (unfortunate name for these circumstances - but is the "standard" title in the default section layout for the site), and click on the "Painful quake aftermath" photos.

Puts in perspective whats really important in life, not the peripheral moaning we are used to the "The West" about various (in comparison) Trivia.

Regards
Zy

108

Maxsw1

on May 26, 2008

Elias01 said:

Do you knwo what the Falun Gong people in Canada says after what happened to the sichuan earthquake, they publicly stated that such natural disaster is a punishment for the communits communist government. Such statement just makes the chinese people hates them even more, especially ones that goes abroad to study. Let's just put it this way, amongst chinese in china, Falun Gongs are the most annoying bunch.

In my opinion, I think you are right. I think they were careless in making those comments and kind of apologize for their actions. Falun Dafa states that the universe's characteristics are truthfulness, compassion and tolerance. What they said does not sound very compassionate as over 50,000 people died and many more are homeless. I think most Falun Dafa practitioners would agree with me also on this.

Mightygoobi said:

Here's my thoughts on Falun Gong. I'm sure Elias and Maxsw01 are likely to know more than I so welcome your thoughts.

There is a part of Falun Gong that is purely a "buddhist/Daoist cultivation practice that focuses on removing attachments and being a better person". From what I've observed, it's a little bit of yoga and meditation mixed together. This is purely harmless and probably a lot of fun and enlightenment.

To your point Maxsw01, I understand that you are saying the Communist Party was worried that more people were practicing Falun Gong than were registered members of the Party, so we should kill Falun Gong? With respect, there are many groups with members more than the Communist Party - what is the special thing about Falun Gong? From owners of cars, to practitioners of karate, to internet users who play a certain MMPORG that is popular in China. So why is Falun Gong the special treatment? It is very unclear to me.

I am guessing there is also a group of people using the Falun Gong name, that practices the 'yoga' (I'm sorry Maxsw01, I don't know how else to call it), but is also very active with 'other stuff'.

I don't pretend to know what the other stuff is - and I'm guessing at least part of it is to criticise the Chinese government. There's nothing automatic wrong with that. What is illogic to me is that plenty of people criticise the Chinese government - in and outside of China. So again, what is the special thing about Falun Gong that automatically targets it for special treatment? (note that if the sole 'other stuff' is, we criticise the chinese government, then it's obviously extremely difficult to justify "brutalizing and torture and organ harvesting" that you say)

Then there are reports of a group that cheers the earthquake for killing lots of Communists and hopes that we can have another earthquake soon to kill more. This group wrote an open letter to the Chinese people saying that the earthquake also is vengeance for attacking Tibet and taking the torch to Mt. Everest. Of course, that provokes a strong reaction in me. And makes me very against Falun Gong - even though I don't know more information.

But perhaps a more important query is - if I was going to condemn China or provoke with a comment about the earthquake, why would I do so through a group that promotes the meditation and practice of being a better person? And why would the group allow the use of its name in such a way? Surely, it opposes being dragged into politics? Even if I was a member of the group and I wanted to make a comment about how good the earthquake was because it killed lots of Communists - why would I link my comment to that group and not, for example, my gym club, my golf club or my yoga club? Something here is not correct to me.

What makes Falun Dafa a "special" case in China is that the Chinese government completely controls religions or structured belief systems in that country. Falun Dafa is a practice that is free, meaning no money is involved. You can learn everything right off the internet on their main page. Many people have found what Falun Dafa teaches to be very profound as there are over 200 million practitioners in over 60 countries and if the Chinese government bought it out and controlled it, which is what they wanted to do, Falun Dafa would just dissappear. Take what happened to Christianity in China. The government appoints the ministers and completely runs the show, thus basically ruining Christianity in China. Falun Dafa is not a religion but it has a belief system and priciples.

Anyways, Falun Dafa practitioners did not let that happen and the Chinese government started arresting a few practitioners. Then around 10,000 Falun Dafa practitioners went to Beijing to appeal for release the prisoners. This was the largest assembly since the Tiananmen square massacre in 1989. Jiang Zemin then ordered Falun Dafa to be eliminated by any means possible and the persecution continues to this day.

That is an extremely brief explanation as to why Falun Dafa is a special case in China. Thanks for your post and I hope mine was somewhat informative. The Epoch Times is an independent news agency that covers the persecution of Falun Dafa if you need any more information. Here is the URL http://en.epochtimes.com/index10.html
If you find the Chinese government's perspective on the persecution, let me know, I am curious myself.

109

Zydor

on May 26, 2008

I think they were careless in making those comments

More than careless ....

This group wrote an open letter to the Chinese people saying that the earthquake also is vengeance for attacking Tibet and taking the torch to Mt. Everest.

I call it verging on moronic.

I certainly dont agree with a few things happening in China at present, although I do believe in the long term direction they are heading. What I am certain of, is comments like this do not help the situation, are to say the least immature, and no amount of Spin will get past that. People who practice amateur spin doctoring always make things worse - usually quite the opposite opinion they have of their own actions.

The government appoints the ministers and completely runs the show, thus basically ruining Christianity in China.

In the UK, the appointment all Church of England Bishops have to be approved by the Prime Minister. Whilst I in no way claim this to be a direct parallel, and certainly acknowledge a closer government control on the realities of daily religious life in China, the conclusion is too simplistic.

A System is only changed from within, whilst it may be affected by external pressures, change will never occur by yelling alone, there always has to be constructive co-operation within. When the Falon get that into their heads, they might be taken more seriously.

Regards
Zy

110

elias001

on May 26, 2008

I think the underground church are just dumb, while the register ones are much smarter, why, they know how to pay within the rules and make constructive changes. In China, everyone knows that if you don't have support of the political side of the equation, meaning government, there is little chance in high heaven or down below hell that you might succeed in your endeavours. I read from Renmin university that with the register churches, they get much better government benefits like assistance for getting church buildings, etc. All the govenrment want is simple, just don't preach about state politics and stay out of it. Everyone knows that in China, why should all those underground christians should be any different. They should count their blessings that they don't earn the wrath of the populace like the falun gong.

111

mightygoobi

on May 26, 2008

Mightygoobi, i don't suppose you could do the translation for Great Britain could you?

For us, Great Britain = England = 英国 yin guo = Kingdom of Heroes

112

Zydor

on May 26, 2008

All the govenrment want is simple, just don't preach about state politics and stay out of it. Everyone knows that in China, why should all those underground christians should be any different.

If we are honest its fundamentally the same in many Countries in "The West", although government control is far closer in China. What is certain in "The West", is that if the Churches get too involved in State Politics - apart from voicing an opinion like anyone else - they will get slapped hard, the Press and a large portion of its population will also join in the slapping.

The days of The Church running International Politics as happened with the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages have long gone - Thankfully. I always find it strange that a Religious Faction (any Faction, not just Falon) will take time trouble and effort in slamming a National Government (of whatever Country), then fain shock horror when that target lashes back. I sometimes wonder which dream world they are living in.

Sure aint my dream world - but thats another story

Regards
Zy

113

HammerSun

on May 26, 2008

Mi-26 (Halo)

114

mightygoobi

on May 28, 2008

As I have invited all to visit my home country, I thought I'd let you know some of the social rules that we have here:

Driving Rules:

1. All road rules, regulations and laws come under the 'purely optional' catergory.
2. In the event of any actually compulsory rules, taxi drivers are completely exempt.
3. Use of your indicator light will shrink your genitals. Do not use.
4. If you are walking cross any road, at any time, at any place. Pray.

Society rules:
1. Everyone knows, the signs that say 'no smoking', 'no use mobile phone' and 'queue here' are for OTHER people.
2. If you are caught smoking near a no smoking sign, just say you didn't understand. There are many things that a cigarette in a big red circle with a cross through it could mean.

Tough things to adapt for visitors
1. Yes, I know you don't like to squat over a hole when you poo. I don't like to put my bum on the germs of 100 strangers bum. So we are fair.
2. By ordering "sweet and sour pork", "wonton long soup" or "Kung Pao Chicken", you are painting "TOURIST" on your head. That's not real Chinese food.
3. Our language is not THAT hard. Just go to Chinatown in your home city and read the restaurant names. You'll see that there are only 7 words in the Chinese language - Dragon, Emperor, Jade, Golden, Palace, Garden and Lucky.
4. No, we don't all know kung fu. We don't all fly through trees and carry swords. When we jump on water, we sink, we don't magically bounced.
5. No, we don't all ride bicycles (though we should... it's sad).

Oh, and NEVER EVER EVER follow the young pretty school girl that just wants to practice her English with you and as you walk together, suddenly find a newly opened tea house that she wants to try to thank you for your kindness. You WILL end up paying 200 USD for your cup of tea.

115

mightygoobi

on May 28, 2008

Zydor,

at the risk of opening a mutual admiration club, I wanted to thank you for your posts. Always interesting and I usually find myself agreeing.

There's been a few posts here about the benefits and disadvantages of Democracy and Communism. To add a bit of balance to my postings, let me suggest one reason why Democracy is good that I don't think often gets said.

It makes politicians more charismatic.

When I hear Barack Obama say "I did it for Ashley" or Hillary Clinton talk about universal health care or John McCain talk about pride in the American troops - I'm impressed. Not for their policy itself - we can debate what's good or bad. But for their charisma and ability to speak in public.

When I hear the Taiwanese politicians (and once I get over laughing at their accent), I am always impressed by the way that they speak. It is with charisma, down to earth, human and I can relate to it in a popular way.

I presume this is by-product of requiring to be 'people skills' and popular in order to be voted in. If you're not charismatic and likeable, then no one will vote for you.

In contrast, most mainland chinese politicians are dull, boring and not charisma. Being 'people-skills' or popular is not useful and not a trait to be selected for. The one exception I think is our Premier Wen Jia Bao (Precious Treasure of the Home if you're still interested in translation of names). He speaks with such humanity, passion and emotion - if I had to vote, I'd vote for him.

Now, being popular doesn't necessarily mean you're good. And perhaps democractic elections might place too much of an emphasis on popularity meaning someone who wants to make hard unpopular but neverthless good decisions does not get into power.

But I do very much acknowledge one benefit of requiring democratic elections is that it forces politicans to show 'human side popularity' and thus they tend to make great speeches (the Ashley speech, "ask not what your country can do for you...", "never have so few done so much for so many" etc.) and have charisma.

116

Zydor

on May 29, 2008

I presume this is by-product of requiring to be 'people skills' and popular in order to be voted in. If you're not charismatic and likeable, then no one will vote for you.

Pretty much. 70% of populations are Classified as CDE. The AB groupings are a distinct minority in most countries. Just like most people in the ABs tend more towards the philosphical/intellectual side of life, the CDEs tend to be more towards practical with less philosophical/intellectual content. Cant fit all in neat boxes, but as a broad sweeping generalisation, its by in large true.

As the CDEs are 70% of votes , Politicians target them at a pace the CDEs are comfortable with. Therefore (as an exaggeration to illustrate) there's more smiling teeth and baby kissing in CDE areas, not in depth discussion on the "evolution of the XXX institution". By the same token, making a great play of the problems of the welfare state to the ABs would be a disaster, they would get bored and walk away.

70% of their target voters are always CDEs - guess what, political campaigns tend to be more charisma based than content, more perception than discussion of Real Drivers behind major issues. That realisation (re CDEs being 70% of populations) over the last fifty years has evolved into more and more Politicians who frankly cant really do what the Role needs. The days of intellectual Public Service driven Politicians giving Strategic Leadership, have long gone. Exceptions in terms of Strategic Thinkers do surface - thank god, or it really would all collapse - more by luck than design though.

The Strategic Thinking Politicians have - by in large - been replaced by vote chasers and meddlers who love to micro-manage, and can only think on the surface of topics, not delve into their true cause and effect (they are rarely capable of anything else, they have little idea how to craft and drive strategic policy, let alone what that really is or should be). The results after elections speak for themselves - Policy direction is usually driven by getting votes for the next Election, not the strategic needs of the Country as an institution. Basic reason is CDEs "tend" to be more influenced by the charisma side of the candidates, not the in depth real issue - again, a broad sweeping generalistion, but as a "Trend" it holds true.

All a little harsh maybe, and exaggerated a little to illustrate the overview, but not far off what we are seeing. However, as Churchill indicated, its the best of a bad bunch, and I personally wouldnt have it any other way. The positives far outweigh the negatives.

Regards
Zy

117

DessanT

on May 29, 2008

China needs to invest in those deserts, replanting them and moving populations there when habatable for them, it can make them have better economics.Also building large cities down there too because I know chinese are great at building tall buildings,reporting from the US, DessanT,back to you Tom.

118

Zydor

on May 29, 2008

Driving Rules:

1. All road rules, regulations and laws come under the 'purely optional' catergory.
2. In the event of any actually compulsory rules, taxi drivers are completely exempt.
3. Use of your indicator light will shrink your genitals. Do not use.
4. If you are walking cross any road, at any time, at any place. Pray.

That could be London, Paris, New York, Berlin, Rome... wherever there is a National Capital City (and some others!), and oh so true

Its real weird, no matter the origin, country, social grouping, political outlook, male or female, what you had for breakfast or what paper you read in the mornings - put a large group of people in metal boxes on four wheels in large numbers and in close proximity, and all hell breaks loose -Sigmund Freud would have been proud of us

Regards
Zy

119

ubernaught

on May 29, 2008

@ Mighty Goobi,

One thing I have noticed in Australian politics (I will not stoop so low as to call it democracy here), is that "charisma" is merely a delivery system, much like the housing of a missile. It enables the necessary agent to get to where it needs to go (in our case, this agent is usually some sort of rabid patriotism counterfaced with individual pride ((sports is good for this))) to maintain industrial growth.

A good politician therefore, as an agent of industrial growth him/herself, should always invest heavily in lubricant/charisma, in order to reach larger concentrations of people. After all... the more people you can infect with your rhetoric... the more chance you have of winning the four-yearly "election."

An excellent example of this dynamic is the computer game DEFCON, though it is devoid of charisma, it nonetheless demonstrates the numbers/victory ratio quite well.

Regards,
ubernaught

120

SpacePony

on May 30, 2008

We the people of The United States of America have become used to having lots of lubercant on hand following any election!

@ Mighty Goobi,One thing I have noticed in Australian politics (I will not stoop so low as to call it democracy here), is that "charisma" is merely a delivery system, much like the housing of a missile. It enables the necessary agent to get to where it needs to go (in our case, this agent is usually some sort of rabid patriotism counterfaced with individual pride ((sports is good for this))) to maintain industrial growth.A good politician therefore, as an agent of industrial growth him/herself, should always invest heavily in lubricant/charisma, in order to reach larger concentrations of people. After all... the more people you can infect with your rhetoric... the more chance you have of winning the four-yearly "election."An excellent example of this dynamic is the computer game DEFCON, though it is devoid of charisma, it nonetheless demonstrates the numbers/victory ratio quite well.Regards,ubernaught