Topic: China - a Fascist State

[Yorkykopite]

trouble is - all the dirty deeds the 'moral' western countries have committed over the years don't seem to get a mention in this pseudo democratic west we live in

china look at what we've done and realise that we are just the same as them

well, they think they are better actually

We are obviously better of course. We could hardly be at China's level!

But, even so, the Chinese state doesn't need our example to behave atrociously. It does so entirely for its own racist and imperialistic reasons.

[Sangria]

trouble is - all the dirty deeds the 'moral' western countries have committed over the years don't seem to get a mention in this pseudo democratic west we live in

china look at what we've done and realise that we are just the same as them

well, they think they are better actually

Actually, they don't do moral comparisons and think they are better. They know they are better, because they are by right the centre of the universe and the greatest people in the world. Moral comparisons serve to excuse any moral arguments the west makes.

This point needs to be understood. China thinks/knows its is the best. Chinese supremacy is its historical state of being, and it is being reasserted now. Chinese culture is the best in the world, and it is a gift to be received. That's the start point of understanding China.

[Bobsackamano]

Actually, they don't do moral comparisons and think they are better. They know they are better, because they are by right the centre of the universe and the greatest people in the world. Moral comparisons serve to excuse any moral arguments the west makes.

This point needs to be understood. China thinks/knows its is the best. Chinese supremacy is its historical state of being, and it is being reasserted now. Chinese culture is the best in the world, and it is a gift to be received. That's the start point of understanding China.

To be fair thats a starting point for also understanding the UK, USA, Japan and France as well as many other nations, particularly those with a history of colonialism as its the only real way of justifying the actions of expansionist powers through history.

However im not sure your argument that Chinese supremacy is its usual state of being holds much water, just from the fact that from the British to the Japanese the Chinese have historically been invaded and dominated rather that the other way round.

[Sangria]

To be fair thats a starting point for also understanding the UK, USA, Japan and France as well as many other nations, particularly those with a history of colonialism as its the only real way of justifying the actions of expansionist powers through history.

However im not sure your argument that Chinese supremacy is its usual state of being holds much water, just from the fact that from the British to the Japanese the Chinese have historically been invaded and dominated rather that the other way round.

History goes back a bit longer than 200 years, especially for a country like China that sees itself as a nation with an unbroken history going back to at least Qin Xihuang (around 200 BC), or longer if you look at proto-China.

Also, it's a nice quip to say that it's a good starting point for the other countries, but, the US apart, it's important to note that the other western countries no longer think that way. That kind of thinking is a historical artefact, largely alien to the people of today. China has historically thought that way, and now it is thinking that way again.

However, this way of thinking isn't completely alien to western countries. As I said, the US thinks that way, and we understand how the US thinks that way. It's not a clash of civilisations, between America and the rest of the world. It is simply a self-evident truth that America is the greatest nation in the world. That obvious truism now understood, let's get on with life. And so it is with China.

[Max_powers]

History goes back a bit longer than 200 years, especially for a country like China that sees itself as a nation with an unbroken history going back to at least Qin Xihuang (around 200 BC), or longer if you look at proto-China.

Also, it's a nice quip to say that it's a good starting point for the other countries, but, the US apart, it's important to note that the other western countries no longer think that way. That kind of thinking is a historical artefact, largely alien to the people of today. China has historically thought that way, and now it is thinking that way again.

However, this way of thinking isn't completely alien to western countries. As I said, the US thinks that way, and we understand how the US thinks that way. It's not a clash of civilisations, between America and the rest of the world. It is simply a self-evident truth that America is the greatest nation in the world. That obvious truism now understood, let's get on with life. And so it is with China.

Actually, we don't know how billions of people spread across thousands of years thought. I am not too well educated on Chinese history but I doubt that you can boil it down to this. Especially in a country as big and diverse and not entirely "Chinese" as China.

But this is how many Nationalists think in many countries even today. Even in USA, many people don't think the USA is bee's knees. But people of certain political affiliations are more likely to believe it.

Nationalists in India think India is the greatest, Nationalists in Russia think Russia is amazing and other people and countries are inferior. Under Nazi's Germans thought the same. etc. etc.

The only reason why these beliefs are so prevalent in China is because of the information and education system in China which is controlled by the government and pushes certain viewpoints. The history and culture of China have fuck-all to do with any of it. Change the education system and information landscape and within 2-3 generation, I doubt those views would be as prevalent.
 

[Yorkykopite]

It hardly matters whether the Chinese believe they are the best or not. What matters is policy. How do they treat their own national minorities? And the answer in the case of the Uighurs is that they herd them into concentration camps, level their villages and their destroy their mosques, eliminate their culture and traditions and brain-wash millions of captives into becoming obedient Chinamen and Chinawomen, mouthing the sewage produced by the Chinese Communist party. Those who resist are murdered.

All this falls under the definition of genocide as laid out by the UN conventions. 

For anyone who thinks we are just as bad, or the Americans are, or 'the West', I can only say that you must have lost your marbles. But don't worry. The British secret police won't be along to arrest you.

[Sangria]

Actually, we don't know how billions of people spread across thousands of years thought. I am not too well educated on Chinese history but I doubt that you can boil it down to this. Especially in a country as big and diverse and not entirely "Chinese" as China.

But this is how many Nationalists think in many countries even today. Even in USA, many people don't think the USA is bee's knees. But people of certain political affiliations are more likely to believe it.

Nationalists in India think India is the greatest, Nationalists in Russia think Russia is amazing and other people and countries are inferior. Under Nazi's Germans thought the same. etc. etc.

The only reason why these beliefs are so prevalent in China is because of the information and education system in China which is controlled by the government and pushes certain viewpoints. The history and culture of China have fuck-all to do with any of it. Change the education system and information landscape and within 2-3 generation, I doubt those views would be as prevalent. 

Check out popular media in China.

[Max_powers]

Check out popular media in China.

Yes, the heavily censored popular media must truly reflect all the diverse opinions that people hold or could potentially hold.

[Sangria]

It hardly matters whether the Chinese believe they are the best or not. What matters is policy. How do they treat their own national minorities? And the answer in the case of the Uighurs is that they herd them into concentration camps, level their villages and their destroy their mosques, eliminate their culture and traditions and brain-wash millions of captives into becoming obedient Chinamen and Chinawomen, mouthing the sewage produced by the Chinese Communist party. Those who resist are murdered.

All this falls under the definition of genocide as laid out by the UN conventions. 

For anyone who thinks we are just as bad, or the Americans are, or 'the West', I can only say that you must have lost your marbles. But don't worry. The British secret police won't be along to arrest you.

It matters to them because it's where their policy begins from. Just as our policymaking begins from modern liberalism. Our protests matter little to them because they are powerful enough not to care, and our arguments stemming from liberalism are irrelevant in their view.

As I've said before, the most substantive thing we can do is move away from them, to allow us some level of teeth. Localising our economy is also a good move from a green perspective. But our moral arguments are irrelevant to China; they don't care.

[Sangria]

Yes, the heavily censored popular media must truly reflect all the diverse opinions that people hold or could potentially hold.

Not all their media is censored by the state. There are some that are pretty much universal to all Chinese that are not censored. Think a Chinese equivalent of the Iliad and Odyssey, stories that define their identity just as the Homeric classics defined Greek identity.

[Max_powers]

Not all their media is censored by the state. There are some that are pretty much universal to all Chinese that are not censored. Think a Chinese equivalent of the Iliad and Odyssey, stories that define their identity just as the Homeric classics defined Greek identity.

I think it's silly to assume that any single story or even cluster of stories can define an identity for large groups of people simply because they exist in a vaguely defined landmass with some cultural similarities. People are not automatons where 1 billion people can have a single identity or singular view of what it means to Chinese. However, some good old propaganda and myth-making can make it seem that way for sure.

Censorship can come in many forms too. It doesn't have to be book burnings and media controlled TV.

Surveillance and police state can pretty much stifle dissenting opinions in social media.

The historical narrative can be made into whatever you want through selective coverage of stories and histories in school, in TV and films etc. Pretty much every country does this to some extent, but no one controls the narrative as much as China.

Are Chinese students learning about the history and culture of all the various ethnic minorities within China? Are the ethnic and cultural minorities given equal and fair representation in media?

Are they given a fair and balanced view of the Chinese Civil War? Are they taught about more shameful things in recent Chinese history like the Tiananmen Square Massacre, Cultural Revolution, the famines during 50's and '60s?  etc. Or are they allowed to talk about these things freely? Are there TV Shows or movies that cover such topics?

Like I said other countries do this too, but in the US, for example, people are free to read up on things like Iraq War, Vietnam War and make their own opinions, even if they are not taught in history classes. And indeed most people who have opinions on them do hold negative opinions of the US's role. You can read up and talk about any topic pretty much.

[Sangria]

I think it's silly to assume that any single story or even cluster of stories can define an identity for large groups of people simply because they exist in a vaguely defined landmass with some cultural similarities. People are not automatons where 1 billion people can have a single identity or singular view of what it means to Chinese. However, some good old propaganda and myth-making can make it seem that way for sure.

Censorship can come in many forms too. It doesn't have to be book burnings and media controlled TV.

Surveillance and police state can pretty much stifle dissenting opinions in social media.

The historical narrative can be made into whatever you want through selective coverage of stories and histories in school, in TV and films etc. Pretty much every country does this to some extent, but no one controls the narrative as much as China.

Are Chinese students learning about the history and culture of all the various ethnic minorities within China? Are the ethnic and cultural minorities given equal and fair representation in media?

Are they given a fair and balanced view of the Chinese Civil War? Are they taught about more shameful things in recent Chinese history like the Tiananmen Square Massacre, Cultural Revolution, the famines during 50's and '60s?  etc. Or are they allowed to talk about these things freely? Are there TV Shows or movies that cover such topics?

Like I said other countries do this too, but in the US, for example, people are free to read up on things like Iraq War, Vietnam War and make their own opinions, even if they are not taught in history classes. And indeed most people who have opinions on them do hold negative opinions of the US's role. You can read up and talk about any topic pretty much.

Have you heard of Louis Cha?

[Max_powers]

Have you heard of Louis Cha?

Nope. I just checked, he was a novelist I guess.

I am basing what I am saying on my personal experiences. I live in Vancouver a city with a large Chinese population and I have many colleagues and friends who are Chinese or Hong Kong'ers. They certainly don't have this singular Chinese identity. In fact, their identity and view of China depend mostly on their own experiences and background.

Most people I know from Hong Kong don't even identify themselves as Chinese and differentiate between themselves and Mainlanders to make a point.

I have a colleague who is older, he immigrated from China with his family in the '60s when he was 10 years old. He holds quite a negative view of the Chinese government and its actions. Thinks they are corrupt and full of crooks. He loves Chinese cuisine and culture in general but doesn't think any one culture is superior to another. He loves travelling the world to discover new things.

I also know a few international students from mainland China and they all grew up in Xi Jinping's China before coming to Canada to study. In general, they are more nationalistic and spout the party line. I know a few of them who post quite a lot of anti-western propaganda on social media ie. Hong Kong protests were a CIA operation, all democracies are broken, whats happening in Xinjiang is an anti-terrorism operation etc.

[Sangria]

Nope. I just checked, he was a novelist I guess.

I am basing what I am saying on my personal experiences. I live in Vancouver a city with a large Chinese population and I have many colleagues and friends who are Chinese or Hong Kong'ers. They certainly don't have this singular Chinese identity. In fact, their identity and view of China depend mostly on their own experiences and background.

Most people I know from Hong Kong don't even identify themselves as Chinese and differentiate between themselves and Mainlanders to make a point.

I have a colleague who is older, he immigrated from China with his family in the '60s when he was 10 years old. He holds quite a negative view of the Chinese government and its actions. Thinks they are corrupt and full of crooks. He loves Chinese cuisine and culture in general but doesn't think any one culture is superior to another. He loves travelling the world to discover new things.

I also know a few international students from mainland China and they all grew up in Xi Jinping's China before coming to Canada to study. In general, they are more nationalistic and spout the party line. I know a few of them who post quite a lot of anti-western propaganda on social media ie. Hong Kong protests were a CIA operation, all democracies are broken, whats happening in Xinjiang is an anti-terrorism operation etc.

If you've never heard of Louis Cha, but feel able to talk about Chinese culture, then you need to read about him. Or better still, read him, or watch series based on his novels. His stories are very popular among Chinese all over the world, drawing in all strands of China and the Chinese diaspora. He probably wouldn't have seen himself as a Homer. However, he wrote historical fiction, drawing from myths of Chinese history, and his stories are both drawn from history, and in their consumption, they shape understanding of Chinese history. As such, they play a similar role in Chinese culture as the Homeric classics in ancient Greek culture.

[Yorkykopite]

If you've never heard of Louis Cha, but feel able to talk about Chinese culture, then you need to read about him. Or better still, read him, or watch series based on his novels. His stories are very popular among Chinese all over the world, drawing in all strands of China and the Chinese diaspora. He probably wouldn't have seen himself as a Homer. However, he wrote historical fiction, drawing from myths of Chinese history, and his stories are both drawn from history, and in their consumption, they shape understanding of Chinese history. As such, they play a similar role in Chinese culture as the Homeric classics in ancient Greek culture.

Intriguing. Though Homer, of course, belongs to everyone, and has done for centuries. The same is true of Hesiod...and Plato, Socrates, Aristotle etc. The Greek classics are universal. It's meaningless to say they pamper or inflate Greek nationalism for example. They are universal texts, and appreciated as such, just as Shakespeare, Dante, Goethe are. In the last 70 years American culture has gripped the imagination of the world, from jazz to Hollywood, from Philip Roth to Bob Dylan. I don't think Chinese culture has produced much along these lines.

The very idea is preposterous. That's one of the problems of Fascism. It detests free expression and cultural innovation. Everything has to please the old fuckers on the Central Committee.

[Max_powers]

If you've never heard of Louis Cha, but feel able to talk about Chinese culture, then you need to read about him. Or better still, read him, or watch series based on his novels. His stories are very popular among Chinese all over the world, drawing in all strands of China and the Chinese diaspora. He probably wouldn't have seen himself as a Homer. However, he wrote historical fiction, drawing from myths of Chinese history, and his stories are both drawn from history, and in their consumption, they shape understanding of Chinese history. As such, they play a similar role in Chinese culture as the Homeric classics in ancient Greek culture.

Sure I'll check him out.

But I am not really talking about Chinese culture though. I have a problem with you insinuating that because of a common culture all Chinese people think the same about larger social and political issues. This type of logic is lazily thrown around all the time. In a way, it's kinda racist as it takes agency away from human beings and pretends that they are only capable of thinking and behaving in a certain way.

A more reasonable explanation is the information landscape around the people and the social and political pressures to conform. Which of course is strictly controlled by CCP, which obviously explains why within China dissenting voices are not heard.

Or you can choose to believe that everything CCP does perfectly aligns with Chinese culture or ethos. 

Like I mentioned, in my personal experiences, Chinese folks do hold a wide variety of personal and political views.   

[Sangria]

Sure I'll check him out.

But I am not really talking about Chinese culture though. I have a problem with you insinuating that because of a common culture all Chinese people think the same about larger social and political issues. This type of logic is lazily thrown around all the time. In a way, it's kinda racist as it takes agency away from human beings and pretends that they are only capable of thinking and behaving in a certain way.

A more reasonable explanation is the information landscape around the people and the social and political pressures to conform. Which of course is strictly controlled by CCP, which obviously explains why within China dissenting voices are not heard.

Or you can choose to believe that everything CCP does perfectly aligns with Chinese culture or ethos. 

Like I mentioned, in my personal experiences, Chinese folks do hold a wide variety of personal and political views.   

Instead of throwing around accusations of anti-Chinese racism and so on, you can check out the ubiquity of the author and how his works pervade Chinese discourse. There are older works still, such as The Water Margin and Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which Cha himself drew on to create a perceived timeless narrative. But Cha's stories are by some distance the most well known among Chinese.

[Sangria]

Intriguing. Though Homer, of course, belongs to everyone, and has done for centuries. The same is true of Hesiod...and Plato, Socrates, Aristotle etc. The Greek classics are universal. It's meaningless to say they pamper or inflate Greek nationalism for example. They are universal texts, and appreciated as such, just as Shakespeare, Dante, Goethe are. In the last 70 years American culture has gripped the imagination of the world, from jazz to Hollywood, from Philip Roth to Bob Dylan. I don't think Chinese culture has produced much along these lines.

The very idea is preposterous. That's one of the problems of Fascism. It detests free expression and cultural innovation. Everything has to please the old fuckers on the Central Committee.

The idea of Chinese supremacy predates fascism and the CCP. It predates the Roman Empire, although they share the same idea. It's the idea that all the civilised lands are united under one rule, with the barbarians on the outside.

[Max_powers]

Instead of throwing around accusations of anti-Chinese racism and so on, you can check out the ubiquity of the author and how his works pervade Chinese discourse. There are older works still, such as The Water Margin and Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which Cha himself drew on to create a perceived timeless narrative. But Cha's stories are by some distance the most well known among Chinese.

I am not really accusing you of racism, just that your view of how people think and form their political opinions is very simplistic.

People use the same type of arguments to explain Russia, India, Japan and whatnot. 

See I am an Indian by birth. Based on Indian culture, epics, upbringing, history can you tell me what my political and social views are?

[The_Nomad]

In Singapore where I live, among the local Chinese, you will find both solidarity and antipathy towards China. I'm of Indian origin but have skin in the game in the sense that i find the ethnic Chinese around me being swayed by arguments on both sides. The one thing the PRC system has going for itself in convincing the diaspora about its motivations is the fact that they are almost all, Han Chinese. Never underestimate the pull of ethnicity. Ever since Qin Shi Huang, the IDEA of unity among the Han has been a very emotive and powerful one. Although there is fairly open suspicion and hostility among the local Chinese here towards the PRC, the feeling is a little different towards the Chinese people in China. While you do get the usual jokes and stereotyping of mainlanders, I do sense deep down that the advancement of the PRC is also seen somewhat as a reflection of the 'advantageous' attributes of the Chinese race. Qualities like hard work, thrift, civilisational smarts(?), the benefits of order etc. Of course the last point is obviously a reflection of where Singapore is as a nation with a political system not so subtly modelled after the CCP.

 In recent times, especially the last few turbulent US-China years, I have seen an increasing willingness on the part of local Chinese to see the confrontations as an attempt to hold back the advancement of the Chinese people. The CCP has been very effective in corralling and in some cases, mobilising, these feelings among the Han Chinese diaspora. It's not a good sign. In fact, local Chinese now talk about being 'profiled' when they're in countries like the USA and Australia. This may well be confirmation bias on their part but you can see how they might think that and China is there to take full advantage of such perceptions. You may have read about the arrest of a Singaporean academic arrested in the USA for alleged spying on behalf of China. That in turn breeds more suspicions of ethnic Chinese and it becomes a vicious cycle just like with Muslims.

There are many anecdotes about mainland Chinese here in Singapore asking their local brethren why they don't feel a sense of loyalty and kinship towards China. It's quite worrying for the government here. There are many many first and second generation Chinese emigres in sensitive positions in the private and public sector. With the exposure of more examples of confused loyalties resulting in prosecutions, the situation can quickly spiral downwards. Singapore is now quite inextricably linked with China and any potential sanctions by China has the distinct possibility of crippling Singapore.

[Red-Soldier]

China bans BBC World News from broadcasting

China has banned BBC World News from broadcasting on its territory, according to a decision announced on Thursday by its broadcasting regulator.

China has criticised the BBC for its reporting on coronavirus and the persecution of ethnic minority Uighurs.

The BBC said it was "disappointed" by the decision.

It follows British media regulator Ofcom revoking state broadcaster China Global Television Network's (CGTN) licence to broadcast in the UK.

Ofcom's decision earlier this month came after it found that CGTN's licence was wrongfully held by Star China Media Ltd.

CGTN was also found in breach of British broadcasting regulations last year, for airing the allegedly forced confession of UK citizen Peter Humphrey.

In its decision, China's State Film, TV and Radio Administration said BBC World News reports about China were found to "seriously violate" broadcast guidelines, including "the requirement that news should be truthful and fair" and not "harm China's national interests".

It said that the BBC's application to air for another year would not be accepted.

The BBC said in a statement: 'We are disappointed that the Chinese authorities have decided to take this course of action. The BBC is the world's most trusted international news broadcaster and reports on stories from around the world fairly, impartially and without fear or favour."

The commercially-funded BBC World News TV channel broadcasts globally in English. In China it is largely restricted and appears only in international hotels and some diplomatic compounds, meaning most Chinese people cannot view it.

British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab called the move an "unacceptable curtailing of media freedom".

Relations between China and the UK have seen a serious deterioration in recent months over Hong Kong, where Beijing introduced a controversial new security law after a large pro-democracy movement swept the ex-colony.

In January the UK introduced a new visa that gives 5.4 million Hong Kong residents the right to live in the UK and eventually become citizens because it believes China is undermining the territory's rights and freedoms.

And in the past two years China has been systematically blocking or banning foreign media, including in effect expelling journalists from three US newspapers in 2020. The BBC website and its app are already banned in the country.

In February the BBC published a report featuring interviews with Uighur women who said they had been systematically raped, sexually abused and tortured in China's "re-education" camps in Xinjiang. China's foreign ministry accused the BBC of making a "false report".

Last month the US said China has committed genocide in its repression of the Uighurs and other mainly Muslim groups.

According to estimates, more than a million Uighurs and other minorities have been detained in camps in China.

China denies that Uighurs are persecuted. Last year China's UK ambassador Liu Xiaoming told the BBC's Andrew Marr that reports of concentration camps were "fake" and the Uighurs received the same treatment under the law as other ethnic groups in his country.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-56030340

[zadoktBeast]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/21/boris-johnsons-warm-words-on-china-likely-to-infuriate-backbenchers

Before the forum was attacked, Red-Soldier posted a link to a Guardian article about the corrupt Boris de Pfeffel Johnson's refusal to allow 'occasional political difficulties' to stand in the way of 'improved trade ties' with the Nazi party in Beijing. In doing so he declared himself to be 'fervently Sinophile'.

I know that criticism of Boris on a Liverpool-centric forum can seem like preaching to the choir (a choir that happens to be 100% right), but I was personally amazed/shocked that this wasn't mentioned on the TV news at all, so thought I'd repost the link here.

[Elmo!]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/21/boris-johnsons-warm-words-on-china-likely-to-infuriate-backbenchers

Before the forum was attacked, Red-Soldier posted a link to a Guardian article about the corrupt Boris de Pfeffel Johnson's refusal to allow 'occasional political difficulties' to stand in the way of 'improved trade ties' with the Nazi party in Beijing. In doing so he declared himself to be 'fervently Sinophile'.

I know that criticism of Boris on a Liverpool-centric forum can seem like preaching to the choir (a choir that happens to be 100% right), but I was personally amazed/shocked that this wasn't mentioned on the TV news at all, so thought I'd repost the link here.

This raises a good point - have we ruled out state actors in the hacking of RAWK?

Maybe all those shills posting in here with their first post defending Chine got annoyed at getting banned and got their colleagues in the hacking department involved.

[Red-Soldier]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/21/boris-johnsons-warm-words-on-china-likely-to-infuriate-backbenchers

Before the forum was attacked, Red-Soldier posted a link to a Guardian article about the corrupt Boris de Pfeffel Johnson's refusal to allow 'occasional political difficulties' to stand in the way of 'improved trade ties' with the Nazi party in Beijing. In doing so he declared himself to be 'fervently Sinophile'.

I know that criticism of Boris on a Liverpool-centric forum can seem like preaching to the choir (a choir that happens to be 100% right), but I was personally amazed/shocked that this wasn't mentioned on the TV news at all, so thought I'd repost the link here.

Thanks for that.

And here I was thinking the mods took the site down to allow a few posters to cool down. 

Didn't occur to me that an outside entity would want to hack the site for political reasons.

[Robinred]

In Singapore where I live, among the local Chinese, you will find both solidarity and antipathy towards China. I'm of Indian origin but have skin in the game in the sense that i find the ethnic Chinese around me being swayed by arguments on both sides. The one thing the PRC system has going for itself in convincing the diaspora about its motivations is the fact that they are almost all, Han Chinese. Never underestimate the pull of ethnicity. Ever since Qin Shi Huang, the IDEA of unity among the Han has been a very emotive and powerful one. Although there is fairly open suspicion and hostility among the local Chinese here towards the PRC, the feeling is a little different towards the Chinese people in China. While you do get the usual jokes and stereotyping of mainlanders, I do sense deep down that the advancement of the PRC is also seen somewhat as a reflection of the 'advantageous' attributes of the Chinese race. Qualities like hard work, thrift, civilisational smarts(?), the benefits of order etc. Of course the last point is obviously a reflection of where Singapore is as a nation with a political system not so subtly modelled after the CCP.

 In recent times, especially the last few turbulent US-China years, I have seen an increasing willingness on the part of local Chinese to see the confrontations as an attempt to hold back the advancement of the Chinese people. The CCP has been very effective in corralling and in some cases, mobilising, these feelings among the Han Chinese diaspora. It's not a good sign. In fact, local Chinese now talk about being 'profiled' when they're in countries like the USA and Australia. This may well be confirmation bias on their part but you can see how they might think that and China is there to take full advantage of such perceptions. You may have read about the arrest of a Singaporean academic arrested in the USA for alleged spying on behalf of China. That in turn breeds more suspicions of ethnic Chinese and it becomes a vicious cycle just like with Muslims.

There are many anecdotes about mainland Chinese here in Singapore asking their local brethren why they don't feel a sense of loyalty and kinship towards China. It's quite worrying for the government here. There are many many first and second generation Chinese emigres in sensitive positions in the private and public sector. With the exposure of more examples of confused loyalties resulting in prosecutions, the situation can quickly spiral downwards. Singapore is now quite inextricably linked with China and any potential sanctions by China has the distinct possibility of crippling Singapore.

Thanks very much for that. A very thought provoking and illuminating post.

I’m a novice when it comes to East/West history/politics. I share Yorky’s disdain for communism generally, and the current Chinese government in particular. The notion that there are broad similarities between historical imperialism of the west, and the suppression of minorities, and political dissent, by modern China, makes an interesting debate, but one of false equivalence I think.

Free expression and education in the truest sense are at the heart of this. The U.S under four years of Trump took a big backward step - but mid-west Trumpers didn’t have to tune in to Fox News or Alex Jones; there were alternatives.

[TipTopKop]

mid-west Trumpers didn’t have to tune in to Fox News or Alex Jones; there were alternatives.

Endless source of humour for me.

Once contemplated holding a drinking game to the words "ChiComs" or "Globalists" but I'd have liver failure by the end of an evening.

[Yorkykopite]

Endless source of humour for me.

For me too.

That's the difference I guess. In the West we can laugh at the idiots. In China they must kowtow to them.

[Sangria]

For me too.

That's the difference I guess. In the West we can laugh at the idiots. In China they must kowtow to them.

I wouldn't call the leaders in China idiots. They're highly educated technocrats. They're just completely alien to the concept of ethics as we in the west understand it. They're exactly the kind of people whom we'd like to have running something like the civil service. They're just not people whom I'd like to have leading a country.

[Yorkykopite]

I wouldn't call the leaders in China idiots. They're highly educated technocrats. They're just completely alien to the concept of ethics as we in the west understand it. They're exactly the kind of people whom we'd like to have running something like the civil service. They're just not people whom I'd like to have leading a country.

Amazing comment!

Our civil service is reasonably efficient and, by historical standards, astonishingly un-corrupt. I don't think we want the Mafia running it, which is essentially what the CCP is.

As for "ethics as we in the west understand it", I'd have thought a better term would be "ethics."

Unless you mean there is something intrinsically Chinese or 'eastern' about mass murder and barbarism?

[Sangria]

Amazing comment!

Our civil service is reasonably efficient and, by historical standards, astonishingly un-corrupt. I don't think we want the Mafia running it, which is essentially what the CCP is.

As for "ethics as we in the west understand it", I'd have thought a better term would be "ethics."

Unless you mean there is something intrinsically Chinese or 'eastern' about mass murder and barbarism?

Ethics as you'd understand it would be the Greek line of thinking and as defined by that term. However, ethics as understood to be morals are not exclusive to the western/Greek school. Morals do exist in other countries too, in different forms to what we're used to. Eg. do you understand how important the concept of filial duty is? It's not just the friendship that we in the west understand to be the ideal of a parent/child relationship. Family also means something different to what we're used to.

Also, it demeans the discussion to describe the Chinese leaders as Mafia and nothing else. A better understand of them might be gained from looking at the Soviet Union, and what they aspired to.

[Robinred]

Ethics as you'd understand it would be the Greek line of thinking and as defined by that term. However, ethics as understood to be morals are not exclusive to the western/Greek school. Morals do exist in other countries too, in different forms to what we're used to. Eg. do you understand how important the concept of filial duty is? It's not just the friendship that we in the west understand to be the ideal of a parent/child relationship. Family also means something different to what we're used to.

Also, it demeans the discussion to describe the Chinese leaders as Mafia and nothing else. A better understand of them might be gained from looking at the Soviet Union, and what they aspired to.

I’m intrigued by that last paragraph, Sangria. Talk of ethics with reference to the Mafia or the aspirations of the Bolsheviks and Trots always puts me in mind of the wonderfully apposite words of George Santayana: “Fanaticism consists of redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim“.

[Sangria]

I’m intrigued by that last paragraph, Sangria. Talk of ethics with reference to the Mafia or the aspirations of the Bolsheviks and Trots always puts me in mind of the wonderfully apposite words of George Santayana: “Fanaticism consists of redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim“.

The more (more in relative terms) successful Communist countries valued their scientists and engineers and geared everything to achieving a rational society. That's why, despite their abysmal social failures (due to utterly lacking any social understanding), they had high achievements in some areas. Areas that the traditional left usually place on a pedestal in their ideal of a socialist society (healthcare, education, planned economy, etc.). The USSR was the epitome of socialism without liberalism.

[Yorkykopite]

Ethics as you'd understand it would be the Greek line of thinking and as defined by that term. However, ethics as understood to be morals are not exclusive to the western/Greek school. Morals do exist in other countries too, in different forms to what we're used to. Eg. do you understand how important the concept of filial duty is? It's not just the friendship that we in the west understand to be the ideal of a parent/child relationship. Family also means something different to what we're used to.

Also, it demeans the discussion to describe the Chinese leaders as Mafia and nothing else. A better understand of them might be gained from looking at the Soviet Union, and what they aspired to.

Who said "nothing else"? But at least we can agree that they are Mafia (plus other things).

As for ethics, all I'll say is that genocide and mass murder are probably deemed to be unethical in China too. Certainly, I know one thing. China signed up to the UN conventions. That means we (the human race) can hold them to something.

[Sangria]

Again, I'm a little bit amazed.

The Soviet Union wasn't just a vast moral failure. It was an epic economic failure as well. Its healthcare was a mess, its economy backward and irrational, its education system in a shocking state.

Try not to assess everything from the conclusion up, and that from a moral standpoint. The USSR, with a basketcase of an economy, managed to compete with and even outperform in some areas the US at its peak in science. Looking at another Communist country, one of Cuba's most notable exports is doctors. And in both, literacy rates jumped up under Communism. Let's not let fears of moral relativism affect assessment of history.

[Sangria]

Who said "nothing else"? But at least we can agree that they are Mafia (plus other things).

As for ethics, all I'll say is that genocide and mass murder are probably deemed to be unethical in China too. Certainly, I know one thing. China signed up to the UN conventions. That means we (the human race) can hold them to something.

Genocide and mass murder isn't the only alternative to what you recognise as ethics. But my point isn't that Chinese ideas of ethics isn't what leads them to perpetrating these things. My point is that China's leaders aren't idiots, which you called them. They're extremely clever indeed. They just don't recognise your ideas of ethics. It's their very rationality and intelligence that leads them to a course that we find morally unacceptable. And before you decide to take offence at that, try to understand my point.

They're fundamentally nationalists, and they're brought up as Communists. They're brought up to think of rationalism as the only way forward. They think that China is the only thing. One comparison I can think of is with the science-worshipping Stalin and his Russian nationalism. Rather than dismiss them with "They're evil", try to understand what they're doing and why, the better to counter them.

[Yorkykopite]

Try not to assess everything from the conclusion up, and that from a moral standpoint. The USSR, with a basketcase of an economy, managed to compete with and even outperform in some areas the US at its peak in science. Looking at another Communist country, one of Cuba's most notable exports is doctors. And in both, literacy rates jumped up under Communism. Let's not let fears of moral relativism affect assessment of history.

I took my post down because I don't want to be sidetracked into a discussion about the Soviet Union - a land where scientists and engineers sometimes did well, and sometimes were sent to the gulag. A land where Lysenko ruled the roost.

Besides, the historic failures of the Russian economy are too well-known now to be very interesting any more.  "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us" etc. 

[Yorkykopite]

They just don't recognise your ideas of ethics.

I know. Nor the UN's. Nor those of so many Chinese dissidents.

[Sangria]

I know. Nor the UN's. Nor those of so many Chinese dissidents.

Rather than have your world view as the only one, and any other being worthy only of a witty aside, have you ever tried looking at things that are alien to you? For instance, you've spoken before about Socrates and the beginnings of western ethics. Have you looked at other aspects of ancient Greek society that we can barely understand today?

[Red-Soldier]

Rather than have your world view as the only one, and any other being worthy only of a witty aside, have you ever tried looking at things that are alien to you? For instance, you've spoken before about Socrates and the beginnings of western ethics. Have you looked at other aspects of ancient Greek society that we can barely understand today?

Good discussion this.

Yorky does have some very entrenched views, some I agree with, others I do not.  Israel being an apartheid state for example.

I am not very familiar with Western philosphy, but I have read writings by Confucius.

[Sangria]

Good discussion this.

Yorky does have some very entrenched views, some I agree with, others I do not.  Israel being an apartheid state for example.

I am not very familiar with Western philosphy, but I have read writings by Confucius.

It's not just a case of eastern philosophy being unfamiliar. We tend to only remember when western philosophy works at its best. For instance, we celebrate Athenian democracy as the foundation of many of our modern ideals. But it was that very same democracy, of course, that condemned Socrates to death. And it was that same democracy that weakened Athens and left it devoid of worthwhile leaders.

FWIW, I think that Protestantism, unfashionable though it may now be nowadays, is a far more direct influence on modern liberalism than the ancient Greek philosophers.